The Daily Hurricane

Mitt Romney doesn't care about the poor

2012-02-03T18:59:54Z

The Mitt Romney comedy tour continues in full force. At a recent speech he managed to piss off people from the left and right at the same time. He told America that he doesn't care about the poor and that if the safety net needs to be fixed he'll fix it. Of course, he came back and tried to fix his little gaffe, but these things take on a life of their own.

For most of us, this comment wasn't really news. It simply reveals what we already know. Most Republicans really don't care about the poor. Oh sure, they'll tell you that they do because it really isn't good politics to say you don't care. It's like being for rape, tax evasion, and cruelty to animals. I remember my wife telling me about a group of students at Tulane forming an organization called "Men Against Rape." Sounds great until you realize that no sane person can be for such a thing.

There's an old saying that some people are born great, others learn to be great, and others have greatness thrust upon them. Then, there's the long list of Republican hopefuls for president. Greatness could enter the room at the next Republican primary debate and I'm not sure if anyone would recognize it. After all, the voices from the right aren't angry that he said he didn't care. They're mad that he said he would fix the safety net. Their version of a safety net would be a softer brand of concrete.

Caring isn't a hard thing to do. We all have people in our families we care about. Some of them may be down on the luck and some of them may be there because of their own stupidity. We don't stop caring. We may advocate doing things that might look like a lack of caring. However, behind every suggestion is an undercurrent of caring. We see that with families dealing with addiction, a lack of motivation, or anything else that might get in someone's way. Caring offers options. Lack of caring is indifference and a simple lack of offering alternatives.

If any single statement indicates why Barack Obama should get a second term it is that right there. There are many on the left that are upset with Obama for different policies he has advocated or failed to advocate. People in the middle are also sometimes disappointed. Heck, I'm one of those, but the alternative is just too frightening. Who wants a president that can honestly look you in the eye and tell you they don't care about you?

Politics often bring difficult choices. You have to choose between a wishy-washy Democrat (in general) or a soulless Republican. Their conscience just doesn't seem to bother them enough. Having interacted with many that Romney describes, I can understand a contempt, disappointment, or even anger. Those emotions are not a lack of caring. Indifference is a lack of caring. Those emotions would lead you to advocate policies to force them to do something you would want them to do. While we may not agree with such things we would not deny the caring behind it.

Most of the time, I consider the work of Sigmund Freud to be a joke. However, the concept of the Freudian slip is a serious one. Most of the time, when people say something it comes from something they really believe. Even when it comes out in joke form it usually has a kernel of truth for that person. So, Romney can backtrack all he wants, but the truth has been spoken and it is an ugly one.

Furthermore, a picture paints a thousand words. Someone that has made his fortune by pillaging on the livelihood of others already has a track record of a lack of caring. It's a mean world out there. For many of us, that cruelty has come back to bite us. Do we really want someone in the oval office that embodies that cruelty?

UPDATED: Susan G. Komen Foundation Shows Its Political Ass

2012-02-03T14:18:40Z

UPDATED: Komen just announced that they are reversing their decision to cut off funding for Planned Parenthood. Good decision, but now CEO Nancy Brinker should fire Nancy Handel, then resign herself for this political decision.

You've probably heard by now that breast cancer organization, Susan G. Komen Foundation recently terminated its long time partnership with Planned Parenthood purportedly because PP was "under investigation". The "under investigation" excuse is from a new rule Komen put in place to supposedly "improve how grantees are selected." Nancy Brinker, the founder and CEO of Komen, denied that their decision to cut breast cancer screening funding to 19 Planned Parenthood affiliates was political.

So what's really going on here? Well, it's not pretty. Komen recently hired a new senior vice president of public policy, Karen Handel. Who's that, you ask? She's a right wing Republican and former Georgia Secretary of State who ran for governor on an anti-choice platform. One of her public positions, of course, was de-funding PP just like Congressional Republicans are trying to do. She has vilified PP, ignoring the critical work it performs providing health care to poor women. But I digress. Soon after joining Komen, the foundation implemented a new rule for "evaluating" which organizations to which it would grant funds. This new rule denies funding to any organization "under investigation" by any local, state, or federal authority. Well, we all know that PP is the favorite punching bag of the right wingers in Congress and that anti-abortion zealot, Cliff Stearns (R-Fl), has an ongoing investigation into if PP has used federal funds for abortion, which, of course, it hasn't. Using the "investigation" (read witch hunt) as an excuse, Komen cut off funds. The Atlantic is reporting that 3 sources with direct knowledge of the new rule confirmed that it was established specifically to target PP. Brinker, of course, is all over national television now, denying what we all know is true. After the decision to cut PP funding, Komen's top public health official, Mollie Williams, immediately resigned. More resignations have been following.

Responding to this political (and stupid) decision better than I ever could is Linda, who made a powerful youtube video that has now gone viral. She concludes her statement by saying, the "Foundation has shown your ass. Now you can kiss mine." Brave lady. Have a look (warning: don't watch if you are squeamish. It's graphic):

My mother is a two time survivor. She survived because of early detection and great medical care. Cutting off screening for women who can't otherwise afford it is hateful and heartless.

Here's a message from the Daily Hurricane to Nancy Brinker: Stop talking. Nobody believes you. The decisions by you to hire Nancy Handel, make a new rule to target Planned Parenthood, and then cut off funding to Planned Parenthood, were purely political intended to mollify your supporters/staff who advocate hate and ideology over women's health. You should first be ashamed of yourself, then reverse your decision, fire Handel, and resign. Those are the only decisions you can make to calm the firestorm of justifiable criticism that you caused.

If you agree, contact the Susan G. Komen foundation and tell them what you think. If you donate to the Komen, you might consider withholding any further support until they change this decision.

You can also donate to Planned Parenthood to help.

Republicans Order Arrest of Journalist at House Energy Hearing | this small planet

2012-02-02T13:46:51Z

Josh Fox arrested on Capitol Hill.

Delaying the Inevitable

2012-02-02T07:18:10Z

In his state of the union, President Obama urged all of the states to raise the dropout age to 18. To prove I'm not simply a sheep I will say that is absolutely the wrong thing to do. In fact, I think that's moving it in the opposite direction that it needs to go. The big problem is that public school curriculum stop serving the needs of the majority the minute they all step into high school. Lisa Falkenberg of the Chronicle addressed this in her piece.

I was compelled to email her because some of the conclusions were anti-education. It was asserted that teachers, counselors, and administrators actually counsel kids to drop out and do things administratively that encourage students to drop out. I will cop to the fact that there are some students that we don't try to dissuade as fervently as we should, but I have never known any educator to encourage it.

Her article mentioned test prep courses that seemed designed to push them out. They aren't designed to push them out. They are designed to get them to pass the test. It may be true that students may choose to leave, but that is a result of a flawed plan and not the intention of the plan itself. In these things we often mistake the effects for the causes. Individual teachers and administrators do not cause dropping out. It is a flawed system that simply looks to delay the inevitable.

Political correctness has its place, but sometimes it is an impediment to the truth. It is politically correct to say all kids can learn. That is true to some extent, but people have misunderstood its limitations. All people can learn, but they can't all learn the same things and they can't learn at the same rate. Yet, this mantra has led our country down a dark road where nearly half of our children aren't getting their needs met.

You often have sixteen and seventeen year olds without any high school credits. So, is delaying their withdraw a year somehow magically make them graduate? It's happened before, but it is rare. The truth is that their demise happened years before that and the system never came up with a solution. Some educators will work hard for that student and if that student has any fight left in them they might succeed despite the odds. Simply put, the mechanisms aren't there.

I've spent more time at home than I'd like recently and I see dozens of ITT, Everest, and Fortis commercials designed to get those without skills to acquire some. Why are we allowing private companies to step up and charge people a fee (sometimes a phenomenal one) to do something we should be doing in high school? Is it more important for them to pass a test that has virtually no correlation to success in the work place or university setting? I suppose it is more important that we feel good about ourselves than to actually make a difference in more kids' lives.

Private Sector Workers Undercompensated

2012-01-31T13:25:52Z

The headline at National Review Online reads "Federal Workers Overcompensated." It refers to this study just released by the Congressional Budget Office comparing wages and benefits of federal government employees versus their counterparts in the private sector, illustrated by this chart:

As you can see, the difference in wages isn't that much. The higher wages-21% more--for those with a high school education or less are almost exactly offset by the lower wages-23% less--for those with a professional degree or doctorate. The rest are nearly identical, leading the CBO to this conclusion:

"Overall, the federal government paid 2 percent more in total wages than it would have if average wages had been comparable with those in the private sector, after accounting for certain observable characteristics of workers."

The major difference is on the benefits side:

"On average, the benefits earned by federal civilian employees cost 48 percent more than the benefits earned by private-sector employees with certain similar observable characteristics."

When both wages and benefits are taken into account:

"Overall, the federal government paid 16 percent more in total compensation than it would have if average compensation had been comparable with that in the private sector, after accounting for certain observable characteristics of workers."

Let's flip the NRO headline, Private Sector Workers Undercompensated." It's not that federal workers are getting paid too much, albeit slightly, and have more generous benefit packages. It's that private sector employees are getting-to put it not so gently-glued, screwed, and tattooed. Why is that? According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 33.2% of federal employees have union representation. The private sector number is 7.6%.

Two Great Web Resources To Empower Yourself

2012-01-31T04:11:41Z

While much of what is on the web is junk, there are some great resources for folks who want to use their discretionary time effectively.

C-SPAN has a full archive of all its programming over the years.

One thing I find of value at the C-SPAN site is the Booknotes page. Booknotes was a weekly interview program that ran each week for a number of years.

The most recent interview I listened to was one from 1989 with Colonel David Hackworth. Colonel Hackworth was a decorated solider from Korea and Vietnam who came to oppose war and much about how the Army operated. This is programming you can listen to on your home computer while you are getting other stuff done.

Here is a Colonel Hackworth's obituary from 2005.

An interview on Booknotes I found of interest was one from 1998 of Iris Chang who wrote The Rape of Nanking--The Forgotten Holocaust of World War II. This book is about the Japanese occupation of China. Here is an obituary of Iris Chang

If you look on the top left on this link, you'll find access to a full list of old C-SPAN series and programs about a great number of topics. There is a great deal of interest here on a wide variety of topics relating to American history and American authors.

Another great resource is the website of the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art.

While there is a great deal of interest at this site, it is the new American wing that most holds my attention.

Here is a New York Times tour of some of the exhibits in the American wing.

You can look at and read a bit about every piece of art in each gallery of the American wing. You can do this for the art in the other galleries of the museum as well.

This works on a mobile device as well if you look it up that way.

Each work also has a link to its place the very good Heillbrunn Timeline of Art History.

This art is an insight to the political, cultural and personal lives of Americans.

If these resources don't sail your ship, find something that does.

Everybody has the capacity to understand complex things. The resources are out there to learn all sorts of stuff.

Empowered with what we learn, we all have the ability to put forth our views and to act. Progress is up to each of us.

(Below--Enoch Wood Perry's Talking It Over from 1872.)

Is The Weather Itself Part Of The Liberal Plot?

2012-01-31T04:10:01Z

The United States Department of Agriculture has updated the map it issues to help gardeners across the nation determine what they can plant.

Because the nation is getting warmer, people are now able to plant various flowers and trees in parts of the country that before would have not been hospitable to such a wide range of plantings.

Above you see the map. Here is the link to the USDA site that has facts on how to use the map, and also has specific information for each of the states.

The Chicago Sun-Times has a story about how this warming is being acknowledged in the ways everyday people are planting their gardens.

From this story----

"Vaughn Speer, an 87-year-old master gardener in Ames, Iowa, said he has seen redbud trees, one of the earliest blooming trees, a little farther north in recent years. "They always said redbuds don't go beyond U.S. Highway 30," he said, "but I'm seeing them near Roland," 10 miles to the north...."It is great that the federal government is catching up with what the plants themselves have known for years now: The globe is warming and it is greatly influencing plants (and animals)," Stanford University biology professor Terry Root wrote in an email."

Do folks who think global warming is a scam believe that these map changes are a government plot? Is it better to deny even the prospect of warming than to at least admit the possibility, and to prepare for what might be on the way?

Here is a synopsis of current warming facts from the co-conspirators at the New York Times.

Folks on the right can go on creating an alternate reality about just about everything. I'm certain that press bashing will by itself change the facts in just the same way the idea that the rain will follow the plow made arid places wet.

(Below--The Eastern Redbud Tree. You might be seeing more of them in Iowa before long.)

The Life of the Unemployed

2012-01-28T05:40:21Z

It's been a long time. I want to introduce myself. My name is Scott Barzilla and I am unemployed. Back in November, things were picking up. I had what seemed like a firm offer from an insurance company and I got a holiday job at Barnes and Noble. That job went away when the holidays ended and the insurance company is still doing background checks. Meanwhile, I've shelled out nearing 500 dollars getting certified. It's time for the money flow to switch directions.

As the Republican primary campaign gains steam it is high time that we start looking at real issues. The entertainment candidates are out of the race. Of course, for some it is all entertaining. For those of us out of work it is becoming sickening. Why have I been gone so long? Well, suddenly paying a great deal of attention to politics seems too disheartening. Many of us are suffering and the suits in Washington are doing very little.

Of course, with the changing economy comes the changing roles in family life. I'm now stay at home dad. I do most of the cooking, cleaning, laundry, and assorted work around the house. The upshot is get to do my baseball research and get to call the insurance company every week to see what hoop I have to jump through now. The dream of working in baseball took a hit this week too as the local nine hired someone else to do the job I want to do.

Something hit me today as I was driving around town. There used to be a place in my area dedicated to helping people like me find another job. That building has been torn down. Why? Government funding just isn't there. So, at a time when we need resources the most, they aren't there.

The candidate that understands that we are the priority will win the race. In many cases, it's not about money. I have clothes, a house, and food on the table. What I don't have is a clear sense of identity. Yes, I'm a father and a husband, but what else? Am I an educator that's on hiatus? Am I simply a stay at home dad that loves to write? Am I something else entirely? For generations, men have been the breadwinners in the family. Many of us have evolved to accept that our spouse will make more. Now, she makes it all.

This is all great, but what does it have to do with the issue at hand? Simply put, deficit reduction sounds wonderful, but at some point it becomes difficult to sustain an argument where you want to grow the economy and yet want to cut back. Cutting back means cutting jobs. Cutting jobs means adding to unemployment. That might work when the economy is booming and opportunities are plenty. That's just not the case right now.

A wise man once said that a recession occurs when your neighbor is out of work. A depression occurs when you are out of work. For those in a depression, they don't care about deficit reduction. They care about getting a job. At some point, telling people that balancing the budget will help boost the economy becomes a bit hollow. When will it help?

The current Congress has passed less legislation (to this point in the session) than any session for at least half a century. That would be great if everything were going great. As we know, that is not the case. This is why Congress has the lowest approval rating it has had in modern history. So, keep pedaling deficit reduction if you wish, but I ain't buying it.

Video: How Economic Inequality Harms Societies

2012-01-24T19:01:45Z

This is about 17 minutes long. It is a lecture by Richard Wilkinson regarding income inequality and how it effects overall quality of life. You'll be smarter for having watched it.

I encourage you to watch and discuss.

Report: White House Pressured Scientists to Underestimate BP Spill Size | Mother Jones

2012-01-24T13:55:22Z

Kate Shepherd reports on emails released under FOIA that confirms what we feared during the BP Macondo well blowout: in an effort to get the blowout off the television, the government downplayed the environmental damage. in her report in Mother Jones yesterday, Kate reports on the emails.

Report: White House Pressured Scientists to Underestimate BP Spill Size | Mother Jones.

Truer Words...

2012-01-23T12:53:19Z

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Volkswagen Super Bowl Commercial - Star Wars: The Bark Side

2012-01-22T06:31:26Z

Shared without comment:

Except to burst out laughing.

Ron Paul: A Victim of His Own Ideology

2012-01-21T03:06:06Z

You're all familiar with the libertarian leanings of Republican candidate, Ron Paul. Lately, his followers have taken to claims that the media isn't treating him fairly. Poor Mr. Paul, he can't even get asked a question about abortion at a debate, and he was an OB for years!

I have this to say to Paul followers:

The media doesn't have to play fair. The media is made up of (mostly) for-profit corporations. They are not out to play fair, they are out to make money. It is extremely hypocritical to continue to act like a victim of foul play when the actions of the media are just consequences of the free market he vehemently supports.

Ron Paul doesn't get the ratings Newt Gingrich does. Therefore he won't get as much coverage, ok?

Let him grab those bootstraps and go out there and work harder for his airtime.

Serial A-hole

2012-01-20T21:40:51Z

This could also be subtitled "The Wandering Eye of Newt"

I know I personally suffer from Adult-Onset Attention Deficit (AOAD), but has the Tea Party buried their heads in their rectums these days? I know it was soooooo last century when the Newtster was House Speaker, but seriously, this man got a standing O last night for calling out the moderator for daring to question his despicable, hypocritical adulterous practices.

The reason I bring up the AOAD is that I seem to remember some folks on the other side of the aisle being vilified for the same thing, and having their campaigns implode -- think Gary Hart and John Edwards as they made a run for the White House - and bringing to mind the Newtster's overseeing the impeachment of a former President for the same behavior. Why isn't the same thing happening to him? Hypocrisy is hypocrisy and knows no partisan designation, thank you very much.

Thomas Sowell of the National Review asks, "How much does Newt Gingrich's personal life matter ... when the fate of the nation hangs in the balance?" I would say that it matters as much now as it did before and during Clinton's impeachment by the House.

Jenny Sanford - you remember her, the wife of that SC Republican Governor who 'went missing on his hike of the Appalachian Trail via trysting with his mistress in South America -- told the Tribune, "The bigger question for the voting public today is, What does the candidate stand for and how likely is it he or she will follow through on those convictions?" Hmmm, let's ask Elizabeth Edwards if she agrees with that, except we can't, and let's ask the Newtster's first two wives. And of course, Jenny Sanford ended up divorcing her philandering husband ...

Did you know that the Newtster met his first wife, Jackie, when he was in high school when Jackie was his geometry teacher. She was seven years older than he was - quite scandalous back then. Newt and Jackie secretly dated until their wedding. He was 19. He divorced her when she was recovering from uterine cancer surgery. The First Baptist Church in his hometown apparently had to take up a collection to support the family he deserted. Six months after that divorce, he married the woman he'd been cheating on Jackie with, Marianne - wife #2, whom he called on Mother's Day in 1999 to say he wanted a divorce ... eight months after he found out she had MS. Did she really not see that coming? AND he asked for an annulment from the Catholic Church as well.

The Newtster acknowledged in an interview with a conservative Christian group that he was having an extramarital affair as he led the impeachment charge against President Clinton. How's that for hypocrisy? He said "There are times that I have fallen short of my own standards." Dude, that kinda indicates a complete and total LACK of standards, and moral compass.

Let's recap: he leaves ex-wives 1 & 2 because they become ill - one with MS and one with cancer, leads the impeachment of a President for the same thing he was doing at the time, and wait, there's more ...

During his tenure as speaker, he was disciplined by the House of Representatives for ethics accusations, and he resigned from the House under pressure from his Republican colleagues. Yes, they would eat their young if they thought it would further their own careers, and yet Mr. Teflon lives.

Do you remember when Newtster's 'Gang of Seven' railed against what they saw as ethical lapses under Democratic control in the late 90's? Ironically, the Newtster himself got snagged in the House banking scandal when his check kiting was exposed: he had overdrafts on 22 checks, including one to the IRS for $9,463 in 1990. Yeah, let's put HIM in charge of the money.

Maybe you'll remember the government shutdown in 1995-96, when it is said that the perception was out there that Newtster got his undies in a twist when Clinton didn't invite him to sit in the front of the plane to discuss the budget during a trip to Israel for Rabin's funeral. By all means, let put a petulant child into the White House, and hope he doesn't have a temper tantrum in front of some other leader who has control of WMDs.

And then there's the one about the 84 ethics charges filed against Gingrich during his term as speaker. After extensive investigation and negotiation by the House Ethics Committee, Gingrich was sanctioned $300,000 by a 395-28 House vote. It was the first time in history a speaker was disciplined for ethical wrongdoing. The House Ethics Committee concluded that inaccurate information supplied to investigators represented "intentional or ... reckless" disregard of House rules. Doesn't that make you feel all warm and fuzzy? It's a little bit like the pot calling the kettle black, but ...

Some people feel that moral authority demands that elected officials be held to higher standards than ordinary citizens. I think during a campaign and subsequent holding of office, should they get there, it becomes a moral imperative. Besides, you can always make the argument about it being an issue of time management and/or distractions.

I've got the perfect campaing slogan for him, for 2012 and beyond should he have such aspirations -- The Newtster: serial asshole.

I think it's got legs.

Friday Music: President Obama Sings (Video)

2012-01-20T20:55:37Z

I enjoyed the heck out of this snipped of the President singing Al Green's "Let's Stay Together."

Enjoy.