Really???

I had an active day... aside from work and cooking dinner, I found the time to write two Senators about job creation legislation. One of them was Senator Dodd, which is understandable - he is my senator, after all... The other one was John Kyl of Arizona, whom I loathe. The letter to Senator Dodd is below; my letter to senator Kyl is included in the body of my letter to Senator Dodd:

"I sent a message to Senator Kyl through his website, but since I am not from Arizona I am not going to hold my breath for a reply, action or even acknowledgement. I'm not even sure that his staff will actually show it to him, since I am not a constituent. But the obstructive action he is pursuing has far-reaching ramifications - it impacts unemployed workers in every state of the union, so I feel I have a right to make my displeasure with him known. Would be so kind as to read my letter to him on the floor of the Senate to let the Senator from Arizona know that the obstruction he is putting in the way of extending unemployment insurance and COBRA has enraged voters two thousand miles away. Here is the test of the message I sent to Senator Kyl:

"'Are you really blocking extensions of unemployment insurance and COBRA, which is going to expire in three days, because you want to talk about estate taxes? What is wrong with you? What is wrong with your priorities? You're willing to delay helping those most in need during these tough economic times to help the most privileged and affluent in this country? Are you that out of touch and removed from the stark reality that everyday people are facing in this country? You're more worried about multi-millionaires getting a tax cut than unemployed workers losing their benefits?

"'You should be ashamed of yourself. Your job is to represent the people of your state, not just the people of your state who are in a position to contribute the most to your campaign fund.'

"Thank you."

As of this moment, I haven't heard back from either one of them.

I wish I could...

...just remove myself from the problems of the world. Rush Limbaugh is thankfully recovering from his heart attack (or heart flutter or whatever landed him in the hospital). I may consider him to be a horrible, rotten person and one of the greatest contributors to the partisan deadlock that is hindering us from fixing the problems we are as a nation facing, but I do not wish him ill; I don't pray for his death. Having been discharged from the (I am assuming) private, VIP, suite at the hospital in Hawai'i where he was being cared for he had this pearl of wisdom to share: "Based on what happened to me here, I don't think there is one thing wrong with the American healthcare system. It is working just fine, just dandy." I should hope so with the amount of money Limbaugh has to toss around. For the average, working schlub it would mean possible lost wages, medications to buy after meeting a hefty yearly deductible and running the risk of having his health insurance coverage rescinded. For millions of other Americans out of work or unable to afford health insurance it would most likely mean financial ruin and possible bankruptcy due to insurmountable bills from the ER, the hospital, the surgeons, etc., lost time from work, missed mortgage payments, etc, etc...

For Rush to come out of the hospital and say this is akin to a hedge fund manager stating "The recession is an amazing opportunity to grab up some under-valued stocks and properties and thanks to all the TARP money we received we don't have to worry about liquidity and are allowed to take greater risks than normal." Meanwhile unemployment is 10%, average people are losing their homes and watching their lives and their children's futures evaporate. But AIG executives are complaining that a $500,000/year compensation without a bonus is simply too low a figure for them to accept...

It must be nice to live in their world.

First and foremost, Rudy is an idiot.

I think that there are two problems that haunt the Republican Party and hurt them. The first is the tenacious, mindless devotion to the economic philosophy that has had so many different names: Supply-Side Economics, Trickle-Down Economics, even Voodoo Economics by a doubting George H. W. Bush.

I completely get the idea, I understand the principles behind it, but there is one fatal flaw in the equation: human nature. People are greedy by nature. Just look at Exxon. They broke their own record for earnings by earning 45.2 billion dollars in 2008. It's easy to make that kind of money when you're charging $4.50 a gallon for gas. I was and am still dumbfounded that I was paying that much for gas 6-7 months ago and am now paying $1.79 a gallon. There is no explanation for that. Why did that charge that much? I understand that OPEC cut back on production, they had to work within shared-production contracts with the refiners, etc. But that shouldn't triple the price.

How did prices get that high? Free markets... The notion that market's can and should be self-regulated is absolutely preposterous. Deregulation is what was at the heart of the Great Depression and is the source of our current economic woes. I understand and appreciate that over-regulation and excessive control of the markets will hinder or even stop growth of the economy; I'm not looking to live in a socialist country, but there has to be safeguards in place to ensure that consumers aren't raped by unchecked greed of large powerful corporations. Companies should not be allowed to become so big and have such a substantial influence over the economy that if they fail it means that the whole economy will collapse. Over the last eight years economic power has been consolidated in the hands of powerful, self-serving corporations who in addition to being able to exploit consumers also have been getting huge tax breaks and credits from the government.

And this is one of the cornerstones of Republican ideology...

The other ideology to which they continue to adhere, even as it harms their appeal and hampers their attempts to reach out to moderates is their affiliation with the religious right. Now, politically I am a very liberal Democrat however my personal beliefs lean very much to the right. I think that abortion is morally wrong. I think (like Mike Huckabee) that a person is born gay but can choose not to lead a gay life style and choose celibacy.

Having said that, if I was gay and knowing my personality and libido there is no way in hell I could live a celibate life. I could not enter the priesthood and just suppress my feelings and pray that I do not prey on poor altar boys. This is no longer the 19th Century. I don't expect gays and lesbians to stay out of public and be forced to hidden lives; I wouldn't want to do that. Why should they be expected to do so? Equality is equality. You cannot profess that you are for equality for minorities and women but not for equality for homosexuals. That is hypocrisy.

As far as the issue of abortion is concerned I do not believe that morality should be legislated. While I am morally opposed to abortion I do not believe that making abortion illegal is going to stop people from having abortions. It will only bring back the deadly, secret abortions in back alleys with coat hangers. People who are more affluent will simply go to Canada or {shudder} Mexico to have abortions performed.

And here is the real paradox in these two philosophies. When you put them together under the same roof, you are saying in one breath that you should not legislate morality on one hand (trust the corporations to be fair and let them govern themselves) and saying that you should legislate morality on the other hand (make abortion illegal and deny gays and lesbians the same rights and privileges that "normal" society takes for granted). That is damn near schizophrenic...