Sen. Snowe retires, and RNC Chair blames Dems?

Senator Olympia Snowe, GOP Senator from Maine, announced yesterday that she will not run for re-election, taking another moderate Senator out of politics. Although she voted with the GOP 76% of the time, she was a true moderate. And in her announcement, she blasted the completely partisan way the Senate acts these days. This was a speech that almost Democrat in the White House, resident or writer, could have penned. So why did Reince Priebus, RNC Chairman, blame the Democrats? This is simply how out of touch with reality the GOP is now, and highlights why Senator Snowe is leaving the Senate. To most of the GOP, no matter how far right and far away from most American's views the GOP gets, they are never wrong. Not in their eyes. Senator Snowe, all sensible people of all stripes on the political spectrum will miss you. And the Senate will be a less sane and reasonable place with your departure.

A good night for Romney?

In winning both Arizona and Michigan, Mitt Romney did as well as he could for the night, but was it enough? Yes, the two wins keep other candidates out of the process, the establishment happy, and that's good. But if  tell you as a candidate that in your home state that you won't get half the vote and another candidate will win more delegates than you do, how would you react? That's right, you'd be down as all get out. You'd wonder why you're in the race. Mitt may not feel that way, but in the light of day tomorrow, many GOP money men will. Oh, they'll back him half-heartedly, which seems to be the way everyone backs Mitt. So Mitt, you won tonight, and you'll probably grind slowly to the nomination, but where's the passion for you? It was a good night for Mitt Romney, but does tonight really show, or more likely reinforce a problem, with Mitt? If so, how good of a night for Mitt could it really be?   

Romney in trouble no matter what happens tonight

Romney could win both primaries and still be in trouble, and for democracy, that's a good thing. Why is that? Because in Michigan, delegates are awarded to the winner in each of 14 districts. This as very close to proportional delegates, which is good for democracy. Why should a candidate win 51% of the vote in a primary election and get all the delegates? So why is this also bad for Romney? Because he may win a plurality of the votes in Michigan and get less than 40% of the delegates. And in truth, that's not really democracy, but it does make up a little where Santorum may get 30% of the votes and no delegates. Tell me, which sounds more like a democracy to you?  

Am I really a moderate?

I have given this blog to several people I know, and after reading it, most of them ask me, "Are you really a moderate? You bash on the GOP so much, you seem too liberal to me. We really can't be friends." Well, if that's the way you feel, maybe this will explain. If I lose liberal friends after they read this, I'll tell them the same same that I told my Tea Party friends: "Okay. I'll miss you. If you change your mind about being friends, let me know." Now, I believe that the art of politics is diplomacy and compromise. (Marriage is the same way. Think of any good marriage, and both the man and the woman get what they want about half the time. Think of any bad marriage, and one side imposes their will and refuses to listen to anything the other person says. Politics is the same way.) Now, the Tea Party believes in no compromise and has its politicians (I use that term loosely) have no tact or diplomacy. So yes, I am no fan of theirs. And since the Tea Party has taken over the GOP, I have hated the direction they are taking our Congress. But that doesn't mean I think all their ideas are bad. Do we need to balance the budget? Of course we do. But if I ask them are you willing to compromise, eliminating tax loopholes, thereby raising taxes. No, only shrinking the government will do. The we can cut the Defense budget, right? No, we need to take all of the cuts from domestic spending. So what are they giving up, where is their compromise?  There are few dozen things that I disagree with that the President has done (The big one is: Since bin Laden is dead, why are we in Afghanistan?), but at least he will compromise. Don't believe it? HHS and the Medical Association both wanted churches to have to include birth control in their health plan. It was the President that said that wasn't constitutional, and exempted churches while saying agencies of churches would have to provide birth control to those that wanted it. Think that's a fine line? Yes it is, and it is the act of compromise, it is the act of politics. Too bad the GOP doesn't know how to act.    

GOP needs a new name- The Repressive Party

I have long thought that the GOP needs to change the name of their party. Are they now the party that freed the slaves like Lincoln? No, they believe in states right? Are they now the party that broke up the monopolies Teddy Roosevelt? No, they are now the party of big business. Are they the party that believes in big ideas like when Ike started the interstate highway? No, they have no forward ideas, completely living in the past. Do they believe they should compromise like Reagan did? No, they want to tear down the government, not compromise with anyone to make it better. So what should be their new name? Tea Party? Maybe, but that doesn't really describe them. The Conservation  Party? No, they want to use up all the natural resources we have as soon as possible. They also want to get rid of the EPA, and go back to a time when businesses tried to ruin the air and water. The Repressive Party? Well they want to repress the votes of the poor, repress immigration, repress women's rights, repress dissent for anyone who believes big business is now running the country, and repress any ideas that are secular, against their religious beliefs, or forward-thinking. Yes, the GOP is now truly the Repressive Party.      

How far backwards have we come, America?

Over 50 years ago, a democratic candidate for President had to make a speech telling the country that as President, the Pope in Rome wouldn't be telling him how to run the country, not in foreign entanglements or in social policies at home. Why? Because the country had never elected a Catholic as President. And the country was worried that a religion would take over the country. That candidate, John F. Kennedy, became President and no, he never followed the Pope or the Church in changing the social fabric of our country. He understood that we are a country of laws, not religion. But now, a GOP candidate isn't saying he wants to keep religion out of government, but wants religious beliefs to trump laws. And all over the country, GOP governors, senators, and representative have been enacting laws ensuring religious beliefs are followed. And a large group of people are ecstatic. But it is a large step back for our country, which was founded to ensure no religion could infringe on people. A very large step backward indeed.    

CBS does a dis-service to KU/MU

Yes, I'm, biased, but CBS not having a few minutes before the KU/MU game to say a few words about this rivalry and its' demise is joke. The fact that these two teams are in the top 5 make it a travesty. Would it have been so difficult to start the game at 3:30 local? If it was, they should have let it be the 7:00 pm game on ESPN or Fox Sports.

No more debates? Not if they're like Arizona's debate

Watching the debate from Wednesday night, I was again taken aback, and when the moderator near the end said that this might be the last question of the last debate, I became almost giddy. No more of these ridiculous debates! But then I thought, have they talked about anything that impacts people's lives and are on most people's minds? So I totaled the time and the topics, and here's what I found. Sixteen minutes were spent on birth control and the Obama Health Care (Thankfully, they didn't want to talk about social issues), thirteen minutes on the debt, 12 minutes on earmarks, eleven on education (No Child Left Behind), nine on immigration and Iran, seven on the auto bailout, six on Syria (without saying any solutions about the current conflict there), five on women in the military, and three on taxes and Arlen Specter. How many minutes were dedicated to jobs or the on-going housing problems? That's right, none. So does this mean the GOP doesn't care about these two topics? Only Newt talked about growing jobs, and this was when talking about the debt. Does anyone think the American people don't care a lot more about those two topics than any two topics that were discussed last night, including the debt? GOP, you can blame CNN if you want, and they are partially to blame for the questions. If there's more debates like the one in Arizona, don't bother. If you aren't going to talk about the serious problems facing the country, don't be surprised if we don't take you seriously. And very little of it will have to do with your puritan social values.    

This apple fell a long way from the tree

Watching Franklin Graham, the son of Billy Graham, I was amazed by his views. His father, a great man who I've seen at one of his revivals, is someone that once counseled Presidents, including Richard Nixon. Would anyone call Nixon a great Christian? So Franklin was on TV today saying that dictators that killed the majority of the their country to protect the minority were preferable to democracy. What? That was my reaction when I heard him talk. And anyone who thinks the President is Muslim won't be told otherwise by Mr. Graham, who only thinks the President might be telling the truth when he says he's a Christian. Where Franklin sees division, Billy would have tried to find common ground. The truth is, Franklin is an apple that fell a long way from the tree he came from. But at least if he continues this view, he won't be in his father's shadow. He'll be so far from him, he won't be able to see his father's shadow. And that makes me a little sad, knowing that when Billy Graham is gone, there'll be no one who will try to unite us in the way that only he could.  

How far right can the GOP go?

So now Rick Santorum has decided that now only birth control is bad for the country, but that not only should federal money and standards get out of the education system, but so should the states. So where will the money come from, and what would the standards for a school system be? Could a community decide that Roman Gods actually made the earth and teach that? Could another community teach that slaves were actually the driving force in the Constitution? Rick, this idea isn't far right-wing GOP, it's far right-wing liberalism, far-right Birch Society theory. But you may not be as far right as Bob Morris, an Indiana Representative. He has pulled his daughters out of The Girl Scouts, saying that he has found that the group tries to make sex objects of little girls, promotes homosexuality, and encourages young girls to have sex. He has also said that role models for the group are all feminists, lesbians, or communists. These are the spokesmen foe the GOP? GOP, how far right can you go?    

What's important to your family, Rick?

Thinking about this contraception/ First Amendment discussion, it just got me wondering? What's important to your family? Now I have to say, I've never had children, but I have 4 sisters and had a marriage with a women who had children. So my question to everyone, but especially to Rick Santorum: What's important to your family? No, not you and your spouse, but to your children as they are growing up. Not what's important to them, but what you think should be important in their future. The right person to spend a life with? That may be the most important thing for you to think about. So, of course, you want that person to get along very well with your child in as many areas as possible. Get along and are friends with each other? Of course. They should spend a lot of time with each other to see how they are together. Treat them well and with respect? Of course. Them spending time together will do that, too. Have a good sense of money and agree with how it should be spent? That would be nice, and them seeing how each other make and spend money helps. Physically attractive to each other? Of course, that is very important. Gets along sexually? So you don't care about that, do you, Rick? I think everyone else does. They want their children to meet someone they can get along with sexually. I have for all my sisters, and all my step-kids. To me, it doesn't matter if they're straight or gay, a prude or a sexual freak in some way, like sex once a month or once a hour. I want them, and I think all parents want the same thing, to have their children find someone that they are compatible with, and that they can be happy with. Most people would say this is something that any two people can't just talk about, but must find out through actions. And the easiest way to do this is with some type of conception. So,  you disagree with that thought? Which part, and why? What are you or will you teach your children to do when this important item comes up in their lives? Will you tell them just to talk about it with their perspective mates, or isn't it important to you and your family? Want me out of your family's bedroom, Rick? Stop preaching your faith, stay out of my family's bedroom, and others bedrooms, and I will. But if you bring it up, it's fair to ask about you and your family.           

Mr. Speaker, you lied again

With all due respect Mr. Speaker, how can what you be true? What actions has the President taken in the last 2 years that has hurt this economy? If, as I believe, not one idea that the President has brought up has been passed into law, how can any action that he has taken hurt the economy? In blocking any proposal that the President has made, it is you and the entire Tea Party that is hurting the economy. You, the GOP House and the Senate GOP members have stopped any actions that the President from taking any action that would hurt or help the economy. Therefore, you can not be telling the truth about the President hurting the economy. 

Governor Christie, put rights to a vote?

New Jersey governor Christie has said that he will veto any law that allows gay marriage, and has asked the legislature to put Gay Marriage to a vote. Governor, would any state outside the northeast have okayed mixed marriage in the 60s? Of course not, but what is right for one person is right for all. That is guaranteed by our Constitution. And that is why those laws were overturned. Now remember the line, all men (we now believe that it means all persons, men and women) are created equal. If one person cannot marry and have a household because they love a person of the same sex, that person can not be equal to a heterosexual in the eyes of the laws. And this can not be allowed by our Constitution, no matter what the people may vote. The Tea Party, GOP, and religious groups have recently fought for a strict reading of the Constitution when it comes to the separation of church and state. I'm sorry Gov. Christie, as a GOP governor, you can't stand behind the Constitution when it fits you and throw it away when it doesn't.     

Global Warming? No. Global Weather Changes.

When I got out of the military in late 1994, after a year I decided to go back to college and get a degree. One of the first courses I took was Ecology 101, and I still remember a guest lecturer that talked about Global Warming. It was his thought that the movement had been given the wrong name. He said that the name came from the seas heating up globally, but he thought that Global Weather Chaos was a much better name. He said that although most scientists thought that man's contribution was undeniable, he said that in real life, it didn't matter, for temperatures wouldn't go up in a not steep but straight line, but that fluctuations would happen every year. And he said look for anomalies somewhere every month. He finished by telling us that to see if this theory is true, look at places that have once-a-century weather events that now take place every five year or so. We asked if only bad things would happen, and he said of course not. He said that mild times would happen more often, too, especially in the west, midwest, and southern  parts of  America. With this year here in Kansas City being one of the mildest and least snowy in recorded history, I am reminded of his speech. And I know that although this winter has been wonderful, next year may come back and bite us in the ass. After all, it really isn't Global Warming, it's Global Weather Chaos.   

A bad night for Romney

Sorry Mitt, you can spin it any way you want, but not only did you lose all 3 races Tuesday night, you got less than 1/2 of the votes that you did in 2008 in those 3 states. Need more bad news? In a year where the GOP is suppose to be stoked to beat President Obama, voter turn out was lower than 2008. So not only are fewer people wanting you to be the nominee, fewer people in the GOP care who the nominee is. Now some may say that is because no matter who runs, they'll vote for that person rather than the President. But if there's no passion for you Mitt, what can you campaign on? You hate him, so vote for me? That never works in any election. Was there any good news last night for you? Yes, there is always a silver lining. No actual delegates were assigned last night: Missouri was just a beauty contest, and Minnesota and Colorado were simply first steps to electing delegates. But a lack of passion for a candidate is never a good sign, whether you win the GOP nomination or not.   

Super Bowl Ad

Well, I guess the Clint Eastwood ad got a lot of political flak. Sorry, I don't get it. Now, some of the GOP  loved it and some of them hated it. Most Dems loved it, but some hated it. But I didn't like it for one reason. If Clint was talking about the Detroit car manufacturing group that's still with us, fine. But if he's talking about the city, please get real. The governor wants to take over the city and make elections mute in the city. But if the ad was about the American cars, and Dodge in particular, then it isn't really a political ad. So ABC, FOX, CBS, NBC, and above all, MSNBC, please stop making it about politics. It was about a car company telling the American people, "You thought we came from the brink, and we did. And we're a great car company. But if you think this is the best we can do, WOW!, are you wrong. This is just the first half of what we can do." This would have nothing to do about an administration, or who to vote for, but a thought about a company that wants your business for years to come. And isn't that a better spiel than either the GOP or DEMs gave is today.     

Sanity returns, or does it?

Well, the Susan G. Komen Foundation finally came to its senses and is sending funds to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screening tests. This will again allow low-income women to get exams for early breast cancer detection, saving lives. So sanity returned to one group, but I guess for another, it will never show up. Which group is that? The GOP, but especially the Tea Party wing of the GOP. Why do I feel that way? Well, if I told you for the 23rd month in a row employment went up, will you still complain that the President doesn't care about the country? Yes, and complain that the President wants big government. So now I tell you that the government has cut jobs for the 6th month in a row. Do you still complain? Yes, taxes are too high. So when I tell you that federal taxes are as low as they ever were under President Bush, what do you say? well, the deficits are too high. So now I tell you that the President was willing to cut deficits, but the GOP Speaker of the House said no, and what do you say? That I'm lying about everything. Well, no I'm not, and I know the real reason you hate this President so much. He's black, and at your core, you are all racists. And no, I'm not lying about that either.  

Not First Lady-like?

So, the First Lady goes on The Ellen Show and does 25 push-ups and the right-wing media and bloggers go nuts. Not First Lady enough they say. Not being the proper type of President's wife they utter. She was on the show to promote good eating and exercise habits. I have the sneaking suspicion that the only thing that she could do to please right-wingers is to either leave the White House or stop breathing. So Rush, how long would it take you to do 25 push-ups? Not the point, you say. Maybe it really is the point.

Mitt goes even farther right

Well, just when most people thought that Mitt Romney would try to tack back to the center to attract moderate voters, he gets endorsed by Donald Trump, someone who still is questioning the President's birth certificate. Well Mitt, if you wanted to assuage the far right of the GOP that you're one of them, that may have done it. But if you wanted to alienate all centrist thinking moderates, well, I think you've done that too. Congrats, Mitt. You may have just mortally wounded your own campaign. By the way, how many times can a person shoot themselves in the foot and not bleed to death. With Mitt, we may find out.