GOP to Akin: Abort! Abort!

Some use science for certain
While others use guesses
To open the curtain
On life’s many messes
But Missouri’s Todd Akin
Spit out a new theory
That I guess he had taken
From a man old and weary
Uttered without fact
By a misguided quack
The spinning continues;
The safety net unravels
And the poor have no menus
While the leaders bang gavels




Wow. I knew that the GOP was entertaining some extreme positions on issues, but I had no idea that they did not know where babies come from. First, Akin was off the GOP reservation when he spoke of “legitimate rape.” The preferred party language is “forcible rape.” His theory, taken from a physician (no joke) is that under the stress of “legitimate” or forcible rape, a woman’s reproductive system shuts down and she will not become pregnant. The idea behind all this is that the GOP wants no exceptions to allow for abortions, even for rape or incest. In fact, Jack C. Willke, the physician who proposed this bizarre 14th century theory was a surrogate for Romney in his 2007 presidential bid. Don’t laugh just yet. GOP insanity may be deliberate.

They seem to wait for a reaction and, if it is too negative, they back away and offer up reactive disclaimers; “Akin was way off base and should drop his bid for the Senate.” Nobody has disclaimed Willke, the quack physician who offered the “theory,” or Paul Ryan who co-wrote extreme social engineering legislation with Todd Akin. Akin and Ryan are upset that their anti-woman bills are being described as anti-woman. One of those bills they co-wrote specifically attempted to narrow the definition of rape; hence the very careful use of ”forcible rape” by the GOP to propel the notion that rape is more acceptable as long as it is not forcible. This would mean that statutory rape or rape of anyone unable to give consent would be treated differently in order to forbid all abortions. It also creates the subordination of the raped woman to the GOP “small government” and even to the fetus in cases of pregnancy through rape. There are approximately 32,000 reported pregnancies due to rape in the United States each year. The actual pregnancy rate for rape victims is 6.4%, incidentally, and that is more than twice the rate of pregnancy due to consensual sex despite the unscientific proclamation by Akin, a member of the House Science Committee. The rationale: rape victims are usually younger and in their more fecund years. Nonetheless, this feigned GOP horror at Akin’s screw-up is questionable. The only difference is Akin’s deployment of “legitimate.” Otherwise, the GOP position is identical with both Ryan and Akin. The original version of H.R. 3 would have narrowed that exception to cases of "forcible rape." Perhaps the GOP doth protest too much, especially while advocating small government.

Hypocrisy abounds in this fertile climate. Not only are the leading Republicans throwing Akin under their bus, but they are silent on a related issue of healthcare. If I were to ask you for the only major difference between the Affordable Care Act and Romney’s Massachusetts healthcare bill, would you know that Romneycare pays for abortions while Obamacare does not? Yet we now see Cardinal Dolan (top US Catholic prelate) ready to speak out at a right wing rally headlined by Paul Ryan. That hypocrisy is difficult to understand since Ryan has been outspoken in support of Ayn Rand (the atheist egoist) who condemned government but applauded abortion. Not incidentally at all, Rand, staunch opponent of the common good and powerful advocate for individualism and the free market took Social Security in her latter years although she condemned it in her writings. Aid for the poor? Never. Let them fend for themselves. This is the Ryan offering with a sprig of vouchers thrown in for color in the presentation to the people. Will Cardinal Dolan condemn Ryan for taking the safety net from under the poor? Right! That is why Ryan invited him, of course. And if you think that Dolan has the guts to do so, then I would ask why he has not already done it since the Conference of Catholic Bishops has already condemned the GOP platform planks that threaten the poor. We already have a poverty rate so severe that 30% of children in these United States go hungry every day. Let the poor be better shoppers, then they won’t be hungry. Think of it like Ryan’s vouchers for healthcare. If they are good shoppers, then they can pocket what they don’t spend on food. Hmm, thought for food. That is a new approach. Even the New Testament implies that that we need bread since “Man does not live by bread alone….” Ryan is billed as the thinker for the GOP and he credits Ayn Rand as the biggest influence on his life, so we begin to know what he is thinking. So now we await his rationale for the trickle down theory that has never worked. Economic Darwinism. I can’t wait. Maybe we simply did not give enough to the top tenth of the top 1% to fill their money reservoir. They need more to start the trickle. Surely, that will do it if the government they love to hate can control the riots from the losers in the new economic model, or is it the old and failed economic model of the 20s?

In the meantime, we suffer through pseudo-science and Science R Us research purchased by the Koch brothers. There is no global warming. There is no harm to pollution. Carbon is a vegetable? This would be humorous if only it were not true. It would be harmless if our citizens did not believe it. Alas, we have FOX News quoting the same purchased “scientists.” One of the bought scientists recently rebelled. Richard A. Muller, physicist of the University of California stated: "Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause.” The Koch’s probably won’t hire him again, and FOX won’t quote him.

We have a recent study from the non-partisan Tax Policy Center that shows, if GOP/Romney policy is implemented, that he would keep the current Bush tax cuts and cut rates an additional 20%. He would eliminate investment taxes completely for households making less than $200,000 and abolish the alternative minimum income tax. There are no details as to how the budget would be balanced given this clear decline in revenue. The study shows that eliminating tax breaks to offset the drop in rates would hurt the middle class. Elimination of deductions such as mortgage interest will reduce home ownership. The net effect is a tax cut for high-income households coupled with a tax increase for middle-income households. The study assumes that the GOP will not change its policies, although if voters catch on, they may be forced to modify their policies on the run.
We have the Religious Right preaching that we have dominion over the earth, but largely forgetting good stewardship of this earth. They also preach obedience, but that lesson may be hard to hear by the hungry over the growling of their empty stomachs. I do see a possibility of repeating the harsh government of the 20s with violence in demonstrations and enforcement and possibly even sanctioned repression. I hope that never happens, but the mechanisms are there and so are the developing conditions of providing people less and less to lose. In a 22 August Pew report this year, the share of income for the middle class had fallen from 62% to 45% from 1970-2010. Net worth fell to $93,150 from $129,582. Good jobs were outsourced overseas by Bain, GE and others and most recently some medical services are being outsourced to India and China through our own high-tech communications systems. With tax incentives for investment and for out-sourcing work, what jobs will remain or be created? Can China both fill our pot-holes and the holes in the stomachs of the poor?

How long can this go on without seeing it play out in the streets? The GOP wants Akin to abort his run for the Senate, but that has not changed their agenda as they continue to pound the House gavel and to restrict voting by the old, young and the poor, as in PA. A GOP leader has guaranteed a Mitt victory.


Peace,
George Giacoppe
24 August 2012

Which Side; the Looking Glass

Ah the beauty of greed
It fits nearly everyone’s need
To the haves; an excuse
To have-nots, it’s a noose
And it drives the gears of the mill
To grind out the hope of the poor
Who pray for fairness and bread
But then get blocked by a door
That’s closed until they are dead
Only then do they find their true worth
When the meek shall inherit the earth


In the latest Washington drama, shared sacrifice is taking on an entirely new meaning. For the wealthy, it portends a return to the roaring ‘20s when wealthy investors lived the high life and broke all the rules. Their share was and is in the here and now. Your share is in the hereafter, so please be patient. Eric Cantor, the Republican Majority Leader of the House of Representatives is exclaiming that the right wing and Tea Party are compromising simply by meeting with Democrats and moderate Republicans. Of course. Forgive me for being suspicious. This is the very same Eric Cantor who has invested in selling T-bills short in order to make some money while engaged in the process of “negotiating” the debt ceiling. Now let me see. Cantor is threatening to make our national credit worthless at the very same time he is investing: betting that the price of 20 year Treasuries will decline. For most people, that would be worse than a conflict of interest. A simple conflict of interest is when a person has insider knowledge and uses it for personal gain. Almost no person would be so greedy as to take part in the process of affecting the value of his investment by political posturing, but Cantor is no ordinary greedy investor. He needs to twist the outcome. Forgive me again. Most people would see that action as a conflict of interest because they have assumed that Cantor has an interest in the common good of the United States as well as his own profit and welfare. Maybe if you think that way, you are making the wrong assumption. What if Eric’s only interest is Eric Cantor? Where is the conflict then? Aha! Eric is in the camp of those who hate government and then work hard to damage it to prove their point that government cannot work. Cantor has no conflict of interest if his only interest is Cantor.

Surely, Cantor is only one man and not a movement. Maybe he simply made a bad investment and has a pure heart. While Cantor is disturbing enough, let us look at the entire process. Senator Mitch McConnell, Senate Minority Leader, has publicly stated that his number one political priority is to make President Obama a one-term president, and not to consider “jobs” or “infrastructure investment.” The GOP as a whole has embraced the Grover Norquist pledge of not increasing taxes. That sounds a little limiting if not insane, but when coupled with a hatred of government (Norquist: “I don’t want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.”) Norquist then explains that he want to privatize and outsource any remaining functions.

If you understand that “Pledgers” also have a unique definition of “raising taxes,” the view in the looking glass becomes a bit clearer. Federal subsidies are seen as “negative taxes,” therefore by reducing or eliminating the $ Billion we give to General Electric, we are “raising taxes” and that is forbidden by Norquist. Hence, in today’s economy, there can be no increase to the income side of the ledger. An income increase violates the Norquist pledge. So up is down and left is right. And if you don’t do it my way, it’s NO way at all. Look closer. If we fail to honor our debts on time, then interest rates will soar and our national financial stability is gone, perhaps forever. Who stands to lose the most? Who buys on interest using credit cards? If only cuts are made to reduce the deficit and the largest single item of the budget is made exempt (military budget), then what will be eliminated? Could it be that Medicare will be eliminated? Could Social Security then be sacrificed on the altar of expediency? Could roads and bridges and other investment in infrastructure be cut? Could education for the middle and lower classes be cut? Bet on it, but use toothpicks or old buttons. You are going to need every penny you get simply to live until you file for bankruptcy and beyond. Forget the dignity that FDR afforded for Americans reaching old age. The only good thing is that you may die sooner since health care will be for the wealthy who can afford the care or the insurance to get it.
The mama bears, Michelle Bachman and Sarah Palin have come out for default. That is the same Michelle Bachman that has taken about $30,000 in federal and state subsidies through her husband’s “religious” counseling business that recently was exposed for claiming to “cure” homosexuality. Similarly, she is a partner in a dairy farm that has taken nearly $260,000 in federal subsidies. Profits from that farm according to disclosure reports are between $32,503 and $105,000 for the years 2006-2009. While Ms. Bachman condemns subsidies and “earmarks,” she has been a major recipient. Is this a conflict of interest issue? How about a church and state issue? Of course not. Again, Michelle Bachman holds a predominant interest in her own welfare. Do not expect her to fight Grover Norquist, after all. Giving up a subsidy is exactly like a tax increase according to the party line. I have to assume that Bachman feels that even if the nation defaults that she will still get her subsidies.

Sarah Palin has likewise condemned subsidies and yet her recent reality TV special “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” got $1.2 million in subsidies from the state based on a law she signed in 2008. Apart from the sheer hypocrisy of these “ladies,” their claim of the government having a spending problem instead of an income problem is an interesting diversion. “Government Spending” is not included in their description of their own subsidies. I guess they deserve subsidies and a pensioner on Medicare should be immediately weaned from that dependence. I have never seen socialism so neatly compartmented. When Michelle and Sarah get subsidies, it is not socialism. When Grandma gets a wheel chair it is.

If all this seems confusing, you simply do not understand. Michelle and Sarah are only grudgingly taking these subsidies to be true to Grover Norquist, while Grandma is a societal leach. Besides, it is a religious certainty that Grandma will inherit the earth if she is meek enough. Now if she organizes and attempts to get power to get her benefits on this side of the grave, then shame on Grandma. She may lose her heavenly inheritance. All this should remind us of the danger of organized religions that are so often manipulated to protect an outcome desired by its leaders and members (constituents when you mix church and state). Michelle Bachman, until the past few weeks when she declared her presidential candidacy, was a member of a right wing Lutheran church that condemns Roman Catholics and strictly adheres to Martin Luther’s condemnation of Jews. On the upside, if Michelle and Sarah get their way, then Grandma will get her heavenly inheritance a little sooner with diminished healthcare. Since Marcus Bachman, Michelle’s husband has declared gays, “barbarians,” there has been some confusion about his role in “curing” homosexuals although he is not certified as a counselor. TV footage of Marcus suggests that he may be too light on his feet when he dances, thus creating an image of hypocrisy in his religious counseling as well as questions as to why this activity does not violate the separation of church and state. Michelle’s pastor at the Salem Lutheran Church has been asked not to comment on Michelle’s departure. She has been linked with preacher Bradlee Dean who has conducted strong anti-gay programs through his business and has tried to link President Obama with Osama bin Laden to disparage the president. Economics and hate in the ‘20s was much the same but without Twitter. Hoover personally appealed to the nation’s Community Chest organizations rather than spend a penny on the jobless for fear that they may be motivated not to work if they got government help.

All this seems to suggest that the looking glass for these conservative ideologues does not present them with the same image that we get from our weak eyes. They see beauty while we see greed. They see piety, while we see hate. They see knowledge while we see ignorance. They see justice while we see unfairness. They are sharing our sacrifice by taking the dregs of this futile existence on earth and allowing us to have the far greater rewards of the next life. Now whom are you going to believe? Are you going to believe your lying eyes and ears and heart or are you going to believe these tortured souls who tell you we should default on the debt and confidence in our United States? Come on nation. Suck it up Americans and sacrifice now so you will inherit the earth only a little later.

Peace,
George Giacoppe
18 July 2011

Let's Pretend

Let’s Pretend

Let’s pretend we’re queens and kings
And we can do outrageous things
To make the long days pass
And fill the counting house with cash
Or entertain ourselves with knaves
While scolding naughty slaves
And holding them to blame
When our subjects call us names


You have to be in my age group to remember the Saturday morning radio program “Let’s Pretend.” In those days of yore, radio was the thing and, in a way, it enjoyed rapt attention of the audience because there was no distraction like TV or Twitter. Once you turned on the radio and tuned to a program like “Let’s Pretend,” you could be transported into a world where you were free to suspend disbelief without being jarred back into reality until the ad for Cream of Wheat interrupted the story.

For good or ill, the days of “Let’s Pretend” are gone. We live in a world where news is immediate and on a 24/7 cycle. Most slaves have been replaced with cheap imported labor and the knaves are usually public figures like politicians and TV personalities pretending to be newscasters. The ostentatious wealthy now act as our royalty and, thank God and Greenbacks, they can do no wrong. I will concede that a few slaves exist in the Middle East (like the boy jockeys of Dubai) and that indentured servitude pops up here at home from time to time, but for the most part, economics has created sharp social boundaries where cheap labor is just across a border here and across the world. This cheap labor has reduced formal slavery. It has also created de facto inequity and displacement.

The world has changed in other, substantial, ways. We have few real royals. Rock stars, movie stars and sports luminaries fill our days and nights along with the super wealthy among us. Billionaires have become self-appointed royalty with purchased kingdoms. The aura of bestowed rectitude, power and dominion surrounds this new royalty with just a taste of the era of King David, who could do no wrong despite lusting and murdering and otherwise excepting himself from the ten commandments. King David acted on his lust for Bathsheba and had her husband Uriah killed by abandoning him in battle. He also had 20,000 Syrian captives murdered after their capture and yet he is often praised for his actions instead of being condemned for war crimes.

Now our current “royalty” may not be so dramatic in their transgressions, but the fundamental message they send is identical to King David for the exclusion from blame. Meg Whitman of California is seeking the governorship of the Golden State. She has rarely, if ever, exercised her civil responsibility to vote; never registered to vote until 2002 and did not register as a Republican until 2007 and yet she has spent over $119 Million of her own money to capture the governor’s crown. She has been withering in her condemnation of “illegal immigrants” and yet has failed to take responsibility for hiring one for nine years. Her “Mickie” was not a slave, but was a hired hand and was “part of the extended family.” Extended family or not, Meg has condemned the woman for lying and even accused her of theft despite the fact that her husband’s signature lies on the bottom of the Social Security notice (in 2003) to check and report on the discrepancy in Social Security numbers (thus disproving theft). Clearly, the rules do not apply to a billionaire like Meg. She can, at once, call for inspecting employers of illegal workers and refuse to be questioned on her own hiring. In fact, the hypocrisy goes further by her blaming her opponent without evidence, her former employee, unions, media, and an attorney for bringing the offense to light. So it is not the offense itself, but the discovery by others that is wrong? Bizarre? Not at all for the kings and queens of today. Think of it. It is not the crime, but your temerity in pointing out the crime. Of course. It is your fault. Shame on you.

The first casualty in war, it is said, is the truth. It seems that this is now extended into politics. Even after being corrected for false ads saying her opponent raised taxes and otherwise misgoverned Meg has continued the ads. She promises new jobs, but what will they be? When CEO at EBay, she provided herself with a $120 Million bonus just prior to firing 30,000 workers. She has promised to fire 40,000 California civil servants if elected. Yet the work will have to be done. Will these be new jobs be for undocumented domestic workers perhaps? Maybe if the pay is low enough, we can continue the myth that all we need to do is to deport workers to solve our economic crisis. We can meanwhile pretend that they do not exist. We have no need to integrate them into our society. Let them stay in the shadows of the kingdom where nobody sees them and the royalty can dismiss them with a wave of the hand if you discover an inconvenient truth.

Although Meg has shown no civic responsibility strong enough to motivate her to vote and surely not one strong enough to take responsibility for her failure to abide by the laws, she has the money to do as she pleases. It is up to the citizens who do take their civic responsibilities seriously to reject the pretender to the throne of California. By the way, your vote may save your job rather than provide an illegal job for an undocumented worker. It could also go a long way to establish a way to incorporate the millions who are already here and take them from the shadows where they are easily exploited and underpaid while they set the wage standards for the state while working for the many “Whitmans” of California. Suspend belief, not disbelief.


Peace,
George Giacoppe
6 October 2010

Republican Hypocrites

Don’t you just love the Republicans? Here we have the party of pure selfishness and self-enrichment and every man for himself (they characterize it as self-reliance), the party that gave us the Reagan years of “trickle-down” economics (where just about everything trickled UP), the party that has saddled us and the world with privatization (i.e., the crippling of every government program save corporate welfare), the party that presided over the greatest destruction via neglect of a large American city in history—and they are now preaching the gospel of togetherness, of “Country first,” of “we must devote all our efforts to helping the unfortunate victims of Hurricane Gustav.” Suddenly, all these Gucci-clad conventioneers eager to indulge in the caviar and fine wine at fat corporation parties, have found the religion of restraint, of “we’re all in this together.” For it would be unseemly to be seen scarfing up fancy hors d’oeuvres while New Orleanians were once again drowning in their impoverished soup. So nominee McCain announces he might not ever make it to the convention—but rather might have to pipe in his acceptance speech from ground zero, with ‘the people.’ And George W. Bush makes a show of rolling up his shirtsleeves and posing with emergency managers in Texas—allowing all Republicans to breathe a sigh of relief that they won’t, after all, have to pretend to cheer him after he inevitably reminds America of his last hurricane fiasco.

            And we, the American public, are supposed to buy it. ‘See,’ we’re supposed to opine, ‘Republicans are big-hearted Americans after all, concerned over their fellow men, and even women. Even dark skinned ones.’ That first storm, that Katrina, was just an aberration. Like Iraq. Like torture. Like the greatest debt in American history.

            And who knows, it might work. Just as the other massive hypocrisy of this convention season—the selection of a woman, no less, to be McCain’s vice-presidential running mate—might work to paper over the years of Republican contempt for women’s rights. Why just look—the party of macho really does have its gentler side. And what a feminine side it is, she is. A beauty queen. A gun-toting Alaskan mama. A mother of five—including one she insisted on birthing despite the negative of Down’s Syndrome. A woman who challenges the establishment at the same time she caters to Big Oil, a no-nonsense, pro-life Palin’ woman who isn’t afraid to thumb her nose at environmentalists (much less those over-population fear-mongers), and campaigns for oil drilling in the Anwar wildlife refuge. Wildlife hell, is her motto: I hunt and fish and will have no truck with polar bears as an endangered species. Or, most of all, sex education in the schools. Abstinence is the only teaching we need. Teach your young ones abstinence, and all will be well.

            Except, of course, when it’s one of OUR young ones. Isn’t this always the Republican way? It’s always, with Republicans, “You people”—you ghetto people, you welfare moms, you oversexed over-proliferating dark-skinned peoples. But when it comes to “our” people, our good Christian people, why then it’s a different story. We’re human, after all. No one’s perfect, say our preachers. And surely not little 17-year-old Bristol, 5 months pregnant and unmarried, yes, but isn’t she a woman after all? A natural, human woman? Human like us all, after all. And determined to keep the baby. And marry the baby’s father. What’s the problem?

            The problem is your bottomless hypocrisy. The problem is your abstinence-only program masquerading as sex education. Which, as your own daughter proves, is no program at all. The problem is that here, in the United States in the 21st Century, we can’t risk a vice-President so retrograde, so out of touch, so hypocritical that she can’t even see a problem when it hits her own family. That’s the problem. The only question being this: can enough Americans summon enough common sense, enough outrage to send this party of hypocrites packing, once and for all?

Larry DiStasi