Dueling Budgets

Earlier this Week, US Republicans unveiled their budget plan which is projected to cut $61 billion off this year's budget. Their proposed cuts include limiting or ending funding to the Department of Education and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Obama this morning has unveiled his own budget which would cut $1.1 trillion over the next 10 years, or ~$110 billion per year. Cuts in this plan come from placing a spending freeze on domestic projects. Unfortunately, even this plan falls short of the $4 trillion in domestic cuts that would be needed to rectify the deficit.

Neither plan addresses the three biggest contributors to the US budget: Medicare and Medicaid, Social Security, and Defense spending. However the lesser of the two evils would have to be Obama's plan. The republicans' is filled with impulsive reactions to programs that would actually save money if they were left alone.

Other Updates:

-Iran protests began earlier today as young university students met riot police in the streets. Continuity is not assured but hopeful. The US State Dept has launched a twitter account in Farsi in order to show support for the protesters.

-Protests in Yemen and Algeria are still going on but only Algeria seems to be picking up steam. Al Jazeera is now giving them equal time as Egypt's aftermath.

-The Grammys are going on. Maybe. I'm actively trying not to pay attention.

-Vlad Putin is still a badass.

On Politics Today

"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid."

-Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower,

in a letter to his brother Edgar on November 8, 1954

Short of changing human nature, therefore, the only way to achieve a practical, livable peace in a world of competing nations is to take the profit out of war ?

-President Richard Nixon,

Real Peace 1983

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed; those who are cold and are not clothed ?

-President Eisenhower,

The Chance For Peace, April 1963

Japan was already defeated ... dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary.

-General and Future President Eisenhower

To occupy Iraq would instantly shatter our coalition, turning the whole Arab world against us and make a broken tyrant into a latter-day hero ... assigning young soldiers to a fruitless hunt for a securely entrenched dictator and condemning them to fight in what would be an un-winnable urban guerilla war. It could only plunge that part of the world into even greater instability.

-George Bush Sr,

A World Transformed, 1998

This, I believe, serves to demonstrate how politically far right the United States has been getting pulled over the last couple of years.

Election Results

So Republicans took back the house. Honestly I'm not all that upset. This has been predicted to happen for years now. Next I predict that the republicans will continue to gain popularity and support until the next election in 2 years.

Honestly I empathize with the Tea Party. Frustration over the stagnant economy has been hard on everybody. I merely disagree with them on how they choose to express that frustration politically.

On another note, Prop 19 failed to pass yesterday in California. For some reason. Now drug related violence will continue to happen across the border and a harmless substance will continue to remain illegal. I don't even smoke the stuff; I just think it should be up to the individual whether to do so or not.

Hypocrites on Both Sides

I've noticed that sometime between the Rallies to Restore Honor and Sanity, conservatives and liberals have traded places. One side is always attacking the other on how their rally was nothing more than a thinly veiled attack on those on the other side of the political spectrum. And meanwhile, the side that held the rally is defending theirs as being non-partisan but instead done only for the good of America as a whole.

Who do we believe? Obviously I believe Jon Stewart's rally was better for reasons I already mentioned, but how does the average independent know who to believe? They don't. Both sides remain in their corners flinging poo at one another, which is something that both rallies urged us not to do.

In other words: Efforts to curb the political mudslinging have resulted in even more mudslinging.

Militancy

How angry are conservatives becoming? While surfing the web, I have come across rhetoric that is inflamed almost more often than not while reading/listening to comments made by conservative activists. They often speak of how Obama is a secret Muslim who was born outside the United States, and how the democrats in the federal government are legislating in the direction of tyranny and that they are looking to rid you of your rights. Obviously these sentiments are groundless and are fueled by far right media outlets such as Fox News and conservative radio pundits, and when any single conservative is challenged on his/her beliefs, they are immediately revealed to be concerned over something for which there should be none.

For example, Jon Stewart the comedian has had specifically two far right political figures on his show in the past month, and both have been shot down over matters of policy. Most recent was Ken Blackwell, the vice chairman of the RNC and author of the book "The Blueprint: Obama's Plan to Subvert the Constitution and Build an Imperial Presidency". I'll let Jon Stewart do the explaining:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-april-28-2010/exclusive---ken-blackwell-extended-interview-pt--3

The question is: Have Republicans shown that they cannot lead through the actions of George Bush, and now they are simply jealous that Obama is doing a much better job? Now Obama is not perfect by a long shot, but compare the two: one lied to the american people to involve us in 2 foreign wars which cost us $400m per day, and the other provided us with affordable healthcare which will ultimately save us money. One passed the patriot act, the other promotes transparency in government. One passed laws that allowed Wall Street to make millions off of a financial collapse, the other wants to reform the system to make that impossible. One lobbied to pass $700billion bailouts through congress, the other made the banks pay back the bailouts with interest in order to make it cost much less. One allowed 9/11 to happen under his watch, the other has implemented policies that has foiled several terrorist attempts in just his first year.

Republicans seem to be inventing grievances with Obama and the federal government simply because they cannot stand the idea that there is a successful progressive liberal president in power. It seems misinformation is becoming a world view with these people.

FINANCIAL REFORM

I don't know if you could tell by the title, but I am mad. I enjoy being exposed to opposing viewpoints and thereby opening debate, but recently I have seen opposition that is over the top.

Our Federal Government is no attempting to pass a financial reform bill that would make it impossible to bailout a company by decreeing it too large to fail, while simultaneously tightening regulation over derivatives, which had a huge part in causing the financial recession that occurred in our recent past.

And guess what? ALL 41 Republican senators are opposed to the bill!!!! What the hell is their excuse for siding with Wall Street banks rather than the American people?! I've heard the following milk toast responses:

-it is socialist
-government intervention caused the financial crisis in the first place (untrue as hell)
-the bill is partisan

While the last point is true, it is not enough of a reason for our legislators to sell out their constituents to the Wall street bankers. Whether you love or hate the current administration, you should agree that this particular legislation is essential to prevent another financial meltdown. It is simple fact. No amount of Faux News or MSDNC bias can change that.

The exact action which caused the financial crisis was revealed recently: Goldman Sachs took out large insurance policies from AIG on toxic assets-ones that were doomed to fail. Once those assets failed, Goldman Sachs made big bucks off of their insurance policies and AIG went near bankrupt, which necessitated their bailout. So at the core of the financial crisis, Goldman Sachs made millions while the rest of the economy was tanking. The federal Securities and Exchange Commission recently discovered this and is pursuing legal ramifications.

I believe everyone can agree that the government that governs best governs least. Some may tote the slogan and repeat it enough times for it to be legally called propaganda, and more often than not those people are the ones who legislate exactly opposite to that slogan, but in the end we should all also agree that sometimes adding laws is necessary to stabilize our country. Some may argue that once our government begins to legislate that there is a slippery slope that leads us straight to communist Russia, but that is simply idiotic. This bill, if passed, would improve quality of life for everybody and would prevent Wall Street bankers from making off with America's taxpayer money with no ramifications.