What republicans will do. Not!

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Sunday November 02, 2014 · 8:44 AM PST

2014/11/02 · 08:44

So we are all supposed to get out and vote for republicans. Why? Let us look at a few issues that have been the centerpiece of republican politics these past years.

Health care: Will the GOP pass laws to get rid of health care (Obamacare) reform and take away health insurance from the millions that have signed up so far? No! That is not about to happen.

Border Security: Are we going to see republicans build a wall across the southern border to keep undocumented immigrants from entering the U.S.? Nope! Republicans want the cheap labor that is courted by their corporate cronies.

Abortion: Will the GOP outlaw abortion and close down all abortion clinics across the nation? No!

Gay Marriage: Are we going to see republicans pass laws to make gay marriage illegal in America? Nope!

Marijuana: Can we count on the GOP to pass laws to stop the sale of marijuana and its use as a recreational drug? Nope!

Energy: Will the GOP continue fighting solar and wind energy and make attempts to derail those alternative sources? Nope! They would like to do so because they are direct competitors to oil but it's not going to happen.

Will they reduce the size of government: Absolutely not! Every republican president has increased the size of government in including George W. Bush and his creation of the Dept Homeland Security!

War: Will they keep the country from incursions around the world in search of another war? Nope! To the GOP war is a business endeavor!

There is no need to continue examining these issues because we all know the outcome! Republicans will do little to nothing on any of these issues. They will only respond to matters that have a profit motive behind it and that will fatten their wallets and stock portfolios! To the GOP it is all about predatory capitalism!

The GOP: No wall on the Southern Border

POLITICOSIS

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Thursday October 23, 2014 · 4:55 PM PDT

2014/10/23 · 16:55

It seems every republican out there is making the claim that the U. S. southern border is not secured. Again and again we hear right-wing talking heads on Fox News and at Salem Communications radio stations telling us how we need to "secure the border". Every republican campaign has placed border security as part of their criticism of the present administration. But we have all noticed something peculiar in that at no time have any of those critics offered an explanation on exactly HOW they would further secure the border. Conservative republicans are purposely avoiding that part of the discussion. In fact former V.P. candidate Paul Ryan himself in his recently released book 'The Way Forward ' discusses border security - yet he purposely leaves out an explanation on how he would further secure the border. In effect all these conservative republicans talk about the need for border security without telling us exactly what they would do different than what the Obama Administration has been doing. The reason for avoiding that part of the discussion is because they do not want to bring up the subject of the 'wall' that was supposed to have been built along the the Southern Border. It was not very long ago that every republican out there was talking about building a huge wall along the southern border. GOP members could not stop themselves from talking about the need for a 'wall' as the answer to the immigration problem. America had to build that wall one way or another - they claimed. Yet these days republicans seem unable to even utter the word "wall" in their discussions of border security. That is because we all know - liberals and conservatives - that all that talk about a 'wall' was just a ploy to get votes. Just as it is now.

This time around we find a bit of double-talk in their criticism by reminding us that some 50,000 women and children were picked up at the border this past summer. We can all see how those two propositions are at odds with one another. If the border is not secured then exactly WHO picked up the illegal immigrants? Well we all know that it was the U.S. Border Patrol that picked up all those women and children. The U.S. Border Patrol is routinely picking undocumented immigrants and processing them accordingly. Undocumented immigrants are still arriving at the Southern Border.That's because border security DOES NOT keep immigrants from arriving at our country. In effect border agents simply become part of the apprehension and processing staff. The undocumented immigrants are still allowed to enter the U.S. A few months ago we all heard from Texas Gov. Rick Perry who told us that he was going to secured the border himself by putting the Texas National Guard along that boundary. This is the same governor that proposed to give a "free college tuition" to illegal aliens in Texas. He went as far as accusing other conservatives who did not agree with him with not having a heart. No wonder thousands of undocumented mothers and children from Latin America found their way to the Texas border. He tried to blame President Obama but we all know that Rick Perry was partially responsible for the wave of immigrants into Texas this past summer. And what exactly did the Texas National Guard which was sent to the border by Rick Perry accomplish? Since he is still whining and crying about the 'porous border' we can only conclude that his national guard strategy did not work. All Gov. Rick Perry did was to provide additional help to the U.S. Border Patrol in receiving and processing those who show up at the border - who are then allowed to enter the U.S. They are allowed to enter because of our immigration laws. Laws that could have been changed by republicans who took control of every facet of government in the year 2000. But they did not change such laws because conservative republicans wanted to, and still want to, protect American corporations and their pursuit of cheap labor - at any cost.

POLITICOSIS

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Sunday October 19, 2014 · 12:48 PM PDT

2014/10/19 · 12:48

If you are going to come down with some kind of health problem, make sure it happens to you in a Blue democratic state and not a red Republican one. At least that is what we can conclude from study after study on the status of healthcare in America. According to Fox News and its report "Ten Worse States for Healthcare" on FoxNews.com on July 30, 2014, the states with the worse healthcare systems are all red states. We all know that democrats and republicans view healthcare in completely different ways. Democrats see healthcare as a "right" that has to be available to all citizens regardless of their financial status. This is a more socialistic approach to healthcare and similar to those in England, France, Australia, Russia, Canada and other industrialized capitalist nations. Liberal democrats believe that universal healthcare can be accomplished in America the same way it has been done through out the rest of capitalist world - through a tax funded system that keeps profiteering from dominating the industry. Republicans on the other hand view healthcare as a "privilege" for those with health insurance and/or the financial ability to pay for services. If you do not have health coverage than you are on your own. This is very much what the conservative playbook is all about - profit making. The modern day GOP is a party of predatory capitalism at its worse.

POLITICOSIS

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Wednesday August 13, 2014 · 7:17 PM PDT

2014/08/13 · 19:17

It was just last Summer 2013 that President Obama went before the American people to explain why we, the United States of America, should send military aide to Syria. He was very clear as to why we needed to intervene in the Syrian war and why we needed to assist certain segments of the civil war in Syria. He asked congress for a resolution and authorization (which would have included $500 million in funding) to get our forces into the Syrian conflict. To stress this again, President Obama wanted and tried to get the U.S. directly involved in the Syrian civil war. And he requested congressional authorization to do so. But what happened next was pretty amazing. Republicans who had been urging the president to send troops and aid to Syria - suddenly retreated and refused to grant him the authorization which had been requested by the president. They did a complete about face on the subject. These were the same GOP members who had been accusing the president of not consulting with congress. But as soon as they were consulted they decided to ignore the request. It was the U.S. Congress that kept the U.S. military out of the Syrian war. Not the president. That's because we have a congress that's made up of GOP members that will do anything and everything to oppose and disrupt anything that is requested by President Obama. Their opposition is so acute that they even take the side of America's adversaries as when we saw Sarah Palin and Rudy Giuliani putting down President Obama while praising the leadership skills of Russian President Putin.

POLITICOSIS

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Saturday August 09, 2014 · 8:32 PM PDT

2014/08/09 · 20:32

Regardless of where you look, the missing element in the conservative narrative is credibility. There is not a trace of credibility to be found anywhere in the GOP narrative. The GOP spent years telling the President to put off the employer mandate in the healthcare reform act (ACA). They had all kinds of excuses and every talk show host out there was promoting the importance of postponing the employer mandate. So the president went along with it. Now they are suing him for doing the very thing they urged him to do. So we must conclude that the GOP was urging the president to break the law. Why would one of our political parties urge the president to break the law? Let us look at some other games that have been played by the GOP.

Obama ran for President with an agenda that included closing GITMO. Once he was elected he began the process of closing GITMO but then the GOP mounted a coast-to-coast media campaign to not close down GITMO. But as soon as President Obama put off closing GITMO we suddenly heard people like Michael Medved and other right wing talking heads accusing the President of breaking his promise to close GITMO. That's the game playing that goes on within the republican party. Not the republican voter - the republican party itself. Last year we saw the GOP urging the president to intervene in the Syrian conflict. Members of the GOP in the House and Senate were trying to get the president to get us involved in the Syrian war. The same folks who accused the president of not consulting with them were now telling the president to act on his own. But that time the president called them on it. He asked for a congressional resolution directing him and authorizing him to intervene in the Syrian conflict. And we saw what happened. The GOP got cold feet and refused to introduce a resolution on Syria. They were just wanting to get the president into some kind of political bind. In effect these republican politicians are acting like children playing head games. It is really pathetic. So they sought a situation where they could accuse Obama of a lack of leadership by keeping us OUT of the Syrian conflict OR on the other hand accusing the president of getting us INTO the Syrian conflict. That's how the GOP governs! They sit around brainstorming on how and when and where they can obstruct and bring dysfunction to the Obama Administration. And these are adults we are talking about - adults that are acting like 12 year olds.

This week we have been subject to a mass discussion on the topic of immigration. There we find Governor Rick Perry of Texas and his act of placing the national guard (NG) on the border. The first thing that we all wonder about is why? Why did Mr Perry wait so long to do this? Why hasn't the governor sent the national guard to the Texas border prior to this? After assessing the entire episode we can conclude with three possible answers to that question. First, it could be that Mr Perry did not know that he had the authority to send the NG to the border. That could very well be true because this is the same man who could not remember three separate governmental agencies he would have shut down had he been elected President of the United States. Who in the world runs for president without having a commanding grasp of the issues and the structure and inner workings of the U.S. government? So it could be that he did not know he had the power to send the NG to the border until now.

POLITICOSIS

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Monday September 02, 2013 · 6:44 PM PDT

2013/09/02 · 18:44

There are many GOP members who believe that 'fear' is what we need to instill in the world as a way of Americas military dominance over other nations. This is of course ridiculous since many countries will simply challenge those who attempt to use fear as a global tactic for dominance. It might work in the field of economics whereby a nation may hold back oil or other resources and use them as a tool of diplomacy. But even then it has limits to its usage. Fear as a tactic simply does not work. And President Obama is finding that out in his ongoing approach to the country of Syria and its apparent use of chemical weapons. Countries had no fear of FDR, or JFK, or Reagan or either of the Bush Presidencies. Which is why we ended up going to war again and again. Our posturing of power seems to have served as invitations to conflict. The lack of fear of America brought us Vietnam, Pearl Harbor, 911, Iraq War I and Iraq War II. And for President Obama drawing a "red line" against Syria, as a 'warning' and as a 'fear factor' has done nothing. In some ways it might have worsen the political and diplomatic landscape.

POLITICOSIS

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Monday October 22, 2012 · 7:37 AM PDT

2012/10/22 · 07:37

Most people have strong opinions about abortion and it's role in the social fabric of America. The anti abortion movement and it's supporters including Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan have now resorted to assertions that an "embryo" constitutes a "person" and that therefore ALL abortions should be illegal. While it is true that Americans are not very sophisticated on subjects such as economics and political science, they are not so stupid as to believe that nonsense. An embryo is NOT a person nor does a woman who got pregnant five minutes ago constitute two different people. She does not suddenly count as two people! Not in her vote! Not on her tax return! Nor is she going to buy two plane tickets when she flies on an airliner! The idea is preposterous!

POLITICOSIS

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Sunday October 07, 2012 · 11:31 PM PDT

2012/10/07 · 23:31

Some of you might recall that old Bobby Darin song 'Multiplication'. The chorus went something like..."Multiplication...that's the name of the game". It might be that Mr Romney was listening to that tune just before he went on to debate President Obama last week. That would explain his ideas for healthcare, medicare, social security and other such programs. His ideas are simple! End medicare as we know it and turn it over to the states! So we will then have 50 medicare systems in place. That would sure make things great, wouldn't it? The same for overall healthcare. Let us create 50 different healthcare systems and maybe even 50 CDC style bureaucracies. The same idea awaits Social Security. So that we will end up with 50 different Social Security programs that are sure to remedy so many of the our nations ills. Multiplication is the name of the game according to Mitt Romney, not just in making money but in how he sees social and economic issues in America. Democrats should be talking about those ideas from Romney.

He spoke of his five point program to correct the ills of the American economy but gave us no actual facts on exactly what he intends to do! Making America "energy independent" sounds interesting! Apparently Mr Romney does not keep up on energy news and has not been informed that American oil companies EXPORT more oil to foreign nations than they import! If he were to simply read the reports by the U.S. Energy Information Administration for the first half of 2011 or listen to the nightly news casts he would know that bringing energy independence to America means putting an end to oil exports. Exports that are actually higher than the amount of oil that is imported to America. So exactly how is he going to do that? How is he going to get oil companies to stop selling their oil at higher prices in other countries?

POLITICOSIS

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Wednesday June 27, 2012 · 10:26 AM PDT

2012/06/27 · 10:26

Those of us who grew up during the 'cold war' remember all the school lectures we received regarding the subject of "communism". We were told 'communism' was evil and that communists did not value life the same way we did. We were repeatedly told about the conditions in communist countries and their lack of freedoms and so forth. But there was one other thing that was always part of the discussion - that communist workers were little more than 'paid slaves'. To some extent that was and still is true. In communist countries workers are often little more than 'paid slaves'. The question now is Who are those 'paid slaves' working for these days? American Corporations! You read that right!!! American Corporations that have basically been the foundation for our capitalist system - for which thousands of citizens have died in war to protect - are now all over the world employing communists workers at the expense of American workers.

POLITICOSIS

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Friday February 24, 2012 · 11:47 PM PST

2012/02/24 · 23:47

At this very moment we have a prominent Republican candidate for President who is basically calling for an end to women's prenatal testing. Yes, Rick Santorum believes that such testing leads to INCREASES the number of abortions in the country. At the same time we have another Republican, Virginia's Gov. Bob McDonnell, calling for mandatory prenatal testing as a way of DECREASING the number of abortions! He wants to force women in Virginia to have prenatal testing as a way of preventing abortion! So we have two Republican MEN seeking the exact opposite with a subject that is really a personal matter to WOMEN. Both of these men are part of a concerted movement that aims at pushing the country back decades to a time before labor unions, before medicare, before social security and before women's rights! It is a dual-sided movement with one side going after the social construct while the other goes after the economic sector which is led by a huge anti-worker movement. They believe that they are out to save "American values" and if they can break the back of the American worker, save American capitalism.

They are trying to achieve those goals by approaching the country from a 'theocratic' point of view. They would love to have the Constitution replaced by the Bible! And their actions show the little regard they actually have toward the Constitution which establishes our court system. It is our Supreme Court that has decided that abortion is legal and a personal choice for the woman to deal with. But these folks want to subvert the Supreme Court and have promoted intimidation, coercion, and bullying as ways to subvert our legal system and legal judgments. Some states such as Texas, regard a fetus as a 'child' in cases where a pregnant woman may be the victim of a crime. Which is fine. But we have to be REAL and accept the fact that a woman who became pregnant five minutes ago is not exactly carrying a 'fetus'. If this was the case then EVERY pregnant woman out there would be filing their tax returns as TWO people. So that if my wife got pregnant yesterday I could suddenly claim three dependents today on my tax returns! Are pregnant women in Texas claiming two dependents on their tax filings? Probably not! And why not? If it's so obvious that its a "baby" why didn't the Supreme Court designate a pregnant woman are two-people? Because we have to deal in the real world! And the fact is that an egg is not a hen or a chicken! It's an egg! Frying an egg does not constitute animal cruelty!

POLITICOSIS

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Tuesday May 10, 2011 · 10:28 PM PDT

2011/05/10 · 22:28

Republicans are the bonafide kings of hypocrisy and this past week they seemed to work overtime to retain that title. The exact same talking heads and mouthpieces at Fox News that spent nine years telling us that terrorists arrested abroad did
not require the same due process and legal rights as American citizens are now asking why Bin Laden did not receive "due process". The same clique of hypocrites that told us that the economy, war on terror, the two wars etc etc all belong to Obama now and how we need to stop blaming everything on George Bush suddenly reversed themselves. Now suddenly we are to credit George Bush with the killing of Bin Laden. This is almost laughable! If it were true it would simply show how incompetent the Bush White House was since they would have had the information to capture Bin Laden and simply did not do so. In what appears to be one of the most bizarre episodes in US political rhetoric -some Republicans and their right wing media reps appear to be taking the side of Bin Laden and even insinuating that perhaps Bin Laden should have been read his Miranda rights! This is the same GOP that issued death warrants against Bin Laden! The same folks that offered millions of dollars in reward for Bin Laden's capture Dead or Alive! And apparently even Chris Wallace did not know the difference between the role of Bin Laden in the landscape of terrorism and those of Bin Ladens followers!
Unlike his followers Bin Laden was already known as the mastermind of 911 not only through secondary evidence but he himself has appeared on video tapes all over the world admitting to his horrific deeds. Apparently Mr Wallace forgot all that in his quest to score points for Fox News. It might be however that a Pandora's Box has been open relating to this issue and that in effect the Bush Administration knew where Bin Laden was all along and simply did nothing about it. Something that we might want to examine here at this time by using the same tool that is used everyday by Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Medved and others; speculation!

Some of you might have seen the video tape of President Bush at a news conference where he basically declared that Osama Bin Laden had become an unimportant player in the world of terrorism. On the video from a news conference held on March 13, 2002, President Bush appears almost as a defeated individual who goes on to tell us that Bin Laden had become somewhat of a "marginalized" person and that in fact his capture was no longer a priority for the U.S. Yes that is the absolute truth! President Bush had given up on capturing Osama Bin Laden and just this week some stations played the video of that press conference to set the record straight. Something you will not see on Fox News but which is easily available on YouTube. Now that Osama Bin Laden has been killed one can't help but ask some pertinent questions about the Bush Administration and its approach toward capturing the mastermind of 911. Most troubling is the fact that Bin Laden was residing in a huge compound built right under the nose of the intelligence community without us - The United States - knowing about it! How could that be possible?!?!

POLITICOSIS

Community (This content is not subject to review by Daily Kos staff prior to publication.)

Tuesday May 04, 2010 · 10:54 PM PDT

2010/05/04 · 22:54

As a political junkie and registered Independent, I am always fascinated by some of the political angles that are manifested among the American people - be it Republican or Democrat! One of the things that has been happening in the past year is an awkward angle on the relationship between terrorists and the Republican message. It is a bit complex but more and more people believe that Republicans are hoping for a terrorists act to take place in America because they believe such an act would get the American voter to flock to the Republican party. That of course sounds like something out of the loony bin but we have to look at how and where those ideas come from. So let us look at the following issue and question:

Newer
Older

RSS

What republicans will do. Not!

The GOP: No wall on the Southern Border

Texas/Red States have the worse healthcare

How republicans in congress helped create ISIS

Credibility: The missing link in Republican politics

Syria: The Republican Dilemma

Forcing Women To Have Children

Democrats Better Wake UP!

Some Might Call it 'Corporate Treason'

Rick Santorum: The wackyness of the long distance runner

The Death of Bin Laden: New Questions

REPUBLICAN RHETORIC: A TROUBLING PERCEPTION