Is the Republican Party Built on a Foundation of the BIG LIE?

Despite what we have said in the last few weeks about the Republican platform being the foundation of what the GOP believes, it is now time to comment on their real foundation.  It is NOT the DNC platform; it is the network of lies and half-truths perpetrated upon the public; it is the twisting and ignoring of facts that is the clear basis for this Party.

Where do we start?  Well, why not start where they started:  President Obama is somehow foreign to the American experience and to the American Way.
 
The GOP has made an industry out of manufacturing images of the President that conjure up a foreign-born, non-Christian (Islamist), Kenyan-oriented, elitist who doesn’t even meet the requirement of being a native-born citizen because he doesn’t have a valid birth certificate. 

Maybe you have already forgotten the outrageous “birther” campaign centering on this one thing: an invalid or non-existent birth certificate in this country.  The movement included a Philip J. Berg, Pennsylvania attorney and 9/11 conspiracy theorist, who backed Hillary Clinton for president.  Another notable advocate was Alan Keyes, who was defeated by Obama in the 2004 Illinois U.S. Senate election, and self-described as a ‘conservative political activist’.

But, of course, the right-wing media joined in through the persons of Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and even Lou Dobbs.  However, it was a wannabe presidential candidate who put it into high gear.  Donald Trump resurrected the movement of lies and brought it to a head, since President Obama did release the long form birth certificate from Hawaii.  Although Trump took the opportunity to imply that he made it happen, it was more likely the long-term need to get this falsity squashed that brought forth this reaction from the President.

The Obama-haters didn’t stop there.  In spite of the much earlier Rev. Wright controversy which brought attention to Obama’s Christian denomination membership, and despite his repeated references to his Christian faith, and his appearances at the  Congressional Prayer breakfast, or his use of biblical phrases in his speeches, the general public bought into the fabrication that Obama was, and is, a Muslim.  According to the Huffington Post, about 17% of people still believe this lie, but the numbers are even higher among Republicans and in certain southern states.  It is a tribute to Republican truth-stretching strategy that they have been able to sell this chestnut to about 1/5th of the population.  But that’s not all…

According to a recent article on Addicting Info.org, a right-wing political action committee named “Government Is Not God” recently ran a smear-campaign against President Obama in 19 newspapers, using a dozen bizarre lies about religion and values to rally conservative voters to the polls.  “In the ad, the wingnut GING-PAC lays out its vision of ‘the true agenda of Barack Hussein Obama.’ Upon scrutiny from Politifact, all of the claims rate as false, with a whopping 6 “pants on fire” rebuttals.

Force Christian organizations to pay for abortions: MOSTLY FALSE (qualified by “mostly” only if you equate contraceptive access with “abortions”).
Force Christian schools to hire non-Christian teachers: FALSE
Force all states to permit same-sex marriages: FALSE
Force military chaplains to perform same-sex marriages: PANTS ON FIRE
Force doctors to assist homosexuals in buying surrogate babies: PANTS ON FIRE
Force employers to give illegal immigrants the jobs of U.S. citizens: PANTS ON FIRE
Force States to pay the college tuition of illegal immigrants’ children: FALSE
Force courts to accept Islamic Sharia Law in domestic disputes: PANTS ON FIRE
Force police agencies to allow Muslim brotherhood to select staff: PANTS ON FIRE
Force local authorities to allow Occupy protestors to live in parks: PANTS ON FIRE
Force creation of a permanent government funded “underclass”: Deemed too vague to investigate
The same ad also claims Obama is ‘the only President in history who has deliberately removed the words ‘endowed by their Creator’ when referring to our Declaration of Independence, not once, but several times,’ which Politifact also rated as ‘false’.”

It is clear that all of these lies and half-truths are being used to make Obama seem not only different from the rest of us, but intent on destroying certain beliefs and standards that more than a few Americans espouse.  Again, all this to implicate his ways as other than our ways!

There is another huge lie that lies at the heart of Right-wing attempts to make President Obama seem not only different, but foreign, and that is: Obama is a socialist intent on making our government into a socialist state, much like certain European governments.

Trouble is, America is not a socialist country nor is it headed in that direction.  To be a socialist government, the central government would have to be operating all sources of production and distribution.  This means that all manufacturers, all services, all industries, all modes of distribution - like trucking companies and railways - would have to be government-operated.  They aren’t, and they won’t be under this President (or any other most probably). 

Most of the purveyors of this untruth attempt to display Obama as a European-type socialist, meaning he supports a type of cradle-to-grave “welfare state.”  But the real motive for this appellation is displayed for all to see in an article on Forbes.com.  That real reason is the opposition of the rich toward a government that takes taxes from them and distributes what the rich consider their profits and resources to others with special challenges or needs.  It is displayed in a basic misunderstanding of the commonweal, i.e. the health of a society as a whole.  They simply don‘t want their hard-earned rewards going to people who are, in their estimate:  irresponsible, uneducated, and unworthy. 

Thus, the revealing statement of the real motive for this lie:  these measures are “excuses for the state to take from one group to give to another or to coerce people or businesses to do something they do not want to do otherwise. The more powerful the state, the greater the risk of state coercion under the guise of noble aims. ” (Paul Roderick Gregory on Forbes.com)

A so-called “welfare state” and a socialist country are not the same, no matter how badly the antagonist liar wants them to be.  A socialist state, founded either by the Right or the Left, is all about control of citizens, about power over their thinking and their lives, and all about using them as cogs in the mechanisms of the State.  Nazi Germany and Communist China are not that far apart in their national socialism (or communism).  They controlled all aspects of the lives of their subjects, proclaiming citizen “welfare” while simultaneously taking away all individuality and individual rights.  The only right one possessed was the right to serve the State.

In the Forbes article mentioned above, the author wants to term Obama a European-type socialist because the European welfare state takes one half of national output to provide state health care, pensions, extended unemployment benefits, income grants, and free higher education.  However, he also indicates that these countries leave enterprise in private hands but coerce it through taxation and regulation to contribute to what the state deems “social welfare.”  But a state with private enterprises is not a socialist state.  Social welfare is just that; it is not socialism.  Because 60% of Americans are perturbed by the word “socialist” or “socialism”, these purveyors of lies apply that term (wrongly) to any country that provides for “social welfare.”

Security for the elderly and disabled in the form of Social Security, or Medicare for the aged and sick, or the Veteran’s Administration health care system, or the saving of the American auto industry -- these are not signs of socialism.  The point is that government help for those in less fortunate circumstances than those who prosper is not socialism; it is a social contract that people enter into as citizens to enable society to enhance the lives of all its people.  Government aid is not socialism.  America is not on the road to anything like socialism, because we happen to know the difference between control of people by the state and empowerment of people through supports and opportunities. 

The fact that some small percentage of people, receiving some form of welfare, cheat or take advantage of an opportunity to be lazy or “shiftless” is not an argument for taking away all forms of government help.  If that were so, all the “welfare subsidies” to businesses and corporations should also be taken away because a percentage of those businesses (like macro-farm conglomerates and big oil companies) are cheating us all when they take from the general coffers what they don’t deserve or need. 

Likewise, Socialism is not defined  by government regulation of businesses, banks, and other financial services, nor of drugs and food and other products.  This is the legitimate regulation of  production and distribution so that consumers are protected from unlimited practices that tend to exploit them and their families.  Unfettered profit-taking is a threat to the well-being of citizens because it unleashes not just the benefits of entrepreneurship, but the forces of greed, crime and corruption, as well as threats to health and safety.  Radical Republicans tend to overlook these very real matters whenever they discuss the reduction of regulations, which is almost every day.

Finally, another lie that persists is that President Obama is an enemy of small business and that he is looking to undermine the entrepreneurship that such businesses represent. 
If that were so, would he then reduce the tax burden on small businesses some seventeen times?  From an article by Lori Schulman on Whitehouse.gov, we learn the following:

“Since coming into office in January of 2009, President Obama has signed legislation that created or extended 17 small business tax cuts and credits. Several of those cuts were in three key pieces of legislation: the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the Affordable Care Act, and the HIRE Act. All told, these three laws contain eight different small business tax cuts, including the exclusion of up to 75% capital gains on key small business investments, a tax credit for the cost of health insurance for small business employees, and new tax credits for hiring Americans who had been out of work for at least two months.
The Small Business Jobs Act, signed by President Obama in September of 2010, had another eight tax cuts and credits in it. These included raising the small business expensing limit to $500,000, the highest ever; simplifying the rules for claiming a deduction for business cell phone use; creating a new deduction for health care costs for the self-employed; allowing greater deductions for start-up expenses for entrepreneurs, and eliminating taxes on all capital gains from key small business investments.
In December of 2010, President Obama also signed a tax bill that went one step further and allowed all businesses -- large and small -- to expense 100 percent of their new investments until the end of 2011. It also extended the elimination of capital gains taxes for small business investments through the end of 2012 -- and the President's budget has proposed to make that tax cut permanent.”

Although we have examined only three of the lies continually perpetrated by the Radical Republican base, there are many more, and they persist even now.  Just to name a few (based on information in another blog - prbrownreport.blogspot.com):

Lie #1.
President Obama took $716  billion out of Medicare in order to fund Universal Healthcare. This has been repeated over and over again by both Mitt Romney, and Paul Ryan, and by many running for Congress.  But the fact is, as we have reported before,   President Obama intends to cut $716 billion in wasteful spending over a period of ten years and close a gap in the Medicare budget to give senior citizens more benefits.
Lie #2.
President Obama gutted the welfare system and made it no longer necessary for recipients to work for their benefits. Wrong again! The Obama administration initiated a $1.3 billion program that helps states give work to more welfare recipients but this initiative was killed by Congressional Republicans.
Lie #3.
President Obama is soft on terrorism because he is a Muslim sympathizer. More drone attacks have been authorized under The Obama administration than under George W. Bush and a great many top Al Qaeda operatives have thereby been eliminated. And, lest we forget, President Obama authorized the daring operation that killed Osama Bin Laden.  Oh yes, and Mubarak and Qaddafi are also gone thanks to the support rendered by this President for the democratic desires of rebellious Egyptians and Libyans.

During Adolf Hitler's reign of terror in Nazi Germany he employed a cynical media tactic in order to desensitize the country and lull it's citizens into apathy. Rather than tell small lies, he told huge lies over and over again. So much so that some Germans believed that fiction was the truth (not unlike some Americans today). “This represented a tipping point, and lead (sic) to one of the worst atrocities that the world has ever seen.”

Today, decades later, the Republican Party is using the very same tactic.  What are their intentions?  Some believe they simply want to win an election.  Others believe that their intentions are much more sinister and conspiratorial.  I tend to agree with the latter, as I indicated in several recent postings.  This is not just lying to gain an advantage.  This is lying intended to lull the citizenry into compliance with views that are contrary to the fundamentals of our constitutional republic and democracy.  This lying is meant to put the few in charge of, and in control of, the hearts and minds of the many.  Do not succumb to the Radical Republicans’ BIG LIEs.

The PLATFORM On Which They Stand: Part 2

As we said two weeks ago on this Blog, even though it has been implied that the Republican platform means very little, it is clear that this is a document that defines where a party stands; it defines the “brand.”  As it says in the first sentence of the Preamble, “The 2012 Republican Platform is a statement of who we are and what we believe as a Party….”

In this case, it defines where the extreme right-wing of the Party stands.  Unfortunately, it is that wing that is now taking over, if it has not already, the heart and soul of the Republican Party.  Indeed, if Romney/Ryan want the complete support of their base, they will pay attention to what this platform says.  And, in that vein, it makes sense that all of us should pay attention.  That’s why, today, I want to pull out for your consideration, two more examples of the adverse policies and concepts that will be the basis of actions in a Republican administration and in a Republican Congress.

1)    “We will restore the rule of law to labor law by blocking ‘card check’, enacting the Secret Ballot protection Act, enforcing the Hobbs Act against labor violence, and passing the Raise Act to allow all workers to receive well-earned raises without the approval of their union representative.  We demand an end to the Project Labor Agreements; and we call for repeal of the Davis-Bacon Act….We support the right of States to enact Right-to-Work  laws and encourage them to do so…. Ultimately we support the enactment of a National Right-to-Work law….We will aggressively enforce the recent decision by the Supreme Court barring the use of union dues for political purposes without the consent of the worker… proposing legislation to bar mandatory dues for political purposes.”

    What is left to be said?  Only that the Republican party is against anything that gives a break to unions.  Is it not clear from all this that the GOP sees Labor unions as the enemy, rather than an essential part of the work force, and a factor in business growth?  In stark contrast to their support of Business, and corporations -- with all kinds of breaks, subsidies, and tax loopholes, as well as favorable attention -- they are taking every opportunity, not only to diminish the effect of unions on businesses, but to blunt their effectiveness in the political arena.  They do not want unions to have the power any longer to deliver any election - national or local - to Democrats. 

    All of the above planks support one concept:  the right to work without being a union member.  Right-to-Work laws abolish agency fees and allow workers themselves to decide if a union deserves their financial support.  Their effect is to allow non-union workers to work for less than union scale, and thus benefit employers in cutting costs. One 2001 study indicated that “the mean effect of working in a right-to-work state results in a 6% to 8% reduction in wages for workers in these states, with an average wage penalty of 6.5%. Controlling for regional costs of living reduces this amount to approximately 4%. We find that previous research reporting real wage gains associated with right-to-work states is almost purely the result of border cities that benefit from their proximity to a non-RTW state.”

    This attack on labor unions by the Republican party is not new.  According to one article by Joseph A. McCartin, published August 2, 2011, in the NY Times:

    “THIRTY years ago today, when he threatened to fire nearly 13,000 air traffic controllers unless they called off an illegal strike, Ronald Reagan not only transformed his presidency, but also shaped the world of the modern workplace.  More than any other labor dispute of the past three decades, Reagan’s confrontation with the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization, or Patco, undermined the bargaining power of American workers and their labor unions.”

    Today, the attack is so severe, especially in states like Wisconsin, Ohio and Florida, that long-standing support from certain unions (such as firefighters)  for the GOP is at risk.  It is perhaps not so much RTW laws that have turned the tide, but the threat to the very process by which unions gained their strength and their contract benefits - collective bargaining rights. 

    Just three decades later, it has become clear that the fallout from the Patco strike has hurt workers and distorted politics in ways Reagan himself did not advocate or envision.  For although he was a conservative, Reagan basically supported the concept that private sector workers’ rights to organize were fundamental in a democracy.  Not so with today’s Radical Republicans, and their platform is the proof of how far Republicans have moved away from Reagan’s position.
   
2)    “we reject preferences, quotas, and set-asides as the best or sole methods through which fairness can be achieved, whether in government, education, or corporate boardrooms.  Merit, ability, aptitude, and results should be the factors that determine advancement in our society.”

    A hand-up to those in our society needing the support of others is not part of the rugged individualism, individual initiative and “I built it all myself” mind-set of the Republican Party.  There is no room left for affirmative action, or Pell grants, or broad GI bills, or even for help with failed mortgages. 

    The second sentence above says it all:  the only way for people to advance in this society is on their own “merit, ability, aptitude and results.”  Never mind that the GOP is also responsible for cutting back on many programs and policies that would enable some people actually to succeed on their merits if they were just given the chance.  You can’t expect everyone to succeed in the same way.  Moreover, you can’t put obstacles in the way of success if you truly believe that this is a society dedicated to individual initiative and entrepreneurship. 

    How will certain people succeed if they are held back and blocked by poverty, homelessness, racial or sex discrimination, lack of quality education, or societal invisibility?  What if the talent of that young woman who was living in a homeless shelter with her parents had never been recognized by a teacher or mentor?  Would she have gotten to that science fair to display her understanding and aptitude?  Of course not.  Such things don’t just happen.

    The current GOP must be excoriated for its outright tendency to put obstacles to success in the way, to ignore barriers to success, or to actually support those barriers.  Take a young man or woman of the upper economic class - say someone in a family with annual income well into six figures.  What do they have to start their life’s journey with?  A nice home with all sorts of amenities.  Probably a set of parents ready to spend enormous sums to provide the best for them and to dote on them just enough to give them the idea that they are special.  Access to toys and games that are entertaining as well as educational.  Expectations placed on them by parents, relatives, neighbors, teachers - a whole community of like-minded and endowed people who have a stake in the success of “their kind”.  Opportunities abound:  from toys to sports to cars to prestigious colleges to foreign travel to fantastic vacations. 

    Let’s be clear:  these children have everything necessary to succeed.  Taking advantage of what they are given is their assigned task in life.  They probably have a computer, an I-pad, a mobile I-phone and technology galore - even at an early age.  Yet, some would begrudge access to that kind of thing for “welfare” kids because it’s too expensive and “wastes the taxpayers’ money.” 

    And, isn’t that the point:  that there is ingrained in the attitude of individual initiative and aptitude a basic, sometimes unconscious, prejudice against others who have less to start with?  There is nothing wrong with success, as long as it is built on an ethical base that my success must not injure, harm or degrade another’s life, but must contribute to the welfare of other people and to society in general.  Where is that ethical value in this Platform?

    A level playing field is a fantasy.  It does not, and will not, exist in a Republican universe.  They don’t want it because it would take away from their success, from their accomplishments, from their way of life.  This is at the base of my disagreement with their platform, their party, their members, their world-view. 

    True success on many levels is not built merely on a platform of individual initiative and talent.  One measure of the true success of a society is built upon a platform that cares deeply for the welfare of the most vulnerable among us, because a society that doesn’t care for all its vulnerable people cannot sustain a democratic process or a mobile society. 

    Another measure of success is the effort that a society or government puts into removing barriers to success.  This starts with universal health care as a right and not a privilege.  It continues with an education that aspires to be the best in the world, and which provides to every child the tools and opportunities by which they can indeed become anything they desire.  It continues with a job that not only pays adequate wages, but which provides some measure of dignity to the occupier.  It culminates in a retirement that is well-planned, well-funded, and well-managed.  And one cannot do that without Social Security, an adequate pension, and personal savings or investments that are guarded, secured and overseen by just and fair regulators and regulations.  Along the way, everyone needs mentors and advocates who will help remove or overcome the obstacles that we all face.

    This is NOT the definition of a “dependent” society; this is a commonwealth society, built upon a Judeo-Christian platform that does not consign people to a trash-heap but treats all with dignity, respect and with a moral force that says we are all in this together and another’s welfare is as important as mine.  Your success is my success.  Your difficulties are my difficulties. Your problems belong to me as well as to you.  This is what the Republican platform is missing:  the living concept that we are all mutually responsible and forever interdependent.  Yes, it takes a caring community to raise a child and to see that that child prospers on behalf of us all, not simply for his or her own aggrandizement.

    Individual initiative is an excellent concept.  But missing the key ingredients of interdependence,  responsibility to all and community welfare, it is hollow and ineffective for it limits society by creating a privileged class that separates itself from the rest in order to hoard its success and deny the same opportunity to others--all for fear of losing some of its own wealth and standing.  Many other societies have been injured by this creed, for their creation of privilege for the few has resulted in denigration of the many and led to corruption, degradation, injustice, and disorder. 

    Hopefully, by paying greater attention to what is at stake in these platform concepts, we can avoid this fate.  But make no mistake:  buying in to this right-wing, plutocratic, individualistic clap-trap is a sure path to a society that will not, and cannot, maintain “liberty and justice for all.”   

A Speech Given In A Small Town

(Publius gave a shortened form of this speech at a recent gathering of Democrats in a small town in New York State)

What is this election about?  the economy?  the national debt,  jobs?  environmental issues, social issues or spending issues?  taxes or entitlements?  Is it about individual initiative or community support?   Probably all of these and more.

Before I tell you what I think it’s about, let me tell you what I fear it could be about:

1)    What I fear the most perhaps is that this election could be less about those who will be elected than about those who will remain un-elected, but in positions of power. 

This is what is at stake: the takeover of our government by un-elected power-brokers who have the resources to employ lawyers, lobbyists, and bundlers to an extent not seen before. 
    
They have the ability to dictate the terms of legislation, policy and rules that protect them from law enforcement, enhance their incomes, subsidize their businesses, and provide favorable tax breaks that keep them from having to pay their fair share in taxes. 

Make no mistake: it is part of a plan that has been developing over several decades, culminating in the current Republican Congress intentionally blocking all legislation designed to stimulate the economy, and the Radical Right-wing Tea Party that has taken over the core of the GOP.  
    
Those who still believe that Republicans will use elective office for the benefit of the middle class, or small businesses, or those who work for a living,  have not comprehended this monumental on-going plan to change how, and for whom, government operates.

Translated, this is about no more government aid programs  for the poor and the middle class.  It’s about limiting central government and giving states more power than we have seen in our lifetimes.  It’s about right-to-work laws and the destruction of unions.  It is about a false trickle-down view of  wealth epitomized by the $2 trillion dollars in corporate profits that is not being  invested in job-creation.  Don’t you wonder how much that one self-serving act has contributed to the over 8% unemployment rate that has plagued our economic recovery? 

So, my greatest fear is the takeover of our democracy through manipulation of government and politicians by a plutocracy headed by the epitome of plutocrats: Mitt Romney.

2)    My second greatest fear is related to the first:  that this election is about BIG money.  
    
More specifically, it’s about lies and distortions and negative TV images backed-up with huge amounts of money from third-party super-PACs that don‘t even have to reveal their sources, like: 
    Chamber of Commerce - $100 million
    Sheldon Adelson - $100 million
    Karl Rove’s Crossroads Group -- $300 million
    Charles & David Koch -- $400 million.

It’s not the old way of overt corruption. It’s a new way of hidden, secretive money being used to undermine democratic processes.

It’s a new way of making congressmen or senators so beholden to a donor that they feel under obligation to deliver for that donor.  It’s a new way of fostering dependence on huge amounts of money to fund election campaigns, and to bend the machinery of government to the benefit of a privileged few.  It comes down to our representatives being seduced to put their primary focus elsewhere than on service of ordinary people.

It’s about the Supreme Court equating corporations with individuals, thus protecting their political giving by a constitutional guarantee of free speech.  But protected free speech for corporations is clearly undermining the free speech rights of those with fewer resources and less money.  We have arrived at a point where unfettered money is destroying the franchise, and the one-person one-vote concept.  Money has weighted the vote in favor of the very rich, who can turn an election into a fraud quicker than you can say Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan.

3)    My third fear is that this election is about tearing down not building up.  It is about the destructiveness of war, and the fact that the GOP thinks bellicose talk is the key to foreign policy.  Not only do they want to continue war in Afghanistan, there is no guarantee that they will not intervene in Iran, or some other Middle Eastern country.

It is about treating women as weak-willed, dependent second-class citizens for whom they want limited rights to make choices -especially about their health care - or to earn equal pay for equal work.  These are exactly the denigrations that tin-horn dictators or tyrannical rulers have used to enhance male power and dominance in authoritarian societies. 

It is about laws made under the guise of combating voter fraud in order to suppress the votes of certain groups in the electorate, many of whom do not have the wherewithal to comply with the requirements of those laws. Voter suppression is a heinous act not worthy of a nation that has grown in stature each time it has extended the franchise and made it easier to vote.

Mostly, Republicans want to diminish or destroy programs that grew up under FDR and LBJ -- the New Deal and the Great Society programs.  They call these programs a re-distribution of wealth or class warfare - but it comes down to this:  they resent the fact that through our graduated tax system, they have to pay their fair share of taxes and share their success and rewards with others who need a hand-up to reach another  level.  They resent and reject that altruistic concept quoted from the Bible at the RNC: “of him to whom much is given, much will be required”.

It is about characterizing government as the enemy of the people.  Except, if it involves protection of the rich, military readiness, abortion or religious symbols and practices.  In those cases and more, they make use of strong central government as absolutely fundamental to enforcing their policies and their beliefs. 

As one author said:  “Today’s GOP has nothing to do with the party of Lincoln, or the Grand Old Party. It is an authoritarian party that wants to impose its brand of conservatism that would not only roll back the 20th Century, but would replace our democracy…with an oligarchy in firm and complete control.  This kind of government is ideal for control of a populace by the moneyed elite.”

Finally, then, what I think this election is really about is people.  It’s about YOU and ME. It’s about where we will stand in the midst of this attempt at a power-grab.  It’s about what each of us will do in the face of big money and governmental control by the 1%.  It’s about how much we will give of ourselves to oppose these out-of-control forces that threaten our way of life and our way of governing.  It’s about commitment and dedication to fundamental principles that we can not afford to have trampled. 

That’s why I support Barack Obama for President.  I support him because I believe his principles coincide with mine: like reforming government; investing in people; expanding choice, protecting the vulnerable, providing universal health care.  I believe he sees government not as the Great Destroyer, nor as the wielder of overwhelming power; but as Enabler, as servant of the people, as a force for good that empowers our citizenry in cooperation with other sectors of our society. 

So I say to Mitt Romney: I represent a large group that still feels the impact and importance of what this President says and does, not just on the day we voted for him.  That’s why huge numbers of us are still willing to give a major portion of our time, our talents, our money and our loyalty to this man.

We believe Barack Obama is the man for our times because he cares about middle-class prosperity, values and well-paying jobs.  We believe he is the one who can lead us out of the Bush recession into a new prosperity because he has already averted an economic disaster.  We believe he is the one who will continue to provide real accomplishments just as he did in his first term.  We believe he is a man of balance and integrity who will continue to work for the good of the many not the few.  We believe he is the man committed to peace and understanding in the world,  but who stands up to terrorist acts wherever they occur. We believe he is a man of bold ideas who can lead us to a future independent of the dominance of foreign oil, to an appreciation and understanding of environmental changes that we must make, to an educational system that brings out the best in all of our children and young adults. 

Elizabeth Warren brought the house down at the Democratic convention when she said:
“Mitt Romney’s the guy who said corporations are people. No, Governor Romney, corporations are not people. And that matters, because we don’t run this country for corporations, we run it for people.”

Un-elected power-brokers and Big Money could capture this election and our government unless broad numbers of ordinary citizens join this march to re-elect our President.  And, to elect a Congress dedicated to the primacy of government of the people, by the people and for the people which must not be allowed to disappear from this earth. 

The PLATFORM On Which They Stand

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan spent little time this week defending, referring to, or touting the platform produced by the Republican National Convention.  Let’s be fair, the same could be said of many candidates after they are nominated and the conventions are over.  However, even though it has been implied that the platform means very little, it is clear that this is a document that defines where a party stands; it defines the “brand.”  As it says in the first sentence of the Preamble, “The 2012 Republican Platform is a statement of who we are and what we believe as a Party….”

In this case, it defines where the extreme right-wing of the Party stands.  Unfortunately, it is that wing that is now taking over, if it has not already, the heart and soul of the Republican Party.  Indeed, if Romney/Ryan want the complete support of their base, they will pay attention to what this platform says.  And, in that vein, it makes sense that all of us should pay attention.  The puppets at the top of the ticket are going to pay close attention simply because these provisions are the “strings” that will be pulled to make them dance during the campaign, and during a potential Romney administration.

That’s why, today, I want to pull out for your consideration, some of the adverse policies and concepts that will be the basis of actions in a Republican administration and in a Republican Congress.  You, as a citizen, will carry the burden of these unless you understand that a Republican in the White House, or in the majority of either the House or the Senate, will be disastrous for the middle class and for the ability of a national government to govern, to act globally and to solve national problems.  In brief, here are my nominations for some of the worst.

1)    “The best jobs program is economic growth.  Rely on energetic and entrepreneurial Americans to rebuild the economy.  Prosperity is the product of self-discipline, work, savings, and investment by individual Americans.  Our vision is of a free people using their God-given talents, combined with self-reliance, ethical conduct, and the pursuit of opportunity: an opportunity society.  Excessive taxation and regulation impede economic development.  Small businesses are the backbone of  the U.S. economy.”

    Strange, isn’t it, that the reality of free enterprise is not quite as rosy.  Think of those financial firms that used risky investments to destroy the savings of investors, or of those bankers who approved mortgages that could not be handled by consumers, or the regulators who let corporations get away with illegal practices (remember BP and the Gulf Oil Spill).  So, here we are at a fundamental point of disagreement.

    “Free enterprise” is also about profit-making, competition, finding an edge, displaying strength and over-powering weakness in order to destroy the competition.  It is about paying fewer taxes, keeping labor underpaid, getting rid of unions.  It is about tax breaks and reducing all regulations and oversight by government to the detriment of consumers.  It is about taking every advantage one can (is that what entrepreneurs do?) to loosen controls, restrictions, laws that protect consumers so that entrepreneurs can squeeze every bit of profit possible out of customers, trade partners, other nations, other businesses.  Free enterprise is not bland; it is not for the weak of heart. 

Free Enterprise is built not just on individual initiative but on individual and group manipulation of resources, of government, of buyers and sellers, of the public.  Why else do businesses spend billions on ads or lobbyists or lawyers or bundlers?  They aren’t running your neighborhood’s corner lemonade stand!  Free enterprise is a serious and gritty business, built upon manipulation of the public. So, perhaps when you see or hear the euphemistic phrase “free enterprise” you should think: “unfettered profit-taking” 

    Republicans believe that economic growth is tied to cuts in taxes and the reining in of regulations.  Experience has proven that tax breaks for “Job Creators” (the rich) is not the key to prosperity.  Too many of the “job creators” use their wealth for investments that simply make them richer!  Economic growth must be tied to a broad middle class with good jobs, adequate wages, and money to spend.  Labor and middle management are keys to making corporations and businesses work.  Opportunity is not just for the well-educated, the well-connected or the affluent.  It is a drag on the economy to have large chunks of our population living in poverty, unemployment, homelessness, or just struggling to make ends meet.  A vision that does not include a hand-up to the challenged results in a society pulled down by those who have little or no opportunity. 

    The Republican view of free enterprise is, in a word, incomplete.  They exist in a world in which only other CEOs exist.  They leave out a huge cohort of society, and thus weaken our entire society.  They are not to be trusted with “free enterprise” for they have failed to define it by a clear demonstration of broad opportunities for all.  We are all entrepreneurs, job creators and keys to prosperity.

2)    “We reject the use of taxation to redistribute income”

    Does that mean that special tax breaks for rich corporations should be shelved immediately?  Apparently not.  It means they oppose the re-distribution of tax revenue from the successful  and thus the deserving (the rich) to fund government programs for the undeserving, the uneducated, the unwashed and the irresponsible. 

    It doesn’t speak at all to the redistribution of taxes taken from the middle class to: extend the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts for the  wealthiest among us, or to eliminate taxes on interest, dividends and capital gains; or the end of the inheritance tax or the repeal of the Alternative Minimum Tax on corporations.   It does not speak to the use of the tax code to give breaks to rich multi-national corporations; or to special breaks for corporations like the big oil companies who receive billions in subsidies through the tax code; or the break given hedge fund financiers to count their income as capital gains at a lesser tax rate.  It does not speak to the way too many loopholes in the tax code allow some to prosper at the expense of the many.

3)    “Our goal is a tax system that is simple, transparent, flatter and fair.”

    Guess who benefits most from a flatter tax (let’s say around 23%) for everyone?   Well, since it raises the tax rate for many earning around $40-50,000 and reduces the millionaires rate by about 12%, I guess there can be no question who makes out best.  It’s a front for once again taking from the middle class to give to the rich.

4)    “Three Programs - Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security - account for…levels of spending and debt…already harming job creation and growth (and creating) projections of future spending growth…nothing short of catastrophic….”

    It can’t be said often enough:  Social Security is not a drag on the economy or the federal budget.  It has it’s own Trust Fund that is adequate for years and could be more so if the government paid back what it borrowed from that Fund, and if the cap on wages from which FICA is paid were raised to about $250,000!

    Personal bank or “investment” accounts as alternatives to our present system hold little promise for the under 55 year-old generations.  This is a sham (similar to Part D of Medicare) to give private investment companies access to funds that are not presently under their purview.  What a boon such personal accounts would be to these financial companies. 

    Medicare and Medicaid are flawed, yes.  They do need reform, yes.  But not in the way that Congressman Ryan proposes, for his aim is not reform, but fundamental change in the way Medicare operates.  Inadequate Government subsidies or vouchers or rebates will simply not cover the cost of adequate health care plans for the elderly, the disabled and the poor.  Once again, the proposal of the Republicans is a sham aimed at nothing more than getting rid of Medicare eventually (even though they now say that traditional Medicare will be available as an option - but in a form that covers little and is poorly administered since it will not be a primary concern of the federal government). 

    The Democrats and President Obama have already passed legislation - the Affordable Health Care Act -- which proposes changes in these programs, and which establishes a new Center for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation designed to begin testing new ways of service delivery, improved quality of care and reduced rate of cost growth. 

    I have written elsewhere on this Blog several times of the true alternative to Medicare and Medicaid and that is a single-payer health care system overseen by government but utilizing private vendors where practical. 

5)    “Cutting spending is not enough; it must be accompanied by major structural reforms…and long-term government downsizing…”

    Here we have the essence of the Republican approach to government - down-sizing.  Unfortunately, Republican administrations are not know for down-sizing, but for increasing government when they are in control. 

    Secondly, there is no guarantee that a smaller government will be any more efficient or effective, and thirdly, cutting government is a euphemism for getting rid of programs and regulators that are in the way of the other aims of this Party:  cutting entitlements, regulatory reform, and public unions.  Their criteria for making cuts are phony; they will not follow them; they never have.  Their real criterion, of course, is their major desire to move as much government as possible to the States, where, in spite of their lofty rhetoric, what will happen is reduced administration, less staff, fewer benefits, and the erasure of mandates from the federal government.  A decision by a family to move from one state to another in this atmosphere will be greatly affected by what services are available (left) to individuals and families. 

    What Republicans fail to tell us, of course, is that the Obama administration has already instituted reasoned down-sizing and evaluation of departments and agencies throughout the national government.  Unfortunately, the Republican Congress has rejected the President’s plea for legislation to give him greater ability to re-organize.  And, by their negative attitude toward cuts in DoD, Republicans have demonstrated their inability to cut out unnecessary programs and contracts when the rubber actually hits the road!

The Republican platform is an exercise in rhetorical speech and euphemisms.  It is impossible to know what they are actually thinking or contemplating unless one interprets or translates their terms into the reality of their actions and their past records.  They are utterly incapable of speaking clearly or straightforwardly about anything.  And why is that?  Because their aims are not the aims of the majority of the electorate.  Their policies are not desirable when actually translated into legislation that restricts, that bites, that cuts, that diminishes or destroys.  The outcomes they seek are rarely in line with the rhetoric they use.  So hangs a tale of why many voters are bamboozled into voting for this party of destruction and regression.

It is clearly time for translation of their misleading verbiage.  We shall try to do more next time.