Patriotism: Actions Speak Louder Than Words

Sometimes, it seems as though the rhetoric of the Right can't get any worse.  And then it does!  We have run head-long into the former Mayor of New York City, Rudy Giuliani, who has never had difficulty with saying something that shouldn't be said.  Here he is most recently, quoted from Daily KOS: 

"I do not believe, and I know this is a horrible thing to say, but I do not believe that the president loves America,” Giuliani said during the dinner at the 21 Club, a former Prohibition-era speakeasy in midtown Manhattan. “He doesn’t love you. And he doesn’t love me. He wasn’t brought up the way you were brought up and I was brought up through love of this country.” 
 

Then, he decided to double-down on his outrageous statement by going on “Fox and Friends” within a few days saying he more often hears Obama criticize America than celebrate it.  
 

CNN.com added the following quotes from Giuliani: 

“Giuliani… insisted that Obama doesn't love the United States because he "doesn't express a great love of this country" and criticizes the United States at home and abroad, an outlook on the U.S. that Giuliani tied to Obama's upbringing. 

"President Obama was brought up in an atmosphere in which he was taught to be a critic of America," Giuliani said in a phone interview with CNN. "That is a distinction with prior American presidents." 

But still, Obama is patriotic even if he doesn't love America, Giuliani said, pointing out that "there have been an awful lot of patriots who were critics." 

Giuliani's definition of a patriot? "Someone who is dedicated to the principles of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" and the U.S. Constitution.”  And while the former mayor said he believes Obama is committed to those principles and the constitution, he said he didn't "detect" a love of country in Obama and "honestly" doesn't know whether Obama does. "Honestly, I don't and you don't know what he truly believes. I'm talking about the way that he expresses himself. I can't tell you what's within his heart," Giuliani said. 

Maybe Obama doesn't have "as romantic a view" of the United States as past presidents, Giuliani suggested.  As he did at the dinner on Wednesday, Giuliani pointed to the love former presidents like Ronald Reagan who saw America's problems as the "footnotes." Obama, Giuliani said, sees American problems as "the headline." 
 

In explaining the role of Obama's education in his love for America, Giuliani revived old attacks used against Obama during his two presidential campaigns regarding his ties to socialists like Saul Alinsky.

He also revived criticism of Obama's time attending Rev. Jeremiah Wright's church, the pastor who infamously said "God Damn America.  "The fact that he remained in Rev. Wright's church for 17 years...If you had deep in your heart a love of America you would have quit if the minister said something like that," Giuliani said. 

"There's a real attempt to make it a racial criticism. It has nothing to do with race," Giuliani said, pointing out that "he was brought up by the way by a white mother and white grandparents."

 We could spend a lot of time arguing over whether or not Giuliani’s remarks have anything to do with racial criticism or bias.  I think they do; he believes they don’t.  What’s clear is that he mentions old data about Obama’s origins, being brought up by a white parent and white grandparents, attending white schools, having an association with a black pastor who criticized America, and having an alien upbringing and attitude toward America.  However, for the moment, it seems futile to engage in a debate about this topic. 

Instead, I want to raise another issue for your consideration. For his own purposes, Giuliani has tried to say that Obama is a patriot but not a lover of America.  But, Rudy’s  ”America” is a personal construct, all based on what Giuliani believes.  America is more than that, of course.  It is a nation made up of people: citizens, voters, immigrants, non-citizens, human beings.  What Giuliani, and other ‘critics’ miss is that President Obama has made it a mission of his two-term presidency to serve the people; to make sure that he acts on behalf of individuals, of real people with real needs and real freedoms, as well as real responsibilities.

In my estimation, the President’s concept of love for America is a demonstration of love, respect and meaningful action on behalf of people.  “America” is to him The People.  Giuliani's definition of patriotism? "Someone who is dedicated to the principles of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and the U.S. Constitution.”  I’m sorry:  “America” equates to three principles and a written document?  No mention of citizens or people from Mr. Giuliani.  I’ll take President Obama’s love of America through advocacy for people, the citizens and inhabitants of this nation.

So Giuliani has ultimately made of patriotism or ‘love of America’ a construct of impersonal principles and the articles of an all-important document.  He approached policing of NYC in much the same way as he instituted a profiling of certain people and a ‘stop and frisk’ policy all in support of one of those principles defined by Republicans as Law and Order.  And guess what, as with any governing principle, this one gets perverted and twisted into actions that are contrary to protecting the needs, safety and freedom of all citizens.  Omigosh, there’s one of those criticisms that Republicans claim is un-American, or at least showing lack of love for America.  They would shut down all criticism if they could. 
 

Every principle and document that underlies the concept of America also has the potential to be corrupted and used wrongly.  That is why criticism in and of America is never-ending: simply because perversion of principles and values by certain individuals and groups is never-ending.  In order to preserve our representative democracy and its values and freedoms, American citizens must, as a part of their duty, criticize perversion of our constitutional principles and values.  Those critics are not non-lovers of America or of her citizens.  In fact, they are patriots for they know that American values must be protected and enhanced by her citizens acting to preserve her mission and essence.  

It would help immensely if Giuliani as self-appointed critic would explain just exactly what principle or value is being corrupted by the President in a way that actually shows a lack of love for American people.  Unfortunately, Giuliani has some trouble with being specific or with putting two or more cogent thoughts together.  (Remember that remark from Joe Biden: “Rudy Giuliani — there's only three things he mentions in a sentence: a noun, a verb, and 9/11.” October 30, 2007 MSNBC Democratic Debate) 

Here are some things the President has done to show his love for Americans (thereby for America), based on a much larger list at http://pleasecutthecrap.com:

 

1.       Because of his fight to produce a health care reform act that would adequately insure many citizens, there are now over 11 million people enrolled who before were under-insured or uninsured.  Obama Cares! And this unequivocally demonstrates his love for America and her citizens. Thanks to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, inflation in the healthcare sector dropped to its lowest point in 50 years.  http://on.wsj.com/1E6cYjF

2.      He also pushed numerous acts that stimulated our economy and brought us back from the precipice of Bush’s Great Recession.  Many people have benefitted from this turn-a-round because of the millions of jobs created under this President’s leadership.  The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act created and sustained 2.1 million jobs and stimulated the economy by 3.5%.  (http://reut.rs/i46CEE). 

3.       Not only did he complete the massive TARP financial and banking rescue plan, he also leaned on the banks and others, and recovered virtually all of the bail-out money. (http://1.usa.gov/eA5jVShttp://bit.ly/eCNrD6).

4.       He created the Making Home Affordable home refinancing plan. (http://1.usa.gov/goy6zl). He also signed the Democratic-sponsored Helping Families Save Their Homes Act, expanding on the Making Home Affordable Program to help millions of Americans avoid preventable foreclosures.

5.       Along with Democrats, and almost no Republicans, implemented an auto industry rescue plan, and saved as many as 1 million jobs.

6.       Created a climate in which there have been 55 consecutive months of job growth, totaling more than 10 million jobs, which is roughly 10,000,000 more jobs than Bush created in eight years.   http://1.usa.gov/1vBDeyC.  This is also the longest stretch of private-sector job growth in US history. http://wapo.st/1w3J8Zy

7.       Led the country to 64 consecutive months of economic expansion, eclipsing Reagan’s record, by far.  http://onforb.es/1sxJ2by

8.       Signed the Democratic-sponsored Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure (CARD) Act, which was designed to protect consumers from unfair and deceptive credit card practices. http://1.usa.gov/gIaNcS

9.       Increased infrastructure spending after years of neglect. http://bit.ly/f77aOw

10.   Through the Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009, he and Congressional Democrats provided tax credits to first-time home buyers, which helped the U.S. housing market recovery.   http://bit.ly/dZgXXwhttp://bit.ly/gORYfL

11.   Initiated a $15 billion plan designed to encourage increased lending to small businesses. http://1.usa.gov/eu0u0b

12.   Along with Congressional Democrats, provided funding to states and the Department of Homeland Security to save thousands of police and firefighter jobs from being cut during the recession. http://bit.ly/g0IKWR

13.   Oversaw a reduction in the dollar amount of the federal budget deficit by two-thirds since taking office. http://bit.ly/1xKMmjY

14.   Ordered all federal contractors to pay a minimum wage of $10.10 per hour, leading the way to a national increase. http://wapo.st/1iaU5kd

15.   Established a central portal for Americans to find service opportunities.  http://www.serve.gov

16.   Signed the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act, which closed many of the loopholes that allowed companies to send jobs overseas, and avoid paying US taxes by moving money offshore.  http://1.usa.gov/bd1RTq

17.   Established a Consumer Protection Financial Bureau designed to protect consumers from financial sector excesses.  http://bit.ly/fnTayj

18.   Oversaw and then signed a Democratic bill constituting the most sweeping food safety legislation since the Great Depression.  http://thedc.com/gxkCtP

19.   Along with Congressional Democrats, advocated for and signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, which made it a federal crime to assault anyone based on his or her sexual orientation or gender identity.  http://bit.ly/gsMSJ7

20.   Pushed through, signed and demanded the Pentagon enact a repeal of the discriminatory “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy that forced soldiers to lie in order to be eligible to fight for their country, and put our troops at risk by disqualifying many qualified soldiers from helping.  http://bit.ly/fdahuHhttp://bit.ly/mZV4Pz

21.   Extended benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees.  http://1.usa.gov/g2RLCj

22.   Wrote and signed an Executive Order establishing a White House Council on Women and Girls to ensure that all Cabinet and Cabinet-level agencies evaluate the effect of their policies and programs on women and families. http://bit.ly/e1puTkhttp://1.usa.gov/rFfqMM

23.   Signed the Democratic-sponsored Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which restored basic protections against pay discrimination for women and other workers. This was after the GOP blocked the bill in 2007. Only 5 Republican Senators voted for the bill.   http://bit.ly/fT3Cxg

24.   Signed two executive orders that mirror provisions of the Paycheck Fairness Act, because the GOP Congress refuses to pass it. It makes it possible for employees to talk about their salaries without retaliation, and orders salary data collection. These measures will make it harder for employers to pay women less.   http://huff.to/1nwVOWf

25.   Appointed Kareem Dale as the first ever Special Assistant to the President for Disability Policy. http://1.usa.gov/fi5IY0

26.   Established the White House Council of Native American Affairs, to improve government-to-government relations with Native American nations. http://1.usa.gov/1cIEeEv

27.   Proposed new HUD rules that would enhance Fair Housing Laws, to give HUD and other enforcement agencies more teeth in enforcing them. http://bit.ly/1qkz4uQ

28.   Ordered a review of capital punishment policies after several botched executions. http://nyti.ms/RDJp58

29.   The Obama Department of Justice made significant reductions in drug sentencing guidelines for current prisoners, thus releasing thousands from US prisons. This is the first step in 30 years toward reducing the US prison population, which is the highest in the world, made worse by unjust and inflated incarceration of young men of color. http://n.pr/1mWBLkM

30.   Established new, more reasonable policies in our relations with Cuba

31.   Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto praised President Barack Obama’s executive actions on immigration as “very intelligent” and “an act of justice.”

“I have made acknowledgement of the very intelligent and audacious decision of your administration regarding the executive action for immigration, which is of course an act of justice for people who arrive from other parts of the world but are now part of the U.S. community,”

We do hear too often about “illegals” especially from Republicans, but it is important not to forget that how we treat that question determines how our “principles” play in other countries.

32.   Along with Congressional Democrats, supported and signed Veterans Health Care Budget Reform and Transparency Act, which made more money available to enable better medical care for veterans. http://1.usa.gov/fN4ur1

33.   Along with Congressional Democrats, ushered through largest spending increase in 30 years for Department of Veterans Affairs, with money to go to improved medical facilities, and to assist states in acquiring or constructing state nursing homes and extended care facilities.    http://1.usa.gov/gY8O3x
 

Such changes, initiatives and actions go much further, most unknown to the majority of voters because they have not been sufficiently publicized (you can check out the entire list at http://pleasecutthecrap.com/obama-accomplishments.)

Meanwhile, our intrepid Mayor, both during and after 9/11, seemed to have some trouble concentrating on people rather than on himself and his part in 9/11.  We have merely to review some of his own quotes:

 “The attacks of September 11 were intended to break our spirit, instead we have emerged stronger and more unified. We feel renewed devotion to the principles of political, economic and religious freedom, the rule of law and respect for human life. We are more determined than ever to live our lives in freedom (Dedication for the exhibit "After September 11: Images from Ground Zero." 31 December 2001).  No mention of the people involved – just principles.

 “I was at ground zero as often, if not more, than most of the workers. I was there working with them. I was there guiding things. I was there bringing people there. But I was exposed to exactly the same things they were exposed to. So in that sense, I'm one of them.” (While campaigning in Cincinnati, as quoted in The New York Times 11 August 2007).  Apparently, 9/11 was all about Rudy…

"Aspiring dictators sometimes win elections, and elected leaders sometimes govern badly and threaten their neighbors. … History demonstrates that democracy usually follows good governance (emphasis added), not the reverse." As quoted in "Giuliani: Too much stress on two-state plan" at Jewish Telegraph Agency (15 August 2007).  Sounds to me like a criticism of America…

And guess what?  Nothing has changed.  According to MSNBC, not invited to a private party for Scott Walker and not originally on the speaker list, Rudy inserted himself into the midst of it all and uttered words that garnered much publicity for him; very little for Scott Walker.  Good old Rudy; he’s such a patriot…!  Here are a few quotes attributed to others on the topic of Giuliani as “patriot” or icon:
 

“Rudy Giuliani is a true American hero, and we know this because he does all the things we expect of heroes these days -- like make $16 million a year, and lobby for Hugo Chávez and Rupert Murdoch, and promote wars without ever having served in the military, and hire a lawyer to call his second wife a "stuck pig," and organize absurd, grandstanding pogroms against minor foreign artists, and generally drift through life being a shameless opportunist with an outsize ego who doesn't even bother to conceal   the fact that he's had a (yearning) for the presidency since he was in diapers. In the media age, we can't have a hero humble enough to actually be one; what is needed is a tireless scoundrel, a cad willing to pose all day long for photos, who'll accept $100,000 to talk about heroism for an hour, who has the balls to take a $2.7 million advance to write a book about himself called Leadership. That's Rudy Giuliani. Our hero. And a perfect choice to uphold the legacy of George W. Bush.” (Matt Taibbi, May 31, 2007).

“Among other things, it seems Rudy's a bit of a fibber. Says one thing once, then denies it a few hours later, apparently not familiar with the concept of audio and video recordings.” (Josh Marshall, November 2, 2007.)  First Rudy says President Obama doesn’t love America, then within a day says Obama is a patriot.  Can that be cogent thinking when one concept contradicts the other?

 “He is a small man in search of a balcony.” (Jimmy Breslin, quoted by Paul Slansky in "'Giuliani Time!': The Rudy Quiz", The New Yorker, December 17, 2007)

“[He] didn't bring us together, our pain brought us together... “(Al Sharpton, quoted by Paul Slansky in "'Giuliani Time!’ The Rudy Quiz", The New Yorker, December 17, 2007)

And a much stronger condemnation of Rudy’s lying, posturing, and actions relative to 9/11 that help no one but himself is found at http://www.villagevoice.com/2007-07-31/news/rudy-giuliani-s-five-big-lies-about-9-11/full/. 

"The mayor had also done nothing to make the radios interoperable—which would have enabled the police and firefighters to communicate across departmental lines—despite having received a 1995 federal waiver granting the city the additional radio frequencies to make that possible. That meant the fire chiefs had no idea that police helicopters had anticipated the partial collapse of both towers long before they fell. Though he collected $250 million in tax surcharges on phone use to improve the 911 system, he diverted this emergency funding for other uses, and the 911 dispatchers were an utter disaster that day, telling victims to stay where they were long after the fire chiefs had ordered an evacuation, which potentially sealed the fates of hundreds. And, despite the transparent lessons of 1993, Giuliani never established any protocols for rooftop or elevator rescues in high-rises, or even a strategy for bringing the impaired and injured out—all costly failings on 9/11. But perhaps the best evidence of the Giuliani administration's lack of readiness was that no one at its top levels had a top-secret security clearance on 9/11.”

"A Times editorial concluded in May that the Giuliani administration "failed in its duty to protect the workers at Ground Zero," faulting its "emphasis on a speedy cleanup" and its unwillingness "to insist that all emergency personnel and construction workers wear respirators." John Odermatt, a former OEM director working at the campaign, couldn't tell the  Times whether Giuliani had lobbied Congress on behalf of sick workers, nor could anyone at the campaign offer any evidence that Giuliani had ever, while earning millions at his new 9/11 consulting business in recent years, tried to secure federal funds for responders.” 

 This assessment is basically reiterated by Alternet.org which also introduces its own assessment of Giuliani and his consulting firm, with the following:

“The most valuable commodity the new company had to sell was not management expertise but the aura of America's Mayor -- the man whose cool-headed 9/11 leadership had taken on mythic proportions. While Giuliani's first term as mayor brought him renown as a crime fighter who made New York livable again, his second term was a slowly escalating disaster before 9/11. The city, which admired his feisty stubbornness when the enemies were drug dealers and cop killers, had grown tired of a seemingly endless series of political catfights with school chancellors, black neighborhoods, museums, rival politicians and even hot-dog vendors. And, as would become clear later, Giuliani had allowed the city to meet the disaster unprepared in myriad ways, ignoring the well-noted lessons of the first attack on the towers, which occurred less than a year before he became mayor.”

 Alternet.org tells some of the story of how the former Mayor, who touts himself as a patriot, used his 9/11 experience to make himself millions of dollars, while basically ignoring the needs of others (read all about it at http://www.alternet.org/story/41443/why_rudy_giuliani_can%27t_stop_cashing_in_on_9_11/)

 
So, let us be clear:

§  Giuliani fails to define what he means by ‘America,’ although he does attempt to define patriotism which falls short.  In both cases, he uses vague terms to represent complicated definitions and he leaves out the very basic ingredient of America: her People.

§  Giuliani constructed a false image of ‘not loving America’ and indicates that he just doesn’t ‘feel’ from his speeches that the President expresses a love of America in the way that former Presidents have done. Where have you been, Mr. Mayor? In almost every speech he makes, the President talks about American principles and values, and about the needs and responsibilities of her people.  In fact, in my experience of hearing the speeches of presidents all the way back to FDR, I cannot remember anyone more dedicated to elaborating on democratic values and principles than this President. 

§  It is very interesting that apparently Giuliani seems to think that because this African-American President was raised by a white parent and grandparents, it somehow reduces or nullifies racial criticism and bias.  It does not.  The whiteness of his mother and her parents does not erase the blackness of his skin.  As he has indicated, this President has experienced the same old bigoted reactions of white people to his color.  He has heard car door locks slam closed as he approached cars driven by white drivers, and has been followed in stores by white personnel.  As President he has had to endure all those remarks like Giuliani’s that endeavor to paint him as some sort of alien – outside the mainstream of American (mostly white) society.

In light of all that has been visited upon people of color in this society (read the overwhelming report on Lynching at DailyKos.com if you want to understand something of the burden of fear, lawlessness and recrimination imposed upon Black people in our nation), we might expect African-American citizens, including this President, to be less patriotic, or at least more ambivalent toward our government and officials.  But that is not the reality.   Black folks continue to vote in large numbers, serve in the armed forces in large numbers, work in government agencies, non-profits and volunteer roles that serve the public in large numbers, besides contributing to charitable enterprises, especially faith communities, in large numbers.  Having worked in a community action agency, and as the Director of large state-wide service programs for seniors with low incomes, I have been privileged to serve with men and women of color whose dedication and advocacy for the welfare of people with special challenges has been an inspiration and blessing that will last for a lifetime.

In light of the unjust criticisms and indignities that have been thrown at this President, and in light of America’s troubled history of race relations, it is all the more remarkable to me that this President has always kept his cool and maintained a love for all the citizens of our country.  After all the unjust and fabricated criticisms, denigrations and non-cooperation that this President has experienced, he still works every day for the advancement of the welfare of all members of this society.   That is true patriotism, and that is love for country and all its people that is unsurpassed!

§  ACTIONS speak LOUDER than words.  Love of America is demonstrated by what you do, not necessarily by what you say.  In that respect, President Obama wins every time over this epitome of a self-aggrandizer named Rudy Giuliani.  The latter has no right or standing or unblemished record strong enough to call anyone a non-lover of America. 

§  And, after all is said and done, there is that last remnant of graciousness to consider: respect for the office of President of the United States.  Disagreement, debate and even strong criticism of policy, procedure and programs is fair game in this society.  Veiled or open attacks upon the origins, race, religion and “inward thoughts” of the holder of the office are out-of-bounds.  And yet, Giuliani continues to run his mouth in this most despicable manner.  Too bad some Republican would-be presidential candidates have supported his remarks and his attitude, instead of standing for informed and well-thought-out discussions of policy and legislation. They must share the shame of Giuliani’s misguided rhetoric.

Fortunately, President Obama continues to stand above all the constructed cheap shots and criticisms from Republicans with a dignity and respectfulness that befits a President of the United States whose record of accomplishments for the People of America will be hard to match in the future.   Thank you, Mr. President, for your love for America demonstrated by your dedication to positive actions taken for the welfare and enhancement of all the People of this country and of others throughout the world.       

 

 

 

REPUBLICANS DENY & DELAY: the Planet Groans...

Winter is beginning to take its toll.  Ask anyone how they are doing, and they will invariably respond with a remark about the winter weather, with a hope that it will soon come to an end!  It has been a terribly brutal winter, and Punxsutawney Phil had no mercy as to its ending – ‘6 more weeks’ he predicted on Feb. 2^nd.  Even longer, if you believe the extreme pessimists, or some of our weather forecasters.

This should come as no surprise to us.  The planet earth is reeling from an attack on its atmosphere.  “Air pollution is the introduction of particulates, biological molecules, or other harmful materials into the Earth's atmosphere, possibly causing disease, death to humans, damage to other living organisms such as food crops, or the natural or built environment.  The atmosphere is a complex natural gaseous system that is essential to support life on planet Earth. Stratospheric ozone depletion due to air pollution has been recognized as a threat to human health as well as to the Earth's ecosystems.  Indoor air pollution and urban air quality are listed as two of the world's worst toxic pollution problems in the 2008 Blacksmith Institute World's Worst Polluted Places report.  According to the 2014 WHO report, air pollution in 2012 caused the deaths of around 7 million people worldwide.”(Wikipedia).

Geenpeace.org spells it out a bit more: “Although carbon dioxide is the most significant greenhouse gas in terms of human emissions, human activity is also adding others to the atmosphere that are even more effective at trapping heat. The Kyoto Protocol covers the emissions of five gases besides carbon dioxide: methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6).”   

It’s quite surprising, and scary, that there are still those in leadership positions who refuse to face reality, and thus refuse to do anything about pollution of the atmosphere.  As we know too well, these human ostriches are hiding from a reality that scientists are proclaiming loudly and urgently.  Why do these politicians continue to argue against the fact that human beings and human enterprises have helped to get us to this point?  Why do they continue to deny the effect of chemicals and gases on the atmosphere when they know perfectly well that chemicals and gases have the power to influence our immediate environment and our own bodies to a life-changing extent?

Before we answer these questions, let us refer to some examples of the effects of chemicals on our lives and our immediate environment. 

·         First, let’s be clear that the chemicals causing emissions into the atmosphere are already affecting our immediate environment before they even ascend into the ozone layer.  Consider this from sfgate.com:  “Although the atmosphere includes a layer of ozone, ground-level ozone is harmful. Not only does it add to global warming, ground-level ozone is detrimental to human health by causing or worsening respiratory problems. In addition, it negatively impacts ecosystems by damaging vegetation. Each year, ozone causes $500 million worth of reduced crops, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Factories involved with industrial processes, like manufacturing metals or chemical solvents, contribute to ground-level ozone production. Power plants, vehicle emissions and burning fossil fuels also produce ozone. Although these processes do not directly release ozone, they produce nitrogen and volatile organic chemicals. When these chemicals combine in the presence of sunlight, they form ozone” at ground level.

·         Why was DDT banned?  It was a heavily used pesticide that was used generally throughout the Western World prior to 1972.  It made people ill.  It killed flora and fauna.  It killed people.  More specifically, it is likely to:

o   Be a probable human carcinogen

o   Damage the liver

o   Temporarily damage the nervous system

o   Reduce reproductive success

o   Cause liver cancer

o   Damage reproductive system

·         What are some of the results of chemo-therapy in the attempt to kill cancer?  It’s so toxic that an incredible protocol has grown up around its administration.  It’s so toxic that people often say that the treatment is worse than the cancer.  It’s so toxic that recipients often vomit, feel weak, lose their ambition, and lose their hair.  It is so powerful that it often kills cancer – a good result all-in-all, but let us not forget that cancer is a malignancy that requires a devastating treatment to kill it.  Those chemicals are strong – and not just strong; they are overwhelmingly invasive.

·         Some of those cancer-curing chemicals are now being used to attack and retard other physical illnesses like the auto-immune disease, Multiple Sclerosis.   Some physicians are now using a cancer drug as chemo-therapy for some MS patients in the early stage of the disease to retard the process of the killing off of cells in the myelin sheath of the brain, which lesions are the loci of MS symptoms.  Again, the strength of these drugs administered intravenously, is strong leaving the recipients with some of the same symptoms that cancer patients often suffer.

·         Have you ever thought about those TV ads for strong drugs that have myriad side effects announced?  Other than the obvious requirement that such drugs must be advertised with side effects made clear, there is a message here about the effects of strong chemicals on one’s body.  Drugs today are stronger than ever, and the chemicals that go into them are ever more toxic for the human body.

·         Then we come to illegal drugs taken by some people as “recreational” or “mind-blowing” or just plain fun.  Here again, we find a basic denial of their devastating effects upon the human body and mind.  Even when we see people wasting away, or displaying effects like speech difficulty or memory recall challenges, or an effect upon motor skills, there is denial of what the drug – like heroin, ecstasy, hash or pot – is causing over time.  Of course, addiction to some prescription drugs can end up with the same effects – oxycodone and Xanax - to name just two.

·         But let’s not stop there.  Let’s move on to farming; dairy farming.  In his book, “Republic, Lost”, Lawrence Lessig talks about the government subsidies that are given out to protect certain products or crops such as sugar and corn.  He states that such government subsidies are harmful to small farmers and even to cows!  Then he launches into a story about cows not digesting corn well, farmers feeding them corn because it’s cheap, and having to supplement their feed with antibiotics because as cows eat corn, certain bugs brew in the poorly digested mix stewing in the cow stomachs.  Farmers use 25 million pounds of antibiotics a year or eight times the amount consumed by humans.  And guess what?  This overuse of antibiotics causes the growth of superbugs with resistance to the original antibiotics, so guess what children are drinking in their milk these days?  E coli and salmonella.  So, we should expect to hear about a three-year-old who died after eating a hamburger and a 22-year-old dance instructor who can no longer walk.

·         Chemicals in our food and beverages in quantities far exceeding anything resembling reasonable amounts (if there are any reasonable amounts for some of these chemicals like phenylketonurics which contain phenylalanine, aspartame and potassium benzoate, etc.).  Are these chemicals necessary; are they safe; are they having side effects we have not even considered?  We have to ask, is there any connection between the growth of heavy chemicals in our food and beverages and in our water that have any connection to the spike in diseases like Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, MS,  and in a condition like autism? 

·         Finally, we must point to chemical spills, chemical uses in natural gas exploration (hydro-fracking), many oil spills, explosions; and, the leaking or dumping of industrial effulgence in streams and lakes, lead in old house paint, asbestos left over in older houses and the left-over deposits of chemicals from old chemical plants over which housing developments have been constructed (with cancer outbreaks in those areas are much, much higher).

My point?  My point is that we are already experiencing in these attacks upon our own bodies and minds and our immediate living environment, the deleterious effects of chemicals and industrial wastes.  A similar assault is taking place in our atmosphere above the disasters created right here on the Earth, and yet somehow the non-thinkers and non-listeners find a difference between the chemicals attacking us here and the chemicals and effulgence attacking our atmosphere.  Somehow, nitrous oxide or bromine does not wreak upon the ozone layer and the atmosphere what heroin or anti-cancer chemicals or DDT do to our bodies.  It is a shameful lack of logic and common sense - to say nothing about denial of scientific method – for the climate change deniers to keep us in a state of denial and non-action so that our planet screams out with heat records and winter monster storms and low temperature records taking their inevitable toll on our quality of life and our well-being.  Why do politicians continue to deny the effect of chemicals and gases on the atmosphere when they know perfectly well that chemicals and gases have the power to influence our immediate environment and our own bodies to a life-changing extent?

We are being bamboozled by the oil and fossil fuel industrialists.  They know that denial and delay are not just to be contrary.  They know that this is part of their plan to keep us dependent on fossil fuels for as long as it takes to make many more billions of dollars (as the Koch Brothers have been heard to admit).  This is not just a denial of climate change; this is their approach to milking us of dollars that go into their pockets and their industries and their indulgences. 

Let me just remind you briefly of the positions and actions taken by the Koch Brothers:

“Charles G. Koch and David H. Koch have a vested interest in delaying climate action: they've made billions from their ownership and control of Koch Industries, an oil corporation that is the second largest privately-held company in America (which also happens to have an especially poor environmental record). It's timely that more people are now aware of Charles and David Koch and just what they're up to. A growing awareness of these oil billionaires' destructive agenda has led to increased scrutiny and resistance from people and organizations all over the United States.
“The Koch brothers, their family members, and their employees direct a web of financing that supports conservative special interest groups and think-tanks, with a strong focus on fighting environmental regulation, opposing clean energy legislation, and easing limits on industrial pollution. This money is typically funneled through one of three "charitable" foundations the Koch’s have set up: the Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation; the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation; and the David H. Koch Charitable Foundation.

 Total Koch money to the Climate Denial Machine, 1997-2011 = $67,042,064.”  (GreenPeace.com)
 
In 2013, the Koch’s enlisted “Republicans to make it unlikely any bills regulating carbon emissions ever become law, and because they are requiring accompanying off-setting tax cuts, they guarantee their anti-climate change policies will remain the law of the land. The Koch brothers’ pledge is the work of their tax-exempt Americans for Prosperity, and the “No Climate Tax” has successfully prevented Republican lawmakers from addressing climate change particularly by thwarting efforts to control greenhouse-gas emissions by killing cap-and-trade energy bills in the Senate.
The No Climate Tax pledge…garnered signatures from 411 lawmakers nationwide including the entire House Republican leadership,  one-third of the members of the House of Representatives, and a quarter of U.S. senators. According to a New York Times report on the Koch pledge, “Since most solutions to the problem of greenhouse-gas emissions require costs to the polluters and the public, the pledge essentially commits those who sign onto it to vote against nearly any meaningful bill regarding global warning, and acts as yet another roadblock to action.” Roadblock is putting it mildly, and it means regardless the threats from climate change, there is little Americans can expect from Republicans in the way of relief because they are beholden to follow directions from the Koch’s and their source of power ALEC.”

In a complicated ruling June 23, 2014, the Supreme Court dealt a blow to the Koch Brothers by not overturning the EPA’s ability to regulate greenhouse gasses.  The utility industry, the Chamber of Commerce, and 13 states led by Texas argued that the EPA does not have the legal authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, but by a vote of 7-2, the court ruled that the EPA does have the authority to regulate emissions at facilities that already release pollutants.”  (politicususa.com)
Nonetheless, there is still the basic factor that the SCOTUS has ruled that individuals (and corporations) can continue to give huge amounts to these foundations and think-tanks and PACs anonymously, so that the public will not generally know who or what is backing the deniers.

In an article written for HuffingtonPost.com, dated 10/02/2014, Mike Lux reminds us:

“It is no wonder why the Koch brothers hold their political retreats with their fellow millionaires and billionaires in highly secretive sessions, the things they say and the agenda they lay out, while ‘inspiring’ to Mitch McConnell, is repulsive to most Americans.  They say that they want to decrease regulations so they can make more profit’.”

            “Even more absurd is their offensive overall agenda (laid out clearly and unequivocally at the Koch secret meeting at Rancho Mirage in California in June of 2014).  The Koch’s VP for Policy and Research described “an ideal society where the only government would be the military, police, and court system. Government is thus limited to a small but absolutely critical number of tasks, basically keeping our neighborhoods and cities safe from crime, defending our country from those who might violate our national territories, our commerce at sea, and providing justice in a fair and apolitical court system.  In this ideal system, there would be no water safety protections, no national park system, no public roads and bridges.  There would not be taxes on corporate profits or on the wealthy at all.  There would be no consumer, homeowner or worker protections from Wall Street banks, big energy companies, pharmaceutical plants, health insurance companies, fast food companies.”

So, the climate-change-by-human-hands deniers will continue their quest to stop legislation, to prevent new regulations and to block actions by the EPA and others.  The Koch Brothers and their followers do not take orders from anyone, including the Supreme Court.  They are intent on destroying their opposition and they know that, in most cases, money will win, not hubris or unfunded persuasion.

Have I thus written this in vain, as one more meaningless contribution to progressive opposition to money in politics and the rise to power of individuals and corporate entities that make up an elite cabal of governance of this country, mostly done in secret?  Perhaps.

However, bringing awareness of environmental dangers in any form to the public forum is never a waste of time.  Hopefully, drawing a parallel of the effect of chemicals on our own individual bodies and minds will serve to remind us that chemicals and gases with carcinogens being spewed into the earth’s atmosphere are also exceedingly dangerous to our planet and our planet’s atmosphere.   Just as we have made people sick, we are making our planet Earth sick and perhaps threatening its very existence.  After all, we are a part of an expansive universe full of planets, suns and moons, and other celestial bodies of matter.  Are we too parochial to believe that our planet, like others before it, might become too toxic to support life, unless all its many systems and essential life forms are nurtured, cared for and protected? 

The Koch brothers and their ilk, with all their earthly treasure and political agenda, are as nothing compared to the vastness of our universe.  The physical and scientific laws and systems of that universe will determine our fate in the long run if we choose not to act in the interests of the preservation of life and eco-systems that exist here and now.  Time is running out….     

The President's Prayer Breakfast Speech

You Know What? I have no patience with people (apparently Christians, although that's up-for-grabs) who are criticizing President Obama for remarks he made at the February 5th Prayer Breakfast he attended with his wife, Michelle. I've said it before, and at the risk of too often repeating myself,  I assert again that Barack Obama is one of the most straightforward and often passionate defenders of our American values and standards. He talks about family, he talks about the importance of the middle class and the poor, he talks about equality of opportunity for all in our nation; he defends differences, quite often in religion; he defends those who are in need, particularly as he demonstrated with the oft-maligned and attacked ACA or "Obamacare" as it has been derisively named for all time (little did the Right-wing radicals suspect that their epithet would turn out to be a truth - Obama actually does care as 10.5 million people who are now adequately covered will gladly tell you!). The President has been an ardent defender of our core values and standards which he emphasizes in almost every speech, and which he demonstrates through many of his policy initiatives, putting words into action.

However, that Barack Obama is a defender of our most cherished values and a passionate advocate of the most vulnerable cohorts of our population does not seem to deter these Radicals from their constant, belligerent criticism of our President. Aside from the fact that their criticism is leveled at remarks taken completely out of context, these critics have missed the point of his breakfast speech, as they are wont to do with anything coming from him. I might take just this moment to remind you that many of the Radical Right of this country are imbued with the false premises of Social Darwinism, with contempt for the Weak and praise for the Strong ("men of action"). They focus on the propaganda ploy of the "Big Lie" in order to persuade many of the unknowing public to join them in their unholy crusade. (I would also remind you to check out my postings on this Blog regarding Social Darwinism and regarding the Big Lie technique: 7/17/2012 and 2/8/2014).

It is regretful that his critics have probably not read his entire speech (you can avoid this oversight by clicking on this link or by pasting it in your browser: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/remarks-by-obama-at-the-national-prayer-breakfast/2015/02/05/e9374b70-ad53-11e4-9c91-e9d2f9fde644_story.html). If they did read it all, they would find, as I did, that his main theme was: "the degree to which we've seen professions of faith used both as an instrument of great good, but also twisted and misused in the name of evil." And then he asks a very basic question: "how do we, as people of faith, reconcile these realities -- the profound good, the strength, the tenacity, the compassion and love that can flow from all of our faiths, operating alongside those who seek to hijack religions for their own murderous ends?"

His answer is contained in three "principles" that make sense for any person of faith: "...first, we should start with some basic humility. I believe the starting point of faith is...not being so full of yourself and so confident that you are right and that God speaks only to us, and doesn't speak to others, that God only cares about us, and doesn't care about others, that somehow we are alone in possession of the truth. Our job is not to ask that God respond to our notion of truth -- our job is to be true to Him, His word and His commandments."

Most Right-wingers do not like talk of 'humility.' They want only to talk of strength, of superiority, of exceptionalism, of the old and outmoded concept that 'might makes right.' They are the bearers of a distortion of the Christian faith, for Christianity places humility and an all-pervasive non-reward-seeking love (agape) for neighbors (including 'enemies', by the way) in the forefront of all our endeavors. Their concept of Christianity is not that which Jesus preached on the Sermon on the Mount, or that their Savior spoke of and took action upon in his demonstrations of his beliefs. It is not the religion of the Parable of the Good Samaritan, it is not the religion of the Crucifixion, it is not the religion of Jesus' own judgment upon the religious leaders and right-wingers of his day: the Sadducees (priestly aristocratic class) and the Pharisees (legalistic interpreters of the Law or Torah).  Jesus spoke often of the flaws inherent in the pervading religion of his day, but always pointed to a higher truth, which is exactly what the President tried to do with his emphasis on God's word and commandments.

Here's what the President of the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission had to say about President Obama's remarks: "an unfortunate attempt at a wrongheaded moral comparison." Is he actually trying to say that Christianity has no flaws whereas Islam has many? Apparently, as his next statement says: what we need more of is a "moral framework from the administration and a clear strategy for defeating ISIS." Not so. What we need from Christian, albeit Baptist, leaders is a clear sense of what Jesus' teachings about humility and agape love really mean for Christians in this era of terrorism in the name of religion.  Maybe Pope Francis should come and talk to them a bit, and maybe they should go out into the world and practice what the Pope does as he reaches out to people of all faiths. Have these Social Darwinist Christians ever asked themselves: what can I do to determine what it is that inspires a terrorist to act in such a barbaric and destructive manner? Why do they hate me? Why do they want to put an end to my way of life?  Will these critics ever permit themselves to probe and to understand the motivations, deprivations, humiliations or circumstances that characterize their enemy?  It is apparently not part of their religious teaching, yet it is written into the Christian religion throughout the New Testament. "Judge not, lest you be judged." "Put on Love, which binds everything together in perfect harmony."

But this Baptist leader is not the only Right-wing voice that speaks in such ill-considered language. The former Governor of Virginia had a few choice words that do not enhance anyone. He said: "The president's comments this morning at the prayer breakfast are the most offensive I've ever heard a president make in my lifetime. He has offended every believing Christian in the United States. This goes further to the point that Mr. Obama does not believe in America or the values we share."

While I found the President's remarks to be most un-offensive (because they spoke to Gospel truth), I must say I find the former governor's remarks to be offensive in the extreme. How could any Christian be offended by remarks that stress the positives of all faiths and which point to the fact that every religion, every faith (and non-faith) community has its own positive attributes as well as unfortunate flaws, good uses and misuses? Apparently, once again, there appears to be no room in the Governor's (Pharisaic) heart for any truth other than his own version. Humility is not his strong suit.

But, let us press on. The second thing we need, said the President, "is to uphold the distinction between our faith and our governments. Our government does not sponsor a religion, nor does it pressure anyone to practice a particular faith, or any faith at all." Our founders believed in separation of church and state and they wrote that principle into our Constitution - our founding document - and it is, to this day, one of our most cherished and defended rights, not just to worship freely but to make sure that religion does not gain a foothold in directing the operations of governance (see my Blog postings of 7/3/2014 and 12/3/2013).

Just what values does Mr. Obama not share, since he is very specific about humility and love as cornerstones of a Christian morality (in complete accord with the New Testament, I might add)? In other words, what "moral framework from the administration" would fit with the critics' call for a strategy to defeat ISIS? Are we talking here about killing people as a moral framework and acceptable strategy? Are we talking about annihilation of terrorists as a part of a moral framework? Just what is this Southern Baptist official getting at here? I suspect he is wanting this country to follow Christian Crusaders marching to War against Muslims rather than to follow a Christ-like way about which the President was speaking. With the constitutional ban on a religion or religious practice dictating policy, I would answer: keep your war-like notions and your Christian "moral framework" to yourself and don't try to force what you believe on the rest of us.

It is Obama's third principle that really hits home, and which calls out to critics like the former governor and the Baptist official: where do you stand on "the one law, that Golden Rule that we should treat one another as we wish to be treated?" The President points to The Torah which says: 'Love thy neighbor as yourself.' To the Hadith in Islam that states: 'None of you truly believes until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself.' To the Holy Bible that says: "Put on love, which binds everything together in perfect harmony." (He could have also added similar words from Confucius, Hinduism and Buddhism!). But what he calls us to do in his conclusion is what the Gospel says and requires, and is unfortunately what the governor and pastor missed. Even though their criticism is based on one or two paragraphs, their condemnation extends to the whole of the speech, therefore bringing into question their own religious and moral "framework."

The President said: "Whatever our beliefs, whatever our traditions, we must seek to be instruments of peace, bringing light where there is darkness and sowing love where there is hatred" (citing as examples both Pope Francis and the Dalai Lama). "Each of us has a role in fulfilling our common greater purpose -- not merely to seek high position, but to plumb greater depths so that we may find the strength to love more fully. And this is perhaps our greatest challenge -- to see our own reflection in each other; to be our brother's keepers and sister's keepers, and to keep faith with one another. As children of God, let's work to end injustice -- injustice of poverty and hunger. As children of God, let's work to eliminate the scourge of homelessness. As children of God, let's stand up for the dignity and value of every woman, and man, and child...and work to end the scourge and the sin of modern-day slavery and human trafficking, and 'set the oppressed free.' We can never fully fathom (God's purpose and grace)...But even with our limits, we can heed that which is required: To do justice, and love kindness, and walk humbly with our God. I pray that in His Name... we will run and not be weary, walk and not be faint, and we'll heed those words and 'put on love'."

In summary, let us ask again, not only of the former governor and Baptist official, but of all the President's critics: just what is your problem? Are humility, religious neutrality and freedom, and the Golden Rule not within your Christian framework? Are you saying that loving your neighbor as yourself is not to be applied to everyone? Are you against the role of peace-making, although the Sermon on the Mount calls the makers of peace blessed by God? Are you ready to say that homelessness is the tough luck of those caught in it, or that human trafficking or oppression should not be opposed?

Or are you simply saying that we as a government should stand against all terrorists, seek them out, and destroy them? Is that your "moral framework?" Then I suggest, for your uninterrupted and in-depth reading, that you look up and absorb your own holy book, and assess just who it is that is offending other Christians with such war-like tones and with unrelenting insensitivity to an important speech by the President of the United States on the positive uses and the unfortunate misuses of religion that characterize all faiths. 

It is important to note that the President put all of this into proper perspective when he concluded his speech on the note that "as children of God" we must act in love toward others. It is also of major import that the President asserted early on that God is the source of this loving spirit, for that is the emphasis of Jesus' words in the New Testament. Jesus' primary emphasis was that his disciples should live as the "sons of God. " In other words, because God is who he is, humans are to be sincere, patient, kind, merciful, humble and generous. Thus, Jesus made plain that the first commandment is to love God with all heart soul and mind, and the second is to love neighbor as yourself. Thus, it is that all through the NT, the love of God is essentially equated with love for neighbor. because neighborly love is the will of God for his children. The Christian ethic derives from this relationship of closeness - from a faith relationship -- to God.

But Jesus, as he was wont to do, carried it all a step further; a step too far for many. He declared: "Love your enemies and pray for your persecutors, so can you be children of your heavenly father. You must be all goodness, just as your heavenly father is all good."

The whole point is that human beings are called to act, not out of a calculated prudence, but on the basis of an uncalculating loving-kindness exemplified by the heavenly Father of us all. There is always an ethical "plus" in the words of Jesus, many of which still make us uncomfortable:

love your enemies (Matt. 5:44)
forgive seventy-times-seven (Matt. 18:21-22)
be tolerant of non-conformists (Mark 9:40)
love gives, expecting no return (Luke 6:35)
love stoops to serve as a servant, like the master who waited on his laborers (Luke 12:37)

But, it is perhaps the Sermon on the Mount that throws a moral bomb into the middle of all our pharisaic calculations and expectations. Among the "Blessed" who will see the kingdom or inherit the kingdom of God or be called sons of God, are:

the poor, the sorrowful
those of a gentle ('humble') spirit
those who hunger and thirst to see the right prevail
those who show mercy
those whose hearts are pure (not sinless, but perhaps guileless, sincere, truthful)
the peacemakers
those who have suffered persecution or insults for the cause of right

In the face of this ethical construction of love of other humans based on love of God for all life, it is my conclusion that the speech of the President before the Prayer Breakfast on Feb. 5th, is much more in line with the Christian Gospel, the Christian ethic, the Christian manner than are the words of those who would seek to denigrate peacemaking, humility, or the truth of flaws in all religions and religious followers. Jesus himself condemned the rituals, the showiness, the hypocrisy of the religious groups of his day - the priests and the legalists - because they missed the point of who God is and what the mission of the children of God is all about -- loving actions toward friend and foe alike.

 The President gave us sustenance --food for thought and action -- the critics gave us nothing of the sort. And, what is worse, by criticizing the President for citing Christian misuse of their religion throughout the ages, along with the misuses of other faith groups, the critics condemned the whole of the speech and thus condemned the essence of their own ethical foundation. Their legalistic interpretation of what he said does exactly what the binding and blinding interpretations of the Law by the Pharisees did: it denigrated and condemned the essence of the very religion and ethic it sought to defend! May God forgive them, for they know not what they do!

A THIRD PARTY With LOTS of MONEY?

The juxtaposition of two recent headlines tells a story all its own:

“Senate Votes to move Keystone forward with 9 Democratic Votes” and “Pipeline Explodes in West Virginia”


You don’t get it? Well guess who was one of those nine Senators who voted “yea” on Keystone? Joe Manchin of West Virginia! I heard Manchin on a TV interview about this a few days before he voted YES. He parroted all the reasons that Republicans cite in favor of this pipeline – most of which is just plain fantasy, of course – like: “it will bring lots of jobs to his state” (maybe; however, they will not be permanent but temporary); “it will reduce dependence on foreign oil” and bring oil to his state (not unless West Virginia becomes a foreign country since all the oil coming through the pipe is going to be sold to countries overseas by Canada, a foreign country that owns the pipeline!); it will affect the state’s economy (perhaps; but not in the sense he means; this is a disaster waiting to happen just like that recent explosion, and it will cost West Virginia a pretty penny, maybe a few million!).
 
Now, there is enough about which to be angry here: voting with Republicans on a major dangerous boondoggle is one; using Republican lies and fabrications to support a bill like this is another, and being a Democrat-in-name-only is a third. Completely overlooking all the reasons NOT to vote for this environmental disaster is unforgivable, as is the obvious transaction of voting for the edification of special interests like oil companies just to maintain their monetary support.
 
Technically the Senate vote of 63-32 was not on the pipeline itself (it was a procedural vote to move forward with debate on the bill approving the pipeline). But it did indicate the strength of the vote to stop a filibuster and to override a veto; enough strength to do the former, but not the latter.

Who are the Ten Democrats (one Independent also voted for the bill: Rufus King (Maine). Here’s the list: Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Tom Carper (DE), Bob Casey (PA), Joe Donnelly (IN), Heidi Heitkamp (ND), Joe Manchin (WV), Claire McCaskill (MO), Jon Tester (MT), Tom Udall (NM), Mark Warner (VA). At the moment, it looks as though it is a waste of time to pursue progressive values in the face of such a bipartisan coalition. But, this is not true bi-partisanship; this is more like conspiracy to make it look like bi-partisan cooperation rather than what it is: self-aggrandizement to protect ones resources and one’s elective office.
 
Before we go on, we should point out that in the last few weeks, this was the fourth incident involving a pipeline. The other three occurred in other states, and an article online by Emily Atkin on Jan. 22^nd tells the story of each.


“Earlier this month, a gas pipeline in Mississippi, operated by GulfSouth Pipeline exploded, rattling residents’ windows and causing a smoke plume large enough to register on National Weather Service radar screens. On Jan. 17, a pipeline owned by Bridger Pipeline LLC in Montana spilled up to 50,000 gallons of crude oil into the Yellowstone River, a spill that left thousands of Montanans without drinkable tap water. Just a few days later, on Jan. 22, it was discovered that 3 million gallons of saltwater drilling waste had spilled from a North Dakota pipeline earlier in the month. That spill was widely deemed the state’s largest contaminant released into the environment since the North Dakota oil boom began.”
 
Both Jon Tester of Montana and Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota should probably pay a little more attention to what pipeline failures are already doing to the environment of their states! For that matter, the rest of these turncoat Democrats should pay attention to their own situations because a disaster involving a fossil fuel company could be right around the corner for them. Funny how money and power can hide the reality of very real circumstances.


That brings me to a reality that must not be hidden. That reality is that there are too many Democrats in Congress ready and willing to put their own narrow interests above the interests and needs of the people they represent. In addition, there are too many millionaires and billionaires in the oil business and in the fossil-fuel spectrum of services and subsidiaries. The reality is that these companies are controlling not only our economy, but our institutions, elections and our future by keeping alternative fuels at bay so that they will not be able to take over the fuel market.

Let's take a closer look at one of the examples of aberration and corruptive influence being exercised upon Democrats and Republicans alike. Here's a quote from the Public Citizen newsletter for end of January that spells out what's happening:
"A powerful third party has emerged in American politics. The secretive cabal of Big Business tycoons under the dominion of the notorious Koch Brothers just announced that it will spend $889 million in the 2016 elections. That's hundreds of millions more than the Democratic Party or the Republican Party has ever spent in a single election cycle. (It's also such a specific number that they likely do have commitments from assorted millionaires and billionaires to hit that amount, if not even more.) And, sadly, the other two major parties will join in this disgraceful and pernicious arms race against democracy. Make no mistake: the corrupting money from the Koch Brothers and their ilk threatens a full-scale destruction of our democracy. 

•  These are people who seem to feel entitled -- a misbegotten sense of entitlement stoked by the U.S. Supreme Court's absurd Citizen's United ruling -- to simply buy the government they want.
• These are people who would abolish the minimum wage, Social Security and Medicare.
• These are people who prop up the 'think tanks' and political pawns denying the fact that climate change is happening and is caused by human activity.

 
"Nothing could be more antithetical to the ideals on which this country was founded than domination by a few hundred people whose power and influence derive only from their wealth.  Society should work for everyone not just the already grotesquely rich."
 
So now, let's take a brief look at some of the implications of this "grotesquely rich" Third Party.

First, they are not going to use this money just so certain candidates can win in 2016. No, they are spending this amount to elect politicians who are sympathetic to their philosophy and willing to fight for their agenda. How many Democrats that will involve is hard to say, but there are about 50 of them who have already voted with Right-wing Republicans on matters of some import to the middle class and to the poor., including build the Keystone pipeline, weaken Wall Street reform and exclude abortion coverage from ACA.   In case you haven't seen the list and chart from Daily Kos that shows who voted, here's a link to it: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/01/23/1359748/-These-are-the-Democrats-who-voted
 So now, not only do we have to pay attention to what Republicans are doing, we have to keep tabs on Democratic Party members who are apt to vote with them on issues and policies that are contrary to Democratic Party values and standards.
 

We also have to be vigilant about the Republicans in Congress who have connected themselves to the Koch Brothers and their followers. At the Koch's winter retreat, held at the Rancho Mirage Ritz Carlton in Palm Springs, a group of potential Republican presidential candidates came to pay their respects (and perhaps to kiss the rings of the Brothers). It is reported that Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (already known for his reliance on Koch money for his 2014 run for Governor), Senator Marco Rubio from Florida, Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky as well as Sen. Ted Cruz from Texas, were all on hand for seminars and strategy sessions, and most of the 450 who attended the weekend event leaned away from Mitt Romney and toward these "bought men." Not able to attend was another Koch favorite, Gov. Mike Pence of Indiana. 
 

Instead of trying to list all the Republican Senators and Congressmen who have been recipients of Koch money in past elections (find them anyway at www.opensecrets.org ), let us name some of the organizations that make up the Koch coalition through which they allocate and apply their grotesque contributions. 
 The nonprofit group that oversees the coalition of conservative groups drawn together by the Koch's is the Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce. In addition to the FPCoC, the most active groups in this coalition include: Americans for Prosperity, the American Energy Alliance, Concerned Veterans for America, Generation Opportunity and 60 Plus Association. There are at least another 10 sub-groups involved: American Commitment, The American Future Fund, The Center for Shared Services, Concerned Women for America, Public Engagement Group and some Trusts: Evangehr4 Trust, The Libre Initiative Trust, and the Themis Trust (this Trust houses the data used by the groups in the network). You might want to watch out for these, especially around election time!


It is also important to name some of the corporations, businesses and people associated with the Koch Brothers, and who were prominent among attendees at their Palm Springs gathering. You might even want to consider in a few cases, whether or not you should perhaps boycott some of these companies and services.

Richard DeVos from Michigan, co-founder of AMWAY.
Foster Friess founder and CEO of Friess Associates (investment firm),
Jerry & Leah Fullinwider, Hillwood International Energy,
Richard Gilliam, founder CUMBERLAND Resources Corporation
Richard "Dick" Haworth former CEO & Chairman emeritus of Haworth (international office furniture manufacturer),
Diane Hendricks, billionaire head of Supply Roofing Co.,
Ethelmae Humphreys, chair of TAMKO Building Products (roofing manufacturer),
Kenneth Levy, co-founded Levy equity management firm; wife Frayda is a national director of Americans for Prosperity and sits on board of Club for Growth.
E. Pierce Marshall, Jr., and Preston Marshall head up parts of MarOpCo of Houston (oil exploration)
Karen Wright, founder and CEO of private philanthropy group, Ariel Foundation


More names of businesses associated with the Koch coalition:
Services Group of America (food services wholesaler)
Mountaire Corporation (agribusiness)
Continental Resources (oil business)
Peacock Engineering (packaging company)
Menards (3rd largest hardware company)
Dyason-Kissner-Moran company (international holding company)
Charles SCHWAB Corporation (independent brokerage firm)
Elliott Management (hedge funds)
John Templeton Foundation (organization that attempts to apply scientific legitimacy to matters of faith)


Want more? For an inside account, go to www.motherjones.com/politics and click on The Koch 130, or for an exclusive audio recording of the Koch brothers seminar held in the spring of 2011 in Vail, Colorado, go to this link: http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/08/exclusive-audio-koch-brothers-seminar-tapes.


Finally, let's take a look at some items in President Obama's 2016 proposed Budget that will be DOA (Dead On Arrival) at the Congress because of the Republican majority and the wayward Democrats, many of whom are beholden to the Koch Brothers for election financing.


This is the reality with which we must deal now that the Congress is filling up with people elected with at least some Koch Brothers' money in their financial portfolios. It certainly appears that the Republicans have nothing nice to say about the 2016 proposed budget, except perhaps the proposed increase in military defense funding! Essentially, the Republicans are opposed to all new taxes, new spending and new borrowing. Here are some of what they oppose, and won't even consider, summed up by www.foxnews.com:


"Obama's budget emphasizes the same themes as his State of the Union address last month, when he challenged Congress to work with him on narrowing the income gap between the very wealthy and everyone else. Referring to proposed spending on everything from roads to education initiatives, Obama said, 'We can afford to make these investments while remaining fiscally responsible.'
'We would be making a critical error if we avoided making these investments,' he added. 'We can't afford not to'."

1. "Obama is proposing a six-year, $478 billion public-works program for highway, bridge and transit upgrades, with half of it to be financed with a one-time, 14 percent tax on U.S. companies' overseas profits. The tax would be due immediately. Under current law, those profits are subject only to federal taxes if they are returned, or repatriated, to the U.S., where they face a top rate of 35 percent. Many companies avoid U.S. taxes on those earnings by simply leaving them overseas.
2. The tax is part of a broader administration plan to cut corporate tax breaks and increase taxes on the country's highest wage-earners to pay for projects to help the middle class. Members of the GOP-controlled Congress and other fiscal conservatives have dismissed the overall plan since elements of it were announced several weeks ago.
3. Higher taxes on top earners and on fees paid by the largest financial institutions would help raise $320 billion over 10 years which Obama would use to provide low- and middle-class tax breaks.
4. a credit of up to $500 for two-income families, a boost in the child care tax credit to up to $3,000 per child under age 5, and overhauling breaks that help pay for college.
5. Obama also is calling for a $60 billion program for free community college for an estimated 9 million students if all states participate.
6. It also proposes expanding child care to more than 1.1 million additional children under the age of 4 by 2025 and seeks to implement universal pre-school.
7. Obama's budget also proposes easing painful, automatic "sequester" cuts to the Pentagon and domestic agencies with a 7 percent increase in annual appropriations, providing an additional $74 billion in 2016, divided between the military and domestic programs. Many Republicans support the extra military spending but oppose increased domestic spending.
8. Another centerpiece of the president's tax proposal is an increase in the capital gains rate on couples making more than $500,000 per year. The rate would climb from 23.8 percent to 28 percent.
9. Obama wants to require estates to pay capital gains taxes on securities at the time they are inherited. He also is trying to impose a 0.07 percent fee on the roughly 100 U.S. financial companies with assets of more than $50 billion."

Republicans counter with their usual rhetoric: "But even as Obama claims the plan is 'fully paid for,' the total budget shows a $474 billion deficit for fiscal 2016. Obama's budget plan never reaches balance over the next decade and projects the deficit would rise to $687 billion in 2025. Administration officials say their goal is to hold the deficit to a small percentage of the total U.S. economy -- but not necessarily to eliminate it. " 

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Paul Ryan has accused the president of exploiting "envy economics" as part of his tax proposals.

"It seems to be more of the same policies that have resulted in the lowest, slowest economic recovery out of an economic downturn in the history of the country -- more taxes, more spending, more borrowing," House Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price, R-Ga., told Fox News on Sunday."


And so, the battle is joined. But what the Republicans seem to have forgotten are the facts of the case: the President has brought us out of the Great Recession; investment and stimulus, not austerity produced record numbers of new jobs, the stock market continues to flourish; deficits have fallen dramatically, as has the unemployment rate. Manufacturing, particularly at home, is up and gas prices have fallen to new lows. It is past time to invest anew in infrastructure, education, jobs and a fairer tax structure that has the rich paying their fair share. They are the ones who have benefited immensely in the last six years without passing on those benefits to fellow Americans in the middle class, as well as to others challenged by generational poverty, disabilities, poor mental health and the effects of aging. Instead, they want to attack Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and rid people of their new-found health insurance coverage under the ACA.
 

This writer, of course, comes down on the side of the President, and has little or no use for Republicans who are turning over our form of democracy to wealthy elite willing to spend almost $1 billion to make sure that their vision of limited government, of unregulated economics, and of private not public philanthropy carries the day. They buy elections; they buy lobbyists; they buy officials, they buy negative publicity, they buy favorable policies, they even buy colleges and universities and dictate curriculum, and they buy social engineering (anti-choice on abortion and no contraception, no Planned Parenthood Centers) and a good portion of the electorate. Don't be bamboozled by this crowd.


Like the wayward Democrats mentioned at the beginning of this piece, this corrupting influence is pervasive; able to move a Democrat to vote against the people of his or her district or state, ignoring the facts of science, previous experience, and immediate examples of environmental damage done by explosions, spills and leaks. We cannot, we must not, tolerate rule by a few rich industrialists and investors who dictate all the rules, thereby destroying this government of, by, and for the People.