Truth / Lie

This is something we all need to remember, especially with an election year coming up. Far too many politicians think if they tell a lie enough times, it will essentially become the truth. It won't!

Campaign Spending Is Down

The drawing above (found at the website Ghost in the Machine) pretty accurately depicts the electoral politics in this country, where the person with the most money has a significantly better chance of winning than his opponent does -- a situation made only worse by the Supreme Court decision allowing unlimited money to come in from corporations and other special interest groups in national elections. In fact, it has gotten so bad that in most places you can't even run for national office unless you are rich or have rich donors to whom you've sold your soul.

This is especially true in presidential elections, where the spending has really gotten out of hand. Here are the spending figures for the candidates in the last five presidential elections:

1992...............$192,200,000
1996...............$239,900,000
2000...............$343,100,000
2004...............$717,900,000
2008...............$1,324,700,000

And with the Supreme Court decision allowing unlimited and secret donations to "Super PACs" (which every candidate has), most pundits expect the campaign spending in the 2012 presidential race to dwarf the total for 2008. Some even expect it to be around $3 billion. That's a staggering amount of money for one race in one election.

It's predictions like that which makes this fact so amazing -- in the 2012 campaign for president, at least so far, spending is down. And it's down significantly.

Horton Doesn't Hear A Thing

Political Cartoon is by Pat Bagley in the Salt Lake Tribune.

Hell Is Freezing Over

Those of you who think you might be heading to Hell might want to pack some ice skates and a warm coat, because I'm thinking that place (if it exists) must surely be about to freeze over. I say that because I find myself agreeing with a right-wing Republican senator -- one that in the past has been wrong about every issue that has come before Congress. It is Senator Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma). Coburn has written an article for CNN, and while I may disagree with some of what he says (like lowering tax rates), I believe most of what he says is right on target. Here is some of that article:

Every year, politicians on both sides engage in a process of reverse Robin Hood in which they steal $30 billion from low- and middle-income Americans and provide handouts to the rich and famous.


Millionaires receive tax earmarks and deductions crafted by both parties that allow them to write off billions each year. These write-offs include mortgage interest deductions on second homes and luxury yachts, gambling losses, business expenses, electric vehicle credits and even child care tax credits.


Meanwhile, direct handouts for millionaires have included $74 million in unemployment checks, $316 million in farm subsidies, $89 million for preservation of ranches and estates, $9 billion in retirement checks and $7.5 million to compensate for damages caused by emergencies to property that should have been insured. Millionaires have even borrowed $16 million in government-backed education loans to attend college since 2007.


The goal of highlighting these excesses is not to demonize those who are successful. Instead, by highlighting the sheer stupidity of pampering the wealthy with lavish benefits through our safety net and tax code, I hope to make a moral and economic argument for real entitlement and tax reform. . .


Families are struggling to make ends meet and are making painful economic choices as politicians in Washington borrow billions to provide welfare to the wealthy. Politicians on both sides refuse to fix big problems and defend stupid policies because changing those policies would involve upending a comfortable political status quo.


It's important for taxpayers to understand that these distortions are not accidental loopholes in the law. To the contrary, these provisions are intentional efforts to get all Americans to buy into a system where everyone appears to benefit while the poor and middle class are being robbed.


In the case of entitlements such as Social Security, progressives have argued for decades that a program for poor people will be a poor program. Yet, Warren Buffett hardly needs the same retirement check as his secretary. Ending welfare handouts to millionaires will strengthen, not undermine, the safety net for people who need it most.


Even Canada has adopted means testing in its retirement program by limiting benefits for high-earners. That fact is we can't afford the system we have today. Only by adopting common-sense reforms can we sustain a safety net for those who truly need assistance.


On the tax side, both parties have been reluctant to alter tax earmarks and deductions, such as the mortgage interest deduction. These are considered sacrosanct.


Yet, it's hard to understand how limiting the mortgage interest deductions for yachts will hurt working families. Defending spending in the tax code is not conservative. Providing tax earmarks and deductions to millionaires is a tax increase on everyone who doesn't receive the benefit. The only way we will enact real tax reform, and grow the economy, is by lowering tax rates and broadening the base by scaling back these egregious handouts. This is precisely what President Ronald Reagan did in 1986.


Even though the super committee failed to reach an agreement on broad deficit reduction, there is no reason why the other super committee -- Congress -- should drag its feet. Change in Washington tends to start with small steps. There is no better place to start than scaling back ludicrous handouts to millionaires that expose an entitlement system and tax code that desperately need to be reformed.

It's hard to argue with what Coburn is saying here. If his Republican cohorts were to actually do what he is suggesting, they might actually win over a lot of voters in the next election. That's a frightening thought, but I don't think we need worry. He's suggesting that the rich stop getting handouts from the government (and maybe even pay some taxes), and the thought of that is anathema to the rest of the congressional Republicans. They may hate welfare for poor people, but they love welfare for the rich.

However, it would be nice to end the welfare handouts to the rich (and the corporations), since they are the only ones doing well in this recession and have no need for them.

It IS About Race

Political Cartoon is by Bill Day at caglecartoons.com.

Brown Is Sinking In Massachusetts

When Senator Ted Kennedy died, the progressive movement lost a great champion. But this loss was compounded when his seat was taken in 2009 by Cosmopolitan nude centerfold and right-wing nut-job Scott Brown (pictured above). It got even worse a few months ago when the political pundits began to say it looked like Brown would be able to get re-elected fairly easily in 2012 (since the polls showed him well ahead of any possible Democratic candidates).

But that was then. Things have changed. Brown's congressional cohorts made things a whole lot harder for him by refusing to even consider approving Elizabeth Warren as the head of the newly created Consumer Protection Bureau. When it became obvious there was no way she was going to be approved, Professor Warren (she is a Harvard professor) decided to go back to Massachusetts -- where she declared her candidacy for the senate seat held by Brown.

Since tossing her hat in the ring, Warren has been steadily climbing in the polls. And a new University of Massachusetts Amherst Poll now shows she has a very good chance of unseating Brown in next year's election. The poll shows that she has the support of 43% of the voters, while Brown's support is now 39% (and Brown's favorability rating has dropped to 37%). That is still within the 4.4 point margin of error, but this is the first time Brown has trailed an opponent and the numbers are still moving in a direction that would favor Warren. Here is the current demographic breakdown:

MEN
Brown...............46%
Warren...............40%

WOMEN
Brown...............31%
Warren...............46%

OVER $100,000 INCOME
Brown...............48%
Warren...............42%

$40,000 TO $100,000 INCOME
Brown...............37%
Warren...............48%

UNDER $40,000 INCOME
Brown...............27%
Warren...............42%

18 TO 29 YEARS OLD
Brown...............21%
Warren...............52%

30 TO 54 YEARS OLD
Brown...............44%
Warren...............38%

OVER 55 YEARS OLD
Brown...............41%
Warren...............44%

Finally, it's beginning to look like a good progressive candidate has an excellent chance of taking back Ted Kennedy's senate seat.

Stunning Allegation

Political Cartoon is by Cameron (Cam) Cardow in The Ottawa Citizen.

Unacceptable

Is it really acceptable to you that the United States ranks 27th in the world in social justice? It certainly isn't to me!

More Taxpayer Money For The Big Banks

Remember the TARP program -- the $700 billion asked for and passed during the Bush administration (with the help of politicians from both political parties)? The idea was that these big Wall Street banks were "too big to fail" and their failure would be devastating to the economy, so the taxpayers bailed them out. The banks were supposed to turn around and loan that money out to the denizens of Main Street to boost the economy.

We all know how that turned out. The big Wall Street banks were saved, but instead of loaning the money out they used it to continue playing economic games in the stock market (and of course, passing out huge bonuses to their executives). Meanwhile, the rest of America lost millions of jobs and saw record numbers of home foreclosures -- things that were exacerbated by the failure of the banks receiving TARP money to loan that money back out.

Now we learn from Bloomberg News that the TARP program, which most Americans thought was too large, was actually just chump change. The Federal Reserve had already opened its vaults for the giant banks before TARP even happened, and wound up giving those banks over $7.7 trillion in loans -- and those loans were with no strings attached, and these loans were secret, with neither the people nor the Congress being informed. The loan money was going out so fast that even Fed officials were shocked at the final total. Gary Stern, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis until 2009, said he "wasn't aware of the magnitude" of the secret loans.

What They Don't Want

Political Cartoon is by Steve Breen in the San Diego Union-Tribune. 

Good News And Bad News

We all know that there's no such thing as a bank with a conscience -- at least not one of the huge corporate banks. In spite of what the Supreme Court may believe, corporations are not people and only people have consciences. A corporation only has a bottom line, and they don't care who they have to screw over to fatten the profits of that bottom line.

In the last couple of years banks in this country have been foreclosing on homes at a record level. But while these banks file the paperwork to foreclose on homes, it is actual humans to have to deliver that paperwork and force people from their homes -- usually deputy sheriffs and hired movers.

A couple of days ago one of those corporate banks, Duetsche Bank in Atlanta, sent sheriff's deputies and movers to toss another person out of there home. But when those deputies and movers got to the home, they found it inhabited by 103 year-old Vita Lee and her 89 year-old daughter. That was when those deputies and movers showed they had a conscience. They didn't care how legal the bank paperwork was, they absolutely refused to evict those two women.

I applaud the decision made by those deputies and movers. Kicking a 103 year-old woman from the house she had lived in for 53 years would take a pretty hard-hearted person. Maybe the bank executives would like to go do that job themselves, since they have yet to demonstrate they even have a heart.

Ms. Lee told the people who had come to move her, "Please don't come in and disturb me no more. When I'm gone you all can come back and do whatever they want to." Thank sounds like some pretty good advice to me. I'm just glad to see some authorities in this country still have a conscience.

Meanwhile, the bad news is that poverty continues to grow in this country, and it is innocent children that are being directly affected by that growth. Data from the Department of Agriculture shows that in the last four years the number of children that are receiving free or low cost meals at school has risen by 17% -- from 18 million in 2007 to a current total of over 21 million.

These 3 million new children on the free or reduced-price lunch program are from families that once considered themselves middle class -- that is, until they lost their jobs and were unable to find a new job. And it just keeps getting worse. Every week more families slip into poverty -- which means more children are condemned to grow up in poverty. And the politicians in Washington do nothing but argue over whether rich people should get a new massive tax cut.

Politicians, especially Republicans and blue dogs, are now showing they don't have any more of a conscience than a corporate bank -- that is, none at all.

The Love Bug

Political Cartoon is by Bill Day at caglecartoons.com.

Amarillo Considers "No Texting" Ban

Here's some good news for drivers in Amarillo. The City Commission is currently considering a new law that would ban texting while driving an automobile. Currently the only law regarding cell phone use while driving is a ban on their use in school zones. So far this year, police have issued 53 citations for that.

Personally, I would like to see a city-wide ban on all cell phone use when driving. But there is no doubt that texting is the most dangerous cell phone use while driving a car, so banning that is much better than doing nothing. Even if the law just saves one life, it will be worth it. There is no justifiable reason for putting the lives of others in danger by texting while driving. If the text is that important, then pull into a parking lot, stop the car, and text away -- but it should never be done while driving.

The police in Amarillo say it will be a hard law to enforce, since many people text holding the phone below window level (unlike the picture above) and that would make it hard for an officer to see. But they are still in favor of the new law. Cpl. Jerry Neufeld said, "Texting and driving is a problem no doubt and anything we can do to reduce texting and reduce wrecks and injuries is something we're all in favor of." He went on to say, "I just think the law or the ordinance in itself would be a big deterrent to most people."

I agree. Most people would not text while driving because they won't want to break the law. And those who still will do so may be deterred after some people get tickets and it is known they could get caught. I urge our city leaders to pass this important ordinance.

--------------------------

The Amarillo City Commission is also considering passing an ordinance that would make it illegal for sex offenders to live within 1000 feet of a school, park, or other place where children normally gather. I don't particularly care if they pass this ordinance or not. I just hope they don't think the ordinance will reduce sex crimes against children.

The fact is that such an ordinance would just be a cosmetic one to make the voters feel better, but it really won't make anyone safer. After a lifetime working in law enforcement, I know that when a sex offender wants a new victim he'll find one -- whether that victim lives across the street, a few blocks away, or miles away. I wish that was not true, but that is the harsh reality.

The sexual rape of a child is a terrible crime, and it should be met with a harsh sentence. But once these sick people are released, telling them where they can't live is of no deterrent value at all. They are used to going to great lengths and a lot of trouble to find a victim. Walking or driving a few extra blocks would be nothing to them.

My advice is to know your neighbors, watch your children, and don't let them go off with anyone you have even a little doubt about. That's about all you can really do. If passing this ordinance makes people feel better, then I'm not against it. Just understand that it is not a real solution to this horrible problem.

Search For Intelligent Life

Political Cartoon is by Lee Judge in The Kansas City Star.