Award Winner

Political Cartoon is by Ben Sargent in The Texas Observer.

Susan B. Anthony

Isn't it time to toss our patriarchy out the window, and start living like the Constitution meant something? Doesn't the Constitution guarantee all American citizens the same (and equal) rights? In these modern times, how can any sane and reasonable person believe men are more important than women?

Obedience Is The Problem

GOP Is Split On What Change They Want

After they got embarrassed in the last election, Republican leaders decided their party needed to change. They even produced a report on what kind of change was needed to reach out to more voters -- like moderating their views on immigration reform and same-sex marriage, allowing them to reach out to Hispanics and young voters (both of which voted heavily Democratic). Unfortunately for the GOP, their members in Congress don't agree. They have continued doing what they were doing, and some even want to move further to the right.

The question is -- what do their base voters think? Well, a new survey from the Pew Research Center looked at that. They polled 497 Republicans (and GOP leaners) between July 17th and 21st (with a margin of error of 5.1 points). And what they found was that the party's base voters are just as split as their leaders and elected officials.

Nearly all Republicans think their party has to make changes -- and about two-thirds of them (67%) think those must be major changes. The problem comes in what kind of change is needed. About 40% of Republicans think their leadership is right, and the party needs to moderate its policies to reach out to a wider range of voters. But an even larger group in the party (54%) want to do the opposite -- move even further to the right.

This larger group, led by the teabaggers, fundamentalists, and racists, want to keep an America run by privileged whites -- and they think they can do that by passing laws to keep minorities (and young people) from voting, and by marginalizing those groups through gerrymandering congressional districts. And many in Congress are listening to them, since they are the recipients of those gerrymandered districts.

There is a war going on in the GOP over what direction the party needs to take to become relevant again in national elections, and right now the tea bagger element in the party has the upper hand (because they control who gets elected in the gerrymandered GOP districts). But demographics are working against them. This country is getting less white with each passing year, and nothing will change that -- and trying to keep minorities and the young from voting won't work for very long (if at all).

The GOP does need to change. But the change they are going with right now will just hasten their party's irrelevance in national elections. That's a shame, because I think a democracy needs more parties -- not less. But they, by giving power to the teabaggers, have chosen their path.

Here is a breakdown of the teabaggers in the party from that same survey:

The typical teabagger is male, over 50, white, protestant, and lives in the suburbs. I doubt that surprises anyone.

Judging

Political Cartoon is by Stuart Carlson at carlsontoons.com.

Israel Shows It Is Not Interested In Peace

(Image is from a 5/25/2009 edition of The Telegraph.)

Once again, the Israeli government is showing it is not really interested in the success of peace talks with the Palestinians. They are just using the peace talks to keep Europe and America off their backs while they continue to expand their country by stealing Palestinian land.

The Israeli government has just published it latest list of more than 600 towns and areas that need (and will get more money from the government) -- and the list includes 91 illegal Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian areas. That's six more settlements than were included in the last report, and shows the Israeli government is not really interested in peace (since the last peace talks were discontinued for this same kind of settlement expansion).

The settlements are illegal according to international law. And they expose the real policy of the Israeli government -- to expand their country by building settlements in captured and occupied areas. And they are not willing to even negotiate giving any of the land back (for a Palestinian state) that their settlements are on. Israel doesn't want any two-state solution (which might lead to peace). They just want to expand their country's size.

This is nothing but outright theft of lands that do not (and should not) belong to Israel. The western nations, including the United States, should stop all aid to Israel until it alters this policy of land theft. Is there really any difference between Israel's seizure and annexation of Palestinian lands and Saddam's seizure and attempt to annex Kuwait? How can the United States let the first happen, while it went to war to prevent the other? Isn't it more than a bit hypocritical to turn a blind eye when our friend's do what we would not let other nations do?

Inaction

Political Cartoon is by Clay Bennett in the Chattanooga Times Free Press.

GOP Wants To Punish The Poor By Cutting Food Stamp Funding By $40 Billion

There is no doubt that a record number of people are now receiving help to buy food through the federal government's Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly called Food Stamps). The 2013 level is just over 47.6 million people -- up from 43.2 million in 2010. And it may grow even higher, since Congress has done absolutely nothing to create jobs or get our economy back on track.

There is no doubt that the number receiving food stamps is too many, and the government needs to do something to bring that number down -- way down. The question is how to do it. Democrats want to do it by pumping more money into the economy (which would create more demand and thus more job creation) and by rebuilding our infrastructure (also putting more money in the economy, raising demand and job creation).

The Republicans have a different method. They simply want to cut funding. They recently failed in their effort to cut $20 billion from SNAP -- because the Democrats thought that was too deep a cut, and the teabagger Republicans in the House thought it wasn't deep enough. They are now proposing to cut the program by $40 billion (over 10 years).

I doubt if any House Democrat will support that. It's just too mean-spirited, since it would mean either dropping people from the program or lowering the benefit provided for a family (already at a measly $131 a month average). If this passes, it will have to do so with only Republican votes -- and that is not a sure thing, since the teabaggers may think the $40 billion cut is still too small. And if it does pass, it is dead on arrival in the Senate.

Once again, the House Republicans are not being realistic. You simply don't fix an economy by taking food from the mouths of poor people, or increasing the poverty level (which this cut would do). The way to do it is by putting more money into the economy, not less, and creating jobs. Austerity has never fixed a failing economy, and won't do it now.

Cruzocracy

Political Cartoon is by Ben Sargent in the Austin American-Statesman.

We All Deserve It

Amen to that. Why do the members of Congress get good government health care insurance, but those members of Congress (especially the Republicans) think it is wrong for other Americans to get the same coverage. Hell, they're even talking about abolishing Medicare. That is just insane. We should be offering something like Medicare to every American citizen, regardless of age -- and those in Congress should get the same coverage that all other Americans get. After all, we're supposed to be living in a democracy where everyone is equal and has the same rights and privileges.

First Amendment Wall

Giffords Super-PAC Rakes In The Cash

Once she recovered from being shot in an Arizona shopping Center parking lot, former Rep. Gabrielle "Gabby" Giffords decided to campaign for sane gun control. She and her husband created a super-PAC to help fund the effort, and to pay for advertising to counter the propaganda being put out by the NRA.

Now it looks like her efforts are being rewarded big-time. In it's first six months of existence, her super-PAC has raked in about $6.5 million -- more than a million dollars a month. And half of that money, about $3.2 million, has come from small donors giving less than $200 each -- showing the broad-based support she is getting to institute some sane gun laws (like background checks for all gun buyers).

One of the best parts of this is that contributions to her super-PAC have almost equaled the donations to the NRA in that same six month period. The NRA raised about $7 million.

NOTE -- Anyone who wishes to contribute to Gifford's super-PAC, Americans for Responsible Solutions, can do so at americansforresponsiblesolutions.org. 

Congress Moving Quickly ?

Political Cartoon is by Dave Granlund at davegranlund.com.

Cutting Gov. Programs Increases Poverty

The Republicans have cut most programs that help hurting Americans to the bone -- and they want to cut them even more. They either don't care how many Americans must live in poverty, or they don't understand that they are increasing the poverty level with their cuts. They even want to cut Social Security.

The charts above use the U.S. Census supplemental poverty level figures. Supplemental poverty considers the effect of various government programs on the poverty level. In the above chart, we can see that the current supplemental poverty level, with government help figured in, is at 16.1%. That means that 16.1% of our total population still lives under the poverty level set by the government -- even when we consider the help they get from the government.

That's far too large a number for a nation as wealthy as the United States. But it could be even worse if the Republicans get their way. Note that without the SNAP program (food stamps), the poverty level would rise to 17.6%. And without Social Security, the poverty level would rise to 24.4%. While these programs are eliminating all poverty, they are working to keep millions of Americans above the poverty level.

And they aren't the only programs keeping Americans out of poverty. Without unemployment insurance, housing assistance, SSI income, refundable tax credits, school lunch programs, WIC program, low-income energy assistance, and other programs, more Americans would slip into poverty. Each of these programs works to keep people above the poverty line.

That means every time the Republicans cut any of these programs, they are condemning more Americans to live below the poverty level. Do they care? If so, they certainly don't act like it. They even want to cut Social Security -- the government program that works to keep more people (elderly Americans) out of poverty than any other government program. Before Social Security, about half of the elderly in the U.S. lived in poverty. That has dropped dramatically, to slightly above 10% -- because Social Security works.

Frankly, I am appalled that the party that claims to represent christians could be so unchristian in their actions toward hurting Americans. How can cutting assistance for the poor, and actually increasing the number of poor people, be considered to be christian?