Darn You Supreme Court!!!

So went the impotent cries of legislators today as the Supreme Court said that the death penalty for child rape was unconstitutional. Wow, were some of those guys livid. The CNN Headline read “Lawmakers vow to execute child rapists.” This seemed a little weird to me. In fact, while I hate child rapists as much as the next guy, I’ve never really been obsessed with killing them. Should we be worried that our lawmakers have this dangerous vigilante obsession?

The short answer: no. Our lawmakers are no thirstier for death than we are, as I realized when I thought for a moment. They are thirstier for something that is much more to their benefit. I’m talking, of course, about votes. Everyone wants to be popular. Sometimes, an easy way to make yourself popular is to play the role of a defender of justice and children. How does one cultivate this role? Killing people nobody likes. So when Alabama Attorney General Troy King (or “Priam” as his friends call him) says the Supreme Court is “creating a situation where the country is a less safe place to grow up,” he doesn’t mean that the jails he oversees are such disasters of security that every child rapist we don’t throw against the wall immediately will escape and go back to their inhuman activities. He is simply angry at the Supreme Court for taking away part of what makes him a “good guy” in the eyes of the public.

Why is America one of the last developed countries to keep the death penalty? Because it is politically expedient to do so. Any politician who opposed the death penalty would have to say that child rapists, child murderers, serial killers, all deserve to live. But how can we have any principles while our own government takes life? Are we using the victims to justify our own base need to see people who have done heinous acts die? In many states, the death penalty for child molestation is part of “Jessica’s Law,” named after a 9-year-old Florida girl who was raped and buried alive. Her story is a horrible one, and the tragic end is that the name of this once innocent, harmless girl is being used to kill people. We have to look past our rage at these people and think about what this is doing to our humanity as a nation and as individuals. If we consider the difference between life in prison without parole and a death sentence, which one can we be prouder of? What if, as a nation, we could say “The United States of America does not kill.” That would be a day that all patriots could take pride in.

 

Big Difference

Recently, Fortune magazine interviewed both McCain and Obama about the economy. I found one of the questions to be particularly interesting:

Question: What do you see as the gravest long-term threat to the US economy?

Obama: If we don’t get a handle on our energy policy, it is possible that the kinds of trends we’ve seen over the last year will just continue. Demand is clearly outstripping supply. It’s not a problem we can drill our way out of. It can be a drag on our economy for a very long time unless we take steps to innovate and invest in the research and development that’s required to find alternative fuels. I think it’s very important for the federal government to have a role in that process.

I think we can all agree that the price of oil is absolutely detrimental to our economy, and will continue to be so unless something is done. I hope we can also agree that simply drilling for more oil will have a negligible effect on prices (but a large, unnecessary impact on the environment).

The best answer does seem to be alternative fuels, which may cost a lot of money to research, but will certainly pay off in the long run.

But McCain, well, I’m not sure what McCain is thinking. Here’s his answer to the same question:

McCain: Well, I would think that the absolute gravest threat is the struggle that we’re in against Islamic extremism, which can affect, if they prevail, our very existence. Another successful attack on the United States of America could have devastating consequences.

This is interesting.  It’s true that terrorist attacks could hurt the economy, after all, the attacks on 9/11 did temporarily disrupt economic activity.  And since McCain is talking about threats to “our very existence”, it is also true that a much larger terrorist attack involving, say, a nuclear device, would devastate all aspects of American life.

But lets not stop there.  We can’t ignore the fact that by fighting terrorism (which in McCain’s mind means a war in Iraq and who knows where else), our government spends huge amounts of money abroad that could be spent at home.  This in itself is a blow to our economy, and it also angers the Islamic extremists that plan terrorist attacks.  So maybe McCain should be afraid of terrorists, because he really has no idea how to handle them.

So in the end, we have one candidate who wants to talk about the economy when asked about it, and another who wants to turn these economic questions into “foreign policy” debates (I use the term loosely).  Which one do you think is more in touch?

 

Who’s The Elitist Now?

As you all know, last week massive flooding struck the Midwest, destroying crops and property alike. Thousands of families are now homeless, and our thoughts are with them.

But this disaster is going to do even more damage. The amount of corn destroyed will almost surely cause a sharp increase in food prices. It will also increase the demand for gas, because ethanol prices will rise. Of course, gas prices will be rising anyway because ethanol makes up a percentage of the gas we use.

One would imagine that this would be getting the attention of politicians, especially presidential candidates. But what we have to realize is that the people in power all have different ways of dealing with these types of situations.

For example, Senator McCain’s strategy for handling a crisis is to get as far away from it as he possibly can. Remember Katrina? When that hurricane hit New Orleans, McCain was eating birthday cake somewhere. This time, as Iowa drowned, McCain was attending a California fundraising event. And the money wasn’t going to flood victims…

Senator Obama, on the other hand, has taken a more hands-on approach:

Can you believe him?  What an elitist.  He must think those people are so bitter over this flood thing that they don’t even want to do the work themselves.  At least McCain knows to leave the people alone to deal with their own problems.

 

John McCain’s National Security “Experience”

It’s been one of the core messages of his campaign, that John McCain, as a veteran, has the experience to lead the US in these dangerous times. The question is, can McCain do what he promises to do?

Retired General Wesley Clark has something to say about that:

We love our veterans in this country, and they deserve all the credit we can give them for the heroic deeds that they have performed. And yet, sometimes our love for veterans can cloud our judgment, especially when it comes to politics.

In this current presidential election, almost every voter has the war on their mind. Many see Senator McCain’s veteran status as proof that he will be able to clean up the mess that is Iraq and bring about ____________ (insert definition of victory here). This is an unwise generalization to make. Remember, McCain has never been a general. He has never commanded a large number of troops. He served as a pilot, he was shot down, and he was held as a prisoner and subjugated to torture. But he has never run a war.

As General Clark (who has run a war) points out, McCain has no more national security credentials than Senator Obama. The difference is that Obama knows this, while McCain chooses to ignore it.

 

Just For Laughs

 

Let’s Talk About the Issues Honestly…

I think McCain has forgotten all about that whole “Straight Talk Express” thing.

Here’s McCain speaking in Washington, DC:

No matter which of us wins in November, there will be change in Washington. The question is what kind of change? Will we enact the single largest tax increase since the Second World War as my opponent proposes, or will we keep taxes low for families and employers?

And here’s McCain again:

Under Senator Obama’s tax plan, Americans of every background would see their taxes rise–seniors, parents, small business owners, and just about everyone who has even a modest investment in the market.

What are some things that these statements have in common? Well, for starters, they came out of the same speech. A speech that, like many typical Republican speeches, plays on the fear of higher taxes. This is not because Senator Obama is actually planning to raise all these taxes. No, its just really easy for GOP candidates to accuse their Democratic opponents of being “tax and spend liberals”.

Now I’m going to be honest with you. Obama is planning to raise some taxes. He wants to raise the tax on capital gains and dividends. He wants to allow the Bush tax cuts to expire, therefore raising the income tax on individuals who make more than $250,000 a year. He also wants to increase the tax cap on Social Security, in order to make sure wealthier Americans are paying a fair share.

As you may have noticed, these tax increases are mostly for upper-income Americans who should not have a problem paying. For the rest of us, Obama is proposing, whether you believe it or not, a tax cut. Quite a few, actually.

His plan to cut taxes for the lower and middle classes includes some interesting specifics. Obama wants to completely eliminate the income tax for seniors making less than $50,000 a year, and he wants to provide a universal credit for the 10 million homeowners who don’t itemize deductions.

This is a fair approach to taxation that will certainly help those on the bottom who are being hurt by a bad economy. Better yet, it is responsibly paid for; a refreshing change from the careless fiscal policies of the past eight years. But don’t worry about facts, Senator McCain. Just keep spewing out your garbage, and don’t forget to keep waving your flag.

 

Dennis Kucinich Introduces Articles of Impeachment Against President Bush

Well, it was a nice gesture anyway. Unfortunately, despite the fact that Bush’s approval rating hovers around 30%, Congressional leadership is unwilling to allow the President to face the impeachment that he deserves. It’s kind of sad.

There are some Democrats who are afraid to impeach the President because they fear it will look like revenge for the impeachment of former President Clinton. I like to call this the “Carl Levin approach”, because I first heard of it from Senator Levin himself. While I certainly respect the intentions of Levin and other Democrats who feel this way, I must strongly disagree. Emphasis on the strongly. How can you even compare the lie Clinton told (about an affair) to the countless lies that Bush has told (about everything)? It’s ridiculous.

Another argument is tied to the current election. Some Democrats fear that if they impeached President Bush, it would hurt their chances of taking back the White House in November. I think this has two sides. On one hand, some undecided voters may feel that the Democrats are trying to take back power too early, and see them in a less favorable light. On the other hand, impeachment does not always mean political fallout. Even though Clinton, a popular President, was impeached, the Republicans still took the White House in the next election. And keep in mind, Bush is much less popular than Clinton was.

I know Bush will never be impeached, and it’s disappointing. Kucinich is one of the few Democrats who is willing to take a risk in order to defend the Constitution. I guess the rest prefer to play politics than dispense justice.

However, what is even more disappointing is the complete lack of media coverage. But hey, people would rather hear about Clint Eastwood telling Spike Lee to “shut his face” than keep an eye on their Congress.

 

The National Debt – A National Problem

It’s not hard to hear about the credit crisis on the news. For months, even years, we have been told that too many Americans are in debt up to their ears, and it is starting to catch up to them. However, we hear much less about a credit crisis that affects every American. I guess the national debt just isn’t newsworthy.

The National Debt, as of today, stands at $9,413,548,007,873.48. I think we can all agree that this is a huge number, in fact it makes up about two-thirds of the gross national product. The problem is that for too many of us, this big number is nothing more than a number, with little significance attached to it. What we may not realize is that the growing debt plays a major role in some of the many problems that we face each day.

Two main problems:

1. Inflation - We hear about the fall of the dollar all the time, but we almost never hear about a cause. It is not, as you may be wondering, rising oil prices that reduce the value of our money. It is excessive borrowing. When the government spends more money than it receives, it is forced to borrow money in order to make up for the difference. This adds to the money supply, and any time the amount of money in circulation increase, the value of that money decreases. Therefore, prices rise, on everything from consumer goods to food to gasoline.
2. Interest – The government must pay interest on its debt, just like any other loan. This large amount of money, which increases as long as the debt increases, is quite a waste. It is money that could be spent on infrastructure or education. It could even not be spent at all, and therefore reduce the burden on taxpayers.

The act of lowering the debt is not something that is terribly difficult. All the government has to do is lower spending, raise taxes, or both. Unfortunately, it is the lack of political will that is the problem. Spending cuts are popular, especially among those who favor a smaller government, but too many people (and a certain presidential candidate) have become convinced that the US should cut “earmark” spending, instead of ending the expensive war in Iraq. The latter would save a much greater amount of money.

Tax hikes are even less popular, because for too long people have assumed that tax cuts allow them to keep more of their own money. These are the same people that may not realize that if the government cannot afford the tax cuts that they hand out, the rising debt will only hasten inflation, which will just hurt consumers. If taxpayers paid more, they may find that the money they have left over is worth just as much or even more than the money they would have under lower taxes. It is important, if not essential, for Americans to finally realize that taxes are not evil.

While browsing through Redstate, of all places, I found an interesting quote that a conservative blogger used. However, I don’t think he fully understood it, or he probably wouldn’t have used it at all. Anyway, the quote is attributed to Alexander Fraser Tytler, Lord Woodhouselee, although this is unverified:

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 year.

Well, the good news is that the US has outlived the average great civilization. The bad news is that American voters have the same problem that the quote suggests. We want the government to spend money all over the world so we feel “safe”, and we want to be as free from tax burden as possible in order to feel “rich”. It is a most dangerous combination, and the kind of crisis that the media should really start talking about.

 

It’s Finally Over… But Just The Beginning

Today I was pleased to watch the beginnings of a united Democratic Party.

I’ll admit, for a while I had my doubts that this would happen before the convention. I thought Hillary Clinton would fight this one out to the very end, and take the entire party down with her. But today, Senator Clinton proved me wrong. She exited the race with dignity, and for that she deserved every ounce of the applause she received.

I know there are many Clinton supporters who pledged to vote for McCain over Obama, and a small, emotional part of me understands the feeling. It’s hard to fall in love with a new candidate, especially after he defeats the candidate that you already love. But a more rational side of me knows that the alternative is far, far worse. Disgruntled Clinton supporters, however much you want to bring about the downfall of Barack Obama, realize that a McCain presidency is not worth this tiny personal satisfaction. Senator Clinton knows this. I hope her speech has begun to convince her supporters, and I hope she will continue to fight for Obama as hard as she fought for herself.

After Clinton finished her speech, I had the “privilege” of listening to the media’s commentary. Naturally, they questioned whether Hillary was truly sincere, bringing up the fact that she spent much more time talking about herself than she did Senator Obama. But I don’t think that’s very important. After all, Clinton was the most successful female candidate in American history, and no one should forget her achievement.

As for the sincerity issue, I will say this. I grew up in the 1990’s, and like so many others, I am really starting to miss that peaceful and prosperous decade. I may have come close, but I am not giving up on the family that led us through those times. We can win this election together.

 

A Fool And A Fraud

Sooo… only a fool or a fraud talks tough or romantically about war… how ironic.  This ad is a romantic history of the McCain family at war, for crying out loud. And don’t even get me started on his tough talk.  Remember these moments?

After being interrupted by anti-war protesters during a speech at the University of Denver, in May of 2008:

I will never surrender in Iraq, my friends. I will never surrender in Iraq. Our American troops will come home with victory and honor.

On CNN, October of 2002:

Giving peace a chance only gives Saddam Hussein more time to prepare for war on his terms, at a time of his choosing, in pursuit of ambitions that will only grow as his power to achieve them grows

And finally, who could forget about a little joke McCain made in South Carolina in April of 2007:

Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran.

Senator McCain, don’t try to tell us how much you hate war. If you really hated it that much, you would have thought twice about supporting the invasion of Iraq. Maybe you would be better off changing your campaign slogan to “A Fool and A Fraud”. If you were a real straight-talker, that is.