Newt and the New Republicans

Newt Gingrich has come full circle.

The former Speaker of the House of Representatives was one of the most respected politicians in Washington, especially after engineering the dynamic Republican takeover of Congress in 1994 -- summarized by his brilliant "Contract with America." (This is not to be confused with the weak-kneed, limpid imitation offered by soon-to-be Speaker John Boehner earlier this year -- the ill-fated GOP "Pledge to America.")

Of course, Speaker Gingrich found himself on the horns of a nasty dilemma when the course he charted for America in the 90's led to a budget impasse and forced an historic shutdown of the Federal government. He begrudgingly gave in to the forces of political nature, ate some crow and got the government up and running again -- only to see the hated and reviled President Bill Clinton receive most of the credit for reviving the national economy and posting an actual budget surplus (remember what that was like?)

It was so hard on Newt that he evidently had a hard time telling the truth for a while -- either to his colleagues in the House (who voted 395-28 to reprimand him and fined him $300,000 -- yes, read it here) or to his wife, whom he asked for a divorce while she was recovering from cancer, though he later admitted that it was he who was having an affair. (um, you can read that one here, if you want.)

Tsk, tsk...those were tough times!

Ah, but now Mr. Gingrich's star has risen once again. He is considered something of an elder statesman and is generally credited with being a brilliant political thinker.

It was in that context that he spoke this past week to the Republican Governor's Association-- which is pretty much what it sounds like. All the state governors who also happen to be Republican get together, hob-knob, shoot the gubernatorial breeze and what-not. It is a place to plot strategy, as well, and Mr. Gingrich had some excellent words of advice for the gentle men and ladies. (Catch the full text here.)

I thought his points regarding public education were truly on the mark; accountability in the classroom is a good thing, and true to the beat of his capitalistic heart, he proposes that excellent teachers be rewarded with excellent pay. (I understand that there was a collective choking sound from the governors when they realized he meant that they would have to actually FUND this initiative, not just trot it out as a campaign slogan.)

I also kind of like his proposal to have some sort of annual review of the Declaration of Independence in public schools, and to reassert that America is a learned society. I will be forever grateful for the wonderful teachers who instilled in me my appreciation and love for our Constitution, the Declaration, the Pledge of Allegiance, and our system of checks and balances in government. (Kudos to you, Mrs. Vowell, Mrs. Graves, Mr. Cooper, Mrs. White, and Coach Bragg!)

I do have to admit that I got quite a chuckle when I read Newt's point #6, however; he wants to get rid of "Obamacare," which will entail dealing with the mammoth headache that is Medicare.  But, smart guy that he is, he has a plan. Just imagine the new Republican governor of Florida, Rick Scott, shifting a bit uncomfortably in his chair as Gingrich made this point:

"As a step toward more affordable care, eliminate the $70 billion to $120 billion in theft in Medicare and Medicaid created by the administrative incompetence of the federal bureaucracy and the innovative determination of modern criminals." (emphasis mine)

Scott's company, Columbia-HCA, paid the largest fine in US history for Medicare fraud in 2002 -- more than $600 million. According to Fortune magazine, "among the crimes uncovered were doctors being offered financial incentives to bring in patients, falsifying diagnostic codes to increase reimbursements from Medicare and other government programs, and billing the government for unnecessary lab tests." (read it here)

Now that's the kind of innovative determination we need to get America moving again!

A Billion Here, A Billion There...

So...I'm a genius. I've solved America's financial crisis. Well, at least on paper.

While perusing my Saturday morning newspaper (the only day of the week I get to do so unhindered and unhurried), I noticed a little op-ed piece by Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times. He was addressing the current furious debate over whether to extend the Bush-era tax cuts, a proposal that has garnered much support from the current GOP leadership and many of the newly-elected members of Congress.

There's a lot of talk about what is fair and most productive for "mainstream Americans." The arguments from both sides are generally characterized as either "redistribution of wealth" or "trickle-down economics." The proponents and critics of each of these ideas are united in one common characteristic: they vociferously defend their view and venomously demean the other.

Many of us in the middle are left to ask: "But what does it all mean?"

Enter Mr. Kristof's opinion piece ( you can read it for yourself here.) Citing a number of sources, including a study commissioned by President George W. Bush via the US Labor Department, Kristof mentions that the average "tax cut" that will be extended to the upper one-tenth of 1% of America's wealthiest individuals will be $370,000.

That's not somebody's annual salary, or even the bonus compensation of a Wall Street executive. That's just the amount of "wealth incentive" that 1 in 1,000 of USAmericans who live at the top of the heap will receive by finding a way to renew the Bush tax cuts.

I took out my trusty calculator and did a little math. Folks, that is a staggering $114,976,760,000 BILLION each and every year that the other 99.9% of us are basically being asked to come up with to fund things like -- oh, I don't know-- roads, national defense, Medicare, education and a few other items of vital national interest.

(I know that writing BILLION in all caps is both annoying and redundant, but I'm just trying to be clear here!)

Now, I'm all for equal opportunity. Which is I think the point that Kristof is trying to make. Just how "equal" is the opportunity in America these days when the top 1 percent of Americans own 34 percent of America's private net worth? (Expand that to the top 10% and you'll find more than 70% of the national fortune in bank accounts, trust funds and investment portfolios.)

So, with all the uproar over "cutting taxes" shouldn't we also be asking another question: is that money really going to "trickle down" to those of us who find ourselves not just in the other half, but in the other 90% -- or should I say, 99.9%?

Okay, so maybe I'm not really a genius -- but even I can add it up and see that something stinks like the bottom of the Gulf here.

The $200 Million Dollar Man?

I am almost certain that you have seen and/or heard the reports of President Obama's recent trip to India and Asia. Big, bold headlines (the same adjectives might well be applied to mouths) have proclaimed that the cost of the trip was 200 million dollars A DAY -- or 2 billion dollars for the entire 10-day event.

How could the President justify such an enormous expense while poor Americans were sitting at home with no jobs, no food, no healthcare, and no ability to buy 3D televisions for the holidays? Such has been the rhetoric sprouting all over the internet, from the mouths of angry talk-show hosts (and not a few politicians) and on cable news shows.

The height of the presidential paranoia may have occurred on November 4, on Anderson Cooper's show on CNN, when Cooper interviewed Rep. Michele Bachmann from Minnesota. Ms. Bachmann was asked to give some specifics about how Republicans in the new session of Congress were planning to cut the federal budget. She didn't really answer the question, but did have the following comment:

“I think we know that just within a day or so the president of the United States will be taking a trip over to India that is expected to cost the taxpayers $200 million a day. He’s taking 2,000 people with him. He’ll be renting over 870 rooms in India, and these are five-star hotel rooms at the Taj Mahal Palace Hotel. This is the kind of over-the-top spending.”

Now, I will grant you that I would, indeed, consider that kind of spending to be "over-the-top" and fairly insensitive on the part of the Prez...if it were true! Unfortunately, it appears that Ms. Bachmann and many of the other voices that have been decrying the expense of this official state visit by our sitting President have been blathering a story picked up from the Internet without ever bothering to ask whether or not it was true or accurate!

New York Times writer Thomas Friedman outlines the fact-checking done as a follow-up to the story by Anderson Cooper and his organization in an article published on November 16 ( you can read it here.)

According to Cooper, the $200 million a day figure had originated from a quote by “an alleged Indian provincial official,” from the Indian state of Maharashtra, “reported by India’s Press Trust, their equivalent of our A.P. or Reuters. I say ‘alleged,’ provincial official,” Cooper added, “because we have no idea who this person is -- no name was given."

As Friedman put it so well: "It is hard to get any more flimsy than a senior unnamed Indian official from Maharashtra talking about the cost of an Asian trip by the American president"

But, if it's on the Internet, it must be true (evidently.) Such prominent broadcasters as Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck (and don't forget the aforementioned Rep. Bachmann) reported it as fact, adding that there would be an additional 3,000 people and 34 Navy warships" accompanying the President on his "vacation."

One is reminded of the obsequious bloviating of Senator Joseph McCarthy and the response-in-kind of Army Special Counsel Joseph Welch: "Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?"

My father impressed upon me the importance of voting and participation in the political process we have in America. His words to me were along this line: "If you don't vote, you have no right to complain. And if you do vote, and your candidate doesn't win, just remember that it is still your government and the President still deserves your respect. He is, after all is said and done, the President."


Thanks, Dad; I wish we could remember that in what passes for political discourse these days. And I just wish people would take the time to get their dadgum facts straight before they start regurgitating what they've heard all over the place!


Harrumph!

Three Cheers for Weston, MO

I was so happy to see somebody finally stick it -- peacefully and lawfully -- to the protesters from Westboro Baptist Church over the weekend.

Just in case you have missed it, the folks from Westboro are the ones who protest at the funerals of veterans with signs that say things like, "God Hates Fags", "Thank God for IED's", and "God Blew Up the Shuttle." The "Reverend" (and I use the term very, very loosely) Fred Phelps leads this congregation, composed mostly of his family members from what I understand, in a theology that supposes that much of the national violence in America is a judgment on our tolerance of homosexuality.

They show up and taunt mourners in the belief that somehow this will convince people to rise up and rebel against the powers-that-be..and somehow things will change? Of course, their "protests" are protected as free speech. We do live in America, after all. (A Supreme Court hearing is pending over whether their activities can be defined as hate speech...should be interesting to see who pulls for whom in that one!)

But this past weekend in Weston, Mo -- population 2,000 -- Rev. Phelps and his followers met their match. The citizens of Weston showed up even earlier than the Westboro folks for the funeral of Marine Sgt. First Class C.J. Sadel. More than half of the town's population joined in erecting a human barricade around the funeral home, complete with American flags and patriotic music.

Fox News quoted Weston resident Rebecca Rooney: “We got everybody here early so we could take up all the parking spots,” Rooney said .”We did that so Mr. Phelps wouldn’t have a contingency that was really close.”  (See the report here.)


When the Westboroers did show up, they took one look and headed for home. Score!

C.J Sadell, who was age 34, left behind a wife and two children when he died from injuries suffered in Afghanistan. His family and friends were allowed to mourn with peace, quiet, and some sense of dignity.

Rudy Stettner, of IndyPost.com, offered this comment:

"The people of Weston Missouri may have found the antidote to the vile hatred of the Phelps family and their Westboro Baptist Church freak show. Perhaps other towns in which the bereaved are being tormented, the same tactic may be used to shield the families of fallen soldiers with a protective cordon of love. The Westboro Baptist Church infuriates people by invoking free speech and freedom of assembly. Now they are finding it used against them. Payback is sweet."

Well said, Mr. Stettner; I hope this kind of "local control" will spread peacefully to other communities.

And since it's Veteran's Day this week, why not take the time to thank a vet or two that you know? We don't have to wait to show up for their funerals, you know.

A More Perfect Union

I am writing this on the evening of the mid-term election of 2010; I don't have a clue (as of yet) who has won the vote today. I don't even know who is leading according to any exit polls.

I just want to say that I am proud -- dadgum proud -- to be an American.

When I went to vote this evening, it struck me that I am a part of one of the most elite  and fortunate minorities in the history of the world. I get to have a say in how my life is governed and lived. I am a free member of the greatest society ever constructed on the face of the earth.

People who lived in ancient Egypt, Greece, Rome, China, and even medieval Europe did not have the privilege that I have. They never got a vote when the Pharaoh or the Emperor or the Kings of England, France, or Spain were deciding their fates.

Even in the history of our own great nation, not every one of us has always had the right to vote. Though we were founded on the self-evident truth that "all men are created equal," not every man was -- equal, that is. Red men, black men, men of practically any color but white weren't "equal" enough for too many years after our founding.

And women! Geez, oh Pete, women just weren't considered smart enough or "equal" enough to vote, either, until less than a hundred years ago in America!

I don't know who will win today -- whether there will be a new Republican majority, or a continuing Democratic stranglehold, or a split-down-the-middle stalemate, or even a thorough Tea Party rebellion. But I do know this.

I saw America working today; I saw people of every color, shape, gender, sexual preference, and political persuasion exercising one of the most precious privileges ever given to a nation. We voted. We counted.

And we helped to push the boundary a little further toward that "more perfect Union" our forebears saw 223 years ago.

I, for one, am grateful and will abide by the decisions of the people of the United States. I will seek to do so without grumbling unduly, acting uncharitably, speaking unthinkingly, or obstructing justice in any way.

This is my country; we are the United States of America. And today, I hope you'll join me as we stand proud -- together!

God bless the USA!