Irregular Times Diaries: Unfit Discussion

A couple nights ago when pointing out that IrregularTimes.com seems to be focusing so much on just a handful of topics like Americans Elect (good lord, look at all those entries) that we seem to be missing other topics of interest. Well, here is one of those topics that seems to have been missed.

Michigan Republican Senator Bruce “Douchebag” Casswell has introduced a proposal that would ban children in foster care from using their state clothing allowance to buy cloths from any place other than thrift stores. What is Senator Douchebag’s reasoning?

“I never had anything new,” Caswell says.

He gave some more reasoning, but when all is said and done, this is what it boils down to. I’ve seen this with so many parents that it makes me want to weep. Instead of wanting better for their kids they figure “I didn’t have it that good, why should they?” Only, with Senator Douchebag, instead of doing this to his kids, he’s doing this to the most downtrodden kids we have; those who for whatever reason have biological parents who have given them up. These kids have next to nothing and now Senator Douchebag wants to give them even less. And note, he’s trying to justify his douchebag move by claiming it’ll save the state money, only, it won’t. These kids are getting a state clothing allowance; the only way he’d be able to honestly say it’d save the state money is if he cut the amount the kids were getting. Telling them they can only shop in thrift stores won’t do dick because the same amount of money is being spent, regardless of where they go to spend it.

All he’s doing is telling these kids; “we can’t give you a stable home to call your own with a family who wants you aside from your Foster Parents who you can be taken away from at any time, and now we’re not even going to let you have nice cloths.”

Today, in the Winona Daily News, Nathan Hansen of the town of Rushford identifies a startling gap between rhetoric and reality on the part of Minnesota’s two United States senators, Amy Klobuchar and Al Franken.

Both of these Democrats claim to be devoted to the defense of Americans’ constitutional rights, but talk is cheap. In practice, both of them voted last month to renew the worst aspects of the plainly unconstitutional Patriot Act – without any attempt at reform. Hansen notes:

“Franken in committee and in public denounces the Patriot Act provisions, including the one roving wiretaps that was extended by his vote. But his voting record does not agree with this. The vote marks the second time that he violated his principles, and his promises to his constituents in Minnesota, and the American people as a whole.

Klobuchar, too, has publicly opposed Patriot Act provisions, but abandoned them in order to keep from rocking the boat. It is sad that this illiberal bill passed by 86-12 margin, but the truly sad part of the story is that Minnesota’s out-of-the-box senators have not really been doing anything out of the box.”

We don’t have to just sit and take it when public officials like senators Klobuchar and Franken fail to live up to their responsibilities. We can, as Hansen would put it, get out of the box.

This coming Saturday, there will be an opportunity for Americans who oppose the renewal of the extraordinary surveillance powers of the Patriot Act to get out of the box and be heard by Congress. There will be a protest demanding repeal of the Patriot Act on Saturday, March 12 at Noon outside the west side of the U.S. Capitol Building in Washington D.C. Bring a sign of protest to show that America will not be silent while its constitutional right are sacrificed!

With regards to all the tax cut coverage, right now I’m more interested in DADT.

Right now I’m watching CNN and it seems the Senate is now voting on a stand-alone bill regarding DADT. No news on what the result is yet.

The motion passed, 65-31, DADT is repealed. Now Obama has to sign it (due next week) and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs has to certify it.

Today, in his weekly radio address, President Barack Obama said, “We cannot afford to continue these tax breaks for the wealthiest taxpayers – especially when we know that cutting the deficit is going to demand sacrifice from everyone.”

Hey, that sounds like the old Barack Obama! Has he finally got his mojo back? Has he decided to back out of his decision to help Republicans pass tax cuts for billionaires?

Nope. Right after Obama admitted that his plan to help Republicans pass tax cuts for the rich will put future generations in unacceptable debt, Obama declared that he’s going to go ahead with the plan anyway.

Why? Obama says he just doesn’t have any choice but to cave in to the Republicans’ demands. He says that George W. Bush’s old economic plan, the one that led to disaster, is just too important.

Obama says that he doesn’t have the strength to do anything but allow those unaffordable tax cuts for billionaires to become law.

It’s not like he has the power to veto the deal and force the Republicans to come back with something better.

Oh. Wait. He does.

The most telling line from Barack Obama’s speech today came when President Obama was trying to convince people that he had achieved a hard-fought compromise with Republicans when he agreed to help them push through tax cuts for billionaires.

Obama said that tax cuts for the rich were “not a hundred percent of what I want or what the Republicans want”.

So, neither the Republicans nor the Democrats got 100 percent of what they wanted in this tax cut deal? I suppose that’s true, strictly speaking.

Republicans only got 99 percent of what they wanted. Democrats got about 1 percent of what they wanted.

You can call that a compromise, sure, but not in the sense of the word “compromise” that Obama meant.

Back in 2008, after the election, it seemed that Barack Obama was actually going to make things different from how they were under George W. Bush. Remember that?

Here’s what President-Elect Obama had to say on climate legislation:

“My presidency will mark a new chapter in America’s leadership on climate change that will strengthen our security and create millions of new jobs in the process… Climate change and our dependence on foreign oil, if left unaddressed, will continue to weaken our economy and threaten our national security.”

Here’s what President Obama has to say on climate legislation now:

Yesterday, congressional Democrats announced that they would stop trying to pass “comprehensive energy legislation”. That’s the new term they took on after they had removed real climate action from the bill, and added in big subsidies for oil and coal companies to encourage more fossil fuel use.

Now, the Democrats are saying they’re not even going to try to pass THAT shameful compromise. It was Barack Obama who led the way in abandoning the effort to deal with climate change. He just stood back and watched it fail.

Now, in the middle of the hottest year ever recorded, watch as climate change continues “to weaken our economy and threaten our national security.”

Vote for Barack Obama in 2012? This environmentalist says Hell no!

In a hearing of the House Science and Technology Subcommittee on Energy and Environment yesterday, Chairman Brian Baird declared that, “Whether the moratorium on drilling activities in the Gulf is lifted in 30 days or 30 years, we must accept that the hydrocarbon reserves in these fields will be produced someday.”

Why? Why must we accept that offshore drilling for oil in the riskiest deepwater environments is going to take place?

Don’t we have the freedom to choose another course? Is our government that much in the thrall of the oil industry that our leaders will accept no possibility of an end to deepwater offshore drilling?

Indiana Congressman Mike Pence has a way of exciting people’s emotions. He supports extreme policies from the right wing fringe and has shamelessly built up a range of unethical relationships with corporate lobbyists. It’s easy to get angry with Pence. I get it.

That said, Pence opponent George Holland seems to have allowed his reaction to Mike Pence’s regressive radicalism to go over the line. On his campaign site, Holland writes a list of reasons not to re-elect Pence, and his keyboard starts smoking when it comes to Pence’s support for recent wars:

“America’$ Imperiali$tic War$ & Occupation$
Would you die for a lie? Why should others?
1. The Iraq-Iranian War$ and Occupation$

2. The NATO Turkmeni$tan -Tran$ – Afghani$tan Paki$tani -
India Pipeline War$ & Occupation$”

Get the picture? There’s something about these wars that has to do with a bit of cash.

When political discontent works its way into expressive spelling, it may be time to stand aside for a moment and take slow, deep breaths.

But then, Holland seems to have let go of his fear of hyperventilation a long time ago, attacking Barack Obama for his alleged “Zionist” ways as well:

“Barack Obomber; A Psychopathic Liar, The
Reneger, A Thief, A Warmonger and
America’s Newest, Zionist President!
NATO & The New World Order!”

Sigh. Could former Democratic candidate Barry Welsh please re-enter the race?

Of all the 9 members of the Hutaree arrested for their part in a conspiracy to kill police officers and their families with the aim of sparking a nationwide civil war, Mark Schauer represents the most of any U.S. Representative.

Congressman Schauer had a scheduled appearance in Lenawee County, where most of the arrests were made. His appearance was on Monday, the day after the arrests of the alleged terrorists were made public.

So, what did Schauer do in recognition of the Hutaree arrests? What did he say?

Nothing. In the face of homegrown terrorism centered in his own congressional district, Congressman Mark Schauer was silent. He said nothing. He did nothing. Now, two days later, Schauer continues his path of silence and inaction.

Why was Schauer afraid to speak out against extremism? Is he afraid that he’ll lose the votes of Hutaree supporters?