The Madness of the GOP.

[Bill Cravener]

The Republican Party has gone stark raving mad. They're completely nuts, off the chain, slipping into darkness, and worse, they're proud of it. Each competing to see which of them can out crazy the other. The GOP has championed the cause of millionaires, corporations, big oil/gas and fat defense contractors. They have simultaneously and deliberately alienated labor unions, public employees, gays, racial minorities, the elderly, the poor, the middle class and women. Surveys indicate women voters back Obama over Romney by 16 points (55%-39%). According to polls Obama holds a margin over Romney among crucial independent voters as well. Surveys also indicate a generation gap with all age groups, except those 65 and older (I just don't understand why they do, senility perhaps?), backing Obama. Then there is the income divide with the president holding a 20-point lead over Romney among those earning less than $50,000 per year, while those making more than that figure are divided between the two candidates.

Here is but a small part of the craziness coming from the GOP.

1) Republicans not only want to reduce women's access to abortion care, they're actually trying to redefine rape. After a major backlash, they promised to stop. But they haven't yet.

2) A state legislator in Georgia wants to change the legal term for victims of rape, stalking, and domestic violence to "accuser." But victims of other less gendered crimes, like burglary, would remain "victims."

3) In South Dakota, Republicans proposed a bill that could make it legal to murder a doctor who provides abortion care.

4) Republicans want to cut nearly a billion dollars of food and other aid to low-income pregnant women, mothers, babies, and kids.

5) In Congress, Republicans have a bill that would let hospitals allow a woman to die rather than perform an abortion necessary to save her life.

6) Maryland Republicans ended all county money for a low-income kids preschool program. Why? No need, they said. Women should really be home with the kids, not out working.

7) And at the federal level, Republicans want to cut that same program, Head Start, by $1 billion. That means over 200,000 kids could lose their spots in preschool.

8) Two-thirds of the elderly poor are women and Republicans are taking aim at them too. A spending bill would cut funding for employment services, meals, and housing for senior citizens.

9) Congress just voted for a Republican amendment to cut all federal funding from Planned Parenthood health centers, one of the most trusted providers of basic health care and family planning in our country.

10) And if that wasn't enough, Republicans are pushing to eliminate all funds for the only federal family planning program for humans here in the States and yet Republican Dan Burton has a bill to provide contraception for wild horses (You just can't make this stuff up).

11) Republicans are refusing to expand the Violence Against Women Act which would expand efforts to reach Indian tribes and rural areas. It would increase the availability of free legal assistance to victims of domestic violence, extend the definition of violence against women to include stalking, and provide training for civil and criminal court personnel to deal with families with a history of violence. It would also allow more battered illegal immigrants to claim temporary visas, and would include same-sex couples in programs for domestic violence.

12) And lets not forget the continued push by many in the GOP to limit women's access to contraceptives and abortion.

Yes, the GOP has gone mad, totally and completely mad!!

[FORTRANS]

Hi,

   I just wish the "news" I listen to would have a Republican-free
week about now.  Any fiction of something happening that means
anything from those (that) bozo[es] is nil.

Cheers,

Steve N.

[hutch--]

Bill,

It sounds like a lot of people in the GOP need to prove they are moral to hide their own activities. I guess that would account for such a range of "progressive" legislative reforms.  :P

[anunitu]

One thing that really bothers me Bill,is that many of the things you listed don't get much coverage. If you want to kow these facts,you have to dig deep in the news to find them. It seems that they get glossed over most of the time. Most of what you listed doesn't get mentioned in the media,even though they effect so many people.

[PauloH]

If they get their plans out of paper US is at increased risk for many social problems in near future. This is a dangerous path and not so long.

[Bill Cravener]

There have always been extremes on both sides but lately much of the Right has gone mad. With the influence of their beloved Tea-Baggers and the Religious Right, none of the sane thinking Republicans will stand up and admit that the GOP is out of control. They have truly lost there identity as the conservative party of less government and less taxes. Of course they are all for less taxes if it is for the rich. The Republican Party is no longer conservative a more suitable description is "radical".

As I seen posted on another board:

A party that refuses to raise taxes on anyone, ever when taxes are at historic lows isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party that wants to roll back successful programs like Social Security that have been a bedrock of American society for nearly three quarters of a century isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party that's openly at war with Progressive Era reforms like unions and child labor laws isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party that refuses to make cuts in defense when the U.S. currently spends more than the next 14 countries in the world combined isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party that denies the scientific consensus of climate change isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party that seeks to repeal a law that was decided by the Supreme Court nearly four decades ago isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party that advocates the forced deportation of 12 million immigrants isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party that denies basic facts about the deficit isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party that wants to pull out of landmark treaties the United States helped write isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party that invites white supremacists and fringe organizations like the John Birch Society to its most important conferences isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party whose leaders compare the President of the United States to Adolf Hitler and Stalin on the floor of the House, who threaten impeachment if they don't get their way, and who sow doubt about the President's citizenship isn't conservative, it's radical.

A party whose presidential candidates claim that states should be able to ban contraception and that the Civil Rights Act was unconstitutional isn't conservative, it's radical.

As another example; Republican Rep. Allen West said recently at a public town hall meeting that "there's about 78 to 81 members of the Democratic Party that are members of the Communist Party.''  Those of us old enough to remember Joe McCarthy, a Republican senator from Wisconsin, who claimed that communists and Soviet spies had burrowed their way into the federal government, have heard that nonsense before. Allen West like Joe McCarthy never could produce the names or documentation to back up those claims.

Yes indeed, the GOP has lost their collective minds, the sooner they are dead and buried the better it will be for this once great country!

[rags]

Bill-those 12 million so called immigrants,  broke our immigration laws by sneaking across the border into this country.
They have no legal right to be here. There are proper ways to immigrate to this country, and if they followed the proper
procedures there would be no problem.

A President and his justice department who allows fringe organizations like the New Black Panther Party http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/new-black-panther-party
to spew their bigotry and threats of violence to go unchecked as seen recently in Florida, is a radical President.

As the ratio of people working that pays into the Social Security trust fund, to those that are receiving it increases, it is going broke, and must be overhauled to save it.
what is so radical about that?

You cant spend your way out of a deficit, you must cut the expenditures.  Why is that radical?

That Pelosi, Reid Stimulus package did a great job stimulating their buddies pockets. At $246,000 + per job created, that money could have been better spent.
And what about women's health care in the state of Nevada? Are they considered second class citizens compared to women in other states?
I don't hear any crying from the left on how Sen Reid got the whole state of Nevada exempt from Obamacare. Must be the casinos lining his pockets, so they can keep
their healthcare costs down.

Planned Parenthood is a PRIVATE organization, they got $487 million in taxpayer dollars in their last FY , while at the same time giving millions to similar organizations around the world.
It is not the US taxpayers responsibility to pay for condoms in Africa. Without the Federal funding PPA would cease to exist, because they dont get enough funding
from their private progressive benefactors.

I have no problems with a tax increase, if that tax increase also covers those 47 % of wage earners that pay no federal income taxes.
If you live in this country, and use its infrastructure paid for by federal dollars, then you should also pay for their upkeep.

[hutch--]

Mike,

I will leave the rest alone as they are local US issues but I will take you to task on this one.

> You cant spend your way out of a deficit, you must cut the expenditures.  Why is that radical?

Because it does not work. The closest you have come to an economic reconstruction in the US was FDR's bailout of the disaster that Herbert Hoover inflicted on Americans a couple of years after the great depression hit. Same old crap, trust in markets, cutbacks, massive unemployment, people starving in the streets etc .... Hoover failed, FDR succeeded, why go down the same path of failure again. The US like most other western countries has its economic structural problems, in part because the people making the most money (billionaires etc ...) rarely pay much tax and that means the patsies (those not rich enough to pay for GOP politicians) have to pay the tax for them. You will notice which party rejected the Buffet tax scheme, its OK to shaft little people who work and pay tax in the US but don't tax the billionaires.

Level the playing field with tax then stimulate the economy without padding the pockets of the corporate sector, that will get the US up and going again but don't hold your breath waiting.

[dedndave]

it might work, if they'd fricken cut expenditures in the right places

[rags]

Level the playing field with tax ...

I agree Hutch, as long as that leveling of the field includes every wage earner. Even if it is a low tax rate. Just over half of the wage earners should not
bear the burden of paying for the other 47 % non-payers.

then stimulate the economy without padding the pockets of the corporate sector

That would be hard to do as you said, since both parties are guilty of it. And increasing the size of government
wont do it either, as that increases the tax burden required to keep it functioning, and the government cannot
create wealth(capital) to infuse into the economy.

[jj2007]

...as long as that leveling of the field includes every wage earner. Even if it is a low tax rate. Just over half of the wage earners should not bear the burden of paying for the other 47 % non-payers.

For Europeans, the "state hate" in the U.S. is a mystery. So much ideology...

Make a test: Go into one of the bigger towns, and enter a bank. Admire the hall - the marble and all that. Say to yourself "the CEO of this bank deserves his 100 Mio Dollar bonus". Then go to the counter and ask "I am just an average wage earner, can I have a loan at slightly better conditions than your rich clients?"

Hint: The state is not your enemy.

[MichaelW]

...as long as that leveling of the field includes every wage earner. Even if it is a low tax rate. Just over half of the wage earners should not bear the burden of paying for the other 47 % non-payers.

For Europeans, the "state hate" in the U.S. is a mystery. So much ideology...

Make a test: Go into one of the bigger towns, and enter a bank. Admire the hall - the marble and all that. Say to yourself "the CEO of this bank deserves his 100 Mio Dollar bonus". Then go to the counter and ask "I am just an average wage earner, can I have a loan at slightly better conditions than your rich clients?"

Hint: The state is not your enemy.

Maybe I'm being dense again, but I don't see what bankers and rich clients have to do with inequities in our federal income tax system.

[jj2007]

... inequities in our federal income tax system.

You refer to the Buffett rule, I suppose?

[MichaelW]

I'm not referring to the Buffett rule - I just don't understand what point you were making in your reply.

[Bill Cravener]

This nonsense that half of Americans pay no taxes is absurd! As printed in 2010 the New York Times columnist David Leonhardt urged Americans to look closer and see the truth:

"With Tax Day coming on Thursday, 47 percent has become shorthand for the notion that the wealthy face a much higher tax burden than they once did while growing numbers of Americans are effectively on the dole. Neither one of those ideas is true. They rely on a cleverly selective reading of the facts. So does the 47 percent number."

Labeling the 47% argument a distraction from who really pays what in taxes, Leonhardt explained:

"Even if the discussion is restricted to federal taxes (for which the statistics are better), a vast majority of households end up paying federal taxes. Congressional Budget Office data suggests that, at most, about 10 percent of all households pay no net federal taxes. The number 10 is obviously a lot smaller than 47."

The GOP's refusal to increase taxes on those making a million or more a year will continue to hold back the US recovery. But then that has been the GOP's intention from the beginning of the Obama administration. They do not want this administration to succeed even to the total detriment of the country so long as they can bring about the failure of the black man who dared to be President.

As to Federal expenditures; If continued the current trend in declining Federal expenditures will result in increased deficits and even slower growth. As Steve explained above in his post those who lived through the Great Depression learned the math of deficit reduction the hard way.