Dear Congress

Dear Congress,

I want someone to explain to me the contradicting positions of American conservatives. They want to cut government spending, but want government to do something when disaster strikes. They want to deregulate, but haven't said how deregulation helps preserve consumer confidence. They want small government, but only in areas that benefit their causes. They don't like redistribution of wealth, but don't mind getting government subsidies themselves. Help me understand.

CUT THIS
Conservatives say that the President's economic policies aren't working. In all honesty, with a 9.1%unemployment rate, there is obviously a problem. They say that spending wantonly has increased the deficit while the unemployment rate continues to rise. They site these facts as proof that Obama isn't the "economist-in-chief" we elected him to be.

But no one has explained why the Congress (specifically, the House of Representatives), which has the power of the purse as per the US Constitution, didn't do anything about the deficit or deficit spending before. Where were the fiscal hawks when President Bush was racking up the debt with two wars? I didn't hear anyone complaining as loudly then as they are now about cutting spending. Where was the Tea Party then?

Social Security has come under attack. Granted, people are drawing more from it than are paying to it. That's a serious problem that needs resolution. But its called Social "Security" for a reason. People like knowing that there will be something for them in their old age regardless of the economic climate. Imagine for a moment if the Bush administration had succeeded in privatizing Social Security before the "great recession". Imagine the plight of retired, or retirement-eligible folks losing not only their 401k, but their newly privatized social security benefits. And with nothing to show for all their years of work, they would do what? Probably get on public assistance since the likelihood of going back to work for many of them would be slim. Would that not raise the financial burden on sates and municipal governments, undoing the changes made to the system? Imagine all those people from the "greatest generation" losing their homes because the social security check they were counting on to supplement their income never came. If Social Security should be private and the current income redistribution is offensive to you, then please give your social security benefit back to Uncle Sam. Withdraw your application for benefits, or don't file a claim at all. That's how I will know you are serious.

Here's an idea: those Tea Party members of congress who want to cut everything should begin by cutting their own salaries and the salaries of their staff. Show 'em you mean business.

DEREGULATION
Conservative America says they want government to stay out of their business. Well, they want "small government". They say they want federal deregulation so that economic forces can work as they textbooks say it can. But, no one has explained how the deregulation they want now is different from the deregulation that occurred under Bush? How would the deregulation and the resulting free-for-all that contributed to the financial meltdown then, be prevented now?

BIG GOVERNMENT
So, we don't want oversized government. But after 911, government increased in size exponentially. Never mind the new agencies that were created and redefined roles of the ones that existed. What about the warrant-less wire taps? Increased government scrutiny of religious groups? Is that not big government? Is that not what the conservatives say they are against? But as a nation we seemed all too willing to give up some of those freedoms for Government-provided security. Who was it that said, 'those who would trade liberty for security deserve neither'?

Look at the controversy surrounding the religious cultural center that was to be constructed in NYC. People were up in arms. Some wanted government to get involved to prevent the establishment of the center. They wanted the building designated as a historical site to prevent the imam from building the center. But, I thought we didn't want government involved in our affairs. Government involvement in this matter seemed like big government to me. Surprisingly, mayor Bloomberg felt the same way.

And what of FEMA? Its seems like FEMA is the red-headed step child in all of this. Many of those who want smaller government live in states that are prone to the type of natural and unnatural disasters that FEMA funds are used to recover from. Does the Gulf Coast and Katrina ring any bells? How about the BP oil spill? Without government regulation and involvement who would have held BP's proverbial foot to the fire to hasten the clean up? Tell me a story. How would the BP scenario have played out had there been less Government regulation?

We can't have it both ways. You want government help when it suits you, but when government needs to help others, you cry foul. When the housing bubble popped many wondered why the SEC and other government agencies didn't do anything to prevent it. Simple Answer: when you de-prioritize regulation and oversight these things tend to happen. Bernie Madoff, anyone?

GOVERNMENT HANDOUT
What's up with farm subsidies? So, some farmer lost his crop due to a drought or flood, and my Uncle Sam is supposed to pay him for the loss. At the same time, that same farmer says that government is spending too much money and taxes too much. The logic is that the subsidies keep produce prices artificially low, which is good for the country as a whole. Well, Farmer Brown, if you don't like your government hand out, give it up. Let market forces reign. If that means you take a loss and prices go up, so be it. There is no difference between a farm subsidy and a welfare check. Both payments are made to keep people from being worse off than they could be without it.

Government can't keep spending like it has. Cuts need to be made. A big portion of cuts will result in the ending of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Other cuts could be made but not one person has specified where they would cut. Its always, "we have to take a scalpel to the budget" or "we still have to identify those areas". All those words to avoid saying that you don't know where to cut or don't want to say where you would cut because you don't want to piss off voters.

JUST SAY "NO"
All these fights between the Congress and the White House is like an architect and a contractor fighting over how to erect a building. Neither has a privilege of saying "no" all the time. They both have to work together to accomplish the goal. If they don't, the building doesn't get built; and we are all left looking at a big hole in the ground...kind of like our economy.

Thoughts?
Kevin Greene

"Not Guilty" Is Not The Same As Being "Innocent"

There is a lot of outrage over the recent decision in the Casey Anthony trial. The "Armchair Quarterbacks" out there feel that her acquittal is a miscarriage of justice.

I would argue that what occurred in that courtroom is exactly how our justice system should work. The same mechanisms that got her off are the same ones that keep innocent people out of jail. In order to convict someone, the evidence must not only be clear and convincing, it must be beyond all reasonable doubt.

How many times have we heard of cases where people are exonerated by DNA evidence after years in prison? How would we feel if years from now we find out Casey really didn't do this crime, but she was convicted and put to death over substandard evidence? No one like the idea of an unsolved murder; especially one involving a child. It is truly heartbreaking. But, in the words of Mr. Cochran, "if the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit".

In this case, the metaphorical glove didn't fit; there was reasonable doubt. There was insufficient evidence as to how the child died. If we don't know how the child died, how can we say it's murder? How can you prove who did it, if it was? Additionally, there apparently was no DNA or forensic evidence linking Casey to her daughter's remains.

We all know that her actions following the child's disappearance were highly suspect. What mother goes over a month without reporting her kid missing? What of all the partying and what not? Admittedly, Casey's actions were stupid and inhibited any opportunity to resolve the death of her child. Had she reported the death timely, a more effective autopsy could have been performed. That is, assuming she drowned as was alleged. But stupidity and shameful conduct are not crimes...at least not yet.

If Casey did kill her daughter, her spirit will not be able to rest. Look at OJ. He was also found "not guilty". But his spirit couldn't rest. After getting away with murder, he writes a book explaining how he would have done it, had he actually done it. Who does that? Then, instead of sitting down somewhere and being quiet, he becomes a stick-up man and robs some men in a hotel room (he says he was getting his stuff back). He wanted to be punished for his crimes and needed to do something to ease his conscience. The same will be true in this case. Not guilty is not the same as being innocent.

Casey may have been found not guilty, but she isn't innocent. She will be punished, in this life or the next. I am sure that is little comfort to those of us who want justice for the little girl. I like to think that the mental and spiritual torment the killer will face is much worse than any punishment the legal system could have given.

Kevin Greene

2011 White House Correspondents' Association Dinner | C-SPAN

2011 White House Correspondents' Association Dinner C-SPAN

NPR.org - Medicares Math Problem: Taxes - Benefits = Trouble

Kevin thought you would be interested in this story: Medicares Math Problem: Taxes - Benefits = Trouble
http://www.npr.org/2011/04/30/135844222/medicares-math-problem-taxes-benefits-trouble?sc=emaf

This message was included:

Medicare and you.

*Listen/Watch on NPR.org*
Many stories at NPR.org have audio or visual content. When you visit the link
above, look for a "Listen" or "Watch" button.
For technical support, please visit NPR's Audio/Visual Help page:
http://help.npr.org/npr/consumer/kbdetail.asp?kbid=152

In Defense of Obama

This whole Birther issue is a BIG distraction while the elephant in the room is being ignored. Has President Obama been the best president ever? Certainly not. Has he made concessions and compromises? Yes. Many of us wish he would have stuck to his guns on many an issue. The issue here is that the wise leader is consultative, deliberative and even-handed. Obama has been all of these things. And with Republicans saying "no" at every turn, its hard to get things done as fast as folks would like. Like him or don't like him, we all have to admit that he is President during a very difficult time and no decision he has made or will make will please everybody. That's what living in a democracy is all about: people expressing their differing views with the majority winning out. But that only works when we stay on target and focus on the issues at hand.  But when leaders in Congress cloud budget debates with anti-abortion rhetoric and official statements that weren't meant to be 'factual', how can the work of the people be done? Let's not let facts get in the way of the truth.

Now, even though many liberals and conservatives don't like the the recent budget deal (I know I don't), I think it is the best deal for the country at this time. The reason I say that is the same reason people don't like the deal: that is, compromises were made. In a democracy (especially one this size), compromises must be made. That's how things get done; we all give a little so that business can move forward.  Ask yourself: how much time was wasted with birth certificate and abortion issues that could have ben spent dealing with the budget and the nation's debt ceiling? Why didn't those so-called leaders calling for government shut-down also vote in favor of stopping their own checks if the government shut down?

When Bush was in charge it was almost treasonous to question him. Only a brave few questioned him when he told us going into Iraq was the right thing to do. And they were quickly silenced and branded as unpatriotic.  I actually had a college classmate say that to me. Me?!! I gave this country 9 years of my life in the Army (all without being a Citizen) and some clown questions my patriotism?  I, along with many others, served unquestionably and my honor is doubted? Patriotism is not about blind compliance, it's about reasoned thought. Now it has become common place to say the most insulting things about our leader.  Never mind that the "real" reasons for the invasion of Iraq are still unclear. Never mind that a significant reason for the large deficit is the fact that the true cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were kept off the budget, hidden under Bush-Cheney. Never mind that a federal government shut-down was instigated by people who say they love America, but who clearly can't stand Americans.

That brings to mind a quote from one of my favorite movies, The American President with Michael Douglas. I have included it here and replaced some of the movie-specific references and inserted references to the current debates:

"...America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship. You gotta want it bad, 'cause it's gonna put up a fight.      It's gonna say "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours. You want to claim this land as the land of the free? Then the symbol of your country can't just be a flag; the symbol also has to be one of its citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest. Show me that, defend that, celebrate that in your classrooms. Then, you can stand up and sing about the "land of the free". [...The] problem isn't that [Obama's opponents don't] get it. [Their] problem is that [they] can't sell it! We have serious problems to solve, and we need serious people to solve them. And whatever your particular problem is, I promise you, [certain people are] not the least bit interested in solving it. [They are] interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections. You gather a group of middle-aged, middle-class, middle-income voters who remember with longing an easier time, and you talk to them about family and American values and character. And wave an old photo of the President [...] and you scream about patriotism and you tell them, [he's] to blame for their lot in life [...]"


------transcribed from The American President 1995


President Obama didn't cause the problems we are facing...he is trying to fix them. Why don't we help him?

A Boy and His Daddy

This past week I went to Barbados on vacation. I went expecting to spend a lot of time on the beach and to support my father in his quest to reconnect with his long lost uncle. His uncle Vernon left Guyana when my father was 2 years old; so my father never knew him.  I went on vacation and I got so much more.

I don’t really know much about my father’s side of the family; and I guess I didn’t really know much about my father by extension. My father has always been a mystery to me. He was an immovable force that, until now, has been a tough nut to crack. I was deeply honored that he asked me to join him in Barbados to re-connect with his uncle.  To hear him tell it, he has been meaning to visit his uncle and connect with him since he came to America 20 years ago. It was one of those things that he was “planning” to do, but never got around to it. I don’t know what made him decide to do it this year, but I am glad he did.  I am glad because I saw my father differently on this trip. I also glad because I know he would have been truly hurt if Uncle Vernon died before he met him, knowing he had all this time to do so.

On the day we set out to visit uncle Vernon, I could tell something was different about my father. At the time I didn’t know what it was. There was pep in his step; there was a different air about him. He seemed more relaxed than I have known him to be. Our friend, Jermaine drove us from our lodging to the quiet street in Saint Michael, Barbados. The house stood out in that it had a very tall, not-so-green evergreen and a public phone booth in the front yard (weird combination). As we exited the car and walked up to the house, I didn’t know what to expect. We rapped at the door and young lady who I didn’t know answered and let us in without really knowing who we were. It was as if she recognized that we were family.  The ‘New York” in me was cautious, though.

We entered the home and a shirtless man, named Oral, emerged from a back room holding a baby. The woman that answered the door was his wife, Crystal.  There was a 3 year old boy in is underoos running about and playing; I later learned his name was Caleb.  My father’s uncle came out from the kitchen area looking very much like a man who had spent some time in the Caribbean.  He had on a loud orange, short sleeve buttoned-down shirt and plaid shorts. He was barefooted, of course. The resemblance to my father was uncanny. He had the same hairline as my father and the same shaped forehead.  My father, a man who I have always known to be stern and stone-faced, lit up like a kid on Christmas day. A small tear welled up in my left eye. My father had always seemed to keep his emotions in check and wasn’t known to me to be loose with his affections. But here he was, excited to see a stranger as if he had known him all his life. It warmed my heart to the point of tears.  I was proud to be there for my old man. Those who know me know that have a savior complex.  My daddy needed me, and I was there.

We sat down and talked. Before we came, my father told me that his uncle was in his 80’s and didn’t see or hear well. There was also the implication that Uncle Vernon may have mild Alzheimer’s.  None of that was evident this day. My father and his uncle sat and carried on a conversation about the family bush (our family is a bush not a tree) and long lost relatives. Uncle Vernon’s recollection of past events was spot on and I think that made my father even happier. I think knowing that his uncle remembered the same family and places he knew solidified the kinship my father felt. I almost forgot that my father had these types of feelings.

There were several moments where my father repeated how glad he was that he came and met Vernon; a rare moment indeed. I took many pictures of them conversing, but most of the time I was playing with little Caleb. He likes being upside-down. Some time later I asked my father what his favorite moment was of our little vacation. Not surprisingly, he said his favorite moment was meeting his uncle.  For him, the vacation was over; he did what he set out to do.  I was touched to hear my father describe his feelings about the trip that way. For so long I had thought I had our dynamic figured out. As my parent, he was supposed to be there for me. It never really occurred to me that there could be a time that I could be there for him, to support him in one of his life goals. I tell you, I have never felt closer to my father as I did then. For the first time, he wasn’t just my daddy; he was Gladstone, a man looking for a connection to his family and to his past. In that moment, my father seemed more human to me than I had ever known him. 

Thank you, daddy. Thank you for allowing me to share that moment with you. Thank you for showing me that side of you.  I love you.

It's Not As Bad As You Think...It's Worse

Everyday the news about Japan gets a little more terrible. As if the earthquake wasn't bad enough, the tsunami that followed devastated the lives and livelihoods of thousands of people. Its so sad to think of all the mayhem the wave caused. But just when I started to think the people would recover, news of an impending nuclear meltdown circle the airwaves.

The risk of death due to an explosion is horrible. But what's worse is the long-term effects of radiation poisoning. The initial blast is only the beginning. Radiation will poison flora an fauna. As the radiation works its way up the food chain, cancer will become more of an issue. Both men an women could face reproductive and a host of other as yet unforeseen problems.

But, just as I think things can get worse...ignorance blankets the airwaves. These talking ass-hats begin diagnosing the economic repercussions of this disaster in the most insensitive manner imaginable. A media outlet that shall remain nameless framed the disaster not in terms of lives lost or ruined, homes destroyed or infrastructure damaged, but in terms of the cost to the American populous because of a Toyota Prius shortage. Did I hear right? Is someone comparing shortage of Mickey Mouse cars to a massive earthquake, devastating tsunami and nuclear meltdown? Never mind the loss of thousands of lives; let's get upset because Muffy has to wait a little longer for her Prius.

All of this while Haiti is still in shambles. Where's the outrage? Oh, I'm sorry that Haiti's economy isn't as crucial to globe as Japan's. I am sorry that they don't export anything valuable enough that would drive us Prius-driving, Gucci bag-totting, Wii-playing ass-hats to give a crap. I am sorry that the loss of human life is not enough on its own to keep our national attention for longer than a minute.

Don't get me started on New Orleans. The point of this rant is to remind myself that we don't care about anything unless we are personally affected. Don't pretend to care about the Japanese people or the Haitian people or even Louisiana if all we care about is our cars, fuel costs or flat screen TVs. I love being human, but sometimes we suck.

Pray for Japan, Haiti, Australia, Lebanon, Egypt and all the people of the world struggling right now.
Kevin Greene

Share the Pain

I have been seeing a lot of reports talking about teachers and other government employees and their high salaries and 'Cadillac' health plans. One report stated that the average teacher salary is about
$55k per year. With benefits, that compensation jumps to about $90k. First of all, those statistics are misleading because it includes administrators and other staff positions without direct responsibility for educating the kids. But I digress.

States facing huge budget deficits are trying balance their books on the backs of state workers at the expense of their bargaining rights. Fox news correspondents have been saying that state employees are greedy and not sharing the pain. They have even gone as far as to state that $90k in salary and benefits is so high that the average worker could and should contribute more to their benefits.

But wait just a minute. Are these not the same people who vehemently opposed increasing taxes on people making more than $250k per year? That's $250k before accounting for any health benefits. Fox ran reports stating that 250k is not rich in America. Conservative elected officials fought tooth and nail to prevent our President and Democrats from repealing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. They said it would be bad for the economy. They pressured Obama and he gave in to their demands.

So if $250k isn't rich and those who earn that and more per year can't afford a minor increase in their taxes, how did $55k become rich? When did it become shameful to fight for union rights while the entities really responsible for our current economic situation rake in record profits and bonuses? Fox argued that rich CEOs should get their bonuses so that they stay and don't leave for higher paying jobs elsewhere. So riddle me this, Batman? What happens when teachers quit to take better paying jobs elsewhere or you lose good quality teachers because we are not compensating them? Who educates our kids then?

I understand people are out of work and that many see government employees as and their health coverage with disdain. But wait a minute. When Obama and democrats passed health care legislation the same people who are upset now are the same ones who want to repeal it. Huh? Does that make sense to anyone? So don't make me get insurance, but I want to tell others that they should pay more for theirs.

We have to get our priorities straight. Somehow we as a society have been tricked into voting against our own best interests. Wake up and smell the coffee, people. I am all for fairness. But beating up on the little guy is hardly fair.
Kevin Greene

The Feds Are Prepared For A Shutdown. Are You? : NPR

I wonder if I am essential or not. I could use a vacation but a shut down isn't worth it if I am out of work for more than a few days.

http://www.npr.org/2011/02/25/134043241/the-feds-are-prepared-for-a-shutdown-are-you
Kevin Greene

From 2 and a Half Men to No Men

Check out this article:
http://www.npr.org/templates/email/emailAFriend.php?storyId=134041893
Kevin Greene

Founding Father's View of the Second Amendment

I saw this clip recently and and I think it offers a realistic, comedically precise, interpretation of how the "founding fathers" would react to the application of the Second Amendment today. Obviously, we will never really know how they would feel unless we could actually interview them. But I think that historical perspective is very important when interpreting the US Constitution. Laws frequently change and evolve to deal with changing times and technology. I think that those who have a strict, narrow interpretation of the Second Amendment need to reexamine the history and the context surrounding it.  What do you think?


Constitution Corner

What’s the Effing Difference?

All of this talk about what is going on with Charlie Sheen and his ‘sheenanigans’ has sparked a curious question in me. What is the difference between a Porn Star and a Prostitute (Hooker/Escort)? Is there a ‘real’ substantive difference? I submit that there is no real difference; money (or something of value) in exchange for sex is at the core of both activities. Just like taking something that did not belong to you is at the core of both burglary and robbery.  It is inconsequential to me whether the item taken is taken from a person or stolen from a house.

Let’s think about this one for a moment. I read somewhere online recently that prostitution in and of itself is not illegal; solicitation is illegal. So presumably, someone could legally exchange money for sex so long as they don’t get caught making the deal. Ok, I get it; I think.  The damage to society is the process through which money is exchanged for sex, not the actual exchange of money for sex? And by extension, I guess the porn industry does less harm to our society than Joe Suburban trying to get a hand-job for $20 in his pick-up truck.

A Porn actor (I can’t call them all stars because, let’s face it, they’re not) engaged in the same activity as an escort or prostitute, isn’t committing a crime because said porn actor has a production behind them (no pun intended).  On that note, can we really call them actors? I mean, come on. No one watches a porn movie for the plot. I have never met anyone who after watching a porn flick says, “That was a very well made movie; the pizza delivery guy was very convincing; the character development was spot on.”  I submit that porn actors, or at the very least, their management agents, are soliciting money for sex. The production company tells the actor or his/her agent that they will be paid ‘x’ amount of money for sex with ‘y’ number of costars in ‘z’ many positions (I have no idea what goes into a porn contract, but I would sure like to know). A deal is being brokered, is it not? So again I ask, what is the ‘real’ difference?

What is the real difference between a “professional” singer/musician and a subway performer? Both get paid to sing/perform.  The only quasi difference is the production behind the “professional” musician, which is absent from the guy in the subway.   As a matter of fact, some of the performers in the subway have more talent than some of these alleged professionals running around here.

I am not advocating for the legalization of solicitation or the illegalization of porn. Please don’t take what little joy I have away from me.  I am simply asking, “Why is there a difference?” The point of this diatribe is simply to point out the asinine separations we have become comfortable with in our society. When the news of Charlie Sheen’s bender first broke, many well-known media outlets stated that he was with ‘prostitutes’.  Soon thereafter, ‘prostitutes’ became ‘porn star’. My first thought was: “porn star? I’ve never heard of this lady. How much of a ‘star’ can she be?”  I read my friend’s blog about matter. In it, he talks about the difference between crack cocaine and powdered cocaine and then I really began taking apart the elements of the Sheen story.   I understand the legal reasons for the separations/distinctions, but I think that as a society we should stop lying to ourselves. To take a popular statement from the Presidential campaign: “you can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig”.

http://www.captainamerica-marvel.com

http://www.captainamerica-marvel.com/

First (Un)Official Look At X-Men: First Class Cast

First (Un)Official Look At X-Men: First Class Cast

Anne Hathaway To Play Catwoman And Tom Hardy Will Portray Bane In The Dark Knight Rises!

Anne Hathaway To Play Catwoman And Tom Hardy Will Portray Bane In The Dark Knight Rises!