Caution!  Political parties make up little white lies

 Political parties are not opposed to stretching the truth or telling a little white lie, it is up to you to search out the truth so you can vote for the best qualified candidate.  Bill Clinton stretched the truth with his sexual advances, he threw a mask on when dealing with Congress, he made the Republicans think he was a republican and got many items through Congress. Bush’s presidency was ripe with whatever it took to make their side of the issues shine a ray of sunshine on their faces.  The worst example being getting us into the Iraq war because they supposedly had “weapons of mass destruction”.

The past three years while the Republicans  have been in power in the House of Representatives, most all of their membership in that house have signed a pledge against any legislation that would increase taxes. They have become an obstructionist party, hardly allowing legislation to pass in Congress, while President Obama has been attempting to right the economy, get us out of wars and right the ship of state. 

Both parties have friendly journalist who make up stories for their benefit.  The most recent “story” is that the Social Security system is going to run out of funds in 2033.  The Common Dreams.org editorial staff has researched the folly of their “story”.

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, the chairman of the Defending Social Security Caucus and also chairman of the Senate aging subcommittee says, “The most effective way to strengthen Social Security for the next 75 years is to eliminate the cap on the payroll tax on income above $250,000.  Right now, someone who earns $110,000 pays the same amount of money into Social Security as a billionaire.  That makes no sense.”

The National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, said in a statement.  “The trust fund solvency date for Social Security has seen fluctuations many times in recent decades, from a depletion date as distant as 2048 in the 1988 report to as soon as 2029 in the 1994 and 1997 reports.  This year’s report is well within that range.  Contrary to the crisis myths perpetuated by fiscal conservatives and many in the media, the prevailing facts show once again that Social Security remains among the nation’s most successful and stable programs.  The Trustees report there is now $2.7 trillion in the Social Security trust fund, which is $69 billion more than last year, and continues to grow.  Payroll contributions and interest will full cover benefits for decades to come.

What I have shown you here is why you need to dig deeper into the media and political rhetoric that you see/hear and read.  Search for the truth through credible sources—go to the source when possible—

The source for this article is www.commondreams.org   April 24, 2012, titled “Experts: Contrary to Mainstream Myth, ‘Social Security is Strong’ and Could be made stronger.”

Keep notes, watch TV, Talking Heads, read, read!

Well, the Republicans have settled on Mitt Romney as their candidate going into the Republican National Convention.  It appears that the support is tenuous at best.  Most Republicans want to beat Obama and don't care who is the candidate going up against him.
If you are Republican--Tea Party member, Democrat or Progressive NOW is the time for you to bring all your support for your candidate--be they cut-out articles, magazine articles, video notes, notes from events you have attended, whatever it is, make sure you have your support established and are able to talk about your support for your candidate.  Things are going to get rough--people against the way you think are going to be prepared also, perhaps not as prepared as you, but they are their beliefs and they will try to convince you to change your way of thinking!!  Confrontation will take place in just about any location, on the way to work, visiting a neighbor, over coffee after church, at dinner with friends, you name it, you will need to be ready.  You will need to practice confrontation with your family.  Most people are not comfortable with presenting a point and winning an argument.  Remember, state your point, clearly, have hard evidence ready to back up what your are saying and try--please try to be calm!  Do not belittle your "friend", people don't like that.  Allow him/her to state why they support their view on the issue and listen for evidence.  Listen where they have received their evidence--you are going to present "neutral" evidence as much as possible--example, Christian Science Monitor information--your "friend" may not present unbiased evidence, example:  Opinions from newscasters, political news(CNN and MSNBC  FOX News,).  Hopefully you would have watched/listened/read your opponents point of view and be ready to have a come-back.  Maybe, just maybe, your friend may present enough evidence that will change your way of thinking!!  It is your job to be ready as possible to walk into that voting booth and be sure of your vote. 

Dig, Dig, evaluate, decide

Now is the time you dig into the candidates' statements, videos, speeches, reactions, essays, stands on the issues.  It appears to be a very easy assignment:  1.  Dig into your frame of reference, all of the above, plus more and come up with a justifiable decision.  2.  Start discussing the issues with your friends, listen to radio and TV, read editorial pages in periodicals, see if your decision stands the test of questioning and do your answers represent solid positions.  3.  Alter your position if needed and go after it again.  REMEMBER, YOUR VOTE DOES COUNT!!

Articles on: Cooperatives instead of Corp and Purchasing the Presidency

I have included two sites for you to read. The first one is concerning an alternative to the "Citizen United" Supreme Court decision--Cooperative. Jim Hightower discusses a fine way that already exists and may be the common man's way to avoid corporations.
The second one is "Purchasing the President: the 2012 Super-PAC Mega-Donors. Great article about how the corporations are using the power the Supreme Court gave them. It explains limitations and amounts. Great articles in Common Dreams.org.

Presidential National Convention--Parties vying for Presidential Office

The past few months, the Republican party has been having candidate debates and primary elections, all the process of trying to select the most capable candidate to "run" for the office of President for their party. There is a new twist this time. PAC's have been given the authority to "give" as much as they wanted to a candidate. This came as a result of a Supreme Court decision known as "Citizen United", which said that corporations have the same privilege of "speech" as a human-being, meaning that a corporation may give as many campaign funds it wants instead of being stopped by the usual $2,300 they had prior to the decision. What that translates to is: a candidate merely needs to get one very large donator who would foot his campaign and that is all he would need--so, no more "grassroots" or small donors (usually from the regular population)
Now, the Republican party has narrowed their selection to four candidates. Those candidates are attempting to "win" each of states they "run" in so they can accumlate "votes" going into the Presidential Convention.
The Presidential Convention is where the final candidate is selected. In the pre-50's days, the convention was a brokered convention, usually in a smoke filled room with the party big-whigs attempting to convince the remainder in the room of the ability of their candidate.
The convention today is changed. No-more smoke filled rooms, the candidate comes to the convention usually with the election in the bag because he has accumulated the largest number of "state" wins to achieve the election.
Other things go on at the convention: The party platform is solidified, that is where the party states what they believe in and where they are headed in the upcoming Presidential election. Many personalities are highlight by speeches they deliver and will begin growing within the party.
Usually a sitting President has a good position if he has done a good job in his last term.
What is your job. First, you need to familiarize yourself with both of the candidates; their positions on the issues; that means you need to do some research and become familiar with their reasons for their position. Next, you need to start to form questions that you would like to ask on the issues, do the candidates answer with good answers? Start forming an opinion, once formed, challenge their positions, use letters-to-the editor (remember to keep the letters to one question--yes, you can send more, however publishers do not like long letters, it takes up too much space) call in responses, attend meetings--and on and on--GET INVOLVED--BE ABLE TO DISCUSS THE ISSUES--POSSIBLE ANSWERS!!!!!STAY INVOLVED!

Natural Born Citizen

January 28,2012, Atlanta, GA. President Obama’s Presidency is up for question over his heritage. For the past 2-3 years, his citizenship status has been up for debate because of his “birth certificate” which proved that he was born in Hawaii. He was born of one parent who was a non-citizen, his Dad, and his mother that is an American Citizen.
Natural-Born citizenship is required as one of the requirements to be a President. The Founding Fathers reasoned that a person who has lived as a natural-born citizen would be more familiar with being an American than someone who was a new citizen.
“For persons born in the United States, the rights of U.S. citizenship have been ensured, in constitutional theory if not in everyday practice, since the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868 and the civil rights laws of the 1960’s. The Fourteenth Amendment conferred citizenship upon “all persons born in the United States (It has been proven that Obama was born in Hawaii—his true copy of the birth certificate was produced)…and subject to the jurisdiction therof.” Subsequent laws also give citizenship to children born outside the United States to parents who are American citizens.”
James Q. Wilson AMERICAN DEMOCRACY
President Obama is and has been accepted as the President of the United States. The term that is up for question is “Natural Born”. This has never been questioned before. It has been assumed that everyone understands what natural born means, a natural birth. The Constitutional process has accepted the fact that if one parent is a citizen, the child is a citizen. This is accepted as the norm, world-wide. Usually after the date of majority, the person can chose which citizenship he desires. Some nations even allow dual citizenship, however the nation chosen to live in usually is the one the person must fulfill any commitments, such as military duty.

Policy or politics?

This is the height of the primary season. Speeches are coming from many candidates and those that are in office. How do you tell whether a speech is an "action" speech
(a speech that is directed towards correcting a specific problem, or a speech designed to address a problem that would be good for politics.
Policy or Politics?
A letter to the editor in January 26, 2012 Arizona Republic, by Dennis Santillo, addresses this very problem
"Whenever there is a major address or action by a politician, there emerges the
conjecture: Is this a political speech or a policy speech, a real effort to
address a problem would be good politics!
People would vote for the politician who did the right thing, right?
Yet, it is well-recognized that there is (sic)a difference between what is
political and policy.
...why is that? ...because the electorate is too ignorant to be able to tell
it.
We vote, not on the basis of an intelligent, well-informed analysis and
judgment, but on some emotional/visceral reaction."


Reference President Obama's State of the Union speech. Was it an action speech, or a political speech. It was both. You need to read the text to find where it turns from one element to the other. Most politicians give speeches that have solutions to problems, but are good for politics also. It is at this point in a speech where a politician reaches into his "party's" platform (things they stand behind and/or want to see changed) You can identify the move when they start to enunciate the party's position, or downgrade the other party's positions. An action speech usually has ways available to those voting on the issue that it can be done in the easiest manner. Remember, if you want to change someone's mind on an issue, you want to make it as easy as possible for them to say "yes". So, if you see that kind of activity within a speech, the politician is making it easy for the voter, congress person, whomever to say yes, usually that is calling for action by the listener on the issue. Political speeches can take several forms, usually it backs up the speaker and his position on the issue. He is asking you for your support, in whatever form.
It is up to you to sort through the speech, see if you can identify with any of the positions; can those positions turn you into a supporter? If so, how much, verbal, monetary, unpaid worker, have house parties for the candidate? Do you want to hear more? Less?