ROADBLOCKS TO DISCOVERY

There are times in my life where I think back to the years I spent teaching high school science and wonder about the type of things that I would be presenting to my classes had I remained in the profession.  The choice to leave the teaching profession had nothing to do with a loss of faith in the profession or a lack of enthusiasm for presenting scientific discovery and theory to young people about to make their mark on their world.  Sadly, the decision was made for largely economic reasons. 

The collection of scientific data and the application of scientific inquiry has been a fascination of mine since I can remember.  I have always been attracted to the mental processes involved in critical thinking and scientific discovery.  The courses I took that led up to my degree in Biology were not work for me.  Teaching high school science was not work for me.  Both were a place of fascination and discovery.  The fascination with these things has obviously been passed down to both of my children, one with degrees in Chemical and Mechanical Engineering and working towards a doctorate, another with a degree in Psychology, one semester away from a Biology degree and  on her way to med school.  Earnest inquiry is obviously an important part of life for members of this family.

With that being said, of late I have been taking a hard look at climate science and the effects  our lifestyles have on the environment we are supposed to be preserving for future generations.  I can remember teaching long ago about what was called the “greenhouse effect”.  At that time the scientific theory supporting this phenomena was basically in its’ infancy.  Since that time, years of scientific data and inquiry have brought about a greater understanding of causes and effects brought about by the waste products of our lifestyles.  As with any scientific data and theory generated within the scientific community, what we know today is different from what we knew a year ago.

This should not come as any surprise to any taking the time to read this information.  Sometimes it takes a great deal of time for those who think a certain way to change their way of thinking.  Sometimes what we know at a certain time is absolutely inaccurate.  What we know today, will be replaced by new discoveries.  If science is about any particular thing, it is about collecting data and seeing where that data leads. Scientific inquiry and theory must be challenged. Over time, the process of challenging “truth” results in new understanding.  It has always been so.   Let me give you a few examples.

Galileo believed that the earth moves around the sun, a fact that is now well-established.  However, the Roman Catholic Church waited 359 years to admit that Galileo was correct.  For the life of me, I don’t understand how belief in Galileo’s theory in any way challenged the beliefs of the church.  Yet the Vatican condemned Galileo, the man Albert Einstein called the father of modern science. It wasn’t until 1992 that the Vatican officially withdrew its’ condemnation. 

There was a time when people thought it was absolutely suicidal to get on a ship and sail the ocean blue.  Fears of falling of the edge of the earth were very real.  It took a while but eventually it was proven that Earth indeed was round and that there was no place to fall off!

A more recent example is related to my experiences teaching about the condition now known as AIDS during the 1980’s.  I can remember the first time I gave information to my Anatomy and Physiology classes about a condition that was affecting homosexual males in the San Francisco area.  There was intense interest in the topic, and questions about the disease came at me at a rapid-fire pace from my high school juniors and seniors in my classes.  Since the knowledge of the causes and effects were largely unknown at first, I could only present information that was “known”.  At that time, female students had no fears about contracting the disease.  At that time, males in my classroom who were heterosexual had no fear.  All I could tell them with any degree of accuracy was at that time only a small population of male homosexuals had contracted the disease.  Anyone who was not a homosexual male living in San Francisco had no fear of contracting the disease.  What we knew at that time was limited.  As the months and years passed my teachings on the subject changed dramatically.  As discoveries were made, the “truth” about AIDS changed.  Such is the nature of scientific and medical discovery.  At that time I can remember telling my classes that the worlds body of medical knowledge would double every five years. The ever-changing nature of science is fascinating to me.  After a while, I learned to preface my comments with the following statement: “The data indicates that this is the truth, future data may force us to make changes in what we believe”. 

Pure scientific inquiry is not impacted by ideology, political pressure, or potential for financial gain or loss.  Pure scientific inquiry is accomplished without any forces that affect the ability of the inquirer to make discoveries, interpret data, and continue to challenge accepted “truth”.  The Catholic Church’s condemnation of Galileo was brought about by “spiritual ideology”.  Basically, the Vatican’s believed that the theory being espoused by one of the great minds of that century contradicted their set of beliefs.  That which contradicted their belief was a threat to their existence, and as such, must have been generated by forces contradictory to their way of thinking.  Galileo was put on trial and forced to recant his theory under the penalty of death.  He then lived under house arrest for the remainder of his days.  Ideology, whether spiritually based, or politically based, impedes discovery.  It also tends to restrict legitimate scientific inquiry.

Sadly, political pressure also impacts and impedes discovery.  When the processes of science are impeded by political pressure, the process of discovery is stifled and the inhabitants of the planet suffer.  I will be addressing the topic of the impacts of political pressure throughout my writings in the future. 

There have always been financial restrictions on the processes of scientific inquiry.  In a nutshell, if a scientific discovery impacts the financial future of a corporation or individuals, there will be incredible amounts of money spent to restrict any loss of income by those whose financial gain will be affected. If you don’t believe this, try to discover how much money was spent by the tobacco industry to stifle research and cloud the truth regarding the health effects of smoking.  The amount of money is staggering.

Getting back to my initial question about what I would be presenting to my science classes had I remained in the teaching profession, I think I would spend more time teaching about the importance of the process of inquiry and discovery and do my best to warn my students about forces in place that restrict their expression.

Any roadblock to inquiry and discovery impedes progress and endangers the inhabitants of our planet.  For those who doubt this, take a look at the history of the research funds made available during the Reagan Administration and how this restriction impeded discoveries that would have saved lives.  Funding was restricted and people died because of a lack of understanding caused by a lack of discovery.  Don’t believe this because I brought it up.  Do your own research on it.  You will discover what many already know, that the AIDS research was significantly restricted by a lack of funding.  Political, ideological, and financial roadblocks worked together to keep us in the dark about a disease that killed thousands. 

In 2011, these same roadblocks exist in ways that restrict scientific inquiry.  The costs of these roadblocks are incredibly high.  As a resident of the country and the planet, you can’t afford to be in the dark about these things.  My goal is to get individuals to recognize and question ideological, political, and financial pressure and view the results of scientific inquiry for what they are in their pure state without the noise that influences opinion and increases ignorance. 

In my next post I will present specific information about past efforts to stifle scientific inquiry and expression and why these efforts were so effective and costly to all of us.

TARGETS

 

After a day like yesterday, my mind tends to get flooded with mental images.  It’s these mental images of past events that tend to trigger emotions that generate personal reflections.

This morning I see images of planes flying into tall buildings.  I think of the horror of that day.  Not all felt horror that day.  A young family in Arizona felt the joy that comes with the birth of their newborn girl.  Then I think of the agony they felt yesterday when that now 9-year old girl was gunned down at a neighborhood shopping center.  She had recently been elected to her schools’ student council and went to visit with her recently reelected United States Congresswoman who was meeting with the people she was elected to serve.  Her life was taken from her on a day when she wanted the experience of meeting someone who was dedicated to making a difference by working for change through our nations political system.

Other  images come to mind.  I see images of African-American political leaders being spit upon as they walk together to vote on a health care bill designed to make it possible for millions to acquire the health care that they have been denied up to that point.

I see images of self-described “patriots” making political statements by attending political rallys while openly carrying and displaying guns.  I see images of the aftermath of a previous campaign rally organized for Gabrielle Giffords.  I don’t know if the loaded gun laying on the ground was left in haste or left purposfully to make a statement.  It’s presence makes its own statement.

I see images of a map of the United States showing various Democratic Congressional Districts identified by images of rifle cross-hairs.  I see a list of members of the United States House of Representatives who were being targeted for removal from office.  I see that one of those targeted in this ad is Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona. 

I see images of Giffords’ recent opponent Jesse Kelly inviting Arizonans to ”Get on target for victory in November.  Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office.  Shoot a fully automatic m-16 with Jesse Kelly”

I see images of Sharron Angle of Nevada speaking of “2nd Ammendment Remedies” during her failed Senatorial campaign.  

Now I see images of Gabrielle Giffords fallen to the concrete, a bullet having just past through her head as she communicated with her consituents at her neighborhood political event.  I see images of others including a Federal Judge and the afore mentioned 9 year old girl falling around her as yesterdays gunman wreaks his havoc.

I see images of the nations political players making their case as to whether or not the fiery rhetoric of the past 18 months has in some way made a contribution to this tragedy.  The stances will be typical.  Conservatives will say how much they respect the fallen political leader from Arizona and claim there is no relationship between the rhetoric and the shootings.  .  The Liberals will call for the Conservatives to repudiate (or if you are a Palin supporter “refudiate”) the vile words that they believe have contributed to yesterdays events.

At this time, there is no proof that the individual who targeted Gabrielle Giffords yesterday has any ties to any politically active organization.  The events that unfolded yesterday can not be directly tied to any of the events that I have mentioned in this post.  Individuals who perform such cowardly acts generally exhibit a great deal of mental instability.  The level of instability of yesterdays gunman has yet to be determined.

With that being said I find it important to point out that this happened in Arizona, a hotbed of political rage and vitriolic campaigning.  My first thought when I heard the news was that I was concerned that the shooter might be identified as someone who illegally entered the country from Mexico.  Had that been the case, Arizona might have been faced with a political implosion of major proportions.  No, the shooter was not an illegal alien, he was a 22-year old, white, loner with strong fears of government interference into his personal liberties.  In such a mental state, he infringed upon the personal liberties of 18 individuals on a clear Saturday morning while they took advantage of a political gathering to express their opinions to one another.

As the details of yesterdays events are revealed over time, it will be interesting to see if political rhetoric in this country continues to be filled with images and actions that tend to glorify potential and real violence that has overtaken our political discourse. 

It will be interesting to see if anyone makes any efforts to ask Sarah Palin why she immediately removed her “target” ad from her website on the day when one of her targets was gunned down while performing her responsibilities as an elected official.   If Sarah thought it was appropriate to use the language found in that image prior to yesterday’s events why is it that it is not appropriate now?

When individuals have different views about the way things should be, there are clashes of words and wills.  Why is it that so many in this country use images and expressions of violence as a means of stating their case?  If your case is legitimate, it does not need the threat of violence to reinforce it.

THERE MUST HAVE BEEN SOMETHING GOING ON!

So this is where I admit I was wrong.  I underestimated the Nevada electorates ability to be discerning, to be inquisitive, to take a principled stand against a candidates qualifications for office.  I stated that I thought Sharron Angle was going to defeat Harry Reid in our Senate race because she just had a habit of not going away.  Wrong Steve!  Really wrong Steve!  You all have permission to pile on and I can’t really complain much.

Harry Reid received 60,000 more votes than Sharron Angle in Clark County (Las Vegas region).  Overall, the rest of Nevada chose Sharron Angle by more than 20,000 votes.  Reid was sent back to Washington with a commanding 40,000 vote victory.  (Commanding as compared to an earlier election victory over John Ensign where less than 500 votes decided the contest).

The day after the election there was considerable hyperventilation on local conservative talk radio about the fact that Angle was soundly defeated.  (Hyperventilation always seems to enforce you principled stand don’t you know?)    Our talk radio personalities basically claimed that the Angle defeat was fishy.  There had to be something going on here.  (In other words, Angle really won but the Democrats had somehow stolen the election).  Their reasoning involved the fact that in the two other high-profile Nevada races, Republicans defeated their Democrat opponents.  If Republicans won the these two high profiles races (Governor and House of Representatives) how could it possibly be that Reid defeated Angle?  The “anyone but Harry” crowd felt the sting of defeat once again.  Something must have been going on!

After spending a few days trying to ingest the results of the elections on a national and state level I have come to the same conclusion.  Something must have been going on!  However, my take on what was going on is significantly different from that of those conservative talking heads that fill our radio airwaves.

In my previous post, I listed eleven reasons why Sharron Angle lost my vote.  Each one of those reasons, taken individually, probably wouldn’t have made a difference in the contest.  However, when you look at the reasons I listed, and combine them with other reasons that I didn’t attempt to bring up you get a pretty clear picture of what Sharron’s problem was. 

For me, my main reason is that I will always refuse to vote for someone who runs from the press.  For others, it was her decision to marginalize Hispanic voters that caused them to vote for Reid.  For others it was her “make lemonade out of lemons” comments.  Still others decided that her history of obstinately refusing to compromise even with members of her own party was a problem.   You see, there was something going on.  It wasn’t that someone was somehow stealing the election.  It was that the tea party movement handed the election to Reid on a silver platter by nominating a candidate who was unelectable.  They snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. In an election environment that was decidedly favorable to Republican candidates, her candidacy was rejected by over 40,000 more voters than those who accepted it.   In doing so they made a major contribution to Democratic control of the United States Senate.  To those conservative talk radio personalities who cast doubts about the fairness of the election, I make the following statement.  It is entirely possible that the people of Nevada actually looked at your candidate and rejected her.  You are right, there definitely was something going on here!

TOP ELEVEN REASONS WHY SHARRON ANGLE LOST MY VOTE

It’s showdown time!  Finally, all of the ridiculous claims, promises, and behaviors of the candidates are over with and it is time for American to vote.  I am lousy at predictions so I won’t even attempt to go there.  However, since every mid-term election tends to be a place where the pendulum swings away from the party in power, it doesn’t take much intelligence to note that the Republicans are going to make significant advances.  However, we could have predicted that on the day President Obama was voted into office.  It is the way of our democracy to swing back and forth.

Since I live in Nevada, I want to concentrate on the campaign to select one of our Senators.  Obviously John Ensign our Republican Senator (and neighbor) doesn’t have to fight for his political life this election.  His future is a bit more settled for now. 

The eyes of the nation are on the Harry Reid vs. Sharron Angle contest.  Many see it as a critical competition that will help determine who gets control of the United States Senate.  Those of us in Nevada see this and much more. 

Do we replace the individual who has risen to the prominence and power of Harry Reid with a political neophyte?  Does it even matter that he is the leader of the Senate?  Is there any benefit to Nevadans for having him in such a power position of leadership?  Will we see any difference in our everyday lives if Sharron Angle gets elected?  That my friends, is not a question anyone has easy answers for.

I am lousy at prediction of future events so you can take this with a grain of salt.  I predict that Sharron Angle will defeat Harry Reid on November 2nd.  My reason for this is that politically, she just refuses to go away.  There was no legitimate reason for her to defeat Sue Louden in the Republican primary.  In any other election cycle, (minus the tea party crowd) she would have been a small blip on the radar.  However, Sue Louden did a horrible job in the last weeks of her campaign and allowed herself to be marginalized and defeated by someone who most believed didn’t have a chance.

Most political observers in Nevada had predicted a Louden primary victory and a landslide victory in the general election over Harry Reid.  There was very little chance that Reid was going to be able to overcome the “anyone but Harry” crowd.  Enter Sharron Angle.

Sharron Angle is a political neophyte as compared to Harry Reid.  She is not politically savvy and often has a hard time talking because she spends so much time trying to take her own foot out of her mouth.  She suffers from political hoof in mouth disease.  She has turned what should have been a Republican landslide into a close race.  Now that we are down to the final day of the campaign, polls show that she has a slight lead that is within the statistical margin of error.

This campaign will be won or lost on turnout.  Democrats outnumber Republicans in Nevada by a number that should give them victory in this election.  The real question is whether Democrats will feel enough urgency in this midterm to go to the polls.  If Democratic turnout is strong, Harry Reid has a chance to pull off one more electoral miracle.  If Democrats aren’t motivated enough to put down their morning coffee and go to the polls on Tuesday Sharron Angle will be our Senator for the next 6 years.

Let me say out loud that Sharron Angle left me no choice but to not support her.  I have watched her intently since the beginnings of her campaign and I just can not make the decision to support her.  Regardless of how I feel about Harry Reid, Sharron Angle had the opportunity to win my vote, but she failed.   My reasons are all related to her personal stances on issues that are meaningful to me and my family.  A politician with her professed stances and ideas is someone who does not represent my beliefs regarding every topic that I consider to be a “major deal”.    In honor of David Letterman I want to give you my TOP ELEVEN REASONS WHY SHARRON ANGLE LOST MY VOTE

REASON # 11 – HER POSITIONS ON  SOCIAL SECURITY AND UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS - In one of Sharron’s most obvious instance of foot-in-mouth disease she basically shared her feelings that those on Social Security and those who receive unemployment benefits are somehow taking advantage of handouts from the government.  Never mind that we pay our whole life into both of these systems.  Never mind that the policies of the past administration have made such significant contributions to the joblessness that Nevada is experiencing.  Those who are unfortunate enough to lose their job are somehow taking handouts from the government.   

REASON # 10 – HER STANCE ON THE REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS OF PREGNANT WOMEN (RAPE AND INCEST SURVIVORS) She has stated that women who have survived the horror of  rape or incest and have gotten pregnant as a result of these things should not have the right to terminate their horribly destructive pregnancies.  She said they should “make lemonade out of lemons.”   Obviously Sharron has never had to face this issue personally.  I wonder if she would drink lemonade made from rotten disgusting lemons? 

REASON # 9-HER STANCE ON SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE. Well of course the Constitution of the United States does not use the term “separation of church and state”.  Her implication here is clear.  In her world, the country was founded by “Christian people” and we are a “Christian country”.  No Sharron, even as a Christian, I can come to the conclusion that the country was founded on the opportunity to worship as one pleases, or not worship at all.  The founders were trying to make this a place that was diametrically opposed to where they came from.  They were attempting to escape the tyranny of the Church of England.   Notice that there is no “Church of the United States”.  I am a believer.  I am not one who believes the government should bow down to or be controlled by a particular spiritual persuasion. 

REASON #8 – HER ATTEMPT TO GET LEGISLATION ENACTED THAT WOULD NOT REQUIRE INSURANCE COMPANIES TO COVER MAMMOGRAMS AND COLONOSCOPIES. Well of course she doesn’t.  She is a Republican.  She does not want anyone telling any business how they should operate.  No one should tell insurance companies to cover any effort to reduce the presence of two of the most deadly diseases we all fear.  Of course, she probably doesn’t worry much about the fact that not covering these life-saving procedures will result in the insurance company paying out millions to cover those who are affected by these diseases.  In her world, she better hope she stays healthy.  I just don’t think she thinks that far ahead. 

REASON #7- HER STANCE ON ABOLISHING FREDDIE MAC AND FANNIE MAE. Freddie and Fannie are a mess.  As one who works in the industry most impacted by their presence, I can say that there are real problems.  abolishing Freddie and Fannie is like using radiation treatments to solve an infection.  There is no way getting rid of these two organizations is even remotely possible.  No Sharron, you treat the problem without destroying the patient.

REASON #6 – HER BELIEFS THAT GLOBAL WARMING IS NOT A MAN MADE PHENOMENON.  When the tobacco companies did their best to persuade the public that smoking was not addictive nor a contributor to cancer, they did it by attacking the science.  Big corporations attacking science that proved that the big corporation produced a product that killed people.  Those in the forefront of the campaigns to stop the conversation about global warming are doing so by attacking climate science.  The result will be the same for them.  Those who attack the science that supports contributions of humans to the climate mess we have created will also eventually proven to be supporters of the corporations that are contributing to the problem.  For now, we get to listen to Sharron Angle tell us that the science is not clear.  Clearly her commitment to corporate America is greater than her commitment to the physical environment their activities degrade.  Instead we get to listen to  juvenile comments like “look it’s snowing, I told you global warming is a hoax!”

REASON #5 - JUST TOO MANY IGNORANT COMMENTS! 

Spoken to students at Rancho High School when questioned about her political ads that denigrate Hispanics.   ”So that’s what we want is a secure and sovereign nation and, you know, I don’t know that all of you are Latino,” Angle told the Hispanic group. “Some of you look a little more Asian to me.”

“As your US Senator, I’m not in the business of creating jobs.”

“these programs that you mentioned — that Obama has going with Reid and Pelosi pushing them forward — are all entitlement programs built to make government our God. And that’s really what’s happening in this country is a violation of the First Commandment.”

REASON #4 – HER STATED BELIEF IN THE POSSIBILITY OF “2ND AMENDMENT REMEDIES.  Basically, if we don’t get our way in this election, we can always revert back to 2nd amendment remedies.  Guns and violent overthrow of the government is legitimate because you disagree with it because it is currently run by individuals who think differently than you. Here is my admittedly callous descriptions of her stance.  If we lose, we can always shoot em!  For the record, I am a gun owner and have been for 45 years.  It’s not about guns folks.  It is about responsibility.

REASON # 3 – HER DECISION TO MARGINALIZE  HISPANIC VOTERS. When presented with the very real possibility that she was not going to make inroads into the hispanic vote in Nevada her campaign hit the reset button and began a series of attack ads portraying individuals coming over the border as dark, scary, and dangerous.  When confronted by a group of students at Rancho High School she responded that some of them didn’t even look hispanic, they looked Asian.  In other words, “Why are you complaining about my ad, you don’t even look hispanic?”

REASON # 2 – HER INABILITY TO REMOTELY CONSIDER THE POLITICAL STANCES OF OTHERS EVEN WHEN THEY ARE MEMBERS OF HER OWN POLITICAL PARTY.  Even Republican State Legislators who worked with Sharron in the past have made a great deal of noise about her absolute inability to work with others, forge compromises and get anything done.  Many significant Republican leaders in the State of Nevada have urged us not to elect her!  She was voted the worst legislator in the Nevada Assembly several times by her peers.  Those who know her voting record have given her the name “41 to Angle” as the result of the fact that she was the only dissenting vote on so much legislation

Do we really need a person with that record representing us in the nations’ capital? 

REASON # 1 – HER INABILITY TO DEAL WITH THE NATIONS PRESS THAT SHE WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH REGULARLY WERE SHE ELECTED.

“We need to have the press be our friend. We want them to ask the questions we want to answer so that they report the news the way we want it to be reported.” – Sharron Angle

I will admit that this is my pet peeve!  Sharron has literally run from the press and will only answer questions she deemed appropriate.  (Appropriate generally means questions that enable her to pronounce her way of thinking)   The press has a responsibility to investigate statements, actions, and potential policies of those running for elected office.  They have a responsibility to the American people regardless of their political associations. 

When Sharron Angle made the decision to run from the press, she made the decision to run from the people of Nevada, to run from her policies, to run from her way of thinking, and to keep us in the dark with regard to her qualifications.   However, she has only recently told us that she will talk to the press after she gets elected.  This one bugs me!  As someone who had to listen to Sharron tell Harry Reid to “man up” over and over.  Here is my comment.  “Sharron, man up, answer the $%^&*# question!”

As someone who was just about ready to vote against Harry Reid, there is no way that I can do that now.  A vote for Sharron Angle violates almost every political belief that I have.  I never really thought any one candidate could so thoroughly encompass all that I disagree with. 

Yet, she will probably be my representative in the U.S. Senate.  Which basically means, I have no representation.  If that is the case, I will cast my gaze onto the election campaign of John Ensign on the next cycle.  Until then, we will be represented by Sharron Angle and a man who under investigation for having his parents pay 96 grand to the husband of the woman he was having an affair with.  (By the way she lived down the street from me, and the house is now in foreclosure because they can’t get jobs!) Never a dull moment in Nevada!

THE TEA PARTY MOVEMENT: SAME GIFT, DIFFERENT WRAPPING PAPER

 

My previous two posts addressed where the tea party movement gets the majority of its’ financial backing and the general characteristics of those that support the cause.

In this post I want to address the cause itself.  What is it that they want?  What policies do they want to implement?   Generally speaking, the group is made up of many smaller organizations so it is very difficult to get a 100% accurate handle on the policies and actions that they want our elected representatives to take.

The tea party movement wants to be recognized as the only true patriots.  In that regard, there is nothing new here.  This has been going on for a long time.   The movement has co-opted the typical Republican tactic of using key words and phrases to describe their plight.  They throw around rhetorical terms and phrases such as “freedom”, “tyranny”, “Constitution”, “forefathers”, “original intent”, “socialism”, and ”taking their country back”. 

It is not difficult at all to see that the terms and phrases they throw around so freely are designed to stir the emotions and actions of their followers by staking the claim that they alone represent the desires and intent of the country’s founding elite.  Conservatives have always made it a point to make the claim that they are the only true representatives of how “it was supposed to be”.  The more vocal elements of the movement have always been the ones to make the most noise about this.

The intent of the rhetoric is to cement the claim that they are the only “true patriots”.  Thinking differently than they do will get you branded as ”less American”.  I am sure that supporters of the movement who read this post will completely disagree with these statements.  Of course they do, they are true Americans. Those who do not believe exactly as they do don’t love the country.  As an individual who used to belong to that crowd, I can unequivocally state that their concept of what it means to be a “true patriot” can basically be classified as bandini.  Conceptually, for the more ardent supporters of the tea party, those who are not with them are their enemies and are treated as such.

Tea party supporters want to eliminate excessive government spending, reduce taxes and the federal deficit.  Take a close look at the following statistics before making up your mind as to which administrations had the most effect (positive or negative) on the national debt.

• 1961-1965 – Kennedy/Johnson  (-8.3%)
• 1965-1969 – Johnson (-8.3%)
• 1969-1973 – Nixon (-3.0%)
• 1973-1977 – Nixon/Ford (-0.2%)
• 1977-1981 – Carter (-3.3%)
• 1981-1985 – Reagan +11.3%
• 1985-1989 – Reagan +9.3%
• 1989-1993 – H.W. Bush +15.6%
• 1993-1997 – Clinton (-0.7%)
• 1997-2001 – Clinton (-9.0%)
• 2001-2005 – G.W. Bush +7.1%
• 2005-2009 – G.W. Bush +20%

Every single Democratic administration since the time of John F. Kennedy has presided over policies that resulted in a reduction in the national debt.  Every Republican administration with the exception of Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford have presided over policies that resulted in increases in the national debt.  Five straight Republican administrations have presided over policies that have increased the national debt. 

George W. Bushs’ last administration increased the national debt by 20%. His administration presented President Obama a country that was in the worst financial shape since the Great Depression.  There is no way to describe this other than it was a national disaster. 

The Obama administration has put policies in place that have added to the national debt on a level that scares all of us.  You can not look at the policies implemented in efforts to overcome the disaster presided over by the Bush administration without being concerned about the national debt.  All of us, regardless of whether or not we align ourselves with tea party solutions, are nervous about the national debt.

I am not one who takes the same attitude as Dick Cheney about the debt.  Remember he said that “Reagan proved that deficits are don’t matter”.  Obviously they didn’t matter to them while George Bush/Dick Cheney were in office and the Senate and the House of Representatives were in Republican control.  $9 trillion of the present $13 trillion of national debt, was brought to you by the Bush administration in just eight years.  Basically, deficits don’t matter as long as we are in office.

So while I share the concern for the national debt with those who align themselves with the tea party movement, I am not so short-sighted as to believe that giving control of the government to individuals with the same basic philosophies that caused the debt to balloon in the first place is a wise move.  Let me ask a few questions that might give you a different slant on the issues.  I might be considered unpatriotic by some who read these questions but I can live with that.

• Why is it that those who align with the tea party movement have only recently “gotten religion” about the national debt?
• Where were their voices during the last five Republican administrations as they ballooned the national debt?
• Is it possible that their concern about the national debt only occurred when a Democratic administration took over the reigns of the country?
• Did you expect the current Democratic administration and Congress to continue the policies of G.W. Bush and drive the country into a complete financial meltdown?
• Do you believe that returning to the policies that have proven to be so disastrous to the country will somehow solve the problem?
• Do you really believe that electing a rather small number of political neophytes with limited understanding of how things work in Washington will change the thinking of the Republican party?
• Have you considered that tea party candidates that actually make it to Washington will have limited power to change things and will be forced to “go along to get along” by those currently in power within their caucus?

The tea party wants to limit the influence of government  (regulation) in the free market system.

As covered in one my recent posts, removing regulations designed to protect the American people from the greed of individuals and corporations whose only objective is to make more money has been a major contributor to the country’s financial collapse.  Without legitimate regulations designed to prevent the financial rape of the American people we will have more Enron’s, more BP oil spills, and the like. 

Have you heard this argument before?  You bet you have, it has been coming from Republicans for many years.  Just because the package has a different wrapping, don’t expect that it will do anything but make the rich even richer at the expense of others who are not so fortunate.

You have heard the oft-used phrase that states that doing the same thing and expecting different results is insanity.  The tea party is the same gift wrapped with different paper and ribbon.  There is nothing new about the movements way of doing things. 

Often times  members of a given political group have difficulty understanding how people who think differently could possibly think the way they do.  In this case, those of us who think differently than those who align with the tea party do so because their remedies have been used before without benefit. In fact their remedies have made major contributions to the national disaster inherited by the Obama administration. 

There are those within the tea party movement who question the patriotism of anyone who thinks differently than they do.  Those of us who voice a different opinion risk being called “un-American” or “un-patriotic”.  I will gladly wear that mantle rather than risk placing people into government that want to return to disastrous policies.  Thinking that their presence will somehow make those policies work differently than they have for the past 25 years is insanity.

Questioning the patriotism of someone who doesn’t agree with you politically does nothing to strengthen your political argument.  In fact, it calls attention to the fact that there are times when it is the technique of those whose arguments and policies have failed in the past.  When you can think of nothing new, nothing effective, nothing that will work, question the patriotism of those who think differently.  Even the techniques of some in the tea party movement mimic long-practiced Republican behavior.  Just another piece of the gift that remains the same.

The Tea Party Movement: The Pendulum Swings

In my last post, I called attention to the financial and ideological forces that have given rise to this latest political rebellion known as the tea party.  The point of that post was to illuminate both progressives and conservatives as to the real nature of the forces that have fueled the tea party movement.

We know where the money is coming from.  We know what those who provide the money want for their contributions.  We know that the more prominent tea party organizations can not be considered a “grass-roots” movement.  It is a movement that has been co-opted by several extremely rich individuals who want to become even richer.  To make this happen, there must be “boots on the ground”.  There must be a large number of individuals who can be persuaded to “rise up” against the current political establishment and bring about change.  It does not matter to those on the cutting edge of the tea party movement that their activities may, indeed, further the causes of those funding it.  What seems to matter is that they “take their country back”.  That phrase is one of the most overused, least understood phrases that have ever been uttered in the political realm.

The 2006 and 2008 elections were a stinging rebuke to those who lean toward the political right in this country.  What I have found most surprising about Republican defeat in those two elections is the rejection of oft-used Republican tactic of inserting “family values” issues into their campaigns.  Those who voted along Democratic lines in those elections completely rejected the “guns, gays, & abortion” themes so often brought to the forefront by those running the Republican campaigns in efforts to stimulate their political base.

In prior elections, these themes resonated more strongly within the American electorate.  It would be interesting to determine to what extent unhappiness with the performance of the Bush Administration contributed to the reduction in the relevance of “family values” issues.  In essence, those espousing these issues were marginalized and overwhelmed by those who had their own set of family values.  It was almost as if the “left” shouted from their rooftops that they were tired of those on the “right” claiming the family values mantra.  They seemed to say that they were tired of being classified by the “right” as not having values.  In essence they were saying that we all have values, and we are tired of you claiming that your values are the only ones that count.  I will admit, I do grow fatigued of those who claim that someone’s  values are “un-American”.  Who are you kidding?  People who think differently than you are just as American as you are.  In fact, it is just as “American” to think differently as it is to believe as you do.  There, I said it!

I remember a lot of political commentators making ridiculous comments after these elections that the Republican Party was fading fast and was in real danger of becoming irrelevant politically in this country.  Those comments were short-sighted and for the most part, unbelievable.  While it was true that the party was in disarray, the ebb and flow of the political struggle in this country operates as a pendulum.  It was only a matter of time until the pendulum swung back.  As a pendulum moves, it goes from one extreme to another.  As it travels between extremes, it must pass through the middle first.  Most of us, have political beliefs that are more aligned with the center than with the extremes.  We just don’t make a lot of noise about our beliefs as those on the extreme are prone to do. This election is going to be about returning to the middle.  There will be more balance in the governing bodies of this country when the new Congress is sworn in.  Whether or not our elected politicians can actually govern from the middle will be the story of the next two years. 

So who are these “boots on the ground” that make up the vast majority of the tea party movement?  First of all, they are mainly members of the Republican Party.  They are the very same conservative voters whose political ideology was so soundly defeated on the national level in 2006 and 2008.

Amy Gardner, of the Washington Post recently published the results of months of research done by their news organization into the nature of the tea party movement.  (Gauging the Scope of the Tea Party Movement in America, Amy Gardner, Washington Post, Oct. 24^th)  The research completed involved canvassing hundreds of local tea party groups throughout the country for information about their membership.  Efforts were made to contact every tea party group in the nation in an attempt to get a handle on the membership of this “new political reality” encompassing the country.  Their results go a long way towards explaining the tea party phenomenon.

The tea party is a conglomerate of local groups, both large and small, and for the most part they have not participated in any political campaigning this year.  Seventy percent of the groups said they have not participated at all.  This stands in contrast to the  small number of national groups that claim the tea party label. (See my prior post on the scope and reach of the Koch Brothers and Koch Industries into the tea party movement.)  For the most part, at the local level, they are just average Americans who are unhappy with the performance of their elected officials and are tired of not being heard.

Respondents to the Washington Posts efforts for the most part confirmed that there is very little agreement among the leaders of the various groups.  They don’t agree on what they should be most concerned about.  Interestingly enough, social issues such as same-sex marriage and abortion rights did not register as concerns.  Less than half of the groups even mentioned that they wanted to limit the size of government.

Here is an interesting bit of information that came from the study.  Eleven percent of the tea party respondents said that President Obama’s race, religion or ethnic background was either “very important” or “somewhat important” to them.  It seems that the claims about racism being a factor affecting the unhappiness of tea party supporters are somewhat justified.

Remember that those who have issues with the race of the President are not generally inclined to shout it from the rooftops, or respond to it in surveys.  Suffice it to be said that there is an element of racism found within tea party supporters.  The extent of the racist elements within the group is yet to be determined. Legitimate estimates are that up to 1 in 4 tea party members have difficulty with the fact the country is being run by an African American. The racial overtones infiltrating the movement may also be shown to be regional. 

It could very well be that increased media coverage of the more prominent activities and rallies within the tea party movement have called attention to signs and behaviors by those who have racist tendencies.  Extremists always generate the most noise.  Research indicates that many of the groups have kicked out questionable members to help them project a more tolerant image.  That being said, there is ample evidence to show that there has been infiltration of avowed racist individuals into the tea party movement.  The extent to which this has influenced the movement is yet to be determined.

Here is something to think about.  If Hilary Clinton had been elected President in 2008, would I have had to spend time writing about the chauvinistic presence within the movement instead of the racist presence that seems to infiltrate it now?   How you answer that question is probably a good indicator of the amount of tolerance you have for either of those types of human behavior.

When groups were asked to name a nationally prominent leader who represented their group over one-third said “no-one”.  Often Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck are mentioned as potential leaders of this election cycles’ group of fed up Americans.

Here is a remarkable statistic that probably gives more than ample evidence that the tea party movement is, for the most part, made up of very conservative members of the Republican Party.  96% of voters who say they support the Tea party movement also say they voted for John McCain in 2008!  In statistical terms, that’s a landslide.  The tea party movement is not an independent, bipartisan movement as it sometimes claims to be.  It is a group of conservatives who support Republican ideology.  If you are shocked by that claim you just have not been paying attention to what is going on ideologically in this country.

So who are the “boots on the ground” that are members of, or supporters of the tea party movement in this country?  My research (some not brought out in this post) seems to indicate that tea party supporters are generally:

• Conservative Republicans who are reacting to Democratic control of Washington.
• Individuals who started out being mad at the Republican establishment for behaviors and political actions that are contrary to stated beliefs of Republicans and now are doing their best to oust Democratic candidates in the 2010 election.
• Have limited political experience and very little experience in organizing political events.
• Have taken no action politically since the last election cycle.
• Are not professional political operatives.
• Have had their political operations funded by huge sums of money being fed into their coffers by very rich individuals who prefer to remain in the shadows and who have an agenda that will make them richer than they are now.
• Not members of any minority population.
• Extremely impatient when their political beliefs are not shared by the majority of Americans.
• Prone to express their discontent by stating that they “want their country back”, or stating that thinking any differently than they do is evidence of being “un-American” or “socialist”.
• Prone to claims that those who believe differently than they do are not following the guidelines and intents of the original framers of the Constitution.
• Rarely Constitutional Scholars.
• Fairly typical of other conservative groups that have made it a habit of going on the attack against representatives of government elected in accordance with the Constitution and representing a political ideology different than their own.

 

For the most part, tea party supporters are just members of the American electorate that were marginalized in the last two elections and making every attempt to accelerate the normal swinging of the political pendulum back to their ideology.  In many respects the tea party movement is perceived as being something entirely new to the political environment.  Reality, however,  illustrates very clearly that the movement has been here many times before under different leadership and different names.  This movement crops up every time the nation is being led by a Democratic President whose party controls both sides of Congress.  There is nothing new here.  We have seen it all before.  The fact that this movement has been around before under a different name does not in any way reduce their anger or their effectiveness.  It only calls attention to the fact that their presence and influence was totally predictable by anyone who legitimately follows the movement of the political pendulum.

THE STRENGTH OF THE TEA PARTY PLANT IS DETERMINED BY ITS’ ROOTS!

As someone who has been watching the workings of the “tea party” groups that have infiltrated the political environment of the country, I have kept quiet about the fears that I have for its impact.  With the mid-term election only a few days away it is time to give my legitimate perspective on this latest attempt to “take back our country”.

In this post I want to discuss roots.  As a former biologist and an avowed environmentalist learning about the anchors of any organization makes sense. Roots are hidden, out of view parts of plants that act as anchors and absorb life-giving nutrients and water.  Since this discussion is about the tea party, we can assume that the roots I am going to discuss are the very roots of the tea plant.  I like the symbolism.

Roots trying to take hold in bad soil rarely flourish.  So it is with the tea party movement.  The soil in which this “grass-roots” organization has found itself is rich with all of the nutrients necessary to sprout an amazing organization that has almost literally taken over its political environment. 

The runaway federal deficit, the banking industry disaster, the housing market crash, and the financial industry destruction have left the political environment fertile soil for the sprouting of the “new” political reality known as the tea party.  A recession-battered electorate combined with a completely unfocused political strategy from the White House has resulted in a terrific environment for a “new political reality”.  Seeds of the tea party movement, lying basically dormant for a while have sprouted into a thriving and prosperous tea party movement.

With respect to the political plant we call the tea party; there are two major nutrients that are required for its survival. First, the plant needs central themes and ideas.  Second, the plant needs enough money to cause the effective distribution of those ideas.  In the case of this latest version of the tea party, both of these nutrients have been largely supplied by a corporate entity known as Koch Industries.  Koch Industries (K.I.) has supplied the nutrients required by the tea party plant through their “non-partisan grassroots” driven organization known as Americans For Prosperity.    Koch Industries is the most prominent and influential corporation in today’s political environment.  It is a corporation that until recently was hidden from the eyes of the tea party movement and the rest of the American electorate.  Those days are gone.

From the Koch Industries Website

Koch Industries is a corporation owned and run by the David and Charles Koch.  K.I. is the second largest corporation in our country taking in over 100 billion in revenue. The Koch Brothers have given a hundred million dollars to right-wing causes in their lifetime. The Koch Brothers central political ideology involves reducing personal and corporate taxes, interfering with governmental regulation of the corporate world, and reducing social services for those less fortunate than themselves.  Their goal is to destroy progressivism. Their ideas and their money have become the life sustaining root system of the tea party as we know it today. Very few of the tea party “boots on the ground” have any knowledge of the roots of their organization and the influence these roots have on the very nature of the tea party plant.

The Koch Brothers also have their own personal roots as all of us do in our lifetime.  Generally our personal roots start with our parents by way of their way of raising us.  The Koch Brothers father, Fred was a very rich, very libertarian member of society.  His ideas about limiting the governments influence into his financial empire are legendary.  He was an important member of the John Birch Society, an organization that in 1963 warned of a takeover of the Federal Government by communists.  The John Birch Society claimed that Dwight D. Eisenhower was a secret communist agent.   Here are a few ideas that will give you a glance into his thought patterns and the environment in which his sons were raised.

He believed that the colored man (his awful words, not mine) loomed large in the communist plan to take over America.  He believed that Welfare was a secret plot to attract rural blacks to cities, where they would foment a vicious race war.

I don’t think we have to say a lot more about Fred Koch.  We can see plainly the nature of the environment in which the Koch brothers were raised.  David Koch ran for Vice President in 1980 on the Libertarian ticket.  The Libertarian ticket espoused getting rid of Social Security, Federal Regulatory Agencies, Welfare, the FBI, the CIA and public schools. 

Tea Party Financier David H. Koch

The Koch Brothers have risen to prominence in the political environment of the country by providing ideas and money to large numbers of political operations in what can best be described as stealth attacks on the Federal Government.  Here are three of their more prominent beliefs:

• They want lower personal and corporate taxes.
• They want minimal social services for the needy.
• They want less oversight of industry (especially environmental oversight).

Here are some interesting facts about Koch Industries:

• According to the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, they are one of the top 10 air polluters in the United States.
• According to Greenpeace, they are the kingpins of climate science denial efforts throughout the country.
• The corporation has a pattern of lawbreaking, political manipulation, and obfuscation.

The Koch Brothers are not minor players in the tea party.  Their ideas and their money have made a huge impact in the germination and growth of the tea party.  The facts seem to bear out that the tea party would have had very little impact on our political environment if not for the Koch Brothers.

You have heard that the “love of money is the root of all evil”.  In the political environment in our country, without money there is no political gain.  Interestingly enough, the Koch Brothers political efforts are all related to increasing the profit margin of Koch Industries.  Decreased environmental regulation means Koch Industries gets government regulators off of their back so they can operate their business with impunity and without fear of retribution.  Successful reduction of environmental regulation increases their bottom line.  In other words, makes them richer.  Denying the accuracy of climate science that points towards the effects of greenhouse gases on climate eventually results in the inability of the government to regulate greenhouse gases.  Guess who makes more money then?

Limiting corporate taxes obviously impacts their bottom line in a positive way.  One of Charles Koch’s former friends Gus diZerega has commented that perhaps “he has confused making money with freedom”. 

Another former Koch adviser has commented that “right-wing redneck stuff, works for them”.   In essence, they will use just about any method possible, to block government efforts that will reduce their profit or increase their taxes.

The tea party movement owes its soul to the Koch Brothers.  The more that is revealed about their involvement in the philosophy and funding of the movement the more this becomes apparent.

So what does this mean for the tea party movement?  It seems that the “grass-roots” movement as it is called is not a ”grass-roots” movement at all.  It is a movement, perpetuated, and funded by the second largest corporation in American that, at its core, is using the unknowing electorate to further its agenda and increase their profit.

As stated before, individual tea party members generally know little or nothing of their role in assisting the Koch Brothers in their effort to change the environment in which their massive corporation functions.  Individual members of the tea party, for the most part, could care less about the roots of their organization.  All they know is that they want their country back.  The huge amount of funds provided to the organization by the Koch Brothers goes unnoticed by the boots on the ground screaming at the government, railing against the way things are, and blaming liberal elites for the conditions of the country.

I am not persuaded that knowledge of the influence brought by the Koch Brothers will make a difference to any individual who has bought in to the ideas and influence of the tea party movement.  I do find it interesting however, that a great number of the boots on the ground are the very people that the Koch Brothers fight so hard to diminish. 

Those who espouse the political ideology of the Tea Party are unwittingly furthering the goals and dreams of two men who own and run the second largest corporation in the country.  The Koch Brothers knew it would be that way, and it is the very reason why they have pumped so much money into the movement.   

 Powerful and rich individuals such as the Koch Brothers know how to spend their money in ways that will give large returns for their investment.   In this case, they have taken advantage of the country’s financial and political environment to germinate a political movement that will, in the long run, make them more powerful and significantly richer.  Thus is the nature of the roots of the Tea Party Movement. 

Post Script- For an extensive look at the influence and nature of Koch Industries, the Koch Brothers, and Americans For Prosperity, read Jane Mayer’s August 29^th, 2010 10,000  expose “Covert Operations “  in the New Yorker.  Jane is a terrific investigative reporter and I have used her article extensively in preparation for this blog post.

www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer

Running From The Media – Postscript

It looks like Sharron Angle has once again fallen in line with her typical “run from the media” stance.  It seems that today in Nevada she pulled one of her stunts again.  Read about it here

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/25/angle-campaign-used-decoy_n_773716.html

When the “dump Harry” crowd in Nevada tries to explain that anyone would be better than our current Senator, they have no real clue as to the nature of their tea-party-backed candidate.  Here we go again Sharron, avoid the press, keep from opening your mouth and once again saying something that proves you aren’t even close to being qualified. 

While I understand your anger at the conditions we face in Nevada, your solution is no solution at all.  Your solution is nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction that will not provide any relief for what we are going through here.

WORDS AND ACTIONS SUPERHEROS!

Words and actions!  For the most part we use words and actions to come to conclusions about  politicians and their fitness for the offices that they aspire to.  For me, what they say and what they do fully defines them.

I fully understand that for a large portion of the electorate, the only thing that matters is their candidate’s party affiliation.  But what about those of us who actually make an effort to evaluate a candidate before deciding whether or not to cast our votes for or against?  We look at words and actions.

I will admit that there are times when I stare at my television or computer screen and shake my head in total disgust.  Some of the thoughts uttered by candidates for office are so incredibly offensive that I can’t help but wonder if anyone is really that ignorant.  Yes, ignorant.  I thought that sounded better than “stupid”.   “Stupid” is such a combative term.  “Ignorant” just seems a little tamer to me. 

Today’s Words and Action SuperHero is Rand Paul, currently running for the Senate in Kentucky.  Let me try to set the scene for you.  BP  (British Petroleum) is one of the oil industry’s major players.  About 6 months ago, a horrific explosion on  their Deep Water Horizon oil rig off the coast of Louisiana cost eleven men their lives.  The ensuing oil leak poured  thousands of gallons of oil into the gulf daily for months.  The devastation to the marine environment may never be measured fully.  It may be impossible to measure the devastation to the individuals who make their living in gulf-related industries.  Suffice it to say, it was our countries worst ecological disasters and a major economic disaster.

 

Simply stated, the disaster was caused by deliberate, calculated actions of  British Petroleum.   BP operatives from the top of the corporate ladder on down ignored attempted governmental regulation of their day-to-day operations.  Their actions caused death and destruction on a grand scale.

Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill

 

Obama Administration decided that it was time to make BP pay for their lack of regard for the safety of its workers and the environment surrounding their oil well.  Only time will tell if BP’s actions can be proven to be criminal.  (Republicans blocked the ability of the administration to effectively investigate this issue).   The Obama Administration took actions to hold BP accountable for their actions.  The damage done by BP was horrendous.  The response from the Administration was completely justified.   Enter Rand Paul.  What does Rand think about the government seeking to make BP pay for their actions?

“What I don’t like from the president’s administration is this sort of, ‘I’ll put my boot heel on the throat of BP,’” Paul said in an interview with ABC’s “Good Morning America.” “I think that sounds really un-American in his criticism of business.”

Message to Rand Paul: This wasn’t just an accident, it was a calculated business decision designed to pump more profit out of their well.  Evidently you believe that holding business accountable for business decisions that destroy lives, livelihoods, and the environment is “Un American”.  In other words, the rights of the corporation supersede the rights of individuals that their actions impact negatively.  Individual rights are diminished by the rights of the corporate world.  Really?  Is that what you wanted to say?

Rand Paul, your words define you.  You are now officially a “Words and Actions Superhero”.   There will be more members of your club added in the future.

Comments Always Welcome!

 

WHEN MORE BECOMES LESS

Conservatives place a great deal of their faith in the “free market” system.  Simply stated, anything that stands in the way of the free market is bad for business, bad for capitalism, bad for America.  As a general rule, the Republican party will fight against any and all attempts to regulate the market and restrict its’ expression.

There has always been a conflict between our two major political parties over the need for regulation.  Democrats also believe in the free market system but generally believe that individuals and corporations operating within our free market system need to be regulated to protect consumers.  Republicans generally fight any form of regulation of these same individuals and corporations.

The Bush administration did its absolute best to gut regulatory agencies whose task was to protect the American people.  Much of what we are dealing with today is the result of regulatory agencies inability to do their jobs.

The problem with an unregulated market is the presence of human beings operating within the market.   You see, the very real presence of selfishness and greed within the human race makes an unregulated market a disaster for many who experience the greed and selfishness of others.  Can you spell       E N R O N?  If we could trust every CEO, every manager, every person who makes decisions within the business and corporate world to make decisions that are for the “greater good” we would not need regulation of their operations.

However, the “greed is good” crowd operates with one general rule.  More.  I want more, I will get more, and I will get it in spite of the damage it does to others.  I get more, you get less.  Let’s look at a few examples.

BP  ignored attempts to regulate the operation of their deep water oil rigs and the people and creatures of the gulf paid dearly for it.  The oil spill in the gulf is one of the most damaging human and ecological disasters this country has ever experienced.  Had BP not ignored regulators and let them do their job, the gulf would not have been saturated with oil.  Why did they ignore the regulators?  Because BP wanted to get as much oil out of their well as possible in the shortest amount of time.  More.  They wanted more oil, more profit.  The results are devastating. People died.    Anyone who thinks that this particular well is the only one BP operates  while ignoring regulatory agencies designed to protect the gulf is fooling themselves.

Could there have been any more damage done to the American people than that caused by the greed and unfettered behavior of the banking industry executives?  They wanted more.  They got more.  To this day, banking industry executives continue to behave in ways that are contrary to the best interests of the American people.  Where were the regulators?  Where was the enforcement of regulations designed to protect us?  Why are these executives still making millions of dollars in income instead of being jobless or even in prison?  They got more, the American people got a crashed economy and the loss of their livelihood. 

There is no one simple explanation for the crash in the housing market in this country.  As one who works within that market, I have experienced first hand, the devastation that has come as a result of this crash.  Lack of regulation and lack of enforcement of existing regulations of the loan industry is one of the major contributors to the housing market crash.  The banks wanted more.  They got more.  Everyone else got less.  I spend a great deal of my business day counseling individuals about their options in this market.  Most of the time, homeowners have to choose the least damaging option.  Regardless of their choices, for the most part, the damage is extensive.  The damage is extensive because someone wanted more.

We would not need to reform the health insurance industry if it wasn’t for the fact that every single decision about who gets their medical bills covered is related to profit.  The profits experienced by the health insurance agencies in this country are absolutely obscene.  They get more.  Others get less.  Try explaining that to a person who is dying and has no hope of recovery because the insurance company that they gave their hard-earned dollars to has decided not to cover their medical expenses.  The insurance company retains more of their profit, the individual gets their life destroyed.

I could go on and on with examples of how lack of regulation in the market, or lack of enforcement of existing regulation allowed someone to get more and others to get less.  It is the very nature of individuals and corporations to want more.  The problem comes when getting more involves doing things at the expense of others.  Some will say, that it is the very nature of a free market society to do just that.  Some win, some lose. No big deal.

Conservative politicians cry out from their elevated positions in society that regulation of the market is bad for business, bad for the economy, bad for the country while taking obscene amounts of money from the corporations and their greedy CEO’s.

 While I agree that over regulation can be an issue.  There is no doubt that deregulation of the corporate world is a bigger one.  There has to be a middle ground.  “Middle ground” is not a concept that our politicians have any understanding of.   As you vote in the coming election.  Understand this.  A vote along conservative lines is a vote for deregulation and lack of control over the “more” crowd.  Are you part of that crowd or are you part of the crowd that is paying for their greed?