Posts Tagged 'politics'



Representative Murtha is Right

We at TheLogicalReport.com believe in honesty, and it is with great sadness that we must say, that we feel that Representative Murtha of Pennsylvania is correct when he says that voters in western Pennsylvania are racist.

We’re not reporting this with glee or as a way to further separate Democrats from Republicans or as a way to explain votes that Obama doesn’t get; we’re saying it based on personal experience. We have ties to western Pennsylvania,  specifically west-central Pennsylvania (the area that Murtha represents), and we’ve spent time there. There is plenty of racism there. It’s not typically blatant, mean-spirited, put on the white sheets racism, but it’s an insidious lack of trust and dislike of those who are not in the majority.

Racism has been a serious problem in this country since its inception, and thankfully, it’s not as much of a problem in a large part of the country now. Lack of diversity in areas such as west-central Pennsylvania, though, which have largely remained homogonous (composed mainly of white Christians) means that the progress toward a more accepting society is slower there. I never condone racism, and I’m not making excuses for it; however, it’s logical to expect that this would be the case.

Many people in west-central Pennsylvania have had absolutely no life experiences (work, school, play, dating, bingo) with African Americans or Hispanic Americans or Jewish Americans or anyone who isn’t a white Christian—or, for that matter, openly homosexual men and women. I know that this might be hard to believe, but it’s true.

This lack of diversity means that racism handed down from generation to generation takes longer to dilute than when people are able to learn through their own experiences that the stereotypes aren’t true. Knowing people is understanding them—and loving them—and that doesn’t happen much in Murtha’s district. This segment of the population (and it’s not everyone) is much more likely to vote for a white Christian than an part-African American Christian, especially when there are lies being spread that he might be a Muslim.

By the way, thinking that someone might be dangerous because he’s a Muslim is also racism.

Liberals Hate Americans? Oh, I Thought They WERE Americans!

 

Representative Robin Hayes (R-North Carolina) said on Saturday that liberals hate Americans who work hard and believe in God.

Why has the republican party become the party of hatred? Why do they find it necessary to spread divisiveness among the people they are supposedly representing and supporting? And why do they find it necessary to lie to “their” Americans? Liberals hate real Americans? Oh, really? It is these hateful liberals who have always advocated for social programs and a higher minimum wage that, incidentally, help the poor, who, incidentally, are the ones bashing the liberals for hating Americans. These hateful liberals are also the ones who always advocate for small businesses that belong to REAL AMERICANS even though these REAL AMERICANS are all, according to Hayes, republican.

Hayes has accused Barack Obama of inciting class warfare. This reminds me of my post from yesterday (Ramblings on Palin’s Real America...), in which I talked about President Bush always saying the opposite of what he really thinks and is doing. It is actually the republican party that has declared class warfare: they have given huge tax cuts to large AMERICAN corporations while letting the rest of us fend for ourselves and expecting us to be grateful for a 600- or 1200-dollar tax rebate, supported tax loopholes for AMERICAN companies who incorporate overseas, threatened to privatize Social Security so that all of us AMERICANS are dependent on the “free (hah!) market, cut social programs for AMERICANS, reduced funds to mandated programs for poor AMERICANS, reduce funding to Medicare and Medicaid for AMERICANS, have fought against raising the minimum wage for AMERICANS, and changed bankruptcy laws to make it more difficult for AMERICANS.

I also find it interesting that Hayes and others would encourage the hatred of one neighbor for another neighbor, especially by invoking God. Isn’t the message of Jesus Christ one of love for one’s fellow man? No? Well, I wasn’t aware that Jesus’ message was one of such evil, violence, and hatred. I’m sure that many REAL Christians would be appalled to hear Hayes’ Nazi-speak, for anyone who could purposely try to divide the citizens of this country by encouraging them to hate one another is not a REAL Christian.

Liberals hate Americans who work hard and believe in God? I have news for you, Robin:  Liberals ARE Americans who work hard and, for those who choose to, believe in God. Do you?

Ramblings on Palin’s Real America and Us Versus Them

 In 2001, President George Bush, in regard to the so-called war on terror, said, “You’re either with us or you’re against us…,” laying the groundwork for a cultural divisiveness that has become larger than any sense of country that we all share as Americans. And what’s most frightening is that the “you’re either with us or against us” mind set has become the norm rather than the anomolous, embarrassing, temporary blot on our collective soul that it should be. Now, the McCain campaign is carrying the torch, perhaps all the way to the next White House.

 Bush’s words encouraged us to judge one another’s motives and allegiances, for, after all, if we didn’t agree with the commander in chief, then we were being unpatriotic. If we didn’t support the invasion of Iraq, a country that had nothing to do with September 11 or any other terrorism threat at the time, then we were unpatriotic. If we didn’t rush to thrust the youngest and bravest of us into the line of firearms and bombs and beheadings in that sovereign nation, then we were not supporting those youngest and bravest of us——those troops—-and we were being unpatriotic. If we didn’t support tax cuts for the wealthiest among us in a time of war so that the rest of us could, once again, have the financial proof that trickle-down economics does not work, then we were unpatriotic.

And so it has continued for the past 7 years, from illegal wiretapping and spying on you and me in our telephone conversations and e-mails to firing government officials who refused to randomly investigate only Democrats for voter fraud that wasn’t voter fraud to snubbing anyone whose first language was not English. Our government has continued to foster an “us versus them” perspective.

The McCain/Palin campaign is now continuing to encourage that divisive, incendiary, destructive train of thought. In one of her latest campaign speeches, Palin spoke of small-town America as the “real” America, once again trying to divide our country into those who are patriotic, that is, those who agree with the McCain/Palin vision for this country, and those who are not patriotic, that is, those whose vision for this country does not include privatizing Social Security, taxing us on our employer-offered health benefits, and providing Socialist welfare to corporate America.

When George Bush did it, I dismissed it as “well, it’s George Bush.” I, as well as so many other Americans, came to view whatever Mr. Bush said as the opposite of what was really going on in his mind and behind our backs——–and he never disappointed me. When he said that he was a uniter, it turned out that he was a divider. When he said that wiretapping was always done with a warrant, it turned out that he was spying on Joe six-pack without warrants. And when he pressed on with his “us versus them” idea, it was just another day at the office. Maybe he was using the old divide and conquer routine.

Is that what Senator McCain and Governor Palin are trying to do now, divide and conquer? That sort of tactic can be successful if executed properly, with a surgeon’s precision and an Olympian’s skill. George Bush, Karl Rove, and Dick Cheney have that skill and that precision. The proof is in the state our poltical discourse. They laid a solid foundation for the Republican candidate. But is that the kind of country we want?  Do we really want it to be you’re either with us or you’re against us? Isn’t anyone else tired of the “I’m right, and you’re wrong—and un-American” line? Do we want our leaders to encourage a distrust, a sort of neighbor-versus-neighbor kind of America? 

It sort of reminds me of the Civil War.

McCain Pals Around with Terrorists

He really does.

Although I wrote about McCain’s infidelity and his ties to the Council for World Freedom (what many on both sides would call a terrorist group), I’ll admit that I wasn’t aware of his close friendship with domestic terrorist G. Gordon Liddy. Anyone remember him?

I’m not going to list Liddy’s criminal acts or talk about his extremist beliefs here; you can read about them for yourselves either in this Huffington Post article or in this wonderful testimony to Liddy’s character, mostly told in his own words.

I will, however, make a point of saying that Liddy helped to plan the total incapacitation of an American citizen in the Watergate case in order to keep illegal acts by the government from becoming public. It appears that he was also interested in firebombing the Brookings Institution. I believe this all makes him a domestic terrorist. Here’s an interesting transcript of an interview with Daniel Ellsberg, the gentleman who leaked the Pentagon Papers. Pay special attention to the part where he talks about the, ummm, attempt to sort of do him bodily harm; Liddy was convicted of conspiracy in that one.

Does this second association to terrorists (or is it third?) make Senator McCain a terrorist? Does it make us afraid of what might happen if he’s president? Does it make us wonder why he has been dishonest about his associations? I, myself, am pondering the answers to these very complicated questions.

McCain: Annenberg, Council for World Freedom, and Being Unfaithful

All  right, this “Obama lied about his association with Bill Ayres” thing has gone on ad nauseum. First, it’s a lie. Second, why can’t McCain just talk about social, economic, and foreign policy issues? He seems to not have any faith in his own political agenda.

Let’s take the Bill Ayres thing—–again. Senator Obama NEVER lied about having known Bill Ayres. He never gave an item by item list of every encounter, either happenstance or planned, that they’d had, but he never denied knowing him. So why do the conservatives keep saying that Obama lied about knowing him? And why does Sarah Palin keep saying that Obama “pals around” with terrorists? Ayres isn’t a terrorist. And Obama didn’t seek him out because he at one time was a radical. Get over it. And stop lying.

If you want to talk about Obama sitting on the same board as Ayres, you’re going to have to categorize McCain and his supporters as terrorists, too. The board was for the Annenberg Foundation, which was established by Walter Annenberg, who was a Republican and whose widow is a contributor to the McCain campaign. Oh no! Annenberg associated with terrorists, and his wife must also, and that means that McCain is a terrorist! Ridiculous.

I like the way McCain and his little helpers use the words “poor judgment” when describing Obama. It’s ironic, really, since that’s what the report on the Keating 5 said about John McCain and his involvement. Imagine that.

And if you want to continue to play the “guilt by association game” AND the “he’s been lying about it” game, check out McCain’s ties to a radical terrorist hate group, which called itself the U.S. Council for World Freedom. I haven’t heard McCain offer any detailed listing of gatherings that he had with this group; in fact, he’s been rather quiet about it. Here’s another version of the story. Stunning.

It also looks as if, as is so very often the case with conservatives who tout “marriage and family values,” McCain was unfaithful to his first wife, Carol. This story quotes the first Mrs. McCain, as well as the L.A. Times and McCain, himself. As we all know, being unfaithful to one’s wife makes one an unfit choice for President. Fascinating.

My point is that we all have skeletons, and John McCain has his share of guilt by association and personal poor judgment. I don’t necessarily think that those associations make him either a liar or the wrong choice for President. We need to stick to the issues that matter, and some past association that John McCain doesn’t want anyone to know about because it wasn’t his finest moment is not an issue that matters——at least not to me. But if the hate-mongers of the Republican Party want to dredge it all up, then I say, yes, by all means let’s get it ALL out in the open.

Palin Found Guilty of Abuse of Power

An Alaskan legislative inquiry, upon investigation, has found that while Sarah Palin did not commit a crime in moving to replace a cabinet member, she was, indeed, guilty of abuse of power in what has come to be called Troopergate.

Palin fired Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan when he refused to fire state trooper Mike Wooten, who was Palin’s ex-brother-in-law, because the trooper was embroiled in a custody battle with Palin’s sister. It’s wonderful that Palin feels so strongly about her family, but laws, even ethics laws, are made to be followed regardless of personal involvement with any particular matter. That’s part of what makes someone worthy of being elected—we know that the person will not pick and choose the situations in which he or she will follow the laws.

There’s apparently a fine line between abusing the public trust and committing a crime, and luckily for Palin, she managed to keep her pointy-toed stilettos on the right side, so she won’t be seeing the inside of a cell over this problem. However, being found guilty of abuse of power does mean that Mr. Monegan can persue the matter legally——and it also means that Sarah Palin might not be someone we can trust to tell the truth.

When the story first broke over the summer, she welcomed the investigation, saying that she had nothing to hide, but after she became the vp nominee, she did a 180 and refused to cooperate with the investigators. Now, we know why. The Palins are now clinging to the only little piece of good news in the report, and that is that she did NOT TECHNICALLY committ a crime. I say that if that’s all ya got, then maybe trying to get elected isn’t your biggest problem.

McCain Votes Against Funding Troops and Veterans

That’s right; it’s John McCain who has consisently voted against our troops and veterans.

Let me just make my position clear on this: Democrat or Republican, Independent, Libertarian, or any other political affiliation, one of this nation’s most despicable secrets is that we let our troops and Veterans suffer. We use them to shield us, and then we just throw them away and let them fend for themselves. The number of homeless  Veterans and those not getting adequate medical care is in the hundreds of thousands. These people do what the rest of us are too afraid to do, and our refusal to give them whatever they need, both while they are fighting and after they come home, is something of which we should all be ashamed. 

Now for McCain’s record.

In March 2006, McCain voted against allocating more money for Veterans’ medical services because the money would have come from closing a corporate tax loophole. McCain voted against our Veterans in favor of large corporations.

In April 2006, McCain again voted against giving money to Veterans Affairs. McCain voted against our Veterans.

In March 2007, McCain voted against a supplemental spending bill that would have given money to the war in Afghanistan, the war (although I prefer to call it an invasion) in Iraq, and Veterans Affairs. McCain voted against our troops and our Veterans.

There’s more—and a lot of it, which you can read on a Veterans Web site. After you do, maybe then you’ll ask yourself this question: Who is John McCain?