Wednesday, July 30, 2008

Barack Obama: What the Left Expects of Him as President

The Nation, one of the oldest left-wing publications in the US, recently published an open letter to Barack Obama, stating what they consider to be essential policy positions that he must embrace for their continued support. I suspect that they are beginning to become concerned about his level of support for their agenda, given his recent drift to the political ‘middle’.

Below are the policies to which they expect him to commit his unwavering support, lest he risk losing theirs:

  • Withdrawal from Iraq on a fixed timetable.

  • A response to the current economic crisis that reduces the gap between the rich and the rest of us through a more progressive financial and welfare system; public investment to create jobs and repair the country's collapsing infrastructure; fair trade policies; restoration of the freedom to organize unions; and meaningful government enforcement of labor laws and regulation of industry.

  • Universal healthcare.

  • An environmental policy that transforms the economy by shifting billions of dollars from the consumption of fossil fuels to alternative energy sources, creating millions of green jobs.

  • An end to the regime of torture, abuse of civil liberties and unchecked executive power that has flourished in the Bush era.

  • A commitment to the rights of women, including the right to choose abortion and improved access to abortion and reproductive health services.

  • A commitment to improving conditions in urban communities and ending racial inequality, including disparities in education through reform of the No Child Left Behind Act and other measures.

  • An immigration system that treats humanely those attempting to enter the country and provides a path to citizenship for those already here.

  • Reform of the drug laws that incarcerate hundreds of thousands who need help, not jail.

  • Reform of the political process that reduces the influence of money and corporate lobbyists and amplifies the voices of ordinary people.

Are the above positions ones which you support? If not, you should not vote for Obama.

Friday, July 25, 2008

Interesting Emails

I received some forwarded emails—often called “viral” emails because they get continuously forwarded—that I thought were an interesting illustration of Left vs. Right. Often these are of dubious origins, and I do not know who originally authored these.

Humans originally existed as members of small bands of Nomadic hunters/gatherers. They lived on deer in the mountains during the summer and would go to the coast and live on fish and lobster in the winter. The two most important events in all of history were the invention of beer and the invention of the wheel. The wheel was invented to get man to the beer.

These were the foundations of modern civilization and together were the catalyst for the splitting of humanity into two distinct subgroups: 1. Liberals, and 2. Conservatives. Once beer was discovered, it required grain and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor the aluminum can had been invented yet, so while our early ancestors were sitting around waiting for them to be invented, they just stayed close to the brewery. That's how villages were formed.

Some men spent their days tracking and killing animals to B-B-Q at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of what is now known as the Conservative movement.

Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting learned to live off the onservatives by showing up for the nightly B-B-Q's and doing the sewing, fetching and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the Liberal movement.

Some of these liberal men eventually evolved into women. The rest became known as girlie-men. Some noteworthy liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the invention of group therapy, group hugs and the concept of Democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and beer that conservatives provided.

Over the years conservatives came to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth, the elephant. Liberals are symbolized by the jackass. Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They like their beef well done. Tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare. Another interesting evolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men. Most social workers, personal injury lawyers, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't fair to make the pitcher also bat.

Conservatives drink domestic beer, mostly Bud. They eat red meat and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big-game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumberjacks, construction workers, firemen, medical doctors, police officers, corporate executives, athletes, Marines and generally anyone who works productively. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.

Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to govern the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more enlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America. They crept in after the Wild West was tamed and created a business of trying to get something for nothing.

Here ends today's lesson in world history: It should be noted that a Liberal may have a momentary urge to angrily respond to the above before forwarding it. A Conservative will simply laugh and be so convinced of the absolute truth of this history that it will be forwarded immediately to other true believers and to more liberals just to piss them off. And there you have it.

And the second message:

Our Tax System Explained: Bar Stool Economics

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing. The fifth would pay $1. The sixth would pay $3. The seventh would pay $7. The eighth would pay $12. The ninth would pay $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.' Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free.

But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings). The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings). The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings). The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings). The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings). The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

'I only got a dollar out of the $20,'declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,' but he got $10!'

'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I got'

'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'

'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

Wednesday, July 23, 2008

Does it Matter what the Europeans think of America?

I have a good friend—a liberal—who is mortified by what he considers the sullied reputation of the United States as a result of Bush administration policies generally, and the Iraq war in particular. In his view, the USA’s ‘diminished’ status internationally makes gaining international cooperation on global issues far more difficult. It seems like many liberals feel the same way as he.


I, however, have a different view. First of all, I know of no definitive evidence that the reputation of the USA has been adversely affected. Moreover, I don’t see that it matters one way or the other anyway. To be completely honest, I really don’t care a wit what the rest of the world thinks of the USA. It’s always nice to be liked, I suppose, but I don’t define my sense of worth based on what others think of me.


In our many debates on this subject, my friend argues that it will be much more difficult to line up international support for US interests and objectives if the people from whom we seek such support don’t “like us”. My position is that France will do what is in the best interests of France first, and the world second, and the United States a distant third. (OK, so the French are a bad example; they dislike everything and everyone not French.) All countries, in fact, will do what is what they believe to be in their best interests, then the best interests of the world. How they ‘feel’ about the USA is, and should be, irrelevant.