Politics As Usual

When I heard about it I didn't believe it. When I found out that it was true I was in awe. As many by now know, congress has voted to open up debate on the healthcare bill, which is great. But the means by which they did so was not so great. In order to do so, all 60 Democratic votes in the Senate were needed in order to block a Republican filibuster, which they got from a price that will be paid by the American taxpayer.

One Democratic Senator, a Mrs. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, was originally opposed to voting with her Democratic colleagues to open up debate on the bill. In order to convince her otherwise, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, along with some other congressional Democrats, added a clause to the bill which promises to provide $300 million in aid to Landrieu's state of Louisiana in the form of a "Medicaid bonus."

Essentially, Landrieu's vote was bought by her colleagues. Is it just me, or is there something terribly wrong with this picture. Bribes are not the way voting on bills should be taking place. Unfortunately, there have been many instances on both sides of the aisle where congressional leaders were promised something in exchange for their vote, and it's perfectly legal.

During President Obama's campaign he promised to "clean up" Capital Hill. What happened to getting rid of "politics as usual." It is sickening that such a stunt can be pulled so openly in Washington D.C., with no shame what so ever. I am sure that Louisiana and the Katrina victims need the help, but this is certainly not the way to go about it. I am hopeful that President Obama has the courage to condemn his colleagues, and finally clean up Washington and put an end to this abomination.

Happy Thanksgiving

Real Talk Politic wishes all a happy and healthy Thanksgiving. Hopefully you are all with close friends and family on this turkey filled day. Along with celebrating Thanksgiving, Real Talk Politic is also celebrating its 1 year anniversary. Happy Birthday Real Talk!

Here are a few video clips of some memorable political turkey filled moments for your entertainment, from Barack Obama to Sarah Palin to George W. Bush. Enjoy.

Sorry

Why is it so hard for people to say that they are sorry? Perhaps it is because saying sorry draws attention to the fact that you made an error in judgement. It means that you have recognized that you made a mistake. Worst of all, it means that you have recognized that you were wrong.

We are all human, and as humans we all make mistakes. To deny that fact is to be out of out of touch with reality. It is hard enough to get family members or friends to say sorry to one another, and when talking about politicians, forget about it.

President Bush and The Bush Administration made a terrible mistake when they decided to invade Iraq in March of 2003. It has since cost hundreds of thousands of lives, well over 4,000 of which were American military men and women. Let's also not forget about the hundreds of thousands that have been injured and disabled for life as a result of the Iraq War.

The Bush Administration had originally invaded Iraq based on the primary belief that the Saddam Hussein regime had ties to al-Qaeda and were developing nuclear and biological weapons. We all remember the infamous address by U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell at the United Nations where he pinpointed exactly where the production of weapons of mass destruction was taking place, or so he thought.

Fact of the matter is, as we clearly know today, is that Saddam Hussein's regime was not developing WMD's, nor did they have relations with al-Qaeda. Sure the Hussein regime was extremely evil and corrupt, but that is no reason to invade a country. If the U.S. was to invade every country with an evil and corrupt government we would be at war in South America, Africa, Asia, and, well, all over the world. The Bush Administration clearly made a mistake by invading Iraq and has never, to this day, apologized and admitted that they were wrong for doing so.

Admitting one's wrongs holds no political barriers. President Obama and the Obama Administration also seem to be guilty of being unable to say sorry to the American people. During his campaign and early on in office, President Obama promised the American people that if the gargantuan stimulus package was passed the unemployment rate of this country would not exceed 8%.

Well, when President Obama took office the American unemployment rate was at 7.2%. Almost a year down the road and hundreds of billions of dollars later the unemployment rate has jumped to 10.2%. Not only does the Obama Administration refuse to apologize to the American people, but they insist that the stimulus has been working. A jobless recovery is not what the Obama Administration had intended back in January of this year when President Obama told us that the stimulus package would stop the unemployment rate from growing over 8%.

As we all know, saying sorry is a very difficult thing to do. It takes vulnerability and admitting one's wrongs. The Bush apologetics and Obama apologetics are diluted, and in complete denial. Not being able to recognize that we all make mistakes is to be out of touch with reality, even if that mistake was at the expense of human lives or billions of dollars of debt for subsequent generations to come. We need more honest apologetics in Washing D.C.

Compromising Health Care Reform

This week the Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus introduced a health care reform plan that would not add to the federal deficit. The bill does not include a public option (AKA government funded health care), a key element of reforming health care according to President Obama and fellow democrats. At least it used to be a key element. Recently President Obama has said that the public option is not absolutely necessary to reach his goals for reform.

Many people have acknowledged that passing health care reform has a "make it or break it" stigma attached to the success or failure of President Obama's presidency. Is President Obama loosening his belt on his goals for health care reform simply so that he can say he was successful? Is he letting the main component of reform, a public option, slip under the table so that he can say he passed health care reform legislation? Is gaining a few Republican supporters worth erasing such a key element from the bill? Negotiating, compromising, and reaching a common solution is extremely important for passing partisan legislation, but is health care reform really something that can be compromised? These are all important questions we must ask ourselves.

Furthermore, another questionable aspect of Baucus' proposal is the idea of mandated health care coverage. In other words, if an individual is not insured they could receive a fine. The bill does create health care exchanges, non-profit health insurance cooperatives, and sets limits on out-of-pocket expenses, but should we really be fining people if they can't afford health care insurance.

The Baucus plan is definitely a step in the right direction, but much more work needs to be done if we are going to pass serious health care reform. This plan estimates to cover nearly 30 million uninsured Americans While nearly 50 million Americans remain uninsured. We can do better. America can do better.

Universal Health Care, Is It Time?

During the Presidential campaign of 2008 Senator Barack Obama promised to reform the health care system in America. Now, more than halfway through the 2009 calendar year, President Obama is fighting hard to fix the health care problems that he talked about repeatedly during his campaign without adding to the nation's debt. This is no easy task.  In fact, the last time any substantial reforms were made to our health care system was in 1965 under President Lyndon B. Johnson with the creation of medicaid and medicare.

Politicians on both sides of the aisle agree that health care reform is necessary. Their differences lie on their views of what kind of reform is needed and where the money will come from. Politicians who oppose Obama's plan have called it nothing more than pure socialism, a government take over of the nation's health care system. These are the same politicians who have drawn charts to represent the President's plan. Charts that can be described in one simple word. Confusing.

Just hearing the words socialist health care and looking at a chart that looks like a maze leading to nowhere has made many American's think twice about the President's health care initiatives. Hell, I don't like the sound of it either. Who wants the control over their own health taken away from them and put in the hands of the government? Who wants to be led on a long journey to nowhere? Not I.

In the mean time close to 50 million American's live every day of their lives with no health care insurance, millions of American's can barely afford the coverage plans they have, and millions of American's may think they have great health care coverage until they get sick or injured and learn that their health care provider won't pay for their treatment because of a pre-existing condition.

There is something wrong with this picture. There is something wrong when roughly 1/6 of the population of the "greatest nation on Earth" is uninsured and even more underinsured. There is something wrong when nearly every westernized country has universal health care with the exception of America. There is something wrong when we equate a persons health and well being with corporations making a profit. Yes, there is something wrong.

Universalizing the health care system in America is not going to be easy. It is a complex issue with extremely complex solutions that the majority of Americans, including myself, will not be able to grasp. It will not be easy to pass in congress nor will it be easy to figure out how the system will work and how it will be paid for. But one thing is for certain, health care reform in America is long overdue.

Sonia Sotomayor's Senate Hearings

So far, so good. That is in reference to Judge Sotomayor's three days of Senate Hearings so far this week led by Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy. She has been asked some very tough questions from Senators on both sides of the isle, and has answered them all diligently in a cool and calm voice. Even Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who has been amongst those asking some of the toughest questions from the bunch, said to Sotomayor that "unless you have a complete meltdown, you will be confirmed. And I don't think you will."

Sotomayor has been questioned on everything from gun rights to abortion. She has also been questioned about some extremely controversial statements she has made in the past. Amongst these statements were one in which she said "I hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life." Sotomayor explained herself by saying that this statement was made during a speech especially for Latino women, and that it was meant to inspire them. She admitted that the statement "fell flat," and probably regrets ever saying it. In the hearings Senator Graham told her that "If I had said anything remotely like that, my career would have been over. And that's true of most people here." He is probably correct about that.

For such an important position in which you are appointed for life, it is necessary that such tough hearings be held, and that we learn absolutely everything there is to know about this woman. Tomorrow we will hear speeches from some of Sotomayor's biggest supporters and foes. However, even if her enemies make some great points, Republican Senator Graham is probably correct in saying that she will in all likelihood be accepted and become the first Latino women to be on the Supreme Court of America.

Health care in America

For decades the choice to socialize health care has been debated in the United States.  Those for socialized health care often argue that in a country like America we should not leave nearly 50 million Americans uninsured, and even more Americans underinsured.  They argue that America is the only westernized country in the world that does not have free (taxed) public health care.  They will argue that roughly 20 thousand Americans die every year simply because they do not have health insurance.  They will argue that health insurance is a business that strives to make a profit, and that saving someone's life should not coincide with making money off of an ill person.  They will argue that health insurance isn't a Republican issue or a Democratic issue, but rather a moral issue.  They will argue that not only do countries with public health care spend less, but they actually do better with respect to quality and availability.  They will argue that our mail, police, public schools, libraries, and many other things in America are all socialized, so why not socialize something that will save lives.

People against socialized health care will argue that many people who have health care are satisfied with their privatized health care system.  They will argue that socialized health care means that people will start going to the doctor an unnecessary amount of times because it's free, and we will all have to pay for it out of our own pockets.  They will argue that the government rarely does anything right, and health care is certainly something that they don't want in the government's hands.  They will argue that socialized health care means waiting in long lines.  They will argue that socialized health care means less attention from doctors.  And perhaps most importantly they will argue that if health care becomes socialized the quality of our health care will decrease.

Both sides bring up great points.  One thing that everybody should be able to agree on however is that now is certainly one of the best times to put this issue on the table, and have people with strong opinions from both sides dispute their views.  Tell the American people the truth about the benefits and weaknesses of each system, let the public know the facts, and let them decide.

If the U.S. Government is going to hold conferences and committees to discuss the issue of health care in America it is only fair to discuss the issue with people who hold a variety of perspectives.  This past week some doctors, nurses, and concerned citizens interrupted a Senate Committee hearing one after another (watch video below), raising their concerns that not one single person on the committee was in support of "Single Payer" health care, a health care system that many people believe to be the only solution for public health care in America (read up on Single Payer at http://singlepayernow.net/).  Those who interrupted the hearing were escorted out of the committee by police and arrested.  I urge everybody to get the facts on the issue, talk to your local politicians (http://www.house.gov/), and stand up for what you personally believe in, whether it be private health care, public health care, or something in between.  If you support "Single Payer," support HR676.

Another day of Senate Committee hearings brings more protesters...perhaps it is time to put Single Payer on the table, at least for the purpose of debate and discussion.  SINGLE PAYER ON THE TABLE NOW?

Democrats: almost unstoppable

Senator Arien Specter has been the Senator of Pennsylvania for the past 29 years as a devout Republican. On April 28th, Specter decided to switch playing fields, taking a step towards the left, miraculously overnight turning himself into a Democrat.  Specter was stated saying, "As the Republican Party has moved farther and farther to the right, I have found myself increasingly at odds with the Republican philosophy and more in line with the philosophy of the Democratic Party."  The reason this is such a big deal is due to the fact that the Democrats are extremely close to reaching the 60 necessary senators needed to create a "fillibuster proof majority" with which President Obama will be able to pass any piece of legislature he wishes; a truly dreadful thought for any right winger.

The other reason this move has been making such big news is because Specter, acting as Pennsylvania's Senator for the past 29 years, has been in charge of some major committees due to his seniority.  While making the switch from right to left, Specter wanted to be assured that he would retain his seniority.  To no surprise of the dirty game of politics, Specter was stripped of his seniority after he made his big move.  Now Specter will have the last word on almost every committee on which he sits, going from first in line to back of the line behind some men who have been in the Senate for just four months.  This was a very ugly vote in my opinion, which was cast by none other than his newfound fellow Democrats.  We can all but hope that Specter is given back his seniority, and that 29 years is not stripped away because a difference in philosophies.

Can we spend our way out of this recession?

People all across America are arguing about what steps need to be taken to solve our economic crisis. President Obama has taken a very unique approach to fix our economic problems, and that is to spend his way out of this recession. Many people are wondering why in the world we are spending ridiculous sums of money when our economy is going down the drain. If a family is having monetary troubles, shouldn't they be saving rather than spending? Shouldn't a country with monetary problems be saving rather than spending? This question could be debated by radicals on each side without ever coming to a conclusion of what the best way is to get out of the recession that we are currently in. It is clear where President Obama and his economic advisers stand on this issue. While many ask where the money is going to come from and what this will mean for future generations, President Obama has stressed the importance of acting now and acting fast. Aside from spending money to do things like create jobs and get our educational system back on track, and making long term investments in energy, what else do you propose be done about America's current economic crisis? It is easy to find blame, but hard to find solutions. Below is a summary of what/where President Obama is spending America's stimulus dollars.

The stimulus plan that is currently underway in the United States divides $789.2 billion dollars between spending (24%), aid (38%), and tax cuts (38%). Spending will go to modernizing our electric grid, energy efficiency, road and bridge construction/modernization, grants/loans for water infrastructure and food prevention, equipping schools with 21st century classrooms/labs/libraries, etc. Aid will come in the form of helping local school districts balance their educational budgets, temporary increase in federal funding for Medicaid to states, increases in student aid, extra grants for colleges work-study programs, extending jobless benefits, etc. And finally tax cuts will come in the form of helping workers who earn less than $75,000/year (married couples $150,000) get payroll tax credits, increasing tax credits to first time homeowners buying between April 2008 and June 2009, etc. (Wall Street Journal Friday, February 13 2009)

The launch heard around the world

As if President Obama didn't have enough on his plate already, Kim Jong-il gave the President, along with the rest of the world, a larger plate to deal with. At 4:30 this morning North Korea launched a rocket in their attempt to thrust a satellite into outer space. According to Washington officials, the rocket failed to go into orbit but flew at least 2,000 miles. This is double the range of a rocket they tested in 1998, which raises fear across the world of a long-range missile attack. Although their rocket failed to reach space, the North Korean media was praising Kim Jong-il's actions and insisted that the satellite was not only successfully circling the Earth, but broadcasting North korean patriotic songs as well.

While the United Nations is not yet sure what actions they will take, President Obama has firmly condemned North Korea for their missile launch, calling it a "provocative act." China and Russia on the other hand are not yet convinced that North Korea has done anything wrong, but are still studying the matter.

What it comes down to, even if you believe that North Korea should have the right to pursue their nuclear and space program development, is that Kim Jong-il is depriving his citizens of a good life by actions such as these which will only further ruin any hope they have left at restoring a relationship with the western world. China remains one of the only countries that continues to import food, oil, and other aid to the ailing country. If Kim Jong-il wants to see his country prosper he needs to stop launching rockets such as the ones he launched today, and join the civilized world in their pursuit of a peace.