Saturday, March 28, 2009
CONFUSED
The American people are sometimes confusing with their ideas, opinions, and actions. But Oklahoma people are more frequently confusing in their notions of good and bad government, as well as good and bad persons. The Militant Moderate often feels like a stranger in the world that surrounds him.
Republicans tend to be the most confusing and the most exasperating people.
As the old hill country saying went, “Any fool with half-sense and one eye can see” that the country is in a real mess. It is not difficult to reason that since the republican party has been in control for eight years, they must bear some responsibility for the mess we are in.
It is perhaps more difficult, but not much, to see that the party’s central political theme that the government is our enemy and not our friend, and its legislative stress on less government and less regulation, has created an anarchical climate in which ruinous profiteering business practices have been rampant.
Why is that so easy for some of us to see, and so difficult for others?
As one of the two out of three Americans who think that President Obama is doing a good job, and one of the four out of five who view him favorably, it is difficult to understand the personal animosity which persists within a republican minority. His success in solving our problems and saving the country is the last thing they want, according to their own leaders. That is hard to understand.
It continues to be confusing and appalling to encounter acquaintances and friends who believe the trash talk and lies circulated. Again, this past week, the Militant Moderate visited with a well-educated friend who was surprised at the MM’s support of Mr. Obama. This friend then repeated the “known facts” that Obama was not born in this country, that he is a Muslim, and that he is a part of a foreign socialist conspiracy to take over the country. Gah!
The people of Oklahoma continue to be confusing. They want quality children’s services, an education system, penitentiaries to punish lots of people, a court system, a law enforcement system, mental health services, drug treatment, highways, and all the better services of government. Then, they turn around and elect legislators who promise them tax cuts.
Such inconsistent people are not thinking.
If our state legislature is representative of us, then woe be to this generation! We have seen some of the most ridiculous, stupid bills come up in this current legislature. The recurring bills to allow gun-toting on college campuses, substituting religion for science, and the latest insult to women creating a state abortion list record are examples.
Somewhere during recent elections the people of Oklahoma must have heard the message in the music, “Send in the clowns!”
The latest republican legislative attack on the public schools has been unbelievable. Through decades educators and public servants have worked to develop a state school system, create curriculum standards, regulate qualifications of teachers, set pay standards, accredit schools, create a good professional work environment, and establish quality control assurances. Now, this legislature wants to dump all this and “deregulate” the schools!
Either this bunch is deluded enough to think they are doing the will of the public, or they think the public is too dumb to recognize that they are instead serving other masters.
Sometime we must discuss the conceptual meaning of the frequently used term “taxpayers.” When your politicians use the term “taxpayers,” they do not necessarily mean you. But they want you to think that they do. There are different classes of taxpayers -- and some are wealthy enough to be campaign donors.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
Republicans tend to be the most confusing and the most exasperating people.
As the old hill country saying went, “Any fool with half-sense and one eye can see” that the country is in a real mess. It is not difficult to reason that since the republican party has been in control for eight years, they must bear some responsibility for the mess we are in.
It is perhaps more difficult, but not much, to see that the party’s central political theme that the government is our enemy and not our friend, and its legislative stress on less government and less regulation, has created an anarchical climate in which ruinous profiteering business practices have been rampant.
Why is that so easy for some of us to see, and so difficult for others?
As one of the two out of three Americans who think that President Obama is doing a good job, and one of the four out of five who view him favorably, it is difficult to understand the personal animosity which persists within a republican minority. His success in solving our problems and saving the country is the last thing they want, according to their own leaders. That is hard to understand.
It continues to be confusing and appalling to encounter acquaintances and friends who believe the trash talk and lies circulated. Again, this past week, the Militant Moderate visited with a well-educated friend who was surprised at the MM’s support of Mr. Obama. This friend then repeated the “known facts” that Obama was not born in this country, that he is a Muslim, and that he is a part of a foreign socialist conspiracy to take over the country. Gah!
The people of Oklahoma continue to be confusing. They want quality children’s services, an education system, penitentiaries to punish lots of people, a court system, a law enforcement system, mental health services, drug treatment, highways, and all the better services of government. Then, they turn around and elect legislators who promise them tax cuts.
Such inconsistent people are not thinking.
If our state legislature is representative of us, then woe be to this generation! We have seen some of the most ridiculous, stupid bills come up in this current legislature. The recurring bills to allow gun-toting on college campuses, substituting religion for science, and the latest insult to women creating a state abortion list record are examples.
Somewhere during recent elections the people of Oklahoma must have heard the message in the music, “Send in the clowns!”
The latest republican legislative attack on the public schools has been unbelievable. Through decades educators and public servants have worked to develop a state school system, create curriculum standards, regulate qualifications of teachers, set pay standards, accredit schools, create a good professional work environment, and establish quality control assurances. Now, this legislature wants to dump all this and “deregulate” the schools!
Either this bunch is deluded enough to think they are doing the will of the public, or they think the public is too dumb to recognize that they are instead serving other masters.
Sometime we must discuss the conceptual meaning of the frequently used term “taxpayers.” When your politicians use the term “taxpayers,” they do not necessarily mean you. But they want you to think that they do. There are different classes of taxpayers -- and some are wealthy enough to be campaign donors.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
Thursday, March 19, 2009
MR OBAMA: GET US OUT!
If this writer could deliver only one message to our new president, he would pose tall in his most Reaganesque stance, muster his most authoritative, actor’s voice with a tone of gravitas, and declare, “Mr. Obama: Get us out -- now!”
While the economy has been the chief focus of the new administration, and for all of America as well, the urgency of the need to get us out of the morass of foreign military entanglements is not being felt appropriately. Other than the blunders and greed of the capitalists, one must remember that another cause of our economic problems was the profligacy of the Bush administration in waging its costly wars on credit while cutting tax income.
Those costly wars and resultant “nation-building” activities off budget got us huge deficits and built a foreboding national debt. That national debt is now handicapping our effectiveness in managing the current economic crisis.
So, we say again: Get us out of all our foreign wars and military commitments abroad! Please do this now, not next year. Don’t listen to those who say we must stay in Iraq 18 months more, and especially do not listen to those military planning experts who say we may have to stay in Afghanistan through your two term tenure in office.
Mr. Obama, please call in your military leaders and tell them they may have their choice of deadlines to leave Iraq, but then limit them to three choices – this fall, next winter, and next spring. Please specify “no residual forces.” Just get us out!
Afghanistan is beginning to look like a black hole for consuming our substance and manpower. The proportion of us wanting out of there now has grown to 42%. Remember that is how the proportions against the Iraq incursion grew – first a third, then a half, then two-thirds, and now 85%. The Afghanistan war will quickly become more and more unpopular.
Let us do a little recalling of historical events regarding Afghanistan. After a terrorist attack on embassies, President Clinton ordered missile strikes on Bin Laden’s base training camps, barely missing Osama himself by a few hours. After 9/11 when the Taliban refused to give Bin Laden over, with minimal ground forces we assisted rebel armies in attacking and chasing their leaders out. Afghan rebels did the heavy lifting. We had very few troops there, and mainly in an advisory capacity.
Remember please that we really had only one mission there, and that was to kill or capture Osama Bin Laden and his Al Quaida cronies. We seem to forget. We let Osama get away into Pakistan, where some Taliban leaders are also holed up. We have been inappropriately busy helping the Afghan people set up a government -- rather than let them do their own.
And then our enemies broadened to include all the Taliban and sympathizers. There were sympathizers everywhere, but only a few Al Quaida. We helped form the Karzai government, patterned after a model of our liking, and it has never had wide popularity. It has fallen further into disrepute as corrupt and ineffective.
Somewhere along the line it became our responsibility to enforce the Karzai government’s authority, and to battle against insurgents and the Taliban wherever they were. We are now perceived as an occupation force there, with all the resentment that term carries. Let us hope that we are not now putting more troops into Afghanistan for that purpose.
Mr. Obama, please refocus and then terminate our mission in Afghanistan. Make a genuine effort to capture or kill Osama bin Laden, then get out of there. Let the local people handle their own problems of government. We cannot afford nation-building, nor can we afford to police the world. There are terrorist cells everywhere.
If indeed the people of Iraq and/or the people of Afghanistan want some kind of radical Islamic governance, they will have that sooner or later. If they turn out to have cells in their midst that are a threat to us or the world, then we are capable of surgical strikes to punish and harass them. We cannot keep occupying armies around the world.
While it is easy to see that the United States does indeed need bases from which to service its fleet and to maintain air capabilities, these are normally negotiated with friendly countries. We do not seize such territory by force, nor do we maintain large land armies there.
We should be cautious about stationing armies in harm’s way in Korea and other trouble spots. Our 30,000 troops in Korea are not enough to resist an onslaught, but enough to get us into an all-out war if they are harmed.
Further, we should be careful about making treaty arrangements with foreign entities which require us to take up arms and come to their aid. By all means, we cannot make such agreements with former Soviet territories that are now independent. The people of America will not support going to war to protect Georgia, Ukraine, Latvia, or some other former Soviet province or satellite.
So, Mr. Obama, we suggest re-reading President Washington’s farewell address in which he urged us to beware of foreign alliances and entanglements. We strongly urge you to act with all expediency to get us out of wars in foreign lands in which we are now entangled.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
While the economy has been the chief focus of the new administration, and for all of America as well, the urgency of the need to get us out of the morass of foreign military entanglements is not being felt appropriately. Other than the blunders and greed of the capitalists, one must remember that another cause of our economic problems was the profligacy of the Bush administration in waging its costly wars on credit while cutting tax income.
Those costly wars and resultant “nation-building” activities off budget got us huge deficits and built a foreboding national debt. That national debt is now handicapping our effectiveness in managing the current economic crisis.
So, we say again: Get us out of all our foreign wars and military commitments abroad! Please do this now, not next year. Don’t listen to those who say we must stay in Iraq 18 months more, and especially do not listen to those military planning experts who say we may have to stay in Afghanistan through your two term tenure in office.
Mr. Obama, please call in your military leaders and tell them they may have their choice of deadlines to leave Iraq, but then limit them to three choices – this fall, next winter, and next spring. Please specify “no residual forces.” Just get us out!
Afghanistan is beginning to look like a black hole for consuming our substance and manpower. The proportion of us wanting out of there now has grown to 42%. Remember that is how the proportions against the Iraq incursion grew – first a third, then a half, then two-thirds, and now 85%. The Afghanistan war will quickly become more and more unpopular.
Let us do a little recalling of historical events regarding Afghanistan. After a terrorist attack on embassies, President Clinton ordered missile strikes on Bin Laden’s base training camps, barely missing Osama himself by a few hours. After 9/11 when the Taliban refused to give Bin Laden over, with minimal ground forces we assisted rebel armies in attacking and chasing their leaders out. Afghan rebels did the heavy lifting. We had very few troops there, and mainly in an advisory capacity.
Remember please that we really had only one mission there, and that was to kill or capture Osama Bin Laden and his Al Quaida cronies. We seem to forget. We let Osama get away into Pakistan, where some Taliban leaders are also holed up. We have been inappropriately busy helping the Afghan people set up a government -- rather than let them do their own.
And then our enemies broadened to include all the Taliban and sympathizers. There were sympathizers everywhere, but only a few Al Quaida. We helped form the Karzai government, patterned after a model of our liking, and it has never had wide popularity. It has fallen further into disrepute as corrupt and ineffective.
Somewhere along the line it became our responsibility to enforce the Karzai government’s authority, and to battle against insurgents and the Taliban wherever they were. We are now perceived as an occupation force there, with all the resentment that term carries. Let us hope that we are not now putting more troops into Afghanistan for that purpose.
Mr. Obama, please refocus and then terminate our mission in Afghanistan. Make a genuine effort to capture or kill Osama bin Laden, then get out of there. Let the local people handle their own problems of government. We cannot afford nation-building, nor can we afford to police the world. There are terrorist cells everywhere.
If indeed the people of Iraq and/or the people of Afghanistan want some kind of radical Islamic governance, they will have that sooner or later. If they turn out to have cells in their midst that are a threat to us or the world, then we are capable of surgical strikes to punish and harass them. We cannot keep occupying armies around the world.
While it is easy to see that the United States does indeed need bases from which to service its fleet and to maintain air capabilities, these are normally negotiated with friendly countries. We do not seize such territory by force, nor do we maintain large land armies there.
We should be cautious about stationing armies in harm’s way in Korea and other trouble spots. Our 30,000 troops in Korea are not enough to resist an onslaught, but enough to get us into an all-out war if they are harmed.
Further, we should be careful about making treaty arrangements with foreign entities which require us to take up arms and come to their aid. By all means, we cannot make such agreements with former Soviet territories that are now independent. The people of America will not support going to war to protect Georgia, Ukraine, Latvia, or some other former Soviet province or satellite.
So, Mr. Obama, we suggest re-reading President Washington’s farewell address in which he urged us to beware of foreign alliances and entanglements. We strongly urge you to act with all expediency to get us out of wars in foreign lands in which we are now entangled.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
Friday, March 13, 2009
A TOWER OF BABEL
There is a great deal of confusion among the public regarding the various spending measures which have passed or have been proposed to Congress. To some, Washington has been cursed as a modern Tower of Babel.
Of course, one reason for this is that there have been so many different bills during the past month or so.
While everything seems amazingly clear to President Obama, as he exhibits a true capacity for multi-tasking as claimed during the campaign. When questioned on his priorities and what would come first, second, or third, he responded then, “I can do more than one thing at a time.” Indeed he can. It is the rest of us who are having trouble.
We have had more than one thing on the table at a time, and there has been a sequence of spending measures which may become confused. Thus it appears that we may have become victims of a new curse of Babel in Washington.
Another source of confusion has been the same negative republican response to all of these proposals. Republicans rail against every proposal. They confuse people with their redundant, echoing arguments with the same language. Terms like “wasteful spending,” “ear-marks,” “liberal,” and “socialistic” occur frequently. It is not clear which of Obama’s proposals they are addressing at that moment. Their arguments are the same.
Let us take a few minutes to spell out those measures about which there has been confusion in the minds of some members of the public.
First, there was the TARP legislation, which was enacted toward the close of the Bush presidency in the fall. This is better known as the “bank bailout” bill. Bush officials then promptly handed out half of the nearly one trillion dollar package to troubled banks and financial institutions with few strings and no accountability. Everybody has been angry at the way those business executives have handled these funds.
Second, after the car companies were also helped a little by the last administration, there remains about half of that TARP financial relief package still to apportion. The Obama administration has been setting up a plan to use this to relieve the foreclosure problems, the “toxic assets” problem, and to shore up institutions that open up lines of credit. Stiff accountability is demanded.
People are now actually getting mortgages refinanced and relief if they qualify and play by the rules. Financial institutions are actually lending money again to qualified borrowers, including college students.
Third, there was the stimulus bill out there. It passed with three republican votes, and it is now taking effect. Projects are starting everywhere. Republicans like to call these “pork” and “earmarks,” when they are neither. Only the general purposes are named, and the projects are all determined at the state and local level. Nobody’s pet contractor, pet local project, or pet charity is named. There are NO EARMARKS, period. Tax cuts for 95% of the citizenry are now in effect this calendar year. It does not raise taxes, yet republicans are accusing the president of raising taxes on America. Not so.
Confusion and misinformation seems often to be fueled by republican politicians and by radio and TV commentators of their persuasion. However, some legitimate news people do not make differences clear.
Fourth, there is the confusion of TWO budgets.
One budget was just passed by Congress and signed quietly by the President. This is for the fiscal year beginning last September under Bush administration planning and running late for the last six months. It is a budget that should have been passed nine months ago. It is primarily the work of the last Congress, some of whom are no longer in office. This is NOT Mr. Obama’s budget.
In this fiscal year budget are hundreds of earmarks, as has been the custom. These are proportionally divided between republicans and democrats as per their representation in Congress – with 40% being republican earmarks. Both party’s members have pork, some good and some not. Some 25 republican senators with earmarks in the bill voted against it, then claimed credit for these at home.
Mr. Obama has explained that he is reluctantly accepting this budget with earmarks, because it would create a lot of problems to veto the bill on that basis, creating an impasse in Congress and slowing up actions on pressing matters. He’s saving his ammunition for the new budget.
Then finally, there is the “new budget” (for FY 2010 beginning next September). This should be differentiated from all the other issues and measures mentioned above. This one really raises republican hackles. But it is not always clear from their rhetoric just which of President Obama’s proposals they are attacking. Perhaps they don’t know.
This budget runs a huge deficit, something close to a trillion dollars. That concerns some people of both political parties. However, the major reason for this is that, for the first time, the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars are brought onto the budget, and not handled in individual special deficit measures.
An added reason for the deficit is the continuation of some “stimulus spending” in areas such as education and job creation. A few areas of government are expanded such as FDA regulators, nutrition programs, Pell grants for college students, public transit money, and head start programs.
This new budget keeps the tax cuts for 97% of the taxpayers, but allows Bush tax cuts for the super wealthy to expire. It cuts some tax breaks for oil companies, and takes some rich and corporate farmers off public welfare. Further, it establishes a health care reform trust fund which will enable the beginnings of whatever future progress is to be made in this arena.
Thankfully, projections of Mr. Obama’s long range budgets for the future show planned spending to lessen and deficits to shrink.
This has been a long, and perhaps painful, discussion of the fiscal milieu in America today. There is much misinformation, and much misunderstanding, out there. While by no means the greatest explanation of the fiscal measures, it is hoped that this will take away some of the curse of Babel.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
Of course, one reason for this is that there have been so many different bills during the past month or so.
While everything seems amazingly clear to President Obama, as he exhibits a true capacity for multi-tasking as claimed during the campaign. When questioned on his priorities and what would come first, second, or third, he responded then, “I can do more than one thing at a time.” Indeed he can. It is the rest of us who are having trouble.
We have had more than one thing on the table at a time, and there has been a sequence of spending measures which may become confused. Thus it appears that we may have become victims of a new curse of Babel in Washington.
Another source of confusion has been the same negative republican response to all of these proposals. Republicans rail against every proposal. They confuse people with their redundant, echoing arguments with the same language. Terms like “wasteful spending,” “ear-marks,” “liberal,” and “socialistic” occur frequently. It is not clear which of Obama’s proposals they are addressing at that moment. Their arguments are the same.
Let us take a few minutes to spell out those measures about which there has been confusion in the minds of some members of the public.
First, there was the TARP legislation, which was enacted toward the close of the Bush presidency in the fall. This is better known as the “bank bailout” bill. Bush officials then promptly handed out half of the nearly one trillion dollar package to troubled banks and financial institutions with few strings and no accountability. Everybody has been angry at the way those business executives have handled these funds.
Second, after the car companies were also helped a little by the last administration, there remains about half of that TARP financial relief package still to apportion. The Obama administration has been setting up a plan to use this to relieve the foreclosure problems, the “toxic assets” problem, and to shore up institutions that open up lines of credit. Stiff accountability is demanded.
People are now actually getting mortgages refinanced and relief if they qualify and play by the rules. Financial institutions are actually lending money again to qualified borrowers, including college students.
Third, there was the stimulus bill out there. It passed with three republican votes, and it is now taking effect. Projects are starting everywhere. Republicans like to call these “pork” and “earmarks,” when they are neither. Only the general purposes are named, and the projects are all determined at the state and local level. Nobody’s pet contractor, pet local project, or pet charity is named. There are NO EARMARKS, period. Tax cuts for 95% of the citizenry are now in effect this calendar year. It does not raise taxes, yet republicans are accusing the president of raising taxes on America. Not so.
Confusion and misinformation seems often to be fueled by republican politicians and by radio and TV commentators of their persuasion. However, some legitimate news people do not make differences clear.
Fourth, there is the confusion of TWO budgets.
One budget was just passed by Congress and signed quietly by the President. This is for the fiscal year beginning last September under Bush administration planning and running late for the last six months. It is a budget that should have been passed nine months ago. It is primarily the work of the last Congress, some of whom are no longer in office. This is NOT Mr. Obama’s budget.
In this fiscal year budget are hundreds of earmarks, as has been the custom. These are proportionally divided between republicans and democrats as per their representation in Congress – with 40% being republican earmarks. Both party’s members have pork, some good and some not. Some 25 republican senators with earmarks in the bill voted against it, then claimed credit for these at home.
Mr. Obama has explained that he is reluctantly accepting this budget with earmarks, because it would create a lot of problems to veto the bill on that basis, creating an impasse in Congress and slowing up actions on pressing matters. He’s saving his ammunition for the new budget.
Then finally, there is the “new budget” (for FY 2010 beginning next September). This should be differentiated from all the other issues and measures mentioned above. This one really raises republican hackles. But it is not always clear from their rhetoric just which of President Obama’s proposals they are attacking. Perhaps they don’t know.
This budget runs a huge deficit, something close to a trillion dollars. That concerns some people of both political parties. However, the major reason for this is that, for the first time, the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars are brought onto the budget, and not handled in individual special deficit measures.
An added reason for the deficit is the continuation of some “stimulus spending” in areas such as education and job creation. A few areas of government are expanded such as FDA regulators, nutrition programs, Pell grants for college students, public transit money, and head start programs.
This new budget keeps the tax cuts for 97% of the taxpayers, but allows Bush tax cuts for the super wealthy to expire. It cuts some tax breaks for oil companies, and takes some rich and corporate farmers off public welfare. Further, it establishes a health care reform trust fund which will enable the beginnings of whatever future progress is to be made in this arena.
Thankfully, projections of Mr. Obama’s long range budgets for the future show planned spending to lessen and deficits to shrink.
This has been a long, and perhaps painful, discussion of the fiscal milieu in America today. There is much misinformation, and much misunderstanding, out there. While by no means the greatest explanation of the fiscal measures, it is hoped that this will take away some of the curse of Babel.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
Thursday, March 05, 2009
Apocolypse Now?
Does anybody recall the fable of The Scorpion and the Frog? More specifically: Has anyone in the Republican Party congressional leadership ever heard of that story? Has Rush Limbaugh or the people at Fox News heard of it?
Or, does anyone care?
As the fable goes, the scorpion left his home to see the world. Encountering a river, he said to the frog, “Take me across the river on your back.” The frog was hesitant, fearing that the scorpion would sting and kill him when the trip was nearly finished.
The scorpion reasoned with the frog, “I could not kill you, or I would die myself, for I cannot swim.” After many such reassurances the frog agreed to take the scorpion across the muddy stream. As they neared midway, the frog felt a sting in his back and his legs began to numb.
“You fool,” croaked the frog, “Now we shall both die. Why did you do that?”
The scorpion shrugged, did a little jig on the frog’s back, and said, “I could not help myself. It is my nature.”
Rush Limbaugh, the de facto leader of the Republican party, and all his cohorts have been loudly wishing for President Obama to fail. Should we not say, “You fools! Do you really want an economic apocalypse now? Don’t you know that we shall all suffer if Obama’s efforts fail?”
In wishing failure for President Obama, they are wishing failure for the nation as a whole. They are wishing for the collapse of our financial and economic system. They are wishing millions onto the unemployed list. They are wishing the worst of hardships, homelessness, sickness, and hunger upon a sizable portion of the American people.
The recent conservative CPAC meeting involved gluttonous consumption and cheering of nihilist tirades against the democratic president and his efforts to save the nation’s economy. Not the least of those was a jumping, hopping Rush Limbaugh urging the party’s continued suicide mission. That crowd was full of would-be scorpions.
It appears that the republicans are so wrought up with envy and hate for a very personable and popular democratic president that they would go to any length in order to take him down. Further, they fear he might tax their wealth. Like the scorpion, these extremists would take the president down even if the country, including themselves and their constituents, go down the tube as well.
This should not go unnoticed by the Republican party faithful, i.e. the sensible, truly “country first,” moderate elements within that political persuasion. Republicans should think at least twice before they follow Limbaugh off a cliff like a bunch of lemmings, or should we say “ditto-heads?”
Republicans need to find within their midst a voice of reason. They need to find within their collective minds an agenda of their own for curing the nation’s ills (other than tax-cuts), or else they should join with a bi-partisan team effort to pull this country back from the abyss.
All this recalls the days of the Eisenhower presidency, when the fascist, communist sniffing Joe McCarthy ran rampant over the constitutional rights of Americans bringing a noir cloud of fear over the nation. Sadly, the nation’s titular leaders feared his wild, angry, hostile, personal allegations, and would not take a stand. But it finally took only the courageous stance of the Secretary of the Army in a fair forum to expose the arrogant bully and bring him down.
So it is today with the likes of that pompous windbag who spews daily messages of hatred and nihilism over the airwaves to his followers.
Republicans must not continue to allow Limbaugh and his cohorts to usurp leadership of their party, forcing every leadership aspirant to bow before the pompous one out of fear of public embarrassment and ridicule. Until they take back their party from the extremists, they deserve to remain outsiders in the political process in America.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
Or, does anyone care?
As the fable goes, the scorpion left his home to see the world. Encountering a river, he said to the frog, “Take me across the river on your back.” The frog was hesitant, fearing that the scorpion would sting and kill him when the trip was nearly finished.
The scorpion reasoned with the frog, “I could not kill you, or I would die myself, for I cannot swim.” After many such reassurances the frog agreed to take the scorpion across the muddy stream. As they neared midway, the frog felt a sting in his back and his legs began to numb.
“You fool,” croaked the frog, “Now we shall both die. Why did you do that?”
The scorpion shrugged, did a little jig on the frog’s back, and said, “I could not help myself. It is my nature.”
Rush Limbaugh, the de facto leader of the Republican party, and all his cohorts have been loudly wishing for President Obama to fail. Should we not say, “You fools! Do you really want an economic apocalypse now? Don’t you know that we shall all suffer if Obama’s efforts fail?”
In wishing failure for President Obama, they are wishing failure for the nation as a whole. They are wishing for the collapse of our financial and economic system. They are wishing millions onto the unemployed list. They are wishing the worst of hardships, homelessness, sickness, and hunger upon a sizable portion of the American people.
The recent conservative CPAC meeting involved gluttonous consumption and cheering of nihilist tirades against the democratic president and his efforts to save the nation’s economy. Not the least of those was a jumping, hopping Rush Limbaugh urging the party’s continued suicide mission. That crowd was full of would-be scorpions.
It appears that the republicans are so wrought up with envy and hate for a very personable and popular democratic president that they would go to any length in order to take him down. Further, they fear he might tax their wealth. Like the scorpion, these extremists would take the president down even if the country, including themselves and their constituents, go down the tube as well.
This should not go unnoticed by the Republican party faithful, i.e. the sensible, truly “country first,” moderate elements within that political persuasion. Republicans should think at least twice before they follow Limbaugh off a cliff like a bunch of lemmings, or should we say “ditto-heads?”
Republicans need to find within their midst a voice of reason. They need to find within their collective minds an agenda of their own for curing the nation’s ills (other than tax-cuts), or else they should join with a bi-partisan team effort to pull this country back from the abyss.
All this recalls the days of the Eisenhower presidency, when the fascist, communist sniffing Joe McCarthy ran rampant over the constitutional rights of Americans bringing a noir cloud of fear over the nation. Sadly, the nation’s titular leaders feared his wild, angry, hostile, personal allegations, and would not take a stand. But it finally took only the courageous stance of the Secretary of the Army in a fair forum to expose the arrogant bully and bring him down.
So it is today with the likes of that pompous windbag who spews daily messages of hatred and nihilism over the airwaves to his followers.
Republicans must not continue to allow Limbaugh and his cohorts to usurp leadership of their party, forcing every leadership aspirant to bow before the pompous one out of fear of public embarrassment and ridicule. Until they take back their party from the extremists, they deserve to remain outsiders in the political process in America.
Dr. Edwin E. Vineyard, AKA The Militant Moderate
