Monday, October 20, 2014

A Short History Lesson

The Republicon CON Began in 1968 when Johnson would not run -- Vietnam blunder so Humphrey took the Democratic nomination but was albatrossed by the war; Republicon Nixon with his "moral (mental) majority" saw the white entire south flip from Dixicrat Dem to solid Republican. The law and order crowd went with them too.  It stands today. 

So there is power in a BUNCH of red small states.  Republicon strategy even until this day is to win a LOT of the small electoral states PLUS Texas and leave the big NE states Democratic and capturing a few.  It means now for Dems to win THEY must get the black minority, Hispanic, women and other minorities' vote registered and turn out.  To defeat that Republicrats have to voter suppress.  They are utterly loathsome.  Democrats, REGISTER despite Republicons vile attempts at suppression of the black and Hispanic vote.

The president is a human being after all and look at what the nincompoop the man who never should have been president Bush handed this president. He handed him a can of worms and the problem in the American memory is it is ever ever so short. They just do not remember even the Great Recession.  They think it was Obama's fault.  It WASN'T is was honed after 30 years of Republican economic policy for the rich that saw social programs cut while they cut the corporate tax rate. The megga rich NEVER created jobs.  They shipped them overseas.

Obamacare works, Bin Laden by his order is dead, and DOMA is dead, the economy is better and would be better still with more stimulus and unemployment compensation and without the OBSTRUCTIONIST Republican Party wanting to gum up everything this president did.
Even Ebola is doing just what the experts predicted WITHOUT shutting down the borders. Dallas Presbyterian Hospital go kick Republicrats in the posterior for cutting social programs like the CDC and NIH which was making an Ebola vaccine but had to stop because of the Repbulicon cuts. Republicans closed down the government and nearly did not pay the nation's debs everything for Republicans over sized zeal to get power, return to a white racist nation and damn the American public in the process

The president's blunder was trying to reach across the isle to compromise with a racist white Party of Republicons who could not stand to see a black man in that ever so white house.
Everyone after the 2008 horror Great Recession should get down on their knees and be thankful our nation survives.  NOW GET OUT THE DEMOCRATIC VOTE and DO NOT under any circumstances let REPUBLIcrats rule. You will get rule by the 1% megga rich, they will ship jobs overseas and we the 98% will be up s ____ 's creek without the proverbial paddle yet again!   REMEMBER Republicans do not give a damn about most of you.


Sunday, October 19, 2014

A Welcoming Pope/a Synod of Hypocrites

The headline of the story pasted below my post: "Catholic Bishops Scrap Welcome To Gays."

I dismiss the Vatican Synod of Bishops as old men out of touch with science and reality. I, a Jew, love this Pope. I have never said that about a Pope or the Catholic Church in my life!

Pope Francis, though, is a good man having to work with a bunch of Phrases-like hypocrites, the essence of what Christ was alleged to loathe. The words of Christ are humane and good but heretofore the institutions formed from them have been corrupt, cruel, uncompromising and extreme. This pope like no other, however, speaks the essence of his faith. I commend him for that.

The fact that even divorced Catholics (many in number) still must obtain an "annulment" to have the divorce recognized by the Church is mind numbing. The Church figured out a way to slither around this Catholic tenet surrounding divorce which Jesus ACTUALLY condemned unlike homosexuality in which Jesus said nothing. Some of those "annulled" Catholic marriages though acceptable to the Church show offspring from the former marriage to boot. How is that not considered a marriage? How is this an acceptable practice? Oh, I get it big bucks have to be coughed up for the "annulment." thereby netting the Church a lot of cash. Always, follow the money.

We know those who advocate advancement whether cultural, scientific or theological become the sacrificial lambs. Like Galileo this Pope, in the end, probably long after he is gone, will be proven RIGHT and the venomous hypocrites in that Church which hid pedophiles for centuries but now will not recognize the love relationships of divorced or homosexual Catholics will be proven wrong. Bishops, shame on you for overruling this Pope. I love the Christianity the Pope preaches. He is right and those who oppose him consummately wrong! A synod of hypocrites will, in my opinion, eventually not have the last word.

Catholic Bishops Scrap Welcome To Gays

Posted: 10/18/2014 2:04 pm EDT Updated: 10/18/2014 3:59 pm EDT

VATICAN CITY (AP) -- Catholic bishops scrapped their landmark welcome to gays Saturday, showing deep divisions at the end of a two-week meeting sought by Pope Francis to chart a more merciful approach to ministering to Catholic families.

The bishops failed to approve even a watered-down section on ministering to homosexuals that stripped away the welcoming tone of acceptance contained in a draft document earlier in the week.

Rather than considering gays as individuals who had gifts to offer the church, the revised paragraph referred to homosexuality as one of the problems Catholic families have to confront. It said "people with homosexual tendencies must be welcomed with respect and delicacy," but repeated church teaching that marriage is only between man and woman. The paragraph failed to reach the two-thirds majority needed to pass.

Two other paragraphs concerning the other hot-button issue at the synod of bishops - whether divorced and civilly remarried Catholics can receive Communion - also failed to pass.

The outcome showed a deeply divided church on some of the most pressing issues facing Catholic families.

It appeared that the 118-62 vote on the gay section might have been a protest vote by progressive bishops who refused to back the watered-down wording. The original draft had said gays had gifts to offer the church and that their partnerships, while morally problematic, provided gay couples with "precious" support.

New Ways Ministry, a Catholic gay rights group, said it was "very disappointing" that the final report had backtracked from the welcoming words contained in the draft.

Nevertheless, it said the synod's process "and openness to discussion provides hope for further development down the road, particularly at next year's synod, where the makeup of the participants will be larger and more diverse, including many more pastorally-oriented bishops."

The draft had been written by a Francis appointee, Monsignor Bruno Forte, a theologian known for pushing the pastoral envelope on ministering to people in "irregular" unions. The draft was supposed to have been a synopsis of the bishops' interventions, but many conservatives complained that it reflected a minority and overly progressive view.

Francis insisted in the name of transparency that the full document - including the paragraphs that failed to pass - be published along with the voting tally. The document will serve as the basis for future debate leading up to another meeting of bishops next October that will produce a final report to be sent to Francis.

"Personally I would have been very worried and saddened if there hadn't been these ... animated discussions ... or if everyone had been in agreement or silent in a false and acquiescent peace," Francis told the synod hall after the vote.

Conservatives had harshly criticized the draft and proposed extensive revisions to restate church doctrine, which holds that gay sex is "intrinsically disordered," but that gays themselves are to be respected, and that marriage is only between a man and woman.
"We could see that there were different viewpoints," said Cardinal Oswald Gracis of India, when asked about the most contentious sections of the report on homosexuals and divorced and remarried Catholics.

German Cardinal Walter Kasper, the leader of the progressive camp, said he was "realistic" about the outcome.

In an unexpected gesture after the voting, Francis approached a group of journalists waiting outside the synod hall to thank them for their work covering the synod.
"Thanks to you and your colleagues for the work you have done," he said. "Grazie tante." Conservative bishops had harshly criticized journalists for reporting on the dramatic shift in tone in the draft, even though the media reports merely reflected the document's content.
Francis' gesture, and his words inside the synod hall chastising bishops who were overly wed to doctrine and were guided by "hostile rigidity," as well as those bishops who showed a "destructive goody-goodiness," indicated that he was well aware of the divisions the debate had sparked. His speech received a four-minute standing ovation, participants said.

Over the past week, the bishops split themselves up into working groups to draft amendments to the text. They were nearly unanimous in insisting that church doctrine on family life be more fully asserted and that faithful Catholic families should be held up as models and encouraged rather than focus on family problems and "irregular" unions.
The bishops signaled a similar tone in a separate message directed at Christian families released Saturday. There was no mention whatsoever of families with gay children, much less gay parents, and it spoke of the "complex and problematic" issues that arise when marriages fail and new relationships begin.

"Christ wanted his church to be a house with the door always open to welcome everyone, without excluding anyone," the message read. (Oddly, the English translation was less welcoming than the official Italian, ending the sentence after `everyone.')
Cardinal Wilfrid Fox Napier of South Africa, who helped draft the revised final report, told Vatican Radio the final document showed a "common vision" that was lacking in the draft.

He said the key areas for concern were "presenting homosexual unions as if they were a very positive thing" and the suggestion that divorced and remarried Catholics should be able to receive Communion without an annulment.

He complained that the draft was presented as the opinion of the whole synod, when it was "one or two people." "And that made people very angry," he said.

Saturday, October 18, 2014


Yet another rancid vote (see article pasted below) by the Supreme Court unconscionables. It is a SUPREME insult. Liberals, progressives and others, you think because you are mad at the president for some policies that if you not show up to vote in the midterms on November, 4, 2014 you will be sending a message? The ONLY message you will send is a message to yourselves.

Whatever policies the Court has allowed to, in activist Court fashion, wholly reactionarily change a significantly still racist nation, it will allow us to return to a white supremist age. The New Jim Crow age has begun and will be on steroids soon if Republicans are allowed power. Gargantuan money, sanctioned by the Republican-appointed extremist five, is now, more than ever before, allowed to rule politics in this country.

Their many decisions including Citizen's United, McCutcheon, and the striking down of the important Section 4 of the 1965 Civil Rights Act ensures race discrimination and rule by the rich into the 21st century. The Texas decision supporting voter suppression not only allows the exclusion of minorities from participation in the fundamental right from which all other democratic equal rights flow -- the right to vote -- they also by their other decisions ensure oligarchic rule by the 1% wealthiest widening the Grand Canyon size class disparity and the distribution of wealth in this nation.

THIS is what Republicans are about. They are about returning to a white supremist nation, and they use Uncle Tom Clarence, the know nothing should never be sitting on the Court, Thomas to side with the race baiters to ultimately return to that age. Read the summary of how they just voted on the Texas decision and weep. Then weep some more if Democrats lose the Senate.


Supreme Court: Texas Can Use Voter ID Law 

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court is allowing Texas to use its controversial new voter identification law for the November election. A majority of the nation's highest court on Saturday rejected an emergency request from the Justice Department and civil rights groups to prohibit the state from requiring voters to produce certain forms of photo identification in order to cast ballots. The Supreme Court's order was unsigned, but three justices dissented.
The law was struck down by a federal judge last week, but a federal appeals court had put that ruling on hold. Early voting in Texas begins Monday. The judge found that roughly 600,000 voters, many of them black or Latino, could be turned away at the polls because they lack acceptable identification.

Friday, October 17, 2014


If progressives cannot look at the bigger picture then they get what they deserve. I am an ardent liberal and an equally ardent Democrat. Liberals, get a brain. You want the Senate to be taken over by know nothings, racists and science denying religious fanatics? Is that what you REALLY want? And you want a total end to Roe v. Wade so women can die being poisoned by quack abortionists like it was in the good ole Mad Men days.

If progressives cannot see the forest through the trees and overlook what you do not like about the president then you will get a Supreme Court that will do all the heinous things the 5/4 Court already has done but be on steroids doing them.

Liberals, you really think Republicons are going to restore the things on which you think Obama disappointed you? THINK AGAIN. They will do the same things except worse and god forbid they get the presidency kiss health care goodbye, kiss Social Security goodbye, kiss Medicare goodbye and welcome the glories of privatization of everything .. NO safety nets because as the conservatives at one of the 2012 "debates" said “let em die” that is exactly the polices you will get.

GET out the gd Democratic vote and don’t be stupid!

Monday, October 13, 2014


There is method to my madness and thought behind my political beliefs. It is etched in our history the knowledge of which often is sorely lacking by the electorate.

In reductionist simple form during the 1929 Great Depression a remedy untried, until that time, saw government taking some collective responsibility for the unemployed of this nation which numbered then around 25%.  That's a lot of unemployed.

Roosevelt and his team reasoned if jobs -- government jobs -- were created and the unemployed millions could get them, they in turn would spend money and eventually these perfects against the Wall Street created Great Depression could lift the masses out of their quick-sand fate.  It worked for a time until the usual Republican obstructionists suspects temper tantrumed it and the "nine old men" (as Roosevelt called them) on the Court put a monkey wrench into Roosevelt's plan.  So what else is new about Republicans hindering a government plan that works?  Eventually, WWII and massive government spending to win the war fixed it, we thought, for good.

Our Great Recession of 2009, created again by an unregulated Wall Street gone haywire, our history and Great Depression reforms were obliterated by the Ayn Randian trickle-downers who thought the value of capitalist selfishness on steroids was heaven and just what the doctor ordered.  Unfortunately it nearly killed the patient yet again.

The same 1929 remedies that needed to be perfected in 2009 were not or if they were they were created minimally.  Because of the the 2010 Republican midterm sweep obstructionist politics reigned supreme. The hope of Democratic policies that the President wanted could have created jobs but instead the hope disappeared like a mirage in the desert and he was fought at every turn.

Below is an article that starkly shows why I say elections matter.  Republicans and their side car Tea Bag know nothings eradicated money for government agencies like the CDC which was working on an Ebola vaccine, they eradicated an extension of unemployment which would have significantly helped the middle class stay solvent and more stimulus which would have created more jobs.  More jobs means more taxes coming in, reduces the deficit and also means government can continue to help its people while the economy improves. 

The article below on NBC News explains the sad state of what once was a nation of middle class hope but now is a nation mired in despair where money is solely in the hands of the 1%.  It is why I say Republicans must NEVER be elected to positions of great power.  It is for these reasons I scream -- GET OUT THE DEMOCRATIC VOTE ALL OVER THE NATION.  REGISTER DEMOCRATS TO VOTE AND MAKE SURE THEY DO!

This is what the Republican Party has handed you and will continue to if they take the Senate and other echelons of power.  Democrats, in truth, need to re-take the House, keep the Senate and give this president a chance to do what needs to be done.  Read and heed
the following article, learn why it does not feel like we have emerged from a recession and then pass this on. 

Highly Educated, Unemployed and Tumbling Down the Ladder

In the upside-down, topsy-turvy world of jobs these days, even an advanced degree can’t protect some Americans from tumbling down the economic ladder.

The conventional wisdom that more education bears fruit in the labor market gets turned on its head when it comes to unemployment. For people with masters and even doctoral degrees, long-term unemployment is especially insidious. At best, these formerly high-earning professionals face the prospect of a years-long climb back to their former level of income and stature, while they delay retirement to rebuild their decimated nest eggs.

Others won’t be that lucky. Debt, foreclosure and evaporated savings push them out of the middle class, and some just keep falling.

“Most of these people in this long-term unemployed category are experiencing downward financial mobility,” said Carl Van Horn, distinguished professor of Public Policy and director of the John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development at Rutgers University.
Nearly half of the long-term unemployed in a Rutgers survey published last month estimate it will take up to a decade to rebuild their finances. More than 20 percent say it will take more than a decade, or that they’ll never recover. The highly educated are “actually in worse shape because they had farther to fall and had greater financial liability," Van Horn said.

42 and Living With Roommates

“I’ve had to seriously downgrade my living situation,” said Alex Gomez, a 42-year-old with a master’s degree in entrepreneurship. Gomez lost his last full-time job in 2009 and has been looking for work since a short-term contract position ended in 2012.
Gomez’s home was foreclosed on, so the Tampa resident lives with three roommates in a college neighborhood. He drained his 401(k) trying to save his house, and he has around $150,000 in student loans. His mother is tapping her 401(k) to pay his rent. Gomez subsists on that and about $200 a month in food stamps.
“I applied to a supermarket as a deli clerk because I used to be a deli clerk as a teenager.”
“I have been applying and looking for pretty much anything at this stage,” he said. Although he’s looking for work in engineering or data management, “I applied to a supermarket as a deli clerk because I used to be a deli clerk as a teenager,” he said. He was told he was overqualified and turned down.

“Even though jobs have been slowly recovering, these are mostly low-pay, low-wage jobs,” said Ofer Sharone, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Sloan School of Management and founder of the Institute for Career Transitions, a platform that helps the older professional unemployed reenter the work force. “We don’t have enough jobs that require those levels of education right now.”

In a survey of 800 jobless professionals conducted by the Institute for Career Transitions, about 10 percent of the short-term unemployed had doctoral, law or MBA degrees. Among the pool of long-term unemployed, more than 18 percent held such degrees.
“I’ve seen clients who had to downsize, sell their homes, move into a smaller apartment, take in boarders… it changes everything,” said David Blustein, a professor at Boston College’s Lynch School of Education. “The financial consequences of long-term unemployment are hugely significant and very painful.”

Wiped Out by Student Loans

Student loans are an especially thorny issue. The U.S. Government Accountability Office finds that 3 percent of households headed by someone age 65 and older carry student loan debt, and the amount of outstanding federal student debt carried by this age group shot up from $2.8 billion in 2005 to $18.2 billion last year.

“The reality is a lot of people have gone back to school later in life, gotten MBAs or other degrees later in life, and the student loans are still there,” Blustein said.
“Financially, I’ve been sort of wiped out,” said Brian Maimone, an equity researcher in New York who, despite his MBA, has been unable to find work since being laid off five years ago. “I’m at a point now where I’m working at a car wash on weekends for cash flow purposes. Any job is a real job as far as I’m concerned,” he said. “Anything that could be liquidated has already been liquidated.”
“Anything that could be liquidated has already been liquidated.”
Reclaiming professional and financial stability is a long journey. “If you’ve been out of work for a year or longer, your road back is not a one shot deal,” said Joe Carbone, president and CEO of job training and education provider the WorkPlace Inc. “You have to look at it from the standpoint of two or three years.”

“For those individuals who have very advanced degrees and a good length of experience, it does become more difficult,” said Patricia Malone, executive director of the Corporate Education and Training program at Stony Brook University, which trains out-of-work professionals in project management. “They are competing against people who are 10 years younger,” she said. “It takes longer.”

Wayne Little can attest to this. An MBA who worked in sales at IBM for more than three decades, the 60-year-old has been looking for work after being laid off more than two years ago.

Little said he has sent out “well over 1,000” resumes and regularly logs five to six hours a day working on his job search. “I hadn’t looked for a job for 30 years,” Little said. “The world has changed… I was not prepared for the new world of searching for jobs.”

'It's very difficult out there right now'

Little’s family is leaning on his wife’s income, but with three kids around college age, he has tens of thousands of dollars in student loans, and he estimates about half of his 401(k) has been drained to pay basic expenses. Little said keeping their heads above water means cutting out “frills,” middle-class niceties most Americans take for granted, until they’re gone.
“The front walk is falling apart… Some of the things in the house we'd normally take care of, we're not.” Little’s car has well over 200,000 miles on it; his wife’s has 150,000. They don’t spend money on entertainment or gifts anymore. Maintenance around the house has been deferred, he said.

“We're not desperate, but we will be,” he said. "I've looked at jobs that pay half of what I was making at IBM and I would've taken them in a second.”
“I was making six figures at one point, and now I’m making $13 an hour temping,” said Lisa Casino-Schuetz, a single mother with a master’s degree who has taken a string of low-paying jobs to provide for her two college-aged kids.

The Psychological Toll

“In a nutshell, it's devastating,” Blustein said. “The psychological consequences are enormous… As people have to take lower level positions, it does confront their own sense of worth in a pretty negative way.”

Even working, Casino-Schuetz makes so little that she rents out a room in her house to a boarder for $500 a month. Her home and a condo she owns are both in foreclosure, and she has had her electricity shut off in the past.

The elimination of emergency extended unemployment last year made things worse, since long-term jobless professionals have to start liquidating their assets sooner.
“Across the board, the people who exhaust long-term benefits get a lot poorer," said Josh Bivens, director of research and policy at the Economic Policy Institute. New EPI research finds that only about a quarter of jobless Americans are drawing unemployment payments, down from a high of about two-thirds in the immediate aftermath of the recession.
I probably won’t retire. I probably will be working until the end the way things look now.”
Without unemployment benefits, the long-term unemployed must draw down their assets, which presents its own set of serious consequences. Once that money is gone, these families have no financial security today or for retirement.

“Some of them will never get back into the work force,” Van Horn said. “Those people... especially folks in their mid-50s and up, they’re going to be in very bad shape financially because they can’t even take Social Security already," he said. What's more, the benefits they eventually will be able to draw will be less than if they had worked through retirement without interruption.

"You’ll basically have more low-income older Americans,” he said, who will rely more on safety net programs like food stamps and heating assistance.

“Right now, retirement’s out of the picture,” Maimone said. “I probably won’t retire. I probably will be working until the end the way things look now.”

Sunday, October 12, 2014


The pivotal question it seems to me is the utterly mind blowing mistake that Texas Presbyterian made INITIALLY when Duncan went FIRST to the emergency room and was sent home with USELESS antibiotics which antibiotics are way OVER PRESCRIBED anyway as we know but in this case USELESS in the face of a deadly virus like Ebola. That is what makes my head spin. HOW on God's earth could a health care worker KNOW that Duncan was in Africa, showing a temp of 103 degrees and send that man home with a bottle of antibiotics? It is not only a civil liability in my opinion it is CRIMINAL negligence.

The question is is this healthcare worker who now is Ebola positive part of the INITIAL health care worker contact with Duncan when they sent him home? OR is this health care worker one AFTER that when they knew Duncan had Ebola, isolated him and suited up in protective gear? Duncan's treatment is STAGGERING in its stupidity and negligence INITIALLY knowing Duncan was in Africa came back with symptoms, a 103 temperature and they sent him home. Are you kidding me? THAT is the most important screw up.

Having had polio as a child 60 years ago NO ONE but NO ONE sent me home with a vile of antibiotics which would have done nothing. I was isolated and health care workers at that time were covered. Then again I'm from Boston and was treated at the best of the best Boston Children's Hospital by doctors whose knowledge and treatment of infectious disease were unparalleled.

That doctor or nurse in Dallas Presbyterian or whoever it may be who sent Duncan home THE FIRST time with a vile of antibiotics should be FIRED and we KNOW Dallas Presbyterian will be sued to within an inch of its life if this spreads any further and even if it doesn't.

Moreover, I might add Rick Perry and other Texas politicos' implication in this because they refused to accept Medicaid from Obamacare forcing the poor to fill up emergency rooms unnecessarily.

Yet another reason science denying Republicans should not be near centers of power. We are a doomed nation if they are! SIGN voters up and get out the vote for the only Party, the Democratic Party, which accepts rational thought and science!

Friday, October 10, 2014

Choosing Life

Below is the story about the just-married young woman who is choosing to set the date of her own death because she has inoperable and the most seriously aggressive form of brain cancer with a medical prognosis of only six months to live. I concur with her controversial belief that she wants to set the time and modality of her death and has set it for November 1.

I have personally seen throughout my life insufferable things done in the name of "saving" a patient and I always wondered the eternal question: save that patient for what? I have strong feelings about the humongous money spent to extend not life but seemingly never-ending pain and suffering.  I believe that to be a living death sentence in and of itself and out of the question for me.  I have told those I love as well as those who handle my legal and medical affairs that I never want an extension at all costs of a suffering and painful life to be my fate.

It is a personal decision and I am understanding of those who would not do as the 29 year old woman will. I, though, support her decision and would choose death when choosing a quality-life free from pain and suffering is impossible to attain. I place the story about it here or below.

I also place below two books which I think are of great interest and, related to issues about which I have thought and about which, perhaps, pertain to the issue in question here.  I hope (I say hope) to read them both.

Author: Atul Gwande

"Being Mortal and What Matters in the End"

Author: Sam Harris

"Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality without Religion"