The PCTC Blog

The Solution to the Problem -- Fewer Republicans!

Let me put this simply.

If you plan to vote for anyone who has an affiliation with the Republican Party Tuesday in the current climate, you’re a damn fool. Hear me? And if you believe that Democrats are a problem, and you’re “disappointed” in them for not doing more, you’re also a damn fool. Either that, or you’re listening to damn fools. And for you so-called “independents,” get a clue; if you vote for a Republican, then you’re buying into the party line on both sides of the line. Is that what makes you so “independent”? Your gullibility?

I’m going to have more to say about this after the election, but stop listening to “progressives” and “liberals” who call Democrats spineless (or something similar, usually something relatively misogynistic) and ineffective.  THEY are not the problem.

As I pointed out earlier on this blog, THREE HUNDRED SEVENTY FIVE BILLS have been passed by the Democrats in the House, and those bills sit languishing in the Senate. Now, some “progressives,” will tell you it’s the Democrats’ fault. They blame it on those infamous “Blue Dogs.” I’m sure you’ve heard the complaints about Democratic “spines” in the liberal blogosphere.

But that’s NOT the problem. You heard me – that is NOT THE PROBLEM, and anyone who says it is the problem is phenomenally ignorant. Yeah, I know, a lot of supposedly well-educated libs have touted this line, but the very concept is insane. It’s based on the premise that somehow, Democrats are supposed to go before the press and call Republicans a “bunch of poopy-heads” or something similar, I guess. Or maybe it’s based on the fact that left-wing pundits have the same goddamn problem that right wing pundits have, in that they want solutions to problems to be really complicated, so that they come off looking like geniuses.

Of course, a solution to the problem is simple, folks. Think about it.

The Benefits of Health Insurance Reform: Cutting the Right Wing Crap

I have seen this article from the Detroit News (via detnews.com) at least three times. Every single time, the right winger who posts/emails it only uses the first two paragraphs. The purpose is to show that health insurance reform is a bad thing.

You know... because it causes layoffs and stuff. 

Remember; they ONLY post the first two paragraphs:

Beaumont Hospitals is laying off 40 to 50 administrators and managers, a move that comes as some 17,400 employees — including those being laid off — just received bonus checks.

The three-hospital system expects to wrap up the layoffs by year’s end as part of a reorganization triggered by health care reform. The layoffs, announced in an Oct. 4 newsletter, will save Beaumont $3 million to $4 million a year, said Colette Stimmell, a Beaumont spokeswoman.

Okay, that sounds bad, right? Bad economy, and hospital layoffs caused by health insurance reform; that truly sucks. 

Well, not so fast. I told you; they only post the above two paragraphs, and they're counting on the likelihood that no one will actually go read the story. 

Here's the next line:

No layoffs of health care delivery providers are planned.

In other words, folks, they're laying off administrators and managers. Do you know WHY they're laying off administrators and managers? 

Several reasons, actually. The health insurance reform legislation standardized forms, so that all insurance companies use basically the same form; a much easier form to fill out, with less bureaucracy. 

Also, hospitals used to have to jump through hoops just to get paid by insurance companies, and with health insurance reform, now they don't have to, Every insurance company in the country as to follow the same rules.

And the best part is, insurance companies can no longer deny claims, so the entire administrative apparatus in hospitals dealing with chasing down and verifying claims is no longer necessary. 

In other words, even though it's only a few weeks old, we're already seeing the benefits of the health insurance reform package. 

Always check the facts when a right winger presents you with any sort of argument. You'll find that they usually hide them from you; you have to dig. 

 

 

 

 

 

"It gets Better" Has to be More Than a Slogan -- We Have to be Better

There’s a lot of talk about bullying these days, and I say it’s way past time for that; we should have done this years ago. A certain meanness has been far too ingrained in our society for far too long. Things have gotten better, in many ways, but if we are to become truly great as a nation and as a people, we have to take a different attitude. Even though bigotry has become less acceptable in recent years, there is still too much of an accepting attitude when it comes to meanness toward others, for a variety of reasons.

No doubt you’ve heard a lot about bullying in recent weeks; it’s hard to avoid it. This recent spate of stories is due to what seems to be a saddening trend, in which young people are increasingly committing suicide because they are gay, and they are made to feel like outcasts. And why wouldn’t they? They see judgment all around them, and a lot of it’s negative. They may hear about places like San Francisco, West Hollywood or Greenwich Village, where they can be who they are and live freely, but to a teenager living in the self-righteous “Bible Belt,” those places may as well be Mars. And that should be shameful to the people who live in those places.

We will never be a truly free country until every person under our auspices is treated with the respect and dignity due them as human beings. We are who we are; we should all be left alone to our own lives. No one, and I mean no one, should be subjected to negative treatment because of any singular aspect of who he or she is, unless they are hurting others with their actions. Who a person is sexually attracted to is not the totality of who they are, and frankly, that aspect of anyone’s life is none of your business, in any case. I mean, if they’re having sex in the middle of the street, of course you have a right to object, but other than that, it’s simply no one’s business. And I think we would all agree that we would have the same reaction even if it was a man and a woman.

Sometimes, Free Speech is Painful: The Supremes Consider Phelps v. Snyder

Okay, folks, this should be a no-brainer for those of us who actually care about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I know I’m going to take some flak for this one…

The Supreme Court is hearing the case of Phelps v. Snyder, which is a case involving the Reverend Fred Phelps and his disgusting inbred church. Here's the beginning of an article from www.washingtonpost.com:

The Supreme Court seemed to have trouble putting aside the ugliness of the message to focus on the rights of the messenger Wednesday, as justices tried to balance free speech against the privacy owed a grieving family burying a son.

With protesters on the marble plaza outside a packed courtroom, the justices considered the case of the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan., whose anti-gay demonstrations have targeted the military funerals of troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The church - which is made up almost entirely of the family members of its founder, the Rev. Fred W. Phelps - contends that the deaths are God's revenge for the country's tolerance of homosexuality. Albert Snyder - the father of Matthew Snyder, 20, a Marine whose funeral was one of hundreds the group picketed - sued.

Most First Amendment experts said before the argument that they expected the court to make a straightforward, if distasteful, ruling that even vile public speech is protected by the First Amendment. If that is what the justices decide, though, it appeared from the oral arguments that it would not come without some angst.

Sean E. Summers, who represents Snyder, set the tone with his first words to the justices.

"We're talking about a funeral," he said. "If context is ever going to matter, it has to matter in the context of a funeral. Mr. Snyder simply wanted to bury his son in a private, dignified manner."

There is actually something comforting about the statement, “The Supreme Court seemed to have trouble putting aside the ugliness of the message to focus on the rights of the messenger.” That’s what they should do.

This is such an emotional issue. The Fred Phelps family and their disgusting church are about as un-Christian as it gets. Frankly, they’d better hope there is no God and there is no Hell, because if there is, He is sure to put them there for eternity for the things they have done. They are immoral douchebags, and frankly, picketing a serviceman’s funeral is about as un-American as it gets.

But the greatest test of free speech comes not when someone says, “God bless America,” but when someone says “God Damn America.”

The proper response to assholes like Fred Phelps and his disgusting kin, who make up pretty much the entire congregation of Westboro Baptist Church, is to ignore them. To even acknowledge them feeds on their egos, and actually makes them stronger.

There is something about this case that has always bothered me, and it’s been the claim of a “right to privacy” here.

Yes, contrary to what a lot of right wingers believe, there is a right to privacy in the Constitution. But how does it apply here? The Phelpsians weren’t inside the church, and they weren’t in the private cemetery. They were standing on a public street, hundreds of feet from the church entrance and a long way from the cemetery, where Matthew Snyder was buried. How is it possible to have an expectation of privacy along a public street? And if we grant this family that sort of “zone of privacy,” how far do we take that? if there is a strip club on the route between the church and the cemetery, should it be forced to shut down, so that the family doesn’t have to see it on their “private” drive to bury their son?

I would be on the other side, if Phelps and his inbred family went inside the church and held signs and chanted, or they had followed the family into the cemetery. If they had even dogged the cars in the funeral procession, or shouted hatred into the cars, the Snyder family should own them. But in the end, they were on a public street, and they have that right, no matter what we think about them or their message. There is a right to roll the windows up and keep your head down and not listen to or read anything they have to say; you do not have the right to punish them for public speech on a public sidewalk, as long as no other laws were being broken.

This is a hard case to analyze. My visceral reaction is that the Snyders should get everything they’re asking for. If morality were the only barometer available here, I would suggest throwing the book at Westboro Baptist Church. I have all the sympathy in the world for the Snyder family, and as much contempt as I can muster for the Phelps family of creeps. But if we are going to uphold concepts of free speech, we have to do so for everyone, including the scumbags. Absent an issue of public safety, I don’t see how the Supreme Court can side with the Snyder family against free speech. If we allow Fred Phelps’ free speech rights to be abrogated, we don’t honor what Matthew Snyder fought for. He fought for Fred Phelps’ right to be an asshole.

It’s a tough subject, I know, but the right thing isn’t always the easiest or the best thing.

Republicans: C***-Blocking the future; Even More Bills

The purpose of this series of posts (This is number four -- scroll down for the others) is to give you ammunition. Ammunition for all of those friends and others from all sides of the political spectrum who blame Democrats who are not getting things done, when there are 375 examples of bills that were PASSED by Democrats in the House and BLOCKED by Republicans in the Senate.

In the last few days, I have received a few messages about these posts, including several suggesting that Republicans  aren’t really against all of these things; that their ulterior motive for blocking all of this stuff is to make Democrats look bad and win elections. 

Sorry, but that makes things worse. 

I’m here to tell you; there is no justification for this, and I mean none. Saying “no” to anything that might help the people they supposedly represent is not something you go to the voters with, if you expect to win elections over the long haul. A list of accomplishments should entice the most voters. The only time voters fall for this stuff is when they are only offered one side of the debate. Voters should be aware of everything both parties are doing for them or to them. Pass this information along, folks. The election’s four weeks away, and this makes things crystal clear.

Once again; Democrats PASSED the following bills, and Senate Republicans prevented these bills from even coming to a vote. If you think these would be good for Americans, thank Democrats for trying to pass them, and blame Republicans for blocking them from actually making the lives of average Americans better.

Republicans Block Bills to Help Small Business, the Disabled and Pretty Much Everything; More Bills GOP-Blocked

This series is really long, isn’t it? I mean, did you ever realize how many bills have been passed by Democrats in the House, and are being blocked by Republicans in the Senate, just so they can try to make Democrats look bad,and win power back for themselves?  Did you realize they had blocked 375 bills thus far? Also, please understand; this is the third installment, and even with all of these bill, I’m not posting every single one. I’m just trying to give you ammo that you can use with your inattentive friends, to make them realize what they would be voting for if they vote Republican this year. Really, to give you an idea of the number of bills they have blocked, by the time I’m finished, I will have only written about one quarter of the actual number of bills they blocked.

The Tea Party is right about one thing; the people in this country should be pissed off.right now. The government put us into the crapper, and they’re taking their sweet time getting us out of it. But anyone who’s pissed off at “the Democrats” for this is either phenomenally stupid or not paying attention.

Did you know the word “filibuster” derives from the Spanish and French words for “pirate”? That’s quite an appropriate description of the way Republicans are using it these days. They are hijacking the entire system and holding it for ransom. If you vote for them, you will validate their ploy; it will be the functional equivalent to not only paying ransom to the kidnapper, but refusing to have him arrested for kidnapping.

The Cognitive Dissonance of the Right: You Can't Justify Letting a Home Burn for $75

I’m sure you have all heard about what happened to Gene Cranick’s house. If you haven’t, you should learn about it, because the incident is exactly what you can expect in the future, if the assholes who populate this morally bankrupt ideology that they laughingly call “conservative” continue to have their way.

Once again, folks; these people are not “conservative.” They are unfeeling douche bags and nothing more. They are the kind of people who would sell their mothers into slavery if they thought they could get away with it. You hear them talk about fundamentalist Muslims in pejorative terms; well guess what; this incident and their defense of it demonstrates them to be perhaps half a degree above them, if that.

You see, Gene Cranick lives in Obion County, Tennessee, just outside the South Fulton city limits. Because he lives outside the city, he is required to pay a $75 fee every year, so that South Fulton’s Fire Department will come to his house should it catch on fire. This year, the annual payment slipped his mind. I mean, we all do that, don’t we? I have to put my rent payment into my Outlook calendar, or I might forget to pay it, and that comes the first of every month. An annual payment will usually slip our minds – has it been a year already?

Well, Gene’s house DID catch on fire. Well, not at first. At first, a couple of barrels outside of his house caught on fire. South Fulton’s Fire Department came out right away. But when they got there, a dispatcher told them that Gene hadn’t paid his fee, so they were ordered not to spray any water on the barrels to put out the fire. Gene even offered to pay the bill on the spot, and was refused. A neighbor also offered to pay and he was refused, as well.

As you can guess, the fire from the barrels leapt to the house, and before long, the entire house was gone, nothing but a lump of charcoal. Everything that Gene Cranick worked hard for  over the years went up in smoke, as firefighters stood and watched.

All for a payment of $75. Seriously.

I usually restrain my language on this blog, but I can’t with this post. Sorry in advance, but this is not for the kiddies.

More Bills to Make Your Life Better -- Blocked by Republican Filibusters

If you’re a voter and you’re pissed off, good. You should be pissed off, because this country is at a crossroads, and your government isn’t doing as much as it should to fix the problems we face.

But the entire government isn’t screwing us, and it won’t do anyone any good to send every single one of them packing. We need to know WHO to get rid of and who to keep.

This list makes it easy, folks. The entire Republican Party needs to go. THEY are the politicians who are blocking every piece of legislation designed to make your life better. THEY are the ones blocking every single bill that might make your life easier.

This post continues a list of bills that were passed by Democrats in Congress, and blocked by ALL of the Republicans in the Senate. Most of these bills had zero Republican votes in the House; a few of them had a handful of votes. A couple of them were even proposed by a Republican in the House. But every single one of these bills is being blocked by every single Republican in the Senate, all of whom are working in lockstep to prevent a vote. Keep in mind, there are enough Democrats willing to vote for these bills, most if not all of these bills could be law right now, if Republicans – ALL of them – weren’t using procedural measures to prevent the vote.

Let’s continue our list.

Want Proof That the Republican Party is AGAINST the People? Part One

To those of you who are allegedly pissed off and plan to either not vote at all, or vote for a Republican in four weeks so that you can “stick it to the status quo,” let me ask you a question:

Are you completely fricking nuts?

First of all, if you’re a little disappointed in President Obama and the Democrats right now,you're simply not paying attention. The problem isn't that Obama hasn't been working his ass off to get things done. The simple fact is, the Senate is broken; its rules -- especially rules put in place by Republicans -- make it possible for the minority to prevent a vote on any bill they don’t want passed.

Did you know, for example, that a total of 375 bills that passed the Democratic-majority House have been blocked by Republicans in the Senate? That’s THREE HUNDRED SEVENTY-FIVE BILLS! You can’t pass a bill if you can’t vote on it, and because of current Senate rules, one anonymous Republican Senator can block a vote if he objects to it, and it takes 60 Senators to undo that. In other words, if you're frustrated with the status quo, blame Republicans, not Democrats.  

In order to cut the crap on this, I have compiled a list of bills that were passed in full by the Democratically controlled House, but which were filibustered by the Republicans in the Senate. Keep in mind, these are all bills Republicans are either against, or have decided to kill for political reasons, in order to keep Democrats from claiming successes in the next election.

Now, think about that a minute. These people are willing to out YOUR life and good fortune on hold, just so they can attempt to score political points and take power again.

A Suicide in New Jersey; Will Our Society EVER Grow Up?

Not everything can be fixed with a law, and sometimes it doesn't even make sense to try. We have a much deeper problem in this country, and we need to address it, not create another law to paper it over. 

One of the more tragic news stories in recent memory occurred this week, when 18-year-old Rutgers student Tyler Clementi jumped to his death from the George Washington Bridge, an apparent suicide that was apparently caused when Tyler's roommate and a female co-conspirator set up a video camera and posted the live feed on the Internet, as Tyler made out with his boyfriend. According to reports thus far, it would seem that Tyler wasn't quite "out" yet, and the "outing" sent him over the edge.

The state of New Jersey wants to throw the book at the two "pranksters" who committed this act. They've already been charged with 'invasion of privacy;" now the state wants to charge them with hate crimes, apparently so they can throw these two teenagers in jail for a long time and  "send a message," or some other such nonsense. Basically, the state wants to cover its political ass, and ruin two other young lives in addition to Tyler's life, which was taken so senselessly. Of course, as is usually the case with grandstanding politicians, it won't even come close to solving the problem. 

Here's the first question to ask yourself; if Tyler had not committed suicide, would the actions of these two pranksters be okay?