Four more years of...

I know how dejected Republicans must feel today.

I grew up as part of a large, staunchly Republican, extended family. Over the years, a few family members actually ran for public office as Republicans; and, some even won. My immediate family, and I, actually campaigned for the original “Mr. Conservative,” Barry Goldwater, during his failed 1964 campaign for President. I was “totally bummed” when “my guy” was easily defeated. He received only 39% of the popular vote, which translated into just 52 votes in the Electoral College. President Lyndon Baines Johnson received 486 Electoral College votes.

Even in defeat, Barry Goldwater was still widely respected in Arizona (he was a five term U.S. Senator from Arizona).

Yet, in his later years, the Republican Party of Arizona turned on him. Some members even demanded that his name be removed from the Arizona Republican Party Headquarters building. His “sin” was that, like most Republicans of his generation, he had become “far too liberal” for an increasingly conservative, and militant, Republican Party.

Barry Goldwater actually came out in support of allowing gays to serve in the military. He also worked with a bipartisan group to eliminate job discrimination based on sexual orientation. He was quoted as saying that “gays have a constitutional right” to be who they are. He was, of course, very right, when his Party had become so very wrong.

Barry Goldwater was also highly critical of the Republican Party’s increasing embrace of the “Religious Right.” He angered Republicans by openly endorsing a Democrat, rather than the good “Christian Conservative” candidate that they had endorsed. Barry’s candidate won.

At some point, I became aware of Barry’s having been labeled as being “too liberal” for the Republican Party. Not long before his death, I wrote and asked him about it. His reply was that his positions were simply “common sense.” I wrote back, and said “I agree.” After over 100 years of solid Republican Party support, the majority of my extended family had left the once proud Republican Party due to the destructive path they’d chosen to follow.

Barry Goldwater is just one of many past prominent Republicans who would not meet current Republican Party “standards.” Some others would include:

• Abraham Lincoln – He failed to respect “State’s Rights.” He interfered with private businesses (slavery was "necessary if their businesses were to survive"). And, he took private property (their slaves) without compensation.

• Dwight D. Eisenhower – He expanded Social Security. He interfered with “State’s Rights” by sending federal troops to Arkansas to enforce public school desegregation. And, he initiated a massive public works project which created the Interstate Highway System (a system which continues to irritate thousands of drivers a day as they commute to and from work).

• Ronald Reagan – He actually negotiated with Democrats and compromised when necessary to secure a deal. He even raised taxes (contrary to the revisionist teachings of Grover Norquist and the modern day Republican Party).

The Republican Party of today is clearly in trouble. Demographic trends are against them. There simply aren’t enough rich white men to consistently elect Republicans. And, while “Christian Conservatives” have been successfully exploited to provide reliable Republican votes, younger voters overwhelmingly reject the divisiveness caused by inflexible religious doctrine. Even most strongly religious individuals have come to realize that the U.S. Constitution won’t allow discriminatory religious doctrine to be the law in our nation. Besides, Christians too have been hurt by the irresponsible fiscal policies of the Republican Party.

If the Republican Party is to remain relevant in the future, they must purge the extremists - who have led them astray - from their ranks. They must accept responsibility for the Bush years, and admit that starting two wars while giving huge tax cuts to the very wealthy was not responsible. They must pledge to negotiate in good faith to move our nation forward. They must renounce pledges to powerful special interest groups which prevent them from putting our nation first. They must stop using divisive “social issues” to win votes. It’s not healthy for our nation.

And, Republicans must recognize and embrace that we are a diverse nation – not simply a nation of rich white men. For the strength of the Republican Party, and more importantly, the strength of our nation, they must embrace our nation’s diversity and learn to represent all Americans, not just the favored few.

To be sure, I don’t expect to see such changes any time soon. The modern day Republican Party “brand” is quite opposed to it, and their core voters are very committed to their narrow agendas. Besides, the very wealthy are very pleased with Washington gridlock, as it allows them to continue to benefit from historically low tax rates.

Watch closely what Republicans do over the next two years – especially those Grover Norquist controlled Republicans. Will they continue to hold our nation hostage by demanding more tax cuts for the very wealthy, with absolutely no compromise allowed? Or, will they put our nation first and begin to represent all Americans, not just the extremist fringe?

If the Republican Party continues to embrace the “new and improved brand” imposed by Karl Rove and Grover Norquist (two real life “Lead from Behind” dictators), their Party, and our nation, will continue to suffer.

Election Day 2012

It’s finally Election Day. I spent last night reviewing the various largely unknown candidates running for “chief dog catcher,” or some other such “vitally important” elected position.

I also took the time to call a few “friends” and relatives who I know from earlier conversations plan to vote for the “other guys.” In the spirit of Fox News, I encouraged them to keep an open mind, think hard about all the messages they’d heard, and make sure that they get to the polls early on Wednesday morning to make sure that their voice is heard.

The news, and the accompanying political ads, presented a real contrast this morning. In New Jersey, every effort was being made to ensure that everyone who wants to vote is allowed to vote, despite their being left homeless by Hurricane Sandy. Meanwhile, in Minnesota, voters are being asked to make it significantly more difficult – and more expensive – for some people to vote.

Like the Marriage Amendment, the photo-ID amendment was designed to drive loyal Republicans to the polls. Neither should have been placed on the ballot, but after promising a “laser focus” on jobs and the economy, the amendments were the only things the Republicans were able to produce.

Yet, it’s hard to deny that the two proposed Constitutional Amendments have produced jobs – even if the jobs went mainly to highly paid out-of-state “consultants,” hired to make sure that Minnesotan’s vote “Yes” on the Amendments.  Sadly, those jobs will end as soon as the polls close. However, should the amendments pass, more jobs will be “created” --- for attorneys questioning the constitutionality of the amendments, and those hired to “defend” them. It’s unknown whether those jobs will be awarded to Minnesota attorneys, or if they’ll also go to highly paid out-of-state attorneys. Either way, those “jobs” will also be temporary.

As has been the case for nearly all previous laws which have attempted to restrict the rights of Americans, the latest attempts to write religious doctrine or political ideology into law will ultimately fail. Such laws have always ended up being repealed or struck down by the courts.

This cycle, I voted a straight Democratic ticket.

Once the Republican Party returns to its roots of supporting our nation’s Constitution, and its guarantee of freedom and equality for all, will I once again offer serious consideration to Republican candidates.

Our nation has been at its best when it stands up for all its citizens. Unfortunately, the Republican Party has decided to bet against our Constitution and against the American people. They’re flat out wrong to do so.

No matter what the outcome of today’s election, I have confidence that our nation will survive. Despite the continued efforts by Republicans to weaken our nation by attempting to include narrow religious teachings - or a failed political ideology - in our nation’s laws; our nation has, and will continue to, survive.

I do know that our nation’s path to fully realize the promise of freedom and equality enshrined in our Constitution has been long and hard. Numerous groups – blacks, women, couples of different religions, interracial couples, and immigrants, to name a few - have suffered unconstitutional discrimination along the way. Yet, eventually, enlightened lawmakers, or the courts, have stepped in to repeal or overturn discriminatory laws.

As long as our Constitution remains strong, our nation can be strong. If, however, Republicans, and the narrow special interest groups they use for funding purposes, are allowed to prevail; and, if our Constitution is weakened by inclusion of antiquated religious doctrine, or a narrow political ideology, our nation is doomed to fail.

Will our children and grandchildren be better off if we promote discrimination based on ancient religious teachings, or a momentarily “popular” political ideology, to weaken our nation’s Constitution? No, I think not. Interpretations of religious teachings continue to evolve, as do political ideology “strategies” designed to achieve short term gains for a specific political party. I want my children and grandchildren to grow up and thrive in a nation which allows all citizens to reach their highest potential – not just the very wealthy and huge corporations.

That’s why I voted Democratic today. It wasn’t because the Democratic Party is perfect – far from it – but rather because they currently offer the best platform for the continued success of a nation founded on the ideals of freedom and equality.

Running to Forget (the Bush Administation)

I really enjoy the visual image presented in the “Running to Forget” ad that the misnamed “Americans for Job Security” has been has been running. 

 What’s not to like about an image of a young, attractive, “mom” in a $200 jogging suit, jogging down a tree-lined suburban street, while pushing “her child” in a $500 jogging stroller?

The voice-over message, however, is quite unsettling. The voice states:

“I run to forget. Forget about my problems. Forget that my husband’s been laid off twice in the last four years. Forget the bad economy. I voted for Obama, but Hope and Change was just a slogan. Obama promised to turn the economy around in three years. But, spending and debt have exploded. Now we’re facing another recession. The future is getting worse under Obama.”

“Americans for Job Security is responsible for the contents of this Message.”

I have no idea how many “takes” were required to “film” the commercial, but the baby hired to play the role of the woman’s “child” appears to be very uncomfortable in the "establishing shot." It appears that she was attempting to slide out of the stroller to get away. 

Who can blame the baby? She's been placed in a jogging stroller, sent hurtling down a street she’s never seen before, being pushed by some unknown abductor, with her real mommy nowhere in site. She has every right to be terrified.

Now, I don’t blame the woman who was hired to play the “jogging mom.” She had her own acting to do. Her view of the baby was obstructed, and she had no idea the baby was terrified. The production crew, however, should have stepped in to comfort and protect the child. But, I suppose they thought a “terrified child” made for a better ad.

If the baby had heard the voice-over message, and was able to understand it, I suspect she would have been even more terrified.

After all, in just four years of “running to forget,” her “mommy” had already forgotten about the Bush administration which helped push our nation’s slide into the Great Recession. She’d forgotten how President Bush started two expensive wars, while, for the first time in our nation’s history, giving huge tax cuts to the very wealthy.

Had the child heard the message, she might have been very concerned about what would happen to her when she turns four. Will her “mommy” forget about her, too?

Yet, the ad hits a number of Republican "talking points." It implies that the child is a product of a “traditional” one-man, one-woman, family unit. It dismisses “Hope and Change” as just a slogan. It reminds us that President Obama promised “to turn the economy around in three years.” And, it reminds us that “Spending and Debt have exploded.”

Personally, I liked President Obama’s “Hope and Change” campaign slogan. It showed that he was looking forward with optimism for our nation’s future, after a truly depressing Bush administration. I think President Obama has done a remarkable job, despite being obstructed at every turn by a Republican Congress more intent on pushing Grover Norquist’s agenda, than an agenda for recovery, such as the one which President Obama laid out.

President Obama set a challenging goal of turning the economy around in his first term. And, he has done a remarkable job of stabilizing a nation which had been hurtling uncontrollably toward total financial collapse. He managed – with absolutely no help from a Republican Congress – to pull our nation out of its tailspin. He deserves our thanks for what has been accomplished, rather than the Republican scorn for failing to reach the challenging goal he set.

If it had been up to Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, our nation (and GM), would have been allowed to go bankrupt, eliminating all those pesky middle class jobs and the future economic security of those workers. Going bankrupt would have allowed good private companies, such as Bain Capital, to swoop in and buy up our nation’s assets for pennies on the dollar. Imagine the profits to be made by “flipping” our country and selling it – in pieces – to the highest bidders. If selling their PC business to the Chinese was good for IBM, imagine how good it would be for Bain to sell off our nuclear technology to the Chinese also.   

But, seriously, one can only wonder how far our nation might have come in the last four years, if only Republicans had supported our nation’s President during a time of war, rather than following Grover Norquist’s plan to destroy the United States. It’s no wonder Michele Bachmann suspected some in Congress were unpatriotic.

Yes. Spending and debt have exploded. And, despite the denial of Republicans – amplified by Fox News, their 24x7 propaganda channel - this started under President Bush. It turns out that President Bush’s two expensive wars, while also giving massive tax cuts to the wealthy, was not a good way to reduce spending and hold down debt.

Democrats have long been accused of being the “tax and spend” party, as if that was a bad idea. Now that we’ve seen the Republican trickle-down approach, combined with their more traditional “cut taxes, spend and borrow” approach (which leaves the debt for future generations), which seems to be the more honest approach to you?

I can understand the statement that “the future is getting worse under Obama.” From the standpoint of the wealthy businessmen who produced this ad, it's very true. The future does look worse, much worse – for them, not for our nation - under President Obama. After all, in the wake of the Wall Street scandal which pushed our nation to the brink of financial collapse, President Obama was able to secure much needed regulatory reforms to limit the possibility that Wall Street could do it once again. The future has been getting worse - for those who choose fraud over fair competition.

American’s love to compete and are quite capable of competing with anyone, given a level playing field. Unfortunately, large Corporations and the very wealthy have convinced the Republican Party to tilt the “playing field” in their favor, at the expense of our nation as a whole. President Obama, and the Democratic Party, have started the process of reversing this trend. They want to level the playing field to allow all Americans – not just large corporations and the very wealthy – to compete and succeed. And, if history is an indication, our nation will be much stronger as a result.

Living in a strong, free, nation – one which treats all its citizens fairly and equally – is enough to put a smile on every child’s face.

DISCLAIMER: Jogging is a form of exercise enjoyed by many. The idea, like the other lies told by the misnamed “Americans for Job Security” organization, that jogging somehow causes selective memory loss is FALSE. It’s false, even if Fox News devoted three days of breathless coverage to promote the false claim - including airing interviews with numerous highly paid corporate doctors, who swore that it’s true (Besides, Obamacare would make anyone suffering from selective memory loss stand in endless lines just to get treatment for it. Private health insurance companies will not make patients stand in long lines. They will deny coverage over the phone.). Before starting any exercise program, consult your physician to determine the suitability of the program. As long as your physician is not owned by corporate America, they should be able to honestly evaluate your health and recommend an appropriate exercise routine.

Faulty Logic = Bad Math

In his ad, Congressman John Kline appears in an otherwise empty Metrodome, looks into the camera and tells us that “America’s national debt stands at 16 trillion dollars. It’s the equivalent to selling every seat in the Metrodome, every single day, for nine thousand years.”

It's unknown if Congressman Kline actually paid to rent those empty seats, or if he "borrowed" the Metrodome as a "Congressional Perk."

The announcer in Congresswoman Michele Bachmann’s ad tells us that “We all owe it, our portion of the national debt. Each of us owes over fifty thousand dollars to pay it off.” Congresswoman Bachmann then tells us, “I approve this message.”

It's not known if the baby's acting fee will be enough to pay their "debt," or if Congresswoman Bachmann invoked her "Congressional discount" to prevent the baby from joining the annoying middle class.

And, in his ad, Congressman Erik Paulsen, “the Math Guy,” tells us: “The national debt is up ten trillion dollars in 10 years. That’s fifty thousand dollars for every man, woman, and child. That’s unacceptable.”

It's unknown if his daughters were allowed to keep their acting fees for appearing in his ad, or if Congressman Paulsen demanded that they "donate" the funds to his campaign so that they don't learn to demand more "hand-outs" in the future.

These ads continue to drive home the message that the Republican Party has been repeating for almost four years: The deficit is our nation’s biggest problem. The hole President Obama – and all Democrats since the beginning of time - dug in creating it will cost each one of us, our children, and our grandchildren (not to mention their children and their grandchildren) more than $50,000 to pay off. 

(I have no idea why Congressman Paulsen went “off-message” to acknowledge that, perhaps, six years of the deficit might have actually originated during the Bush administration. The official Republican “fantasy” is that the entire budget deficit is the result of President Obama’s "failed policies" – which, for the most part, Republicans blocked him from implementing.)

Anyway, the Republican solution to our “deficit problem” is as it’s been for the last decade or so - take an axe to government programs, and use the money "saved" to provide more tax cuts for the very wealthy. After all, this worked so well during the Bush administration, when Dick Cheney assured us that "deficits don’t matter.”

But, I digress.

The above ads, and the recurring fantasy that “trickle-down economics” is somehow good for our nation, got me thinking. I know that “trickle-down economics” has been very good for the very wealthy, while being devastating for the middle-class and those less fortunate. But, how much does "trickle-down economics" really cost those who the Republican Party refuse to represent? Our nation’s deficit is just one cost. What other costs do Americans of modest means face?

Using the same faulty logic and flawed math demonstrated by Republican Representatives Kline, Bachmann, and Paulsen in their ads, I decided to find out. 

I decided to look at the cost of soda. Like other items in my shopping cart, the cost of soda has continued to rise. So, I looked up the total compensation for all named executives of the Coca-Cola Company (Coke) and PepsiCo (Pepsi).

According to their 2012 proxy statements, the named executives of the Coca-Cola Company (5 of them) received total compensation of $60,437,264 in 2011. The named executives of PepsiCo (6 of them) received total compensation of $63,441,406 in 2011. That’s a total of $123,878,670 for one year, for 11 executives at just two companies.

How that money is supposed to trickle-down into the pockets of “working class” Americans has never been clear to me.

But, using the same faulty logic, and the same bad math, as the three Republican Representatives, I did a bit of my own math. What I found was quite startling:

 

That’s right, at a consumption rate of one two-liter bottle per day, every day, for about 169,000 years, my family might come close to paying the total compensation for 11 top executives, at just two companies, for just one year.

Further, did your compensation go up during the Great Recession? At many large corporations, it sure did -- at least for their Chief Executive Officers.

At Coca-Cola, the CEO received $18,813,013 in 2009, $24,782,017 in 2010, and $29,115,573 in 2011, for a total of $72,710,603 in just three years. At PepsiCo, the CEO received $15,768,350 in 2009, $16,175,381 in 2010, and $17,116,089 in 2011, for a total of $49,059,820 in just three years. I don't know how many employees - if any - were laid off to justify such rewards.

Just like the faulty logic, and "voodoo math," used in promoting trickle-down economics, the faulty logic used in the three ads referenced above leads them to the claim that "every man, woman, and child in America owes over $50,000 to pay off our national debt." Hogwash. It’s our nation’s debt. Our nation is responsible for paying it off. How it chooses to pay is still to be determined. However, if the Republican Party has its way, 98% of the population will have to pay more, so that the favored 2% will be able to pay less.

Similarly, the “logic” used to show how many bottles of soda my family would have to buy to pay for one year of top executive compensation is equally flawed. The respective companies are responsible for compensating their executives, not my family.

In short, no matter how many times a politician, or a news corporation - especially Fox News - presents a “simple common sense solution” (such as Congressman Paulsen’s, “Just spend less”) to a complex issue, you’re probably being lied to. 

In a complex world, there’s no such thing as a "simple solution." No single issue stands alone. Everything is intertwined with something else. Everything has a cost. For each solution, there will be "winners" and "losers." And, just as in our personal lives, to be successful, our nation's leaders must consider numerous trade-offs involved in every decision they make. They should not be allowed to abdicate their responsibilities by signing away their minds to any special interest group. No matter how powerful people such as Grover Norquist, Karl Rove, or the Hunt Brothers might seem, selling out our nation to serve them is not a good idea.

Modern-day Republicans have decided to tip the scales in favor of the very wealthy. And, despite the pain already inflicted, their plan is to continue to do more of the same, no matter what it costs our nation.

Our economy and our nation’s fiscal health will only show significant improvement when a more normal,  balanced, approach is allowed to return.

I implore patriotic Republicans: Tear up the pledges, and start leading for a change. 

DISCLAIMER: I do not directly own any shares of either of the companies named, nor do I plan to acquire any shares in the foreseeable future. I suspect, however, that one of the mutual funds I have probably owns shares of both. Unlike the companies I directly invest in, I have not researched either the Coca-Cola Company or PepsiCo to make an informed decision regarding the appropriateness of either company for my investment portfolio. If I ever decide to do so, Executive Compensation will be just one of the many variables I will consider.

 

A New Pledge of Allegiance?

I used to enjoy attending local Chamber of Commerce meetings, until I finally recognized that we were being used by the national organization to provide unwavering support for Big Business - and to the Republican Party which they have apparently purchased. They were certainly not representing me, or local "Main Street" businesses.

Each Chamber of Commerce meeting started by reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. While I've always been a patriotic American, I started to feel uncomfortable reciting the Pledge as part of an organization intent on destroying our nation.

I hate regulations and taxes as much as anyone, but they have never held me back.

I refuse to accept the notion that it's impossible for American businesses to make a profit under what some  call "crushing taxes" and "burdensome regulations." It's been my experience that good, well managed, businesses have always been able to make money in good times and bad, without lying and cheating, or demanding "special favors" from politicians they've "purchased." Many fine businesses have done this year after year. And, they've been able to do this no matter what the tax rate and regulatory climate happens to be.

Our nation is in danger of being destroyed from within. Grover Norquist disciples started two expensive wars under false pretenses (among other things, they lied about finding Weapons of Mass Destruction). They used borrowed money to pay for their wars, along with the tax cuts they gave to our wealthiest citizens, leaving our nation with a massive debt. Big Business doubled down by demanding more government handouts, insisting that they're necessary for them to create new jobs to replace the ones they've cut and sent overseas.

It also hasn't helped that our nation has been fighting a civil war for decades, fueled, in part, by a 24x7 propaganda channel, Fox News, spewing out dogma as if it were fact.

Until recently, I'd never seen much difference between Republicans and Democrats. Republicans would spend and borrow, while Democrats would spend and tax. More recently, the Grover Norquist disciples have added a whole new obstacle to the success of our nation, by their refusal allow ANY tax hikes, and their refusal to work toward shared solutions to our nation's problems. Only their solution is acceptable - Abolish our Government, turn valuable government programs like Social Security and Medicare over to Big Business, so that they can be killed off as a "business decision" by the private sector. If they achieve their goals, all will be well.

Except it won't.

I'm beginning to suspect that the Republican Party is preparing a new Pledge of Allegiance to be recited at all business meetings. I shutter to think what they might require our school children to recite.

New Pledge of Allegiance

Our nation was built on a foundation of freedom and equality for all. It thrived under people willing to work together to find shared solutions to complex problems. It stagnates and wilts under single-issue politicians, more beholden to special interests than to our nation, who refuse to even look at realistic shared solutions.

The danger is real. Our nation will fail if its future is turned over to an unelected lobbyist, funded and controlled by unknown groups.