Truth is the New Blog

Dear Pam

2009-05-08T12:18:00.009-04:00

I recently responded to a letter by Pam Geller, a conservative blogger who has gotten a lot of press in the past year. If you know of anyone would like to read (or needs to read) some rational thought, please pass this on. My response is on top, with her Letter to America below:

Dear Pam,

I don't live in a library, and my head has not been buried in books my whole life. I am a student of living, of people, and of what I believe to be a pretty humanistic philosophy of doing what's right. I took the time to read your letter to America, so I hope you'll extend the same courtesy to me.

Firstly, I don't believe in bank bailouts any more than you do. When it comes to money, I'm pretty much a free market conservative. Yes, I said it...conservative. I don't want the government to give my money away, and if they're going to use my money to make loans, I would like to know who the recipients are and what the repayment timetables are. But before we blame the big spending liberals for stealing our money, we should take a look at the policies of the last administration (after all, it was Bush who started this whole bailout business, remember?). Under President Bush, nearly a trillion dollars was spent in Iraq under the guise of protecting us from WMDs, which we know (and they knew) didn't exist. Among other things, our money went to torture - which the administration flatly lied to us about, and which violated the Geneva Convention. Our money also went to secret prisons, which no one ever told us about until a leak occurred. All of this was for an agenda across the ocean that really didn't pose a threat to the United States. And now you have the gall to criticize the federal reserve for giving out loans to try to stop the worst economic downturn on American soil in 65 years. Well Pam, I am scared too. I'm scared because the money I spent on torturing Iraqi bread vendors who provided false information just to stop the pain could have been used to give teachers higher salaries, or stimulate US jobs in technology and manufacturing, but instead has increased our national debt by 71%. I'm scared because some people think it's acceptable to hand a blank check over to a president who drank his way through college and wasn't actually elected by a majority, but the same trust is not given to a black man who has achieved more personal, intellectual, and professional success than most Americans, ever. Yes, I'm scared.

The "corrupted" process that you mention - the one in which judges allow gay men and women to legally wed - is no less corrupt than the institution of marriage that conservative christians insist on protecting. If straight people can lie before a priest, physically and emotionally abuse their spouses, commit adultery, enter into marriage for the wrong reasons, and then divorce 50% of the time, then please tell me how else one could possibly harm this institution? As far as the judges are concerned, our founding fathers created a division of power called checks and balances. They did this to ensure that no majority who wins control of one branch of the government can unfairly wield it's power to take rights away from any minority. The specific process you mention - called Judicial Review - was established in 1803, while Thomas Jefferson was President. There is absolutely nothing un-American or new about this process. The only reason you and others have a problem with it is that it is causing conflict with your religious beliefs, which I am certain are not supposed to have a place in the formation of laws and policies.

Regarding your discussion of Presidential qualifications, Kennedy was never a town mayor, never ran a dairy queen, and served in the Senate for less than a decade before being elected the youngest President ever. Ronald Reagan was a Hollywood actor. Politicians with established track records, like Nixon and the most recent Bush, turned out to have miserable presidencies and policies. You and I agree on one point for sure - that we aught to learn from history.

I want to address one final point. In your letter, you liken the holocaust to the democratic election of a President who is trying to rebuild an economic disaster that fell in his lap as a result of republican rule. You liken the holocaust - the persecution of minorities - to equal rights of citizens, regardless of race, sexuality, gender, or disability status (could any comparison be more absurd?). To suggest that the holocaust is anything like our lives today is an insult to the 11 million people who needlessly died at the hands of Nazi soldiers. It is an insult to the 1.5 million children who died in concentration camps, it is an insult to the true students of history, and it is an insult to me for having taken the time to read what you have to say.

Sincerely,
Chase Maggiano

*************

>
>
> Wake up America !!!
> by Pam Geller
>
> I am a student of history. Professionally, I have written 15
> books in six languages, and have studied history all my life. I
> think there is something monumentally large afoot, and I do not
> believe it is just a banking crisis, or a mortgage crisis, or a
> credit crisis. Yes, these exist but they are merely single
> facets on a very large gemstone that is only now coming into a
> sharper focus.
>
> Something of historic proportions is happening. I can sense it
> because I know how it feels, smells, what it looks like, and how
> people react to it.. Yes, a perfect storm may be brewing, but
> there is something happening within our country that has been
> evolving for about 10 - 15 years. The pace has dramatically
> quickened in the past two.
>
> We demanded and then codified into law the requirement that
> our banks make massive loans to people whom we knew could never
> pay back? Why? We learned recently that the Federal Reserve,
> which has little or no real oversight by anyone, has "loaned"
> two trillion dollars (that is $2,000,000,000,000) over the past
> few months, but will not tell us to whom or why or disclose the
> terms. That is our money. Yours and mine. And that is three
> times the $700B we all argued about so strenuously just this
> past September.
>
> Who has this money? Why do they have it? Why are the terms
> unavailable to us? Who asked for it? Who authorized it? I
> thought this was a government of "We the People," who loaned our
> powers to our elected leaders.. Apparently not.
>
> We have spent two or more decades intentionally de-
> industrializing our economy. Why?
>
> We have intentionally dumbed down our schools, ignored our
> history, and no longer teach our founding documents, why we are
> exceptional, and why we are worth preserving. Students by and
> large cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate.
> Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, school
> boards continue to back mediocrity.. Why?
>
> We have now established the precedent of protesting every
> close election (now violently in California over a proposition
> that is so controversial that it wants marriage to remain
> between one man and one woman. Did you ever think such a thing
> possible just a decade ago?). We have corrupted our sacred
> political process by allowing unelected judges to write laws
> that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream
> Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system
> into a banana republic. To what purpose?
>
> Now our mortgage industry is collapsing, housing prices are in
> free fall, major industries are failing, our banking system is
> on the verge of collapse, Social Security is nearly bankrupt, as
> is Medicare and our entire government. Our education system is
> worse than a joke (I teach college and know precisely what I am
> talking about.) The list is staggering in its length, breadth,
> and depth. It is potentially 1929 x 10. And we are at war with
> an enemy we cannot name for fear of offending people of the same
> religion who cannot wait to slit the throats of your children if
> they have the opportunity to do so.
>
> And now we have elected a man no one knows anything about, who
> has never run so much as a Dairy Queen, let alone a town as big
> as Wasilla , Alaska .. All of his associations and alliances are
> with real radicals in their chosen fields of employment, and
> everything we learn about him, drip by drip, is unsettling if
> not downright scary (Surely you have heard him speak about his
> idea to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense force
> stronger than our military for use inside our borders? No? Oh,
> of course. The media would never play that for you over and over
> and then demand he answer it. Sarah Palin's pregnant daughter
> and $150,000 wardrobe is more important.)
>
> Mr. Obama's winning platform can be boiled down to one word:
> Change...radical change Why?
>
> I have never been so afraid for my country and for my children
> as I am now. This man campaigned on bringing people together,
> something he has never, ever done in his professional life. In
> my assessment, Obama will divide us along philosophical lines,
> push us apart, and then try to realign the pieces into a new and
> different power structure. Change is indeed coming And when it
> comes, you will never see the same nation again.
>
> And that is only the beginning.
>
> I thought I would never be able to experience what the
> ordinary, moral German felt in the mid-1930s. In those times,
> the savior was a former smooth-talking rabble-rouser from the
> streets, about whom the average German knew next to nothing.
> What they did know was that he was associated with groups that
> shouted, shoved, and pushed around people with whom they
> disagreed; he edged his way onto the political stage through
> great oratory and promises. Economic times were tough, people
> were losing jobs, and he was a great speaker. And he smiled and
> waved a lot. And people, even newspapers, were afraid to speak
> out for fear that his "brown shirts" would bully them into
> submission.
>
> And then he was duly elected to office, with a full-throttled
> economic crisis at hand [the Great Depression]. Slowly but
> surely he seized the controls of government power, department by
> department, person by person, bureaucracy by bureaucracy. The
> kids joined a Youth Movement in his name, where they were taught
> what to think. How did he get the people on his side? He did it
> promising jobs to the jobless, money to the moneyless, and
> goodies for the military-industrial complex. He did it by
> indoctrinating the children, advocating gun control, health care
> for all, better wages, better jobs, and promising to re-instill
> pride once again in the country, across Europe , and across the
> world.
>
> He did it with a compliant media - Did you know that? And he
> did this all in the name of justice and...change. And the people
> surely got what they voted for. (Look it up if you think I am
> exaggerating.) Read your history books. Many people objected in
> 1933 and were shouted down, called names, laughed at, and made
> fun of. When Winston Churchill pointed out the obvious in the
> late 1930s while seated in the House of Lords in England (he was
> not yet Prime Minister), he was booed into his seat and called a
> crazy troublemaker. He was right, though.
>
> Don't forget that Germany was the most educated, cultured
> country in Europe . It was full of music, art, museums,
> hospitals, laboratories, and universities. And in less than six
> years - a shorter time span than just two terms of the U. S..
> presidency - it was rounding up its own citizens, killing
> others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents,
> and neighbors against neighbors. All with the best of
> intentions, of course. The road to Hell is paved with them.
>
> As a practical thinker, one not overly prone to emotional
> decisions, I have a choice: I can either believe what the
> objective pieces of evidence tell me (even if they make me
> cringe with disgust); I can believe what history is shouting to
> me from across the chasm of seven decades; or I can hope I am
> wrong, close my eyes, have another latte and ignore what is
> transpiring around me.
>
> Some people scoff at me; others laugh or think I am foolish,
> naive, or both. Perhaps I am. But I have never been afraid to
> look people in the eye and tell them exactly what I believe -
> and why I believe it. I pray I am wrong. But, I do not think I
> am.

talent

2008-12-19T09:56:00.000-05:00

Rick Warren?

2008-12-18T17:48:00.009-05:00

Rick Warren hates gays, women who chose choice, and probably a few other groups of people. But that's not the real problem with him. The problem is what he preaches - a philosophy that gives individuals and churches the authority (presumably from God) to meddle in other people's lives, take power in Government to wield it as God's power, and circumvent the law to enforce what they interpret as "God's law."

Check out his website. It's basically an eight point treatise on why the church should be in power rather than the government (as well as how it can accomplish this). Point number six, which covers the authority given to individuals by the church (to "take on" leadership) is really really troubling. Using the church to save the environment, fight disease and poverty, etc. is great. But using the church to enforce semantic based rules on people's lives, or enforce the saving of someone else's soul based on something they don't even believe in is completely at odds with everything our government stands for.

Can good things come out of religious people in the government? Absolutely. But Rick Warren preaches divine authorization and divine administration of people's lives. He is less than a step away from theocracy, and now Obama is inviting him to the steps of Capitol Hill. Can Obama justify this to his loyal following? Andrew Sullivan actually has a great suggestion. Personally, I hope Rick Warren gets booooed so loudly from the audience that no one can hear what he has to say.

Scared Christians Can't Say the Word "Gay"

2008-12-04T16:28:00.001-05:00

An article in the LA Times today says:

"Leaders of the new Anglican Church in North America said they took the extraordinary step to unify congregations and dioceses that had fled the American Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada over issues of Scripture."

The issue is sexuality, not scripture. Why can't anyone say the word "gay?"

Congressional Whine

2008-12-03T11:49:00.002-05:00

Congress is angry that the Treasury Department doesn't have enough oversight over the use of the bailout money.

Well, congress approved what many called a 'blank check.' Now they're whining because they didn't have the foresight to realize the Bush Administration wouldn't properly spend taxpayer money.

Hey Congress, remember the last eight years??

HRC - Prom Queen, not Valedictorian

2008-12-01T14:21:00.007-05:00

HRC just released their Buyers Guide - a survey (loose term at best) of gay-friendly companies which social equality-minded people should patronize. BP and Chevron are both year-long Silver sponsors of HRC, and Shell is a Bronze sponsor. All 3 companies and their subsidiaries* are highlighted at the top of the guide with perfect scores. As part of their criteria for the scoring of companies, HRC includes the vague term "external practices." In other words...funding HRC happy hours, cocktail parties, yearbooks, popularity contests, pep rallies, etc... How much of the BP, Chevron, and Shell money went to fighting Prop 8 in California? Considering HRC spent only $3.4 million on Prop 8, I'm guessing the oil money didn't make it past the bar.

In 2006 (the most recent data I found) the HRC spent twice as much on "Membership Mobilization" (mail postage, phone calls, premium member events/galas) than they did on fighting Prop 8 this year. It's easy to see why HRC has become a non-factor in the civil rights movement.

*correction made from original post, where I thought the subsidiaries were actually competitors not receiving equal treatment.

White House Doctoring Iraq War History

2008-11-25T09:59:00.003-05:00

...and they're using the Web to do it!

Keep a close eye on the White House over the next several months. Most agree that we'll see a lot of new truths coming out.

2008-11-06T16:04:00.001-05:00

When a Constitution is used to strip a person of rights he already has, it is the Constitution, not the person, that is perverted.

Prop 8...Still a Chance?

2008-11-05T15:52:00.004-05:00

No on Prop 8 is not giving up.

Absentee and provisional ballots (about 3 million outstanding) have not been counted, and could possibly reverse the 400,000 majority currently in favor of prop 8. The Associated Press reports this as well.

Most under reported counties are redneck, so the chances are slim...but there is a chance.

An Expat Reaction

2008-11-05T12:27:00.003-05:00

A close friend of mine who spends 6 months out of the year abroad wrote this to me this morning.

Yours for a better America, where diplomacy is the first response and war is a last resort, where people sit down and talk to each other --and LISTEN --, where the religious right does not decide what is taught in schools or control people with a dogma of fear and hatred, and where the US President can actually speak in complete, cohesive, literate sentences!

Pitiful

2008-10-31T09:02:00.001-04:00

6 Days Left

2008-10-30T20:21:00.005-04:00

It's been a while, and boy oh boy is there a lot to write about over the past week (and coming week!).

The biggest frustration in my view this week comes from the Obama Campaign. According to Nielsen, 33.6 million people watched his infomercial (not me...I was busy playing pool). The 30 minute prime time spot cost Obama nearly $4 million.

This is the same man that originally promised to run a publicly funded campaign, then backed down from that promise. This is the same campaign that raised more than $272 million since January 2007 (twice as much as John McCain), and still has the balls to email me today saying they are stretched too thinly, "without a safety net," and need more of my money.

There is a lot I like about Obama, and I truly think he'll make better decisions than McCain. But backing down on his promise of public funding has set a nasty and expensive precedent for future candidates.

Obama not exactly helpful to small businesses

2008-10-17T15:37:00.003-04:00

On his website, Obama writes, "Barack Obama and Joe Biden will help small businesses by cutting health care costs, improving access to capital and investing in innovation and development." But in the majority of cases, this is just not true.

His "improving access to capital" promise is not applicable to many small businesses: "...citing IRS data, the campaign notes that "56.8% of total small business income is earned by businesses in the top two [tax] rates, which Barack Obama has pledged to raise." Full article here

In essence, since most small businesses fall into the top two tax rate brackets, most small businesses will be taxed more heavily than they are currently being taxed. The counter-argument is: "shouldn't business owners making $250,000+ per year be able to afford a little more tax?" The answer is "yes," if the business owner has no employees to pay.

Let's look at a small start-up business making $500k per year. If that start-up has 6 employees then we are now looking at 6 individuals sharing that 500k revenue. For the sake of argument, let's forget about business expenses and just consider all 500k revenue to be split evenly. Each employee would earn ~$83,000 per year, putting them well in Obama's "non taxed middle class," so they should see more money in their pocket, right? Wrong. If the business gets taxed higher, the tax expense is passed on to the employees so they may not see a salary raise in the next year, or they may find their benefits reduced, or they may have to start paying for parking. In this example, I'm being very generous in assuming that this start-up business has no expenses and no investors. Add those realistic factors into the mix and the small business which makes enough to pass the $250k threshold, but not enough to be considered a money pit, suffers even more.

Obama is good at the "us against them" pitch between classes, but his tax proposal would actually increase taxes on many small businesses which would force business owners to tighten up on salaries and benefits for the "us" part of his equation.

When Obama tells you he's going to reduce taxes on small businesses, be wary. His definition of "small business" is misleading to a great extent.

Obama's not allowed to lie either...

2008-10-17T15:34:00.000-04:00

McCain to Letterman: "I screwed up."

2008-10-17T10:02:00.003-04:00

McCain has been saying "I screwed up" since he was 20 years old. How about saying "I'm sorry?" I think Letterman and his audience would have appreciated an apology more than "I screwed up" followed by uncomfortable laughter. John McCain really doesn't see himself the way everyone else does...

Joe the Plumber

2008-10-16T15:29:00.003-04:00

...won't actually be hurt by Obama's plan. He's "not even close" to making that much money. Even if he becomes more successful than any other plumber in Ohio by making more than 250k a year, his taxes will increase by only 3%...cry me a river.

Acorn and Voter Fraud

2008-10-15T15:26:00.004-04:00

Here are the facts (after all, this blog is about truth!)

Acorn verifies the legitimacy of every registration its canvassers collect. If they can't authenticate the registration, or it's incomplete or questionable in other ways, they flag that form as problematic ("fraudulent", "incomplete", et cetera). They then hand in all registration forms, even the problematic ones, to elections officials, as they are required to do by law. In almost every case where you've heard about fraud by Acorn, it's because Acorn itself notified officials about the fraud that's been perpetrated on them by rogue canvassers. Most officials who run to the media screaming "Acorn is committing fraud" know all of the above but don't bother to share those facts with the media they've run to. None of this is about voter fraud. None of it. Where any fraud has occurred, it's voter registration fraud and has resulted in exactly zero fraudulent votes.

You'll hear that Donald Duck, Mary Poppins, Dick Tracy, Mickey Mouse and (new this year) the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys football team have all had fraudulent registrations submitted in their names. That's true. And we know this, why? Because Acorn told officials about it when they followed the law and turned in those registrations, flagged as fraudulent.

This Acorn "fraud" business is just a republican media scam. Don't believe me? Ask the Brits.

CNN Defends Palin! Or at least stops lying about her

2008-10-15T10:59:00.003-04:00

Good article about email rumors and how hard they are to combat.

The Truth About Obama's Tax Cuts

2008-10-13T23:19:00.016-04:00

I was asked by a self described Conservative Jeffersonian friend to respond and give voice to a Wall Street Journal Article on Obama's "sleight of hand" tax cuts. The article appears in WSJ's opinion section, and utilizes an Obama Tax Increase graphic from the American Enterprise Institute which discusses tax rates, but not tax credits which offset the tax rates under Obama's plan. The tax credits which are highlighted and deplored in the text of the opinion, but ignored in the AEI graphic, are not leftist policy as the WSJ suggests. (Tax credit is actually the crux of McCain's healthcare/tax solution).

The opinion criticizes Obama's plan, calling it a "clever pitch, because it lets him pose as a middle-class tax cutter while disguising that he's also proposing one of the largest tax increases ever on the other 5%." Well, this is nothing new or clandestine. Obama has been very upfront about opposing tax cuts for the top 5% (who won't feel it in their everyday life), and providing more economic help to low income Americans. McCain, unfortunately, supports a healthcare tax credit which doesn't give enough to Average Joe, but provides tax cuts to the super wealthy which perpetuate the favors given to the top 5%. By comparison, Obama appears to be a Robin Hood-like figure. Is it welfare for the poor? Is it a tax credit, cut, or handout? Whatever verbiage you use, you cannot deny that Obama is making an effort to help those who need it. McCain's effort to help those who need it is lacking. Lacking in his rhetoric, in practice, and in the WSJ opinion piece. In fact, there is only one mention of John McCain's efforts to help normal Americans in the entire piece. I count seven different efforts on the part of Obama in this piece to help normal Americans.

So what's the point here? It's partially a political rant, but moreover, this is more evidence to be careful about what you read! Compare multiple sources, don't be afraid to question the writer/publisher, and be sure to educate yourself. Don't rely on others with their own agendas to educate you.

I Heart Rachel Maddow

2008-10-13T22:20:00.009-04:00

Tonight on Rachel Maddow's show, conservative David Frum criticized Maddow, essentially saying that the humor and sarcasm on her show is equivalent to the shouts and jeers of McCain's campaign supporters about Obama...the likes of "kill him," "he's a terrorist," etc.

Maddow had notes and questions for discussion of issues, not discussion of the tone and format of her own show. Nonetheless, she responded quickly and directly, saying that the tone and humor used in her show is a method of delivering news, but is in no way comparable to actual violent threats that are made by McCain supporters and which are left un-denounced by McCain during his rallies.

Personally, I have been more angry over the past couple months than I can ever remember as a result of what's going on in the news. Maddow's humor actually allows me smile on occasion in the face of ethical, political, and media failure, without forgetting that these failures are serious and cannot be sustained. Thank you Rachel for helping me not feel so alone in this ridiculous, maddening, and sometimes unbelievable time.

Outright Lie.

2008-10-13T10:31:00.004-04:00

Friday: A legislative investigator found that Palin violated state ethics laws and abused her power by trying to have her former brother-in-law fired as a state trooper.

Saturday: "I'm thankful that the report has shown that there was no illegal or unethical activity there" - Gov. Sarah Palin

WTF?

McCain's foot goes missing...is found in his mouth.

2008-10-13T10:10:00.004-04:00

This weekend, John McCain vowed to "whip" Obama's "you know what" in the final debate on Wednesday. Hmm...old white dude promises to publicly whip young black dude. Really?

Though McCain has dishonorably criticized Obama for being a Muslim, a Christian, and an Arab all at once, he's not stupid or racists enough to harken back to the days of slavery discipline when saying he'll "whip" Obama in the debate. It's just a lipstick on a pig figure of speech.

Even though McCain's not a bigot (really...I don't think he is), it's just not wise to say he'll "whip" his younger black opponent in public. Once again, McCain displays a Joe Biden-like quality of gaffing in his rhetoric.

My advice to McCain: slow down, breath, think, think again, revise your sentence, speak.

Debate

2008-10-08T09:29:00.003-04:00

During the second question, one thing really struck me - when not behind a podium, John McCain's age is more apparent than ever. Last night, millions of Americans saw him hunched over, walking and gesturing slowly. McCain's age and health have been pretty well ignored throughout this campaign, but I think last night's performance, coupled with Palin's increasing publicity, could bring these issues out.

Betty Boop Palin

2008-10-05T19:39:00.001-04:00

I'm in Disbelief

2008-10-03T11:22:00.002-04:00

Our economy is the worst it's been in 70 years, and we're fighting a war in Iraq, while contemplating re-starting another in Afghanistan. These are facts.

Last night, Sarah Palin very notably smiled her way through a vice presidential debate. At times she winked at the camera, and yes even laughed. Is her physical affect a true representation of her assessment of the health of our country? If so, she is more out of touch with her constituents than even I believed.