Historical healthcare

“Our policy is to create a national health service in order to ensure that everybody in the country, irrespective of means, age, sex, or occupation, shall have equal opportunities to benefit from the best and most up-to-date medical and allied services available.“
- Winston Churchill

OH MY GOD Churchill was a communist!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Or not. Actually, definitely not. Unless you’re a conservative American. If Obama had said what Churchill said, Glenn Beck’s head would have exploded live on TV.

Historic day for America. Obama’s healthcare plan passed. Which means more than 30,000,000 more Americans will be insured; insurance companies will no longer be able to oppressively discriminate on any basis, and best of all; Republican and conservative Americans hate it. They seem unable to differentiate between slightly left of centre beneficial policies, and Stalinist Communism.
Obama was absolutely correct when he subtly digged at the Republicans for their appalling use of fear tactics to attempt to win this argument. They should be ashamed of themselves. They, in my eyes, are comparable to those who opposed the Civil Rights Act in ’64.
Obama said:

“We didn’t give in to mistrust or to cynicism or to fear. Instead, we proved that we are still a people capable of doing big things.”

Whilst the Republicans continue to complain about the evils of Socialist medical care, I thought i’d sing it’s praises.
We in the UK have a National Health Service. It is a single payer system. It is government run. It would, in short, make Glenn Beck’s face explode in rage.
According to the World Health Organisation:

The UK’s EVIL SOCIALIST life expectancy (m/f):77/81

The US’s free market haven life expectancy(m/f): 75/80

The UK’s EVIL SOCIALIST Probability of dying under five (per 1 000 live births): 6

The US’s free market haven Probability of dying under five (per 1 000 live births): 8

The UK’s EVIL SOCIALIST Probability of dying between 15 and 60 years m/f (per 1 000 population): 98/61

The US’s free market haven Probability of dying between 15 and 60 years m/f (per 1 000 population): 137/80

The UK’s EVIL SOCIALIST overall World Health standing:18th

The US’s free market haven overall standing:36th

In short, whilst Republicans keep complaining about how awful Socialist medicine is……… we in the UK will continue to enjoy it, whilst living longer.

For a World superpower that basis itself on freedom, I’m not sure how they can justify being so terrible in the healthcare rankings. The US even ranks below Singapore for infant mortality. That’s appalling. But, apparently allowing more children to die than 35 other countries, is far more Constitutional (as is sending the living children to war on the basis of a lie, when they’re older), than giving them a better healthcare program safety net. In fact, half of all personal bankruptcies in the USA are believed to be partly the result of ridiculously extortionate healthcare costs.

Republicans and the Tea Party movement is simply a movement to protect the profits of American insurance companies. To fight against a bill that prevents insurance companies from turning down insurance for patients with pre-existing conditions, and cancelling insurance when people get ill, on the ideological basis that the new bill is “big evil socialist government” is pathetic. I cannot believe insurance companies have been allowed to get away with their utterly immoral practices for so long.

In fact, I watched Republican John McCain tell a room full of people live on Fox News that the British NHS refuses to treat patients over 75. The extent of this ridiculous lie was rendered even more ingenious given that on that very same day, my 83 year old grand mother was being treated on the NHS after having a heart attack. They saved her life. The irony of John McCain’s position is, most of my family, if we lived under the current US healthcare system, would not be able to afford healthcare, and the rich conservative and Republican anti-socialised medicine brigade would have no problem denying us care.

To deny people the right to healthcare whilst you yourself can afford it, in my opinion, is no different to me blocking the road when an ambulance needs to get past. I’m fine and healthy. I paid taxes that went to fix that road. So fuck them!!! That’s the attitude. The “individualist” attitude plaguing the West. The Republican attitude. Today, it was defeated. My face is one of complete smugness today.

McCain today argued that the bill promoted big government. I’d argue that is irrelevant. Our British NHS has survived for sixty years, and whilst it has it’s issues, it is better than the American system. Big government or small government is not the issue. It is the equivalent of approaching an uninsured suffering child and saying “We wont help you, because, erm, well, BIG GOVERNMENT!!!!” Perhaps an injection of big business to curb the excesses of big insurance and big business, is not such a bad thing. I fully support it.

My only issue, is that the bill doesn’t go far enough. After eight years of Republican misery, the fact that anyone actually pays any attention to those lunatics amazes me. President Obama didn’t seem strong enough. He allowed Republicans to populate their lies and fear tactics; the same tactics they used for the war on terror. It has to stop. The Republicans are an international laughing stock. And yet, their usual cry of “SOCIALISM!!! HIGH TAXES!!! BIG GOVERNMENT!!! COMMMUUUUNIIISSSM!!!! NO STIMULUS!!!!!” against anything slightly left of Reagan, seems to generate sympathy in America. The rest of us look on in amazement. Today, that horrendous and selfish tactic lost.

I look forward to watching the psychotic Glenn Beck tell everyone America is now Soviet Russia.

Edward Kennedy 1932 – 2009

Edward Kennedy, the last of the four Kennedy Brothers, Senator for Massachusetts, the “Democratic Icon“, the “Lion of the Senate“, the “Champion of Social justice” has died aged 77. It’s somewhat comforting to know that the Liberal ex Senator and the key player in many liberal reforms throughout his illustrious 47 year career in the Senate, lived to see the election of Barack Obama, the man many see as a Kennedy in terms of his political stance, the first hugely liberal President, since Edward’s brother John F Kennedy was elected in 1960.

The Kennedy’s have achieved almost iconic status around the World, due to their strong convictions, their photogenic quality, and unfortunately, the death that has so tragically defined their family name. Joseph Kennedy Jr died during World War II; John Kennedy became President in 1960 but was controversially assassinated in 1963 in Dallas; and Robert Kennedy was assassinated whilst running for President in 1968; leaving Edward as the only surviving Kennedy brother.

In 1960, Edward’s Brother John gave a speech in New York, that would sum up his, Robert’s and Edward’s attitudes and values, that would influence a young Barack Obama, and the World we live in today:

“What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label “Liberal?”…..If by a “Liberal” they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a “Liberal,” then I’m proud to say I’m a “Liberal.”

Such a strong proponent of Universal Healthcare (whilst those undeserving compulsive liars like John McCain… whom I and a few friends watched last night, live on Fox, telling America how shit the British NHS is….despite the fact that the World Health Organisation, puts us way above the USA in terms of quality healthcare…. I think McCain is just prone to blatant lying, whilst a mass of dispicably selfish right wingers clapped his every word, starting questions quite pathetically with “Thank you Mr McCain, you’re one of the most Patriotic men i’ve ever had the pleasure to meet“….pass the vomit bucket please), it is a shame Kennedy couldn’t have been more involved in this debate than he was. Unfortunately, he was diagnosed with a Brain Tumour back in May 2008, and didn’t recover. He will be greatly missed. I truly hope that the liberal thinking behind his many achievements, has been passed on to this new Generation now occupying the White House, and that much can be achieved that would make the Kennedy’s proud. It is a huge shame however, that Kennedy will not live to see any great Healthcare Reform plan, since healthcare reform has been his political calling for decades.

Edward Kennedy was a key player in the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 – of which he gave a great speech against the Conservative critics of the Bill. The National Cancer Act of 1971 which was a bit of a dip in the water of Universal healthcare; the Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974 which set limits on campaign contributions and forced more public disclosure of where those funds were coming from; the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986 (which was vetoed by profit-is-more-important-than-people President Ronald Reagan) put economic sanctions on the South African pro-Apartheid government until they agreed to end Apartheid and release Nelson Mandela; the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 – a law preventing discrimination on the grounds of disability; the Ryan White AIDS Care Act in 1990 – designed to help those suffering from AIDS on low incomes get access to better quality drugs and care; the Mental Health Parity Act in 1996 and 2008 which states that limits on mental health benefits cannot be lower than limits for medical benefits offered by a group health plan – another step toward better healthcare that the Free Market cannot solve itself; the State Children’s Health Insurance Program in 1997 – designed to make sure that millions of uninsured and under-insured children were covered for health benefits; and the No Child Left Behind Act in 2002 – proposed, I concede by George W Bush just after taking office, designed to test students annually with a state wide standardised test. Schools that receive certain funding must improve year on year or risk tougher sanctions
until they improve.

To sum up, Kennedy was a giant on the political scene, for five decades. Thus ends half a century of the Kennedy Dynasty and it’s influence on American, and in many cases, World affairs. Ted, remains an irreplaceable icon on the side of those seeking Social justice and human compassion.

Edward Kennedy; February 22, 1932 – August 25, 2009

Republican Day III

Now, I could just about cope with the BIG INFLATED SOCIALIST state en acting laws preventing me from stoning my dad, for working on the Sabbath, clearly going against the Bible and Exodus 35:2. I was even able to cope with the fact that the Commie Atheist law tells me that whether my slave dies today, or in two days time, it’s still punishable, even though the rightful word of my loving God tells me in Exodus 21:20-21 that if he dies in two days time, it’s okay and that I shouldn’t be punished (did you know, that the State in it’s increasing attempts to block my religious freedom, have ACTUALLY banned slavery? It’s outrageous. What next, a ban on laughing except for black people and gays?).

However, I cannot quite believe what i’m hearing, when a friend informed me that Gayowa, ConnetiAIDS, Bummingchusettes And Homont aren’t the only States to be allowing those who want to give AIDs to my children, to get married. New York, New Jersey, New Hampshire, and Maine (notice they’re all in Satan’s part of the U.S.OF Awesome) are all expected to vote in favour of the homogays very soon.

In 2006, the greatest President the USAwesome has ever known, George W Bush (Whose first name, begins with the same letter as God’s. Coincidence?) called for a Constitutional Amendment banning same sex marriage. He said quite beautifully, and tolerantly that “A constitutional amendment will put a decision that is critical to American families and American society“. And he’s right!!! American Heterosexual families in Gayowa are now victims. They can’t go outside without men in pink shorts and leather BDSM clothing chasing them with their cocks out and the butt flap on their shorts wide open, forcing them to listen to George Michael. Is this what you want America? You want your children exposed to this?

It’s just unnatural. So horribly unnatural. Nothing about homogay marriage is natural. But my belief in a man who was born to a Virgin, who was visited by three men who followed the words of an angel, and who grew up to perform miracles, was crucified but rose from the dead, walked around for a few days and then flew up to a bearded man in the sky (Who by the way, supported the election of John McCain in 2008….. which means Democrat voters are going to hell)… will allow me to beat those unnatural bastards.

By allowing Homofags to get married, the U.S Senate is undermining the marriage between man and woman. Before the queers were allowed to marry, no men or women ever got divorced. FACT. Britney Spears would not have felt forced into marrying a man for twenty four hours. FACT. Anti-gay Republicans like Richard Curtis would not have accidentally fallen on top of a man in a hotel room whilst they both just happened to be naked (there clothes were stolen by gay democrats!!) and then dressed up like a woman. FACT! And Fox News’s (the only fair and impartial news channel in the World) Sean Hannity would not have been FORCED by the Gays to pose with hookers even though he’s married. FACT!

This is all part of the Gay agenda, designed to destroy heterosexual marriage eventually. Did you know for example, that every time a gay couple marry, a heterosexual couple have to divorce. Heterosexual people are being forced to give up their Religious principles based on Jesus spending a lot of intimate time with twelve male disciples, in order to accept that gayism as anything but a disgusting child abusing aids spreading society killer.

Well I for one wont let it happen any more. And i’m not the only one! Over at the insightful and fully FACT based freedom loving website Americans for Truth have opened my eyes to the truth. They are the “leading resource for exposing and countering the homosexual activist agenda. ” And that’s exactly what it is! An agenda! A Satanist agenda at that. Heterosexuals have no agenda. We just want to be able to get married, whilst oppressing preventing those who engage in sexual acts that we deem inappropriate. (and for those of you who say that truth is subjective…. erm… WAKE UP! ….. The Bible says otherwise…. take that Liberals!!).
They highlight an email they received from a liberal Christian (which is just another way of saying “working undercover for Satan)…

“Grow the [f–k] up. My god your an [a–shole]. I can see that look on your balding head. Probably in the closet all these years trying to deny your mysioginistic [sic] way. God can\’t save you from the [f–cking] miserable choices you make in interpretating his rules as literal, not figurative mesaages [sic] on ways to live your life. I went to sunday school for half of my life – I should know. The name of this site should not be Americans for Truth, but Americans for Lies. People do not force themselves to like other people, amd [sic] only a thickheaded person like you deserves to rot in the depths of hell if there is such a place. Another good name for this site would be mainly [yourana–hole.com]. Perfectly suits you afterall.”

First of all, Satan worshipper, bald men can use their heads to absorb more of God’s light. So what do you have to say now? He then appears to suggest that the word of God is up for interpretation. Which it isn’t. It clearly states that Gays are an abomination. Notice he refers to the “A-hole” a couple of times? Do you know why that is? That’s right, it’s because he loves men. He seems to be suggesting that “Americans for Truth” are picking and choosing what they wish to take literally from the Bible. Which is false again!!! Because I happen to know for certain, that their new website, entitled “Americans for giving AIDs to Atheists” is going to be a massive hit! It’s based purely on Exodus 15:26, which clearly states that if you disobey God, you should be punished with horrible disease. To be fair though, it’s only a matter of time before they get AIDs anyway, given that they’re all gay anyway.

The gay days are numbered! Republicans are going to kick ass!

The Minority Republicans

It was the first time i’d heard of Bobby Jindal, and my instant reaction after his speech was “And this man is actually allowed to talk?” He should be banned from talking, he’s an insult to those of us who can talk without sounding patronising. He’s an insult to oratory. Cicero died all over again last night, this time with shame.

So President Obama made a great speech again, oozing with the same confidence that helped win him the White House, to a joint session of Congress. Fantastically eloquent, and full of exactly what needed to be said. He was absolutely right in blaming the problems America faces, on the greed of short term gains. He was right when he suggested that the distorted world of International Capitalism has lead to making the rich richer instead of investing in the future.

And the Republicans response? Bobby Jindal, the Governor of Louisiana. A man who once said “Transparency inspires confidence, and confidence promotes cohesion” and then his own office ranked last in the Country’s transparency ratings. A man who was referred to by The Wall Street Journal as…. “a boy wonder of the party. At 25, he was appointed to fix Louisiana’s failing Medicaid program, and succeeded.“… despite the fact that since taking over Healthcare in Louisiana, they dropped from 48th in the league, to 50th largely due to the fact that all he did, was cut spending, and made it harder for poorer patients to see a doctor. A man who voted against Gay marriage. There’s nothing like the Civil rights of one minority gaining the right to oppress another. He’s totally against abortion, and voted against all forms of stem cell research. So, to sum up, he’s against gay marriage, abortion, stem cell research, helping the poor, and because he refused to take some of the bail out money to help workers in his state claiming it will lead to tax rises on the wealthy, he’s also a big business suck up. So wait, isn’t that pretty much what the Republicans have stood for all the time? This guy isn’t new or exciting or different. He’s the same shit. He’s begging for the same failed policies. He’s asking to restore confidence with the American people, by offering nothing new. He’s basically saying “We set the country on fire, so I propose we put the fire out, with this new and exciting ….. fire.”

Jindal would only be “new” if he recognised the hypocrisy of stating just how wonderfully pro-life you are, but then cutting all costs that help sustain life for those who are less fortunate than the horribly rich.
He basically said “Hey, The Republicans understand ordinary Americans…….. and that’s why we wont support any plan that is made to help you!!! But we WILL help the rich become even richer!!…..oh, and i’m black by the way, in case you didn’t notice.”

So I wonder, of all the people who could have spoken for the GOP, and knowing their track record on disastrous eloquence, surely Jindal isn’t the best they have? I mean, watching his response to Obama was cringe worthy. He spoke as if addressing a class room of five year olds. Even Fox News didn’t like it. When Fox News don’t like something a Republican has to say, then you know you’re in trouble.

So given that he’s no different to every Republican who came before him, given that he’s offering nothing new, given that he claims his health reforms were some how magnificent because it saved money rather than measuring the level of healthcare on the fact that people, actual humans, not money, but people – suffered more under him than they did previously, and given that he’s a horribly patronising speaker, why did the GOP choose him? I suspect for the same reason they chose Palin when Hilary Clinton was commanding the vote of the Female population. I suspect for the same reason that they chose Michael Steele when Obama had commanded a landslide of the vote of the Black population. Because they represent minorities. There is no other reason why Jindal would be chosen ahead of all the Republicans out there, other than he’s young (to counter the idea that the GOP is full of old men) and of a minority (to counter the idea that the GOP is full of old… white men). It really doesn’t matter how utterly detestable the man is, he’s a minority and that’s the GOPs way of yelling “LOOK WE’RE NOT RACIST!!!.. Despite the fact that we’ve spent decades ignoring anyone who isn’t rich and white“. Jindal started his speech, stating all his minority status credentials. To me, this proved just how important it is to Republicans that they have a spokesman who happens to have a different skin colour, to counter the love for Obama. They failed massively to chose someone of a minority who is actually talented in the field of Politics. The Democrats chose wisely with Obama. The Republicans failed to chose wisely with both Palin and now with Jindal. It’s like they’re saying “Well he’s black, what more do you want?” The alternative of course, is that they picked Jindal for his intelligence, which makes me think that if he’s the best they have, if Palin is one of the best they have, if Michael Steele is one of the best they have, if George Bush was the very best choice the Republicans had eight years ago, the rest of the Republicans must share the combined intelligence of a goat, a retarded goat…. as unfair to retarded goats as that is.

The Democrats should counter with a gay Atheist guy at the top. The GOP could never match that. A gay GOP member (i’m not talking about those many, many undercover Gay GOP members like Glenn Murphy who found his mouth accidentally around a penis. Or Bob Allen who mysteriously offered to give a cop $20 to suck him off) would have to start every speech with “I realise i’m unnatural, disgusting, and God hates me, but…..“

Obama clearly has a talent for eloquence, and I think we’d all agree, also has a great mind. Similarly, although he doesn’t have the talent for oratory that Obama has, John McCain has a great mind. By comparison, Bobby Jindal is a disaster, much like Sarah Palin was a disaster. The GOP need to stop trying to show just how inclusive and diverse they are, and start showing that they understand why America didn’t want them anywhere near Government for at least the next four years.

Good luck to them.

The Spirit of Bipartisanship

If I were to bang my head on a brick wall over and over, i’d quickly come to the conclusion that it hurts, and that I probably shouldn’t spend my time banging my head against that wall any more. If I were to try to solve the pain, by continuing to bang my head on the brick wall, i’d soon be wondering what made me think that continuing to bang my head, would help.

John McCain complained recently that President Obama had failed in his attempts to create a bipartisan atmosphere with regards to the “OMG SOCIALISM ARGH!!!” stimulus package that has recently been passed through Congress. Now, I accept that McCain himself is a great hero of bipartisan Politics (regardless of the fact that he thinks President Bush was right, 95% of the time), on such topics as Global Warming and Campaign finance, McCain has reached across the isle, and that is indeed admirable. But I do go the feeling that a long with 90% of Republican Bloggers I come across day to day on WordPress, he’s horribly bitter.

I’m perfectly aware that the Plan has many social elements within it, that Republicans deem “pork“, regardless of who it helps. But that’s what Republicans must have expected from Democrats. Similarly, they got their $275bn tax relief and cannot legitimately yell “Socialism” when the Stimulus offers Businesses, the bonus depreciation feature exists, when tax credits for struggling small businesses exist, when there is double in what small businesses can write off when it comes to capital investments and new equipment purchases.
I refuse to call $41bn for grants to local school districts; $39bn to subsidise health insurance for the unemployed; $4bn in prevention care; $31bn to upgrade and repair public buildings – “pork”. But obviously anything that doesn’t amount to a mass of tax cuts for the rich, is going to demand the calls of “SOCIALISM” from the opposition.

I’m unaware of how much Fidel Castro would have been willing to accept as truly Socialist with this package. Perhaps he’d have welcomed cash for money-losing companies by allowing them to claim tax credits on past profits dating back five years instead of two, or the bonus depreciation for Businesses buying up new equipment, for a tax credit for businesses who hire disconnected youths and veterans.

In an attempt for me to appear a little bit bipartisan here, I will accept that $650million to convert TV boxes to digital seems a little odd. Although a worthy cause, like $15bn for College Scholarships is a worthy cause, it’s unlikely to stimulate the short term economic woes of a Nation on the brink of economic disaster. This is certainly just a way for those like Pelosi to sneak into the stimulus, those niggling partisan leftovers. However, if the money given for College Scholarships, goes to the right place, meaning the Colleges now how money that they were losing, meaning they don’t have to lay off staff, then it can only be a good thing, regardless of the motive for it appearing in the bill. Investing in infrastructure is also, not ‘pork’.

The word ‘pork’ is interesting, when it seems to only apply to investing in infrastructure, and not to the trillions spent on the deaths of thousands of American troops and 1,000,000 innocent Iraqis. That’s deemed ok. But key infrastructure, PORK apparently.

I am more inclined to accept the Obama Stimulus as completely necessary, than I am to accept the argument that it’s full of “pork”. A stimulus is supposed to be full of so-called “pork” because it works. FDR’s worked. The ‘pork’ is not just words on paper. For example, I recently say Fox News state that “$10 million for urban canal inspection is pork spending”…. not it isn’t. It’s a plan to create jobs, and it will indeed, create jobs. That’s how a stimulus works.

Back to McCain. He told CNN recently that this wasn’t the change Obama promised. That, although Obama went to Capitol hill for input, most of what the Republicans offered was just wiped off the table.
What he appears to mean is, Obama must give in to Republican demands, otherwise they will just act as a roadblock regardless of the proposals.

I am not saying the Democrats and Obama have this sorted out perfectly, nor am I saying that the Stimulus will definitely work. But for the Republicans to publicly state how much of a failure it is before it had even taken shape, is nothing but tit for tat partisan bullshit from the Right Wing of the Political spectrum. Especially considering they have full support for a party that has systematically destroyed the economy, and waged an unjust expensive war over the past eight years. It’s a bit rich of them to be taking the high ground now. It’s as if they’ve been asleep for eight years, woke up on January 20th, and yelled “WE HAVE THE ANSWERS NOW!!“…. forgive me for not falling for it. Forgive me for thinking that the useless Bush tax cuts that were not utilised for the best of the Economy by those rich businessmen who shipped work overseas; those tax cuts that McCain supported, were nothing short of an absolute disaster and highlighted the failure of American Capitalism. Forgive me for thinking that Republicans calling it “robbing future generations” is a despicable charge, given that they had no problem spending taxpayers money bailing out Wall Street, and then had no problem robbing American families of the lives of their children, brothers, sisters, fathers and mothers in the first “Resource War” in Iraq.

I would give a lot of credit, to a Republican who would happily admit that their policies may have failed them, these past eight years. I cannot wait to see that day. I compare the Republican bitterness outrage at this stimulus bill, with the lack of outrage at the Bush stimulus package, the largely useless Bush stimulus package. It’s incredible how little the Republicans are consistent in their hatred of stimulus packages. Spending trillions on an unjust war, and then wasting trillions on big business tax cuts has caused this mess. It’s a failure. And McCain thinks he has a right to suggest otherwise?

The Republican Party seriously needs to change it’s attitude.

When the CBO report shows that Clinton left office with a “budget surplus projected to be $5.6trillion over ten years” compared to the Bush administration leaving office with a “projected deficit of well over $4trillion for that same period“, you have to really start asking if these people should be given the chance to talk at all. The damning report from the CBO continues…“As a result of their misguided fiscal choices,
President Bush and Republican Congresses squandered the budget opportunities they inherited and are passing along historically large budget deficits that will persist for years.” So the question needs to be answered, why do you Republicans suddenly think you deserve to be heard now?

I’m sure the spirit of bipartisanship is needed to a degree, and like John McCain, i’m sure Obama has attempted it. But it has to be taken with so much caution, and it has to be taken knowing just how damaging the Republicans have been since 2001. Take on board suggestions that both Republicans and Democrats agree on. Do not listen to calls for mass tax breaks for the rich, because that is not the way to solve every problem (as we’ve now discovered). The caution has to be taken. Obama is doing the right thing by not giving into these people.

Bipartisanship has to come from both sides. Republicans have to acknowledge their dire failings in order to even gain an ounce of credibility, they have to say “Ok, we messed up, we’re ready to have a rethink“, any short of that, and they just should not be taken seriously.

Perhaps the Republicans are frustrated because they have no control anymore. Perhaps they are all more like Limbaugh than we all think and that they want Obama to fail, because if this stimulus succeeds in pulling America out from the pit of Republican destruction, it will only serve to make the Republicans look a hundred times worse than they do right now.

Given that the majority of Americans who read my blog are Republicans, I fear i’m in for a bit of a beating because of this. I will try and survive. Clearly they do not feature in the 67% approval rating for the way he handled the passing of the Stimulus bill. Instead, they must appear in the laughable 31% that approve of the Republicans in Congress as opposed to the 48% who approve of the Democrats in Congress. They certainly don’t figure in the 68% who approve of the job Obama has done up until now. But you know, what do those 68% know anyway!!!!

If America had wanted much more failed Republican policies, policies that had created this mess in the first place, policies that had resulted in record unemployment, a highly costly illegal war, and tax cuts for the rich who then squander away their even greater wealth, then McCain would now be President. America chose not to keep banging it’s head against the brick wall.

The Right to hysteria

I’m sure we as a Western society need to take responsibility of our thoughts before we make such outlandish suggestions filled with unfounded propaganda. It needs to come from both sides of the Political divide. There are those Liberals among us who will argue until they cannot argue any more, that the Bush Administration were actively involved and had funded 9/11. They will work tirelessly to find any unimportant discrepency and tie it to a mass conspiracy. It is ultimately a fatuous argument on their part.

Similarly, there are those on the Conservative side of the fence, who see a scratch on the flesh and call it a canon ball wound of great proportions. I’m talking about ‘Freedom of speech’. Conservative writers, much like Liberal writers, will not deviate from their ideology. They will insist that the opposing ideology is wrong, not just on certain issues, but on everything they stand for. A GOP Blogger Gopwire writes recently that us Liberals have a deep underlying plan to “to “hush” conservative’s so Obama and his cronnies can be free to destroy our nation as we know it.” I take great offence at this, because there is no plan to silence anyone. And it isn’t just liberals that have attacked what people consider to be their rights, throughout history. Conservatives are just as guilty. You cannot argue that one side is destroying your liberty whilst blindly supporting the same on the other side. Rhetoric as powerful as “free to destroy our nation as we know it” engages not the thoughtful brain, but the easily lead. There are those, like that particular blogger who will insist that Obama has a plan to destroy the Nation purely because his policies disagree with those of the Ideology he blindly and obediently follows. There are those who consider George Bush to have been the devil, even though those in their own Democratic camp have been failing to pay taxes, screwing the system, and generally acting rather corrupt whilst preaching ‘change’. The term “destroy our nation as we know it” is ridiculous hysteria of the worst variety.

There are those Liberals who insist that Nuclear weapons do not serve the purpose they claim to serve, and are in fact inherently evil. There are those Conservatives on the other side of the fence who believe that Nuclear Weapons are a key to National security. I agree with both. They are inherently evil, but one cannot expect to disable your Nuclear capability in the hopes that your enemy will do the same thing out of good will. It just isn’t realistic. The Liberals in this case, refuse to acknowledge that they may be wrong.

There are those Liberal bloggers who insist that Israel is disastrously evil. And whilst the actions of Israel recently, is nothing short of genocide, I cannot help but wonder why those Liberals will not step out of their ideological bearing and condemn Hamas for their wickedness and hatred since coming to power; and in fact before gaining power.

Similarly, there are those who refuse to acknowledge that Western Policy may have something to do with the rise of Extremism. They don’t “hate our freedoms” they don’t want to “destroy our way of life“, they simply hate us for how we’ve treated their Nations in the past. They think it gives them a right to fight fire with fire. We’re all in agreement that terrorism is by definition, evil. But why are we quick to label our enemies terrorists, whilst we are apparently fine with the atrocities our own Governments cause? Why are we surprised that we’re hated?

On the other hand, Conservatives are refusing to take even slight blame for the collapse of the Global economy. They will not for a second hear of the notion that a free deregulated market concept is anything but perfect. They instead, find the most obscure reasons to blame Liberals for the disaster. The Free Market ideal much like the Socialist ideal, is just that; an ideal. It doesn’t work in reality. But even when it fails, the Conservative branch will refuse to accept it.

There are those who insist that Socialism can work, regardless of the fact that where ever it’s been tried, it’s ended in a nightmare of genocide and dictatorship. There are also those who live by the wonders of the Free Market, regardless of that fact that it has left so many nations behind, drenched in indescribable poverty. Neither side will admit it’s notion is flawed. Massively flawed.

Others will live by what the media says, unquestionable in their acquiescence. In ‘Audacity of Hope’ by Barack Obama, along with other sources, speak of an article not too long ago suggested that Guards at Guantanamo Bay had flushed Koran’s down the toilet to the dismay of Muslim inmates. The Pentagon then released a report outlining that although the Koran’s had not been flushed, the female U.S Guards had pretended to smear menstrual blood on the faces of inmates during questioning, and pissed all over the Koran and an inmate. Fox News went that day with the headline: “Pentagon finds no evidence of Koran being flushed“. I often feel anger toward Fox News reports, there bias is shameful. And yet, many people will sit and quote them on their blogs, insisting that they are right… because Bill O’Reilly said so. They do not think for themselves. They do not investigate for themselves. The presume that their bias choice of media, is entirely without fault in it’s assessments. The media has a love affair with partisanship. The people have a love affair with partisanship. That, will never change.

There are those who sport tshirts and logos with “Communism killed 30,000,000 and all I got was this lousy tshirt”, whilst failing to acknowledge the deaths of thousands under Capitalist Regimes like Pinochet’s Chile. Just because one ideology kills less innocents than another, doesn’t make it relatively moral. It just means one dictator with no ideology was much more committed to murder and genocide than the other evil dictator with no ideology. Why are we arguing that it is the fault of the ideology, rather than the tyrants who profess to be apart of that ideology?

Similarly, Obama is savaged by Republicans and conservatives for saying “You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done“. One forum dedicates a topic of conversation to this, with the Topic title being “Obama against free speech for Conservatives/Republicans/Private citizens“. No he isn’t. He’s merely stating an opinion. Which is surely, his freedom of speech right? Freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to say whatever you want to say without consequence. Limbaugh has called Obama “The magic Negro“; he’s said “I hope Obama fails“; Of African Americans, he said “They’re 12 percent of the population. Who the hell cares?“; and he once referred to Obama as “Osama Obama“. The Republicans and Conservatives did not express anger at the utter lack of respect and tact that Limbaugh has shown, they waited until Obama responded and then stood to support Limbaugh. It’s slightly unnerving when that happens. It is not supporting free speech, it is out right support for the freedom to insult and cause trouble without having to stand up to the consequences. You cannot throw such deep hate filled attacks at people and then hide behind “I’m just exercising freedom of speech!!” when you’re called up on it.

Over here in the UK recently, Dutch Freedom Party MP Geert Wilders has been denied entry to the U.K, based on the fact that he is trying to show his film linking Terrorism to the Koran, and Islam in general. It is a film filled with one side of a very complex argument. Wilders does not talk to any Muslims who strictly oppose and denounce all Terrorism in the name of their holy book. He merely sticks to the notion that the Koran and therefore Islam is evil. He fails to point out that actually, there are those who practice Islam, who are strongly opposed to Extemism. Instead, he applies his twisted logic to include all Islam. By that same logic, we could apply the Phelp’s family’s reading of Christianity, to the entire Christian nation.
There will always be excuses by those intending to defend their beliefs, which is there right to do. However, to ignore punctilious evidence that contradicts their beliefs, is disturbingly wrong.

Whilst Wilder has a right to say exactly what he believes, and it was a mistake for the British Government to ban him from the Country, it has sparked a multitude of Conservative Bloggers, who suggest that the British are now pandering to Islam because we’re afraid to offend Muslims. That whilst we allow home grown muslims to call for the slaughter of those who insult Mohammad, we don’t allow the opposite argument to take shape. They go further to claim that it is an out right attack on freedom of speech. This, in my opinion, is utterly misleading.

The suggestion that the UK Government is afraid of offending muslims is a weak one at best, given that the main issue Extemists have with the UK is that we support Israel and the war in Iraq. The fact that a Fascist MP was banned from our shores will only prove to ignite misguided Nationalists like the BNP who insist that we’re becoming a Nation pandering to Muslims. The Government cannot expect to beat the rise of the Nationalists, by banning those who may support the Nationalist cause. Nationalists can only be beaten through debate which serves to ridicule their pathetic cause. Geert Wilders himself, said of Britain “Be brave. Be a defender of free speech. If you don’t you are weak. You are cowards. Your country has already taken a big step in the direction of Islamification.” What he, the Nationalists and all those who insist that banning Wilders from British shores is a step toward the abolition of freedom of speech do not talk about, or report on their Nationalist websites filled with hate and propaganda, is that Wilders is not the only person to be banned from British shores..

Muslim cleric Dr Yusuf al-Qaradawi was refused entry. He has described suicide bombers as “martyrs” and homosexuality as “a disease”.

Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan barred on the grounds that his racist and anti-Semitic views could threaten public order

Now forgive me if i’m wrong, but those people are Muslims right? In fact 80 Islamic Hate Preaches are among the 230 people banned from the UK. You cannot, as the Nationalists would like to do, suggest that freedom of speech is dying purely because those who support your flawed ideology are banned from the Country, yet not make a sound the moment that those who disagree with you are banned. To truely possess freedom of speech, we must allow the hate fill muslims to be beaten by logic and reason, whilst at the same time we defeat those Fascists and Nationalists with the same logic and reason. They may be entirely wrong and flawed in their arguments, but they both have the right to say it, providing they can in fact deal with the consequences of those words.

However, it certainly doesn’t help the Islamic cause, when the protest Wilder’s film about Muslims being violent, by calling for his death.
The problem with Islam is that it cannot claim to take the moral high ground against those who attack the faith, by burning and threatening to kill those responsible for insulting it. Much like the problem with the West, in that anyone who threatens us we call “Terrorists” and yet, we fight terrorism, with terrorism. It’s one big bag of hypocrisy from every side you look. No one side has the moral high ground.

In any event, i’m derailing from the point of this blog. To suggest such a small provision is an attempt to destroy all freedom of speech; like suggesting that the Obama Stimulus is somehow equal to turning the United States of America into Soviet America is misleading and shows a lack of forethought. When Bush was doing it, no one suggested Socialism. When Guiliani’s New York debt reached record highs and spending increased by 30%, no Republican called out “SOCIALISM!”. The moment someone who happens to disagree with them does it, it’s suddenly Leninist.

Similarly, Democrats and those of us on The Left cannot legitimately attack those like the Bush Administration for it’s Free Market failure, when people like Rahm Emmanuel, who served on the board of Directors as Freddie Mac lied and cheated it’s way through scandal; is now given pretty much the top job in Washington. It isn’t change. It’s much of the same. It isn’t Socialism. It isn’t an attack on any fundamental rights, it does not require Political Drama Queens on either side of the political fence to act as if they World is falling down around them whenever the ideological tide changes slightly (ever so slightly) against them. It’s getting boring now.

“You’re wrong.“
“Why?“
“Because you’re Liberal.“
“But you’re wrong.“
“Why?“
“Because you’re Conservative.“
That’s how modern politics is. That’s how modern political bloggers write. I must concede that I too am guilty of this. We don’t care what the opposition has to offer, it will be wrong and useless and too much of the same or too Socialist before it’s even been offered. We take a point and we find evidence to back up our point whilst ignoring all evidence to the contrary. Again, I must concede that i’m guilty of this, but i’m certainly not the only one. I’m yet to read a blog or a Newspaper or the website of a Political Party who come to an equally well rounded opinion.

The Labour Party of the 1970s destroyed the lives of millions. The Conservative Parties of the 1980s and 1990s destroyed the lives of millions. The Labour Parties of 1990s and 00s are destroying the lives of millions. And suddenly we’re all taken in by the Conservative opposition. They must be better than what we already have, we all presume. But it will take another decade before that Conservative Party who will inevitably become the next Government, again, destroy the lives of millions, by which time we’ll have a New New Labour, who offer change, and then proceed to destroy the lives of millions. It’s the same shit, over and over. Do we really believe David Cameron to be any different?

I fully accept that differences in opinion and ideology and the crucial need to have all sides allowed to talk, is a gift of Democracy to the developed World. However, when both sides refuse to accept that the other side may have a point; when both sides refuse to accept how tragically wrong they have been in the past; when both sides refuse to work together rather choosing instead to push their own agenda through (Although I support the Obama Stimulus fully, I do feel Pelosi appears to have used it to her own ideological advantage, which is so desperately wrong) whilst at all times attacking limited aspects of the other side rather than accepting certain arguments they may give as valid; when all of that happens, we are not Democratic. We are two teams of political stubborn spin and twisters, hellbent on destroying the opposition regardless of how negatively it affects the Country.

By creating such deep divide based on a ‘get-one-over’ on your opponent system, we are allowing those people who make a small dent in their car sound like a hellish car crash when they relay the story on their blogs and news articles to influence the weak minds of a generation.

I do not believe Obama is either Socialist or evil. I believe he is trying to do what is best for the Country. Similarly, I believe John McCain and Sarah Palin were not evil, they simply wanted to do what was best for the Country. They just differ in how that goal is to be achieved. Suggesting either McCain or Obama have some hidden agenda, without actual evidence (And I don’t mean taking what you consider to be evidence, out of it’s original context) or adequate quotations, is deeply ignorant. And although that may be true, as Freedom of Speech would have it, those who cry SOCIALIST the moment Obama provides support for those who need it most, or the moment they cry OUT OF TOUCH the moment Sarah Palin makes a mistake when interviewed (as if she’s the only one) have the right to their hysteria.

I’m slowly becoming disillusioned with Politicians across the board in general.

Socialist Healthcare works

“I find it offensive that one in four of the livers donated, go to alcoholics. If there are two people side by side wanting a liver, and both have the right tissue match, and one is an alcoholic, there’s no contest -you take the one who’s not an alcoholic, they are more entitled.” - Eunice Booker, The Observer, front page, 15/02/09

It would appear that we, as a Nation are taking steps to punish people for being flawed. Unlike Eunice, I do not believe that the non-alcoholic in that scenario is more entitled to a liver transplant. I don’t believe anyone is “more entitled“. According to The Observer today, 151 liver transplants out of the 623 administered, were the result of alcohol abuse. As a non-drinker myself, I recognise that if I were in the situation where a drinker was given a liver transplant over myself, I would be annoyed. I accept that. However, without logical thought one could end up distraught at all medical problems.

The man who takes too long in the dentist chair causing you to miss work; because he hasn’t brushed his teeth enough; The woman who is taking up a bed in intensive care because she was txting whilst driving; The man taking up NHS time and money having his tummy tucked because he ate too many chips; The woman taking up Surgeon’s time because she smoked too much and contracted Cancer. Where does it end?

I get the feeling we’re becoming a society hell-bent on attacking anyone who is not like us. Anyone we consider to be less than perfect, we instantly take a dislike toward. On the train to Nottingham on Thursday last week, on my way to go for a lovely meal with my beautiful Girlfriend, I was sat behind a homeless man. He was old and worn out. He had a huge scar running from the top of his forehead to the tip of his left cheek. He kept walking up to the bathroom to hide, so that the ticket inspector didn’t catch him. It was snowing outside. He was wearing incredibly thin clothing. He asked a man passing by on the train if he could spare some change. The man, with his hair slicked back, wearing an incredible posh pin-stripe suit said “fuck off”. I looked at the man as he passed by and shook my head at him complete with a disgusted look.

The homeless man turned round to face me and said “What do you say when homeless people ask for money?” I told him I usually give them the odd pound if I can spare it. He went on “…I’ve got nowhere to sleep tonight, or anything to eat, do you have any change you could perhaps spare?” .. so naturally, I gave him the £2 I had left in my pocket and a packet of crisps I had in my bag. He got up and left to go try his luck elsewhere, but not before thanking me, and getting up with a smile on his face.
As we came to Nottingham station. The very kind lady sat behind me, asked if she could give me back the £2 i’d given to that homeless man, because she didn’t want me to now be short of money. It was only £2 so I wasn’t that fussed; thanked her for her kindness and politely turned it down.

That particular situation has had me thinking all weekend. The diversity of social responsibility was incredible in that brief thirty minute journey. A homeless man who clearly wasn’t completely sane. I’d guess years of living on the street, with no family, perhaps a rough childhood and the appalling conditions he’s had to live with, which inevitably included that scarred face. Then there was me, a typical young man worrying about money, what he wants from life, how he’s going to be able to afford posh holidays and a big house when he’s older who’s also happy to talk to and help the homeless because I do not see them as worthless animals, but as human beings who have simply been unable to cope with the money making side of life, like a cog that has fallen out of the machinery. Then there was the business man, who metaphorically pissed all over the tramp, whose only sense of responsibility is himself. As if money made him a better species of human. And then of course, there was the kind lady sat behind me who was willing to help the person who helped the homeless person.

The beauty of the NHS is it encourages social responsibility. It is the last calling card of the socialist. It says that regardless of who you are, and how much you earn, you are not entitled to a better standard of healthcare than anyone else. It is largely humanist in it’s approach to life. It takes the idea that healthcare should not be withheld from you, if there isn’t a profit to be made, and instead puts you and I on equal stepping. And rightfully so. I am not more or less important than a homeless man who has never worked a day in his life. Because healthcare should not be a commodity. The NHS, is a national treasure.

John McCain during the 2008 Presidential race referred to the British NHS as “undesirable“. Undoubtedly, as many Conservatives like to do, he focused on those who were not pleased with their level of healthcare from the NHS, the disgruntled few. Which accounts for such a small percentage, it’s an insult to those of us who need the NHS; such my dad, who had a heart attack a few years back, and who the NHS saved the life of.
John McCain must be blissfully unaware that according to the World Health Organisation, whilst over 45million Americans cannot afford adequate Health Insurance, the American Government pays 15.2% of GDP toward Health. However, over here in the UK, we’re all covered. Whether we’re worth billions of pounds, or the homeless man I met on the train; and it still costs less of our GDP (8.2% in fact) than the USA. We are in fact, healthier as a nation on the whole, than the U.S.A. And that can be strongly attributed to such a World class Health Service. If that is “undesirable” or “socialist“, then we should be damn proud to be undesirable and socialist, because it works. When the system currently in place in America allows 47 million people to be incapable of receiving adequate health care, and when health insurance costs are rising faster than wages or inflation, you have to really start choosing your words with much more care and attention before you start attacking the system of another Nation.

According to the NCHCA Third of U.S Firms in 2007 did not offer healthcare insurance. 8.1 million children in the U.S were uninsured. Almost 90 million people between 2006 and 2007 spent a period of time without healthcare insurance. And our system is undesirable? It would appear that we have the right system with creases that need to be ironed out, whereas the U.S, has the wrong system entirely. You cannot run away from all ideas born out of Socialist ideals. Some do work!

I’ve always wondered why Healthcare in America, if universal, would be “Socialist” yet police and fire coverage aren’t? Perhaps that question can be answered by what Professor Brendan McSweeney from the Holloway School of Management referred to as “market-failure denial“. The same people who seem to think that Stalin’s Centralised Government in which the guys at the top exploited the guys below, is any different from the guys at the top of a bank or the top of a Corporation exploiting those below them. The only difference of course being, that one is called “Government” the other is called “Company“. It’s a bunch of Eastern bloc Communists scattered across the place hiding under the name ‘Capitalism’, whose Corporate central planning is more costly than that of most developing nations, and whose central planners (management – the guys a million miles away from the workers) earn hundreds of thousands more than those who work for them, who have never seen them before since working there and yet insist on devising targets and procedures. Central planning, is of course, “Communist“. The same people more happy to bail out bankers, than offer healthcare to those who need it most. The same people who are more than happy to yell “I’m pro life!!!“….. until the baby is born into a poor family, in which case, it suddenly isn’t as deserving of life as a rich child.
Go figure.

As for the Observer story from this morning, the moment we start questioning who is more deserving of healthcare, is the moment we start down the slippery slope toward total privatised healthcare.

The Paradox of America

The issue facing the Founding Fathers during the period 1787-1788, was the framing of the Constitution and how they would justify the problem of slavery. How could they reconcile the 1776 Declaration of Independence, with the need for a new Constitution based on their ideals of freedom from imposed rule, when they themselves were imposing rule over others?
Clearly, even back then, Slavery proved to go against everything the Revolution stood for. The Revolution itself can be referred to quite rightly as the Freedom Revolution. The Founding Fathers, Jefferson, Adams, Burr, Franklin, Hamilton, Madison and Washington are perhaps the most important and greatest political figures since Cicero, Caesar, Octavian and later Trajan. But that very issue of slavery which had no affect on the hearts of the citizens of the Roman Republic, would have a considerable affect on the brand new American Republic, purely because if ignored, it would suggest America was born on a gigantic contradiction, of epic proportions. Maybe so. But without that contradiction, and because slavery was so instrumental in the lives of the ordinary man pre-Revolution in America, the question of whether or not America could survive without it, was immeasurable.
America was of course built on contradiction. Built on paradox. The 55 delegates, often known as the framers of the Constitution constantly argued about how best to word it. Jefferson and Hamilton were the equivilant today of Liberal and Conservative. But they managed to frame arguably the greatest document of modern history, despite their differences. And America was born.

(Please excuse my simplistic overview of the American Revolution and framing of the Constitution, i’m young, and i’m from England, and haven’t been exposed to American history all that much, other than what i’ve taught myself from books. So excuse the simplicity.)

“In recent days, there have been misguided criticisms of this plan that echo the failed theories that helped lead us into this crisis” – President Obama.

It strikes me as ridiculous that the very notion of big bankers and business owners who have been on the receiving end of bail out funds – tax payers money, should be allowed to do whatever they want with it. It strikes me as utterly inconceivable that they appear to try to justify six figure salaries despite destroying the economy. They should be in prison if anything.
It should absolute disgust us all, that the CEOs of Chrysler, GM, and Ford have the nerve to ask for $25bn yet will fly home in their own private jets. Those of us who keep the topic of social injustice at the front of our minds, who know people die every day because they cannot get the food they so desperately need, stand united in our absolute outrage at these disgusting, greedy human beings.

Obama, quite rightfully put a stop to it, by capping the wages of CEOs at $500,000.
Obama, The President, yesterday is quoted as saying…
“This is America. We don’t disparage wealth. We don’t begrudge anybody for achieving success. And we believe that success should be rewarded. But what gets people upset – and rightfully so – are executives being rewarded for failure. Especially when those rewards are subsidized by U.S. taxpayers. “
Thankfully, some Republicans have actually supported the cap on CEO wages. Richard Shelby, on the Senate Banking Committee, and Senator for Alabama, said quite rightfully: “In ordinary situations where the taxpayers money is not involved, we shouldn’t set executive pay, But where you’ve got federal money involved, taxpayers’ money involved, TARP money involved, and the way they have spent it, with no accountability, is getting close to being criminal.” He’s correct, in many ways. It’s a pity those blinded by the aspect of competition in the marketplace do not have the same outlook. Those such as “Clarence” commenting on a piece on Swamppolitics.com merely, and quite ridiculously state “Obamas Socialism starts“. But then, to these people, if Sean Hannity mentions ‘Socialism’ then it’s pretty much unanimous within the limited intellect of the Fox News Audience that Socialism rather than responsible Capitalism, is on the rise.

Let’s address the issue of the so called “rise of socialism” being thrown into the argument by those such as John McCain, who as early as October 2008, was referring to Obama as Socialist. And up to and including, the mass of Right Winged bloggers, who insist on calling anyone who isn’t a ‘pro-life‘ (the most misleading concept since ‘Freedom‘), anti-homosexual, Religious, right winger a ‘Socialist‘. Obama is not Socialist. He is as far from a Socialist as a Left winger could be. He’s Centre-left, at best.

So is the stimulus Socialist? No…

Job-creating investments in health: $153bn

Job-creating investments tax cuts for small businesses: $21bn

Job-creating investments in education and training: $138bn

Job-creating investments in infrastructure and science: $165bn

Tax cuts for working families: $247bn
….. Allow me to draw your attention to the second point…. “Job-creating investments tax cuts for small businesses: $21bn” – In what way, other than the mess of a Republican mind, can that be considered Socialist? Even if a video of Obama, dressed up in Soviet attire, speaking Russian, quoting Lenin was to come to light, it wouldn’t change the fact that $21bn in tax cuts for small businesses, is not Socialist.

It is not a Socialist ideal, to bring Wall Street back to levels of human decency and responsibility. Much like it’s not Fascism to allow those companies to exploit the World, make six figure sum salaries, and then run the company into the ground, whilst the government refuse to acknowledge that they’d done anything wrong; like the Bush Administration did and like the ultra-Conservative Republicans still seem to be advocating.

A socialist, says things like “Freedom in capitalist society always remains about the same as it was in ancient Greek republics: Freedom for slave owners.” If you were to claim to be Socialist to Vladmir Lenin, or Per Albin Hansson, or Fidel Castro, and one of your main points to your Socialist agenda, was …. “We don’t disparage wealth. We don’t begrudge anybody for achieving success. And we believe that success should be rewarded“, you’d probably be punched in your ‘dirty capitalist face‘. If he were then to repeat what the White House website states about the apparent decay of the Capitalist system: “We must also work with the same sense of urgency to stabilize and repair the financial system we all depend on.” He’d be taken outside and shot, as a traitor to the cause of Socialism.
I shouldn’t have to explain the huge difference between Obama’s plans for America and Socialism. Those who support Obama, know that the Conservatives are trying everything they can to discredit Obama. Perhaps because he can put a full sentence together, which is something the Republican White House has lacked for quite some time. Or perhaps it’s to take the blame away from those who actually caused the financial mess in the first place; themselves. Either way, the fear tactics employed by the Conservatives wont work.

Capping the wages of the bail out CEOs is not an act of a Socialist agenda, it is the act of a President trying to make an irresponsible Wallstreet, accountable to the people who are now bailing them out. If the President were to simply allow Merril Lynch to hand out a mass of Corporate Bonuses, whilst CEOs who systematically destroyed the economy, think it’s perfectly acceptable to then take home six figure sums; not only would the bail outs mean absolutely nothing, not only would Corporate morality remain in the gutter, but we’d also be setting ourselves up for another major economic disaster further down the line.

John Thain, who used taxpayers money to redecorate his office and give out handsome $4bn bonuses after losing $15bn in less than a year, is quoted here as saying “If you don’t pay your best people you will destroy your franchise“. The problem I see with John Thain here, is that ….. you don’t have best people!! Similarly, the argument being used by the Conservatives is that if Obama restricts the pay of bail out CEOs to $500,000, those people will just move to companies offering more money. Firstly, why would any company offer a six figure sum of money, to a CEO who has ran his company into the ground? Secondly, if those CEOs do move on, great, give someone else a chance, they can’t do any worse than has already been done.

From a GOP which has pledged $150 million cut to the Violence Against Women Act, and would instead spend that money on tax breaks for the rich, I do not know how anyone can take their flawed, and rather despicable side in this debate. If a $150 million cut to the Violence Against Women Act, is the prevailing of a Capitalist society over a Socialist society, I think i’d rather live in what they consider to be a Socialist society.

Obama is being used by the Republicans and Conservatives through their tried and tested Fear machine. Bush, Rumsfeld, and Cheney specialised in it. Republican bloggers and members themselves have embraced it. The fear machine that relies on the idea that the past eight years just didn’t happen. It relies on being unable to acknowledge that it was actually the Republicans who caused this mess in the first place. It’s ignored. It’s ignored, because they know that the moment the word ‘Socialism’ is mentioned, the attention suddenly shifts from how a Republican Party in Government could allow CEOs and top bankers to systematically manipulate and destroy the system, and moves onto how the Democrats propose to fix it. When the truth of the matter is, the bail out Obama has proposed is unprecedented. No one knows how it will turn out. No one knows if it will succeed. It is a pity those same Republicans who attack the stimilus by suggesting they know for sure it will fail and kill America once and for all, didn’t have the same vision before they voted for Bush.

Is Obama really such a huge threat to the future stability of America? No. He is slowly already improving America, collecting it from the gutter in which it was left after the Bush regime. Will America survive Obama, despite Senators like Republican Senator Mel Martinez refered to Obama as a ‘threat’?. The answer, of course, is yes, America will survive Obama, and i’d suggest, America will come out of the Obama Presidency a lot better placed within the World than the isolation of America under Bush.

The paradox of the founding fathers in 1787; the fight for freedom despite the continued use of slave labour, is echoed down the centuries in the unforgivable paradox that the Republicans have created a mess of a system, in which CEOs and Bankers are taking public money that they have not earnt for themselves in absolutely huge amounts whilst the rest of America struggles to feed their families, who could have used that money for themselves. America was born on paradox. It will overcome it again, through the measures put forward by the Democrats, to bring morality back to Wall Street.