A few musings

"Senate OKs un-American piece of legislation

A few days ago, the U.S. Senate voted to keep a provision in the national defense authorization bill. The provision allows for the U.S. military to detain indefinitely and without due process any American in America or in another country or any other person in America or in another country that they suspect to be a terrorist.

Both Sen. Olympia Snowe and Sen. Susan Collins voted to keep this provision. How could they have done this? I believe that this provision is the most un-American, most un-democratic, most Sen. McCarthy-like fear-mongering provision that the U.S. Senate has voted on in my life.

Who would determine who is a suspected terrorist, what criteria would be used, and would peaceful demonstrators such as the brave souls in the Occupy movement be detained?

I believe that America's long-time commitment to due progress, legal representation, trial in a U.S. court, presuming someone is innocent until proven guilty, and telling someone what they are being charged with would end.

I think President Barack Obama should veto this bill.

I think that our beloved Sen. Margaret Chase Smith would have thought that there are few, if any, terrorists in America, would have stood up against this provision, and would have understood what I think is the reason behind it.

I think the senators are afraid of the Occupy movement, want to quash non-violent dissent, and are afraid of losing their perches of power and money. I think it's time to recall Snowe and Collins and replace them with bright, honest people who have a conscience and who will not take money from corporations.

It is said that dissent is the highest form of patriotism."
from Brian Noyes Pulling, Minister and social worker


Rev. Noyes, you patriotism is noted. President Obama has promised to veto this when it reaches his desk. I sincerely hope he does. Time will tell.

From President Obama's Kansas speech: "For most Americans, the basic bargain that made this country great has eroded. Long before the recession hit, hard work stopped paying off for too many people. Fewer and fewer of the folks who contributed to the success of our economy actually benefitted from that success. Those at the very top grew wealthier from their incomes and investments than ever before. But everyone else struggled with costs that were growing and paychecks that weren't -- and too many families found themselves racking up more and more debt just to keep up."

To paraphrase that great enemy of Capitalism, Karl Marx, When labor can no longer afford what they produce, Capitalism will die. And to think, when this happens it will be those windy Republicans, those great defenders of Capitalism, who will be primarily to blame. How very ironic.

“They don't know it, but they are doing it.” 
― Karl Marx, Capital, Vol. 1: A Critical Analysis of Capitalist Production

The lady tells it to the world---Secretary of State Clinton in a speech at the UN:

“It is violation of human rights when people are beaten or killed because of their sexual orientation, or because they do not conform to cultural norms about how men and women should look or behave. It is a violation of human rights when governments declare it illegal to be gay, or allow those who harm gay people to go unpunished. It is a violation of human rights when lesbian or transgendered women are subjected to so-called corrective rape, or forcibly subjected to hormone treatments, or when people are murdered after public calls for violence toward gays, or when they are forced to flee their nations and seek asylum in other lands to save their lives. And it is a violation of human rights when life-saving care is withheld from people because they are gay, or equal access to justice is denied to people because they are gay, or public spaces are out of bounds to people because they are gay. No matter what we look like, where we come from, or who we are, we are all equally entitled to our human rights and dignity.”

“Occupy the Winter! An #OWS Winter will certainly lead to a very hopeful American Spring”,  says Michael Moore.

In an effort to check our hubris concerning  the all-too-flattering common assumption that America deserves the credit for having invented the modern republican State, Bernard-Henri Lévy, French philosopher and writer, in a review of Blandine Barret-Kriegel's book, La République et le prince modern states:“Bullshit, says the author, it's merely the nth and regrettable manifestation of what we must call our hopelessly dense chauvinism. The actual primitive stage of the republican idea is not France of the Enlightenment. It's not even America or England and their respective revolutions. It's a much more modest country, one of much less import. It is a country that doesn't make such a huge deal of its own History. It is Holland and its popular uprising against the Spain of Philip II, at the end of the 16th century. A complete reversal of perspectives. A decentering of quasi-Copernican proportions. A book that sets the story straight and puts the legend in its place -- a rarity, indeed.”

Big-Dollar Industry Lobbying Defeats Public Safety Interests

20-Year Backroom Deal Cut by Congress Exempting Maine and Vermont from Federal 80,000 lb. Truck Weight Limit, according to Truck Safety Coalition

Share 

Published: Tuesday, Nov. 15, 2011 - 10:51 am

By Truck Safety Coalition

ARLINGTON, Va., Nov. 15, 2011 -- /PRNewswire/ -- Despite the fact that more people were needlessly killed and injured in the one-year pilot program in 2010, Senator Collins (R-ME) and Senator Leahy (D-VT) made it their priority to include a special interest exemption for their states that will allow 100,000 lb. trucks on Maine and Vermont Interstates.  This exemption, which changes federal policy, was slipped into an appropriations bill, HR 2112, without any public participation, congressional hearing, or the results of a U.S. Department of Transportation review of the one-year pilot program.  This exemption was adopted before the DOT released an overdue 6-month report and a one-year report on the results of the one-year exemption as required by Congress. The bill is expected to be voted on this week.

Daphne Izer of Lisbon, Maine and founder of Parents Against Tired Truckers (P.A.T.T.) after her son Jeff and three of his friends were killed in a truck crash, responded, "If this bill gets passed with the 20-year exemption, Congress will be sending a clear message that deal cutting for Members' pet projects continues to reign supreme even at the expense of the lives of innocent motorists.  The facts are clear – during the one-year pilot project in 2010, Maine experienced a 43% increase in fatalities with 6-axle trucks and Vermont's fatal large truck crash rate tripled.  I shudder to think about the needless deaths and injuries that will be a direct result of this political horse trading."

Julie Magnan of South Burlington, Vermont, Truck Crash Survivor and TSC Vermont Volunteer Coordinator stated, "When pushing for the one-year exemption, the trucking industry and elected officials promised it would take heavier trucks off our local roads and also that there would be fewer trucks.  Promises broken and it cost us lives and money.  The Vermont DMV tracked the change in permits for 99,000 lb 6-axle trucks and they increased from 1,500 in 2009 to over 3,000 in 2010 during the pilot. Moreover, since the decrease in VMT (vehicle miles traveled) on the non-Interstates was only 1.5%, the pilot may have provided only negligible relief to some communities that complained of heavy trucks using their local thoroughfares, passing close to schools and town centers.*  Undeterred by facts and broken promises, Congress is poised to pass a 20-year exemption."

"This cross-town hypocrisy of DOT sitting on Congressionally-mandated reports while Congress votes to keep a dangerous and deadly pilot program for 20 more years is completely irresponsible.  They are playing games that will result in even more deaths and injuries, more infrastructure destruction and more trucking industry subsidies.  The information we were able to obtain from FOIA requests show that more people were killed during the one-year exemption.  How is it even remotely acceptable to allow unsafe practices to continue for another 20 years?  If this was an aviation safety problem, Congress would shut it down immediately.  There are two different safety standards for American families," stated Joan Claybrook, Chair of Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways.

"Not only is there a 20-year exemption but there are no reporting or safety analysis requirements.  And, if Maine or Vermont decides to increase their state weight limits, the limit on the Interstates also goes up.  If this passes Congress will be writing a blank check for truck weights," stated John Lannen, Executive Director, TSC.  "Now more than ever we need Congress to pass SHIPA (Safe Highways and Infrastructure Preservation Act, S876/HR1574) to retain truck weight limits at their current levels.  If this 20-year exemption goes through, there is nothing stopping the rest of the states from knocking on Congress's proverbial door asking for theirs," continued Lannen.    

Every year on average, approximately 4,000 people are killed and 100,000 more sustain injuries in truck-involved crashes at a cost of $40 billion. In two-vehicle crashes, between a large truck and a passenger vehicle, 97 percent of the deaths were occupants of the passenger vehicle. Bigger, heavier trucks take longer to stop, are more prone to roll over, and accelerate bridge and road destruction.  *("Vermont Truck Interstate Pilot Study- Report to Congress (State of Vermont Version for Review) – Summary Report (Draft)" prepared for FHWA by Cambridge Systematics, Inc.)  For more information, www.trucksafety.org.

Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/11/15/4056529/20-year-backroom-deal-cut-by-congress.html#ixzz1dssaSM91

Shit's On!

Recent comments from around the web:

(The Daily Beast)

robinyates

I hope politicians and bankers worldwide will start to understand the power of the weak, the poor, the disillusioned, the fed up student, the pissed off middle manager who has just lost his job because a director was given an undeserved bonus for failing !

imagineallthepeople

We the 99% include people of all political parties. The 1% controlled political parties are a distraction to keep us apart.

Occupation Wall St: Week 4. What they don’t want you to find out…

By Scallywag • Oct 8th, 2011 • Category: Manners and Etiquette

Week 4; Downtown NYC.
What they did not want you to ever find out is that your generation, the generation born between 1980-1995, actually outnumbers the baby boomers. They knew that if you ever turned your eye towards political reform, you could change the world.
They tried to keep you sated on vapid television shows and vapid music. They cut off your education and fed you brain candy. They took away your music and gave you top ten pop stations. They cut off your art and replaced it with endless reality shows for you to plug into, hoping you would sit quietly by as they ran the world. I think they thought you were too dumb to notice.
Indeed, I thought they had won.
But I watched you occupy the capital of Wisconsin. I see you today as you occupy Wall Street. And I see a spark, a glimmer of the glorious new age that is yours. A changing of the guard, a guard that has stood for entirely too long and needs your young legs to take his place.
I watch you turn away from what is easy and stand up for what is right. I see you understand we as a society are only as strong as our weakest link. I see you wise beyond your years. And I am proud. Give ‘em hell, kids. You are beautiful.
Together we are strong.
- Courtesy of Mal Harrison and Logan Rudd

By Scallywag • Oct 3rd, 2011 • Category: Manners and Etiquette
It’s as if for the first time since the 1970′s American youth is being woken out of its shackles to a deep awareness of the strains of our economic system, the reality that the top one percent of the nation dominates political discourse, exacting profits at the expense of other less mobile classes and side stepping issues that concern them whilst all the while government and the mainstream press pay unparalleled attention to the desires of the money classes.

A Hearty Soup

In New York, London, Athens, Los Angeles, Portland ME and OR and other cities too numerous to mention, the shit's on!  In the U.S. participants are being called "demonstrators", while in London the term has degenerated to "rioters".  Newspaper columnists, political talk show hosts, bloggers et al. are trying to understand the causes that the protesters may be fighting for and/or the outrages they are protesting against.

In this country some say the rise of the conservative right’s tea party and now of a "left wing tea party" points only to differing understandings and solutions of a common ill--social inequality and poverty. Others, like British MP Nick de Bois, point to the fact that the rioters/protesters "had nice cars, nice mobiles" as if these material tokens prove otherwise.

In their article, Could London-style Riots Happen in New York City? (The Nation Magazine October 4, 2011) Sarah Burd-Sharps and Kristen Lewis correctly identify the underlying ill when they dismiss "nice cars and mobiles" as antithetical to poverty.

“... (T)he challenges of being poor in the midst of affluence go far beyond material deprivations. ...

Poverty’s sting comes in large part from sense of powerlessness to change one’s living conditions, a lack of autonomy and control over many crucial decisions and a feeling that one is marginalized or excluded—and thus cut off from choices and opportunities open to others. This sense of being on the outside looking in can lead to lowered expectations, to hostility and even to antisocial and violent behavior. Societies ignore the disaffected and disengaged at their peril.

Do not misunderstand us; there is no justification for violence and destruction. Our point is simply that seeing poverty as a lack of things like cell phones and air conditioners rather than a lack of capabilities like a good education, physical and mental health, strong social networks, political power and more distorts our understanding of why the riots in London  (and elsewhere) happened.

The riots and protests continue, for the cauldron of discontent has been simmering on a back burner for awhile now. As the fire builds the first bubbles of a boil are erupting.  More powerful than "Adder's fork and blind-worms sting" is this soup.

" 2 Witch. For a charm of powerful trouble, Like a hell-broth boil and bubble. 

All. Double, double toil and trouble;  Fire burn, and caldron bubble. " **

From postings on The Daily Beast we read:

**(William Shakespeare Macbeth: Act IV, Scene 1 The Globe Illustrated Shakespeare: The Complete Works Annotated. Howard Staunton ed. New York: Gramercy Books, 1993.)

Goodbye to All That: Reflections of a GOP Operative Who Left the Cult | Truthout

Goodbye to All That: Reflections of a GOP Operative Who Left the Cult | Truthout: ""Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid." (That was President Eisenhower, writing to his brother Edgar in 1954.)"

'via Blog this'

God, man and Stephen Hawking

I watched a most interesting production on the Discovery channel the other night. In it Stephen Hawking, the renowned physicist, explained why he believes there is no need of god (a deity) in an explanation of Creation. His reasoning is clear: Time began at the Big Bang. Prior to the Bang, time did not exist; therefore god had no time to cause anything and since the Bang occurred as a result of nature’s laws, it needed no intervention or cause: A wonderful (in the full meaning of that word) explanation, but as is often the case, an explanation that relies upon definitions; in this case a definition of god.

What is a god? I hold that god or gods are whatever a person holds as the driving force of his/her life. To some their god is money or sex. To others god is found in a collection of books called the Bible, Koran, or Book of Mormon. Still others are driven by a lust for power or prestige. If these become the center of one’s reason for being, then it can be said they manifestly become that person’s god.

As an ordained minister in the United Church of Christ I have no problem with Mr. Hawking’s statements.  I believe that my God fits solidly into what Mr. Hawking is so ardently searching for: An all encompassing understanding of the cosmos both macro and micro, both Relative and Quantum.

In my opinion, Mr. Hawking’s central driving force, his raison d’être, is the full-time study and attempt to come to an understanding of the sum total Law of Nature. As such, his quest is his God and that God, I believe, is the same as mine. 

The God that I stand before in complete awe and wonder is not outside of that which is, but is that which is  (Exodus 3:14). That I do not comprehend the complete reality of all gives cause for my wonder. When I listen to Mr. Hawking I marvel at his ability to pursue God with such conviction and purpose while at the same time denying the small gods of others, including most religions.

Back in the day, when I attended Catholic Sunday School, I noticed how, when pushed far enough for meaning, the nuns, priests, catechisms, theologians etc. all claimed it as a “mystery”.  Some of those mysteries, such as the trinity, I now see as no mystery at all but rather a man made construct that attempts to explain what none of us understand. Historically, whenever a person makes a human attempt at understanding (Galileo, Hans Kung, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, and Stephen Hawking) those dressed in robes of ecclesiastical power become frightened and try their best to silence the “heretics”.
(All great truths begin as blasphemies. ~ George Bernard Shaw)

"Mysteries" are not outside reality. They exist only in our non-understanding or misunderstanding of true nature and its laws. To he or she who dedicates their existence to learning and understanding through the medium of scientific and/or philosophic inquiry, I owe a debt of profound gratitude. Contrary to those that may believe that such work is godless,the progress of such as Stephen Hawking is slowly replacing the small g in "god"  allowing it to truly grow larger and larger. 

“For our knowledge is imperfect… but once perfection comes all imperfect things will disappear. When I was a child, I used to talk like a child, and think like a child, and argue like a child, but now I am a man, all childish ways are put behind me. Now we are seeing a dim reflection in a mirror, but then we shall be seeing face to face. The knowledge that I have now is imperfect; but then I shall know as fully as I am known.”(I Corinthians 3:9-12 Jerusalem Bible)

Mr. President, what are you thinking?

Not since the biblical Job rent his clothes and covered himself in ashes has there been such a weeping and gnashing of teeth as is now going on among astute watchers of United States politics. All manner of pundits; political, economic, social, right leaning and left leaning, are bewailing the so-called “compromise” that allowed our government to avoid “default” and proceed on with their bickering business. 

I am left bewildered, but not yet ready to shower myself with ashes or dress in sackcloth. Reporters, columnists and bloggers of all stripes are in hyper mode, but I find myself staring into what appears to be devastating events with questions as well as terror. My hope is that I am able to process the questions prior to being overtaken by the devastation.  

A short explanation:

I am a retired working man who now relies on Social Security and meager savings. I was raised in a working man’s household and was deeply influenced by historical studies of the industrial revolution and the writing of Emile Zola. I guess you could label me as left (forward) leaning. I am diametrically opposed to the thinking of the Koch brothers, many of today’s Republican governors and the Tea Party in general. It is not that I would label their thinking wrong, but very different from what I believe to be of worth in America; and that is very much indeed.

Back to the subject:

William G. Gale of the Brookings Institute writes, “Low- and middle-class households have seen stagnating or declining earnings over the past few decades, and they have been hit hard in the Great Recession by the housing market collapse and the job market collapse. Now, they are being asked to shoulder—via spending reductions—all of the fiscal reduction agreed to so far.”

Summarizing a list given by George Zornick, writing in The Nation, the debt deal can be divided into who is helped and who is harmed.

Among those harmed:

Veterans—nearly half of the cuts come from “security spending”. This includes the Department of Defense, but also Homeland Security, the State Department and Veterans benefits.

Graduate Students—Elimination of the interest subsidy on student loans for almost all of them.

Seniors—the super-committee may impose across-the-board cuts on Medicare.

The poor—Medicaid is subject to cuts by the super-committee. Federal housing assistance is a likely target for cuts.

Among those helped:

The wealthy—there will be no increase in their taxes.

Super rich Wall Street traders—No increase in their taxes that are  now figured as capital gains; a much lower rate than if figured as income.

Oil and gas companies—their current unwarranted tax breaks are preserved.

Then there is the not-so-often talked about removal of the American people from the democratic process, a development that places our entire system of government at risk. Is this the start down a slippery slope from Democracy to who knows what?

There are also those who believed that without this “compromise” Wall Street would crash. Then, on August 4^th, the Dow lost 512 points or 4.3 percent of its value. Was this just a fender-bender or the first bang of a chain reaction?

Discounting our economy during major wars, our deficits went inter hyper-mode beginning with President Reagan’s attempt to build up our industrial-military complex (though cautioned against by another Republican President, Dwight Eisenhower). 

Then, as if the increasing rate of deficit spending was not enough, George W. Bush seriously and, it could be said wantonly, cut taxes in 2001. This serious hole in our nation’s income, as debt continued to increase, was due to expire last year, but for prejudicial and ill-thought-out reasons, did not. It is due to expire again in 2012.

Officials in the White House have stated that President Obama will veto any attempt to extend these cuts again. However, he has issued threats before.

As I continue to stare at what may be impending disaster for all Americans I can only hope that our President and his advisers have a game plan; one that cannot be shared at this point in time, but will surprise everyone when it is implemented. Beyond that, as a citizen of a democracy I will continue to watch carefully, speak my opinions loudly and in the final analysis exercise my vote.  I pray that by then citizen votes will still mean something.

Mr. President, you are a very intelligent man. Please do not keep us waiting too long. What are you thinking?

Taking Their Measure--And Ours

Money, money everywhere, but not a cent to spend: That’s what the Speaker of the House, John Boehner, and his party is claiming. They forget President George W. Bush's reckless cutting of our country's income (the infamous Bush tax cuts) while placing the cost of two wars totally on credit cards. It seems that Boehner and company cannot remember anything older than the swearing in of President Obama. Therefore, if we are in dire financial straits it must be Obama and only Obama who is to blame. 

George Santayana, a philosopher, essayist, poet and novelist once said, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

I remember. 

Back in 2001 I wrote a piece for a local paper in which I tried to get a measure of the man who had recently become our President. , I redo the piece here in its entirety in hopes it will add to our progress. Maybe someone will forward it to Rep. Boehner.

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

April 11, 2001-- "The Measure of a Man"

In the last presidential campaign, George W. Bush repeatedly stated his intention of securing a prescription drug program for the elderly. He also stated that excellence in education would be one of his top priorities, as would addressing crime, the environment and multitudinous other hot issues. In his first address to a joint session of Congress, President Bush repeated his intentions.

From the moment the Supreme Court installed George W. in the Presidency, he began bad mouthing the American economy. Before ever laying a hand on the Bible, George W. was warning of an economic downturn with such doom and gloom the he seemingly convinced even Greenspan. Now that his self-fulfilling prophecy seems to be coming true, Bush is adamantly demanding economic relief in the guise of a multi-trillion dollar tax cut; a tax cut that will primarily benefit the top 1 percent of Americans. A full 43 percent of Bush's tax relief plan is targeted to those Americans with annual incomes exceeding $1 million.

How does Bush's tax cut benefit the rest of us? Married couples with a median combined income of $60,200 would get a tax cut of $1,095; the median income ($22,800) single person would pay $279 less while median income single parents would see their taxes decline by an average of $326.

Let us turn back to that one percent.

In terms of real dollars, the portion of tax relief slated for each of the nation's 1.3 million wealthiest citizens will amount to $56,300 per year. Spread over 10 years, this will amount to each of these persons paying $563,000 less in taxes for a combined total of $774 billion.

Will this $774 billion gift to the wealthiest Americans solve any of our nation's ills? I doubt it.

On the other hand, if Bush would forgo his tax cuts for millionaires he could easily pay for a prescription drug plan for seniors. The arithmetic is simple. Paying 80 percent of the cost of senior's prescription drugs with an out-of-pocket cap set at $4,000 and a $23 per month premium would set the government back $2,000 per senior citizen per year for a total of $885 billion over the next ten years. Bush's current offering of $48 billion for prescription drug coverage over four years or $150 billion over the next 10 is $735 billion short of adequate coverage.

Before President Bush can counter by saying that instead of drug coverage he is offering seniors a sizeable income-tax cut, let me point out that the median tax cut for seniors will amount to a meager $150 per year for couples or $101 per year for individuals. Try buying a prescription drug plan with that.

George W. would have us believe that he wants to give seniors meaningful assistance with the skyrocketing costs of prescription drugs. However, what is increasingly clear is that he has little interest in doing so. Faced with a choice of giving 39 million senior citizens adequate prescription drug coverage or giving $563,000 to each of the nation's 1.3 million wealthiest individuals over the next ten years, Bush has clearly sided with the latter. Bush's tax cut will effectively remove a possible funding source for an adequate prescription drug program and hand the money to those who have no cause to worry about paying for their medicines.

As troubling as this decision may be, might it be only a pointer to a Bush/Cheney strategic plan?

Back in the 1980s, then-Congressman Dick Cheney voted repeatedly against funding Head Start. When asked why, Cheney explained that because of President Reagan's large tax cuts to corporations and wealthy individuals (which he supported) there simply was not enough money for luxuries such as the Head Start program.

Dick Cheney is now Vice President. Does he think we have forgotten his tactics? Fact is many of us have. If this administration's gift to the wealthy is implemented there actually will not be enough money to pay for "luxuries" such as a prescription drug plan for the elderly.This leads one to wonder what "luxuries" the nation's millionaires will be acquiring with their lopsided share of Bush’s gift.

In April's edition of "The American Prospect", Lindsay Sobel wrote that the tax break for the top 1 percent amounts to $774 billion over 10 years. Here is a look at what else the country could do with that whopping lump of cash (based mostly on year 2000 expenditures). 

New Teachers: Pay almost two million teachers' salaries for 10 years.

Student Aid: Increase the federal Pell Grant budget 88-fold or multiply federal student loans 18 times.

Class Size Reductions: Multiply federal spending for smaller classes in the nation's schools 193 times.

Preschool: Fund preschool for the entire nation's four-year-olds almost eight times over (based on a cost estimate by the Brookings Institution's Isabel Sawhill).

Crumbling Schools: Multiply federal contributions to school renovation by a factor of 59 (compared with the estimated expenditure for 2001).

Police Officers: Pay two million police officers' salaries for 10 years.

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services: Multiply federal spending on substance abuse and mental health services 29 times.

National Health Research: Quadruple the National Institute of Health's budget or increase funding for the National Cancer Institute 234-fold.

Prescription Drugs: Fully fund a comprehensive Medicare prescription drug benefit for senior citizens.

Family Support: Nearly quadruple the federal outlays for welfare, child care, and child support enforcement.

Housing Assistance: More than quadruple federal housing assistance.

Domestic Food Aid: Multiply spending on the supplemental food program Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) 19 times or almost quadruple the federal Food Stamp budget.

International Food Aid: Increase food assistance to foreign countries 97-fold.

Transportation Spending: Double the amount that Washington spends to support mass transit, highways, and aviation.

Natural Resources and the Environment: Triple the total expenditures on natural resources, pollution control, and Superfund cleanup.

Farm Support: Quadruple what the nation pays to stabilize farm income.

Family Tax Credits: Triple-fund the Earned Income Tax Credit for the working poor and the child tax credit.

Middle-Class Tax Cuts: More than double Bush's tax cut for the bottom 80 percent of Americans.

I have always held that the character of an individual should be measured, not by his/her words, but by his/her acts. Since this holds especially true for politicians, I am forced to wonder what George is up to. Can we believe him? What is the measure of the man?

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

Indeed, what is the measure of the 2011 Congress and our current Chief Executive?