Archives for category: American Politics

I wonder how the election of 2012 would have played out if Mr. Romney had campaigned on his real beliefs rather than the extreme Republican Party positions he spouted during the election (anti-immigrant, anti-choice, anti-healthcare reform, anti-marriage equality).

Of course, no one really knows what Mr. Romney’s stood for. His positions changed routinely. For example, as Governor, he enacted a health care plan extremely similar to ObamaCare, a plan he later denounced. As the founder of Bain Capital, Mr. Romney placed profits over the welfare of his employees. As a family man, he jokingly discussed his dog being tied to the hood of the car during a vacation. And finally, as a candidate, he disparaged 47 percent of Americans as on the dole

One assumes Mr. Romney is a principled man; yet, in his quest for the White House, Mr. Romney let ambition rather than his true beliefs guide him. 

President Obama is not blameless. As a State Senator, Mr. Obama endorsed same sex marriage. However, as a Presidential candidate in 2008 and as the President, his position changed or “evolved,” as he put it. He did what was politically advantageous. Later, when public opinion polls showed a majority of Americans approving gay marriage, President Obama heartily endorsed the idea. Instead of being an advocate for change, President Obama lead from behind. 

Politics is a dirty business, and it’s the rare politician that places core values above politically expediency. I can think of only a handful: George Washington, Harry Truman, Barry Goldwater, Nelson Mandela, and Jimmy Carter.

President Obama’s big win on Tuesday didn’t surprise most Europeans. During the election, the German and European press would regularly report the current poll numbers, all of which showed a modest win for the President.

I would occasionally glance at the American press and the various election predictions. For example, last weekend, George Will (a once respected journalist) predicted a Romney landslide (321 EV). Even on election night, a number of pundits continued to predict a big win for Gov. Romney (Dick Morris, Newt Gingrich, Karl Rove) even though the polls indicated otherwise.


Why such a disconnect? Since the very beginning of this election season, the right-wing media (Fox News, National Review, Wall Street Journal, Washington Times) have been spinning misinformation to their conservative audience. They know that it’s more profitable to tell their audience what they want to hear rather than what they need to hear. There was never an attempt at objective journalism, not to mention telling the truth. No wonder, conservatives who listened to this drivel were surprised at the President’s win.





President Obama’s big win on Tuesday didn’t surprise most Europeans. During the election, the German and European press would regularly report the current poll numbers, all of which showed a modest win for the President.

I would occasionally glance at the American press and the various election predictions. For example, last weekend, George Will (a once respected journalist) predicted a Romney landslide (321 EV). Even on election night, a number of pundits continued to predict a big win for Gov. Romney (Dick Morris, Newt Gingrich, Karl Rove) even though the polls indicated otherwise.


Why such a disconnect? Since the very beginning of this election season, the right-wing media (Fox News, National Review, Wall Street Journal, Washington Times) have been spinning misinformation to their conservative audience. They know that it’s more profitable to tell their audience what they want to hear rather than what they need to hear. There was never an attempt at objective journalism, not to mention telling the truth. No wonder, conservatives who listened to this drivel were surprised at the President’s win.






Gott sei Dank!
The Choice is Clear
As an unbiased observer this election season, I’m not endorsing any Presidential candidate. Moreover, in the spirit of objective journalism, I’ve included photographs that represent the two very qualified candidates. The choice is yours. 


The Choice is Clear
As an unbiased observer this election season, I’m not endorsing any Presidential candidate. Moreover, in the spirit of objective journalism, I’ve included photographs that represent the two very qualified candidates. The choice is yours. 


When I saw the headline: “Meat Loaf Backs Romney, citing the candidate’s ‘backbone’.” I thought, this must be a joke. I can only wonder what Meat Loaf has been smoking. 

If ever a candidate lacked backbone, it’s Mr. Romney. His position on the issues changes hourly (health care, abortion, gays, foreign policy, economy, etc.) depending on the audience. And his ability to pander to the lowest common denominator would be comical, if it weren’t so effective at getting votes. 

For example, although I didn’t vote for Mr. McCain during the last election, one of his shining moments came when he corrected a woman at a town hall meeting after she called Obama an “avowed Muslim.” Mr. McCain took the microphone and told her that Mr. Obama was a decent family man that he disagreed with on the fundamental issues. The was the decent and right thing to do. 

By contrast, during a Question and Answer period, a woman told Mr. Romney that she believed Pres. Obama should be tried for treason (a capital offense). Mr. Romney ignored the comment and talked about the sanctity of the US Constitution. His silence says it all.

When I saw the headline: “Meat Loaf Backs Romney, citing the candidate’s ‘backbone’.” I thought, this must be a joke. I can only wonder what Meat Loaf has been smoking. 

If ever a candidate lacked backbone, it’s Mr. Romney. His position on the issues changes hourly (health care, abortion, gays, foreign policy, economy, etc.) depending on the audience. And his ability to pander to the lowest common denominator would be comical, if it weren’t so effective at getting votes. 

For example, although I didn’t vote for Mr. McCain during the last election, one of his shining moments came when he corrected a woman at a town hall meeting after she called Obama an “avowed Muslim.” Mr. McCain took the microphone and told her that Mr. Obama was a decent family man that he disagreed with on the fundamental issues. The was the decent and right thing to do. 

By contrast, during a Question and Answer period, a woman told Mr. Romney that she believed Pres. Obama should be tried for treason (a capital offense). Mr. Romney ignored the comment and talked about the sanctity of the US Constitution. His silence says it all.

This is US Representative Paul Broun (R-GA) speaking recently at a Baptist Church. Rep. Broun sits on the House Science Committee. Among other things, Rep. Broun thinks that the world is only 9,000 years old, and calls evolution, “lies straight from the pit of hell.” 

This is not a joke. This man is one of our elected representatives. It’s thinking like this that prevents the United States from taking any serious action on climate change or any other pressing scientific matter that doesn’t agree with a particular political or religious ideology. It’s appalling that this man sits on the “Science” Committee. And one wonders why nothing gets done in Washington.

There’s something insidious occurring these days in the world of American politics: it’s the rash of new voter identification laws. On the surface, these new laws, requiring eligible voters to provide state issued photo identification at the polls, seem to be a common-sense approach to ensure election integrity. What’s wrong with asking a voter to prove his or her identity? 

Proponents claim that the laws are necessary, or at least useful, to fight voter fraud; yet, there is little, if any evidence, that any significant number of people have attempted to vote illegally. As one expert put it, cases of voter fraud are more rare than getting struck by lightening

So why the new laws? 

Take the case of heavily Democratic Philadelphia where 18 percent of registered voters are without a current driver’s license or other appropriate ID. After Pennsylvania passed its voter ID law, Republican House Majority Speaker Mike Turazi made no secret of the partisan nature of the new law. He told a Republican gathering in June that the new ID law would, “allow Governor Romney to win the state.”


Republicans aren’t even coy about it! The new ID laws seek to disenfranchise certain people from voting. Specifically, demographic groups that tend to vote for Democratic candidates. It’s no coincidence that voter ID laws have only been enacted in Republican controlled states.

Nationwide, 25 percent of African-Americans and 18 percent of all Americans over 65 lack the kind of government-issued ID that would permit them to vote under the voter ID laws. And getting the proper ID takes time and costs money, especially for the poor, the disabled, and the young. A would-be voter must pay substantial fees both for an ID card and the backup documents needed to get it. The voter may also need to take several hours off work and travel significant distances to visit government offices that issue appropriate ID, offices that are only open during select daytime hours. 

Let’s be realistic, these laws weren’t enacted for the public good. They’re aimed at benefiting a particular political party.