Followers

Total Pageviews

Showing posts with label Joe scarbourough. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Joe scarbourough. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 6, 2013

Rule of Drone Law



Joe Scarborough has been on a weeklong rampage after NBC’s Michael Isikoff found a memo that authorized the president to target American civilians abroad if they pose an imminent threat to our country. The word imminent is not clearly worded, and the definition is left to those who can order a drone kill. It doesn’t even say if the president is limited to killing suspected citizens in the United States.

I don’t mind Joe Scarborough being upset by this, but he keeps saying that liberals were outraged when President George W. Bush used to enhance interrogation methods (torture); however, now they remain silent. He doubled down by saying that we owe John Woo, the man who wrote the memo that authorized torture, an apology because it pales in comparison to drone strikes on American citizens who are denied due process. Joe’s apples and oranges analogy doesn’t hold water, even though both are unconstitutional. Joe Scarborough is not known for his thorough investigation of the facts, but he only has the look in his own network. MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O’Donnell, the New York Times, Chris Hayes and Katrina Vander Heuvel have been complaining about the drone strikes killing American citizens and innocent civilians, ever since Anwar al-Awlaki and his 16-year-old son Samir Khan, were killed by a drone strike. Rachel challenged the president last night. Republicans like Joe Scarborough always play the victim card and will never admit that the invasion of Iraq was a blunder from the start to the end. He thinks that this memo Isikoff found is some sort of vindication for the use of torture by the previous administration.

I’m still deeply troubled that we are still holding some detainees indefinitely without giving them their day in court. We have a little over 50 detainees who are ready to be released because we could not find anything to them charge them with, but  we can’t find a country to take them. I believe in our justice system, so I don’t see why we don’t try the remaining detainees in Federal courts, close Guantanamo Bay and send those who we find guilty to our super Max prisons. I don’t know what to do with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the man who plotted 9/11, because we tortured him, so any hopes of convicting him in civilian court is impossible, unless we throw out the constitution.

I’m delighted that Congress is looking to limit America’s authority to kill suspected terrorist and US Citizens. The Senate Foreign Relations will probably have a hearing, and they should insist that the administration let them see the classified Justice Department legal opinion justifying the drone strikes and especially those that target American citizens. I can see the justification for killing American citizens who are affiliated with groups who want to attack our country, but we still need to give them due process; whenever possible. I understand that Anwar al-Awlaki was always on the move, so we had to take him out at the first opportunity available. Congress needs to exercise its authority and uphold the rule of law and not use this occasion to make political points.

This the United States of America, a nation of laws, and not some third-world country that relies on memos as justification to circumvent our constitution. Upholding our laws and constitution does not weaken us; just the opposite. We can’t expect other countries to look up to us if we are doing the same things rogue nations do.

Monday, January 21, 2013

Happy Inaugural /MLK Day



President Obama will begin his second term running because there’s so much to do, and he has less than two years to complete his agenda. Once we get to the mid- terms, politicians are worried about getting reelected, and they aren’t aren’t as willing to step out on a plank for a lame-duck president.

Joe Scarborough, host of “ Morning Joe” is a daily critic of the president, but it’s his opinion and his show but he often lets his mouth get ahead of the facts. The president took his oath yesterday at a private ceremony. Joe Scarborough said he was upset that he heard the president tell his daughter “I did it” at the end of the ceremony. He said the president should have said, “we did it” but as usual, it was taken out of context. The president reminded Sasha that he successfully memorized his lines and didn’t  screw it up. Joe was corrected on air and then said he was glad it turned out that way.

I was relieved that I wasn’t the only one who thought  Senator Ted Cruz went way over the top on Meet the Press yesterday. The panel on this mornings "Morning Joe” condemned the Tea Party senator who was obviously playing to his base constituents. When the host, David Gregory, asked the freshman senator if he though the NRA went over the line by involving the president’s children in their ad, Mr. Cruz said that minutes after the shootings at Sandy Hook, the president started exploiting the incident to push a gun-control  agenda that's designed to appeal to partisans. Really? I saw a deeply concerned president who knew that this was the fourth mass shooting since he has been president. What was he supposed to tell the parents and loved ones of those who died that day;it’s an unpreventable tragedy?

Much of the talk yesterday was about President Obama’s demeanor and whether he would he reach out to Republicans. George Stephanopoulos asked a presidential spokesman why didn’t he at least reach out to Marco Rubio, who’s working on an immigration plan. Two things George, the president has reached out and was rejected time after time and besides it’s a two-way street. Second, Marco Rubio can’t even get a consensus within his own party because as George Will said, “ you can’t get X without Y,so piece meal is not going to get it.” The Democrats are on board with a way in dealing with the 11 million undocumented immigrants. Senator Rubio cannot get a majority of his party to support a pathway to citizenship, which is the X of the equation.

The house Republicans decided to punt on the debt ceiling for three months; instead deciding to force the Senate to come up with a budget or lose their pay. John Boehner has to convince the Tea Caucus, so it’s not a done deal. The House of Representatives  can pass anything they want because it only takes a simple majority;even if the voters reject it. I have to admit that’s it’s a pretty good plan because it will force the Senate to name the programs,that they are willing to cut.I wouldn’t bet against Harry Reid because he will probably insist on tax reform which cut some subsidies GOP donors enjoy.

I’ve been told that the chatter on Facebook in Victoria is not too favorable towards the president today because it means four more years of misery for them. That makes me glad I don’t have a Facebook account, or I would be taking my iPad to bed with me and getting in one last argument.…Smile

Monday, December 10, 2012

It’s just about cost shifting for the GOP

ideological purist cartoons, ideological purist cartoon, ideological purist picture, ideological purist pictures, ideological purist image, ideological purist images, ideological purist illustration, ideological purist illustrations

You don't have to be a genius to figure out what's behind the GOP's reluctance to raise the rates of the top 2%. It's a 40 year plan of reducing the government's role in our lives by starving it to death. If we only cut out the loopholes and deductions, it would hit some in the middle class and then they too would be clamoring to cut more spending. Raising the tax rates to that of the Clinton era would buy us the time to come up with a manageable reform of the entitlements and it would force us to look at the wasteful defense spending. That's the reason the GOP wants to raise the Medicare eligibility age to age 67. Even though that two year cost shifting will not amount to much; it's a start.

The conservatives I see and listen to, whether it be locally or on the television do not want government to provide social services or anything beyond the necessities because they feel it's coming out of their personal pocket. They usually have a different opinion of what “we the people” means because their world is composed of “makers and takers.” That's why we always reach an impasse when both parties try to negotiate.

This can also be seen on the social level where a local land/building owner decided he couldn't in good conscience allow a pharmacist to continue to sell the Plan B on a piece of property he owned. The pharmacist  couldn't just tell his customers that they don't carry the “morning after pill “so now we have a full blown  political argument It's an unwinnable argument because the land owner probably thinks that the day after conception, the embryo is entitled to a Social Security number and property rights. Good luck having that argument.

This morning Joe Scarborough tried to make a case for conservatism, by saying that creating an era of dependency only hurts the poor. I'm not arguing with the statement as a whole but I don't think that's necessarily a view that's held only by conservatives. Joe Scarborough doesn't see that income inequality continues to create a low wage population. The GOP continues to try to dismantle the unions, the minimum wage, and laws which will help workers get into the middle class. He quoted a story in the New York Times where the Appalachian families were encouraging their offspring to remain illiterate, so they could get SSI checks. That's a practice that should be stopped but is that the exception rather than the norm and what's the ratio of investigators to SSI abuse cases?

Joe Scarborough said that President Ronald Reagan brought in conservatism just as people were getting tired of liberalism. The conservatives had a good 10 year reign until conservatism became a business (talk radio, selling books) and then radicalism took the place of good ideas. I tend to agree with that. I've quoted good republican ideas like the “Clean Air Act,” the EPA, Cap & Trade and most recently the “individual mandate.” Today, it's more about individualism than what we can do collectively. The GOP is going through an internal struggle like the democrats did after the 2000 election but on a much broader scale. It wasn't hard for the democrats to become more inclusive because all they had to do was accept fiscal conservative Democrats. The GOP is using the threat of a primary to rein in those who dare to compromise. We’ll see who wins the war between the Wall Street Journal who's arguing for more conservative purity or the Weekly Standard who making a case for taking what you can get and becoming a party for the future.

Friday, December 7, 2012

It’s policy- not gender or skin color



The recent departure of Senator DeMint left a 2- year vacancy that has to be filled by the governor of South Carolina until the people of that state elects a replacement in 2014. It's a legitimate topic of discussion but South Carolina is a very conservative state, so it shouldn't be a surprise when republican Governor Nikki Haley appoints someone who shares the same views as Senator DeMint. She could appoint herself to that position and it would be considered an astute move on her part.

This morning Joe Scarborough said that Tim Scott, an African American legislator from South Carolina, would be an ideal choice because it would fill in the race void the GOP has. It's hard to believe that we are in the 21st century but some are still espousing 20th century views. Joe was so proud of his statement that he seemed to expect that Representative Emanuel Cleaver and liberal columnist for the Washington Post Eugene Washington would agree with him just because they happened to be black. Representative Cleaver told him that Tim Scott held the same views as Senator DeMint but he was a nice man who didn't engage in the crazy talk as the former senator did. It's about policies, votes, and perceptions; not optics. For example, some operative from the Democratic Party dropped a hint that San Antonio mayor, Julian Castro, might run with Hillary Clinton in 2016. That was just a political ploy to muddy the waters for the pundits who think that the GOP having Marco Rubio in a leadership role will sway the Hispanic vote. The Democratic Party can't take minorities for granted but their policies are more suited for that constituency and you won't hear the harsh rhetoric coming from their party representatives.

I shook my head in amazement when John Boehner chose his committee leadership team and could not find one qualified woman or minority to fill any of those posts. They lost the female vote by 11 points but chose to use the same seniority system as always. Media pressure forced the speaker to appoint Rep. Candice Miller (R-MI) to lead the House Administration Committee but she was more qualified to head the more important Homeland Security Committee. The GOP should learn from the business world; seek diversity..... not window dressing.

Towards the end of the program (Morning Joe) this morning, Joe Scarborough said that the GOP should be the worker party instead of the boss party. That's all well and good but he didn't say anything negative about Michigan's republican Governor Rick Snyder cramming through right- to- work legislation yesterday. One of these days Joe Scarborough might come to realize, the middle class is not about low capital gains and dividends rates but is more about mortgage interest deductions, and child and education credits. The country no longer wants to repeal Obamacare (49% against, and 32% for repeal) so it's time to enact legislation to make it stronger, more affordable and accessible. The rich will do just fine with the higher rates and the business CEOs just told the administration that they're fine with higher taxes but they needed certainty and a willingness to reduce the deficit and the debt.