WEATHER »

Throw ‘Em Out


Friday, September 27, 2013
Article Tools
Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Comments
Share Article

The actions of the Republican-dominated House are so damaging that we must face the fact that the Republican Party has become more of a threat to our nation than the terrorists we have been fighting. How could anyone vote for hunger in America? How could anyone vote to cut funds for food, education, and child care when children are the future of our nation?

Last week the Tea Party Republicans cut $40 billion from the federal food stamp program (known as SNAP), which will push some four million people into hunger and poverty. The Republican-dominated House passed a spending bill that would continue painful cuts in housing, education, senior meals, unemployment benefits, and a whole lot more. And it would stop funding for the Affordable Care Act. They don’t care that the recovery hasn’t reached millions of people who still need jobs and basics like health care and food.

Two days later the House added $20 billion to the military budget. How can they coddle the military corporations while our own people are going hungry? Pentagon programs like the F-35 and other wasteful programs have cost us hundreds of billions of dollars. Yet the House added an unrequested $20 billion to the military budget!

Tea Party Republicans are like the Vandals who sacked Rome or the Nazis who burned the Reichstag. Unable to contribute anything, they obstruct our government and threaten our democracy. If the Congress won’t throw them out, it is up to us at the next election to defend the United States from this vile contagion.

Comments

Independent Discussion Guidelines

the govt. has been corrupted, has been for quite some time. The GOP is one side of the same coin.

spacey (anonymous profile)
September 27, 2013 at 1:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

People should work for their benefits. Clinton passed welfare reform and Obama stripped the work requirement from it.

Botany (anonymous profile)
September 27, 2013 at 1:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Agree totally with Spacey; question for Botany: What about those unable to work, or have been forced onto the government grid in such a way that if they DO work, they lose their benefits?

billclausen (anonymous profile)
September 27, 2013 at 6:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The GOP and it's no nothing wing, the Tea Party, are now more dangerous to the American way than any terrorist group.

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
September 27, 2013 at 6:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Stay tuned as Rand Paul abandons his Libertarian principles to court the social conservatives in the Republican party. It could be the final implosion for the GOP, or a renewal of Eisenhower-era politics.

billclausen (anonymous profile)
September 27, 2013 at 7:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If Rand Paul wants to someday be POTUS someday, he should pull the ultimate political pivot move and switch to being a Democratic Party member. He would be an unstoppable favorite of Gen Y. No seriously the GOP is a tainted, toxic brand. Think Yugo.

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
September 27, 2013 at 8:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Has $ corrupted our democracy ? Sadly, yes. Is voting Dem the same as voting Repub ? Absolutely not . New leaders such as Elizabeth Warren , who is a true advocate for the underclasses , make it imperative to make your vote count. When she ( Warren) has the moxie to stand up for the 98% , she needs allies in Congress to back her up . I for one am tired of the Clausen Doctrine often espoused here on the Indy pages that puts all the snakes in the same bag. It's a cop out in my view.

geeber (anonymous profile)
September 27, 2013 at 10:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Word

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
September 27, 2013 at 10:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

OK Geeber, you threw the first punch, can you finish the fight?

billclausen (anonymous profile)
September 28, 2013 at 7:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)

geeber's correct here: leaders like Warren need our support. While the Demos certainly have their own corruption issues, the collapse of sensible Republican leadership [Boehner/McConnell/Cantor] makes supporting Democrats very important.
While you're tired of the Clausen Doctrine, geeber, I'm amused by Botany's the simplistic silliness.

DrDan (anonymous profile)
September 28, 2013 at 7:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I like Ms Warren too, but she is still playing the game in the corrupted process that makes it difficult for more honest people to engage in. If the Dems were so righteous, they'd fight harder for things like taking money out of the game but sadly no. Same coin, doesn't want to lose one side for fear of losing itself. Power game. Back and forth tug of war. This health care nonsense is where the dems completely screwed things up when they had a chance to do the right thing. Instead we get something the heritage foundation advocated for not long ago. The Democratic party is the party of Reagan today, and yes the Republicans are nutzo.

spacey (anonymous profile)
September 28, 2013 at 11:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Agree with geeber.

Just because a particular political party or representative isn't "perfect" per one's personal convictions doesn't mean there are no distinctions overall. And not every voter cares about the same issues to the same degrees.

Consider voter rights. Demonstrable differences between the parties? Check. Women's reproductive rights? Check. Gender equality? Check. Campaign finance? Check. Health care reform? Check.

EastBeach (anonymous profile)
September 28, 2013 at 1:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

@spacey .. I personally think universal health care is better for our country in the long term. But in hindsight, I don't think it ever had a chance in passing, not matter how hard Dems fought. The numbers in the House and Senate never added up.

So the question becomes ... do I keep gripping about a "failure" to get universal health care in place, or do I hope that incremental change to a system which is still profit-based might lead to an even better situation down the road?

There's a time to be an idealist and a time to be a pragmatist. That kind of calculation is an often overlooked part of the political process.

EastBeach (anonymous profile)
September 28, 2013 at 1:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Women's reproductive rights? Check. Gender equality? Check. Campaign finance? Check. Health care reform? Check."

Woman's reproductive rights, clear difference. Gender equality, need concrete examples of discrimination by government. Campaign finance reform, if so many corporations/entities weren't on the government dole, they'd have no incentive to bribe government officials. Health care reform? Stop frivolous lawsuits (as opposed to the legitimate ones) and fund medical schools so that doctors wouldn't have to be devastated by having to pay back student loans. Traditionally, Dems support trial lawyers who sue doctors, and Republicans consider the idea of funding medical as being too radical and bordering on "Socialist".

I read Warren's webpage, and she's long on idealism but short on how to implement her ideas--just like so many other politicians. She supports Homeland Security's efforts without criticism and doesn't say a word against the Patriot Act, the National Defense Act, or the war on drugs.

How is she significantly different from Obama or Clinton in these regards?

billclausen (anonymous profile)
September 28, 2013 at 5:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Elections would be much more important if they weren't largely funded by special interests, who often bribe both sides. Also, according to a lobbyist, when a lobbyist asks "What will you be doing after your political career is over," it's a gotcha moment. Around year 2000, the first time I heard someone say the word "Republicrats," I scoffed, though not out loud. (Sorry anyway, Jack Artusio.) But now I favor "Demoblicans." Did not the Dems overwhelmingly favor the Iraq invasion and the Patriot Act? The two big parties battle more for majority clout than out of principles, in my rough estimate. And the answer isn't the ascendancy of a third party, when the system itself is dysfunctional.

Adonis_Tate (anonymous profile)
September 29, 2013 at 8:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Kudos to the American public for disregarding super-pacs, and also for letting their reps know they oppose USA vs Syria!

Adonis_Tate (anonymous profile)
September 29, 2013 at 8:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Elizabeth Warren will most likely get around to addressing some of the peripheral issues that seem to preoccupy some of our Libertarian leaning compatriots. Presently she is a bit occupied with a few existential type battles . Her work against the banksters and trying to reinstate a Glass Steagle like law is critical if we are to avoid another burst bubble. Also she is finding a way to work across party lines on that , a Herculean task in itself. Eliminating predatory college loan lending , a crisis for our current and future college graduates, is also a giant battle she has and is waging. There is an upcoming Supreme Court ruling that can further open the Citizens United floodgates of money in elections . She is very active in opposing that - " "If the court continues in the direction of Citizens United, we may move another step closer to neutering Congress."
She needs all the help she can get . If that means supporting an imperfect party so be it. To me that is better than silly symbolic throw away votes on unviable candidates with no chance.

geeber (anonymous profile)
September 29, 2013 at 11:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)

correct, geeber, we have to assist Warren in trying to reinstate the Glass Steagall Act which, when it lapsed, help lead to the Great Recession of 2007-08. And there is no reason to throw one's vote away just because, as in my own case like AT, the Demoblicans are almost as corrupt as the Republicrats.

DrDan (anonymous profile)
September 29, 2013 at 2:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Oops , thanks for the correction , DD. Steagall , of course. Also agree with you about corruption of Democratic Party .
I don't hold many politicians in high regard , including Obama at this point , but I would add Sen. Bernie Sanders to the list with Warren as Congressmembers that I admire.

geeber (anonymous profile)
September 29, 2013 at 3 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Careful, geeber: Sanders is a...dare I scribble this... a "Socialist" and you know they're in league with the devil. As an independent, Sanders has room to maneuver, though he caucuses with the Demos.

DrDan (anonymous profile)
September 29, 2013 at 3:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Mr. Cohen has a great idea! Since none of those republicans he wants to throw out we're elected by citizens in their respective districts, we should just do what Mr. Cohen secretly wants but will not admit: a dictatorship of soft tyranny where all his massive government and socialist ideas can be implemented by fiat with Mr. Cohen (a really smart guy who knows better than you) can help preside over every detail of your life.

willy88 (anonymous profile)
October 1, 2013 at 8:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Article V gives the states power (not YET used) to over-ride Congress, in the event that Congress's self-interests conflict with those of the people. Tea is archaic. It's time to deploy V and mandate public campaign financing!

http://www.theamericanconservative.co...

Who's not tired of lesser evils and picked poisons?

Adonis_Tate (anonymous profile)
October 1, 2013 at 8:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

event calendar sponsored by: