Anti-Gay Marriage Pledge a Pledge of Hate, a Pledge to Discriminate

So let me see if I get this right. In today political arena, one actually signs a pledge promising they will continue to discriminate against certain people, and, if they are elected, not only continue to discriminate against them, but appoint judges, amend the constitution and endorse legislation that discriminates against them.

It is a hate pledge.

It is an “I hate gays and they don’t deserve the rights that other people have” pledge.

The most recent signer of the hateful “marriage vow” pledge created by the National Organization for Marriage is Newt Gingrich, who, along with all the other GOPers except Ron Paul has signed a few of these things.

Spin this however you want, but this isn’t something that actually supports marriage between a man and a woman, it’s something that legislates hate and discrimination. Forget for a moment that the government has no business in America’s bedrooms, and that Newt has been married three times (oh the irony). The other irony is that it goes against the conservative grain of less government and less government intrusion. It says not all Americans are equal.

I’m all for a man marrying a woman. Marriage is great. But why on earth would I not want anybody to be happy, in love, and enjoy the same rights I have (like visiting my partner in the hospital, being eligible to share healthcare benefits or retirement benefits like pensions)? I don’t get it. People want to make that commitment, let them make it.

Listen to the arguments carefully. Much of the chatter has nothing to do with gay marriage, and seems to have more to do with some fuzzy philosophical “gay marriage damages traditional marriage and the family” or some such thing. The arguments don’t wash. The fact that a gay couple wants to make a lifetime commitment and enjoy the same benefits (and commitments) a heterosexual couple enjoys is, to me, a complete no brainer.

This single issue could, in the coming years, doom the GOP and its stone-age champions. While some conservatives argue that the candidates must continue to tout “family values” and other so-called conservative beliefs, I’d argue that, in the long run, is wrong-headed and doomed to fail. Their family values, voters will say, are not my family values.

You can bitch at me if you’d like, but clearly the bulk of the voters (both young and old) in America sit in the middle, not at the far right or far left. They are by in large moderates with more commonsense than politicians give them credit for, and want government not to coddle or intrude on them, but to protect the most vulnerable, enact and enforce laws that protect people and the environment, help businesses grow and embrace the diversity that made this country great in the first place. And most of them don’t see gay marriage as an issue.

Unfortunately, our politicians have moved to the dark side: Forget what’s good for the country and instead spend all our time, energy and money getting re-elected and pandering to those on the fringe of the party.

Money, of course (it’s always about the money) is why candidates pander . . . that’s where the big bucks are, especially during the primary wars. But in the end, getting large numbers of voters out in the general election is what counts. And those voters are in the middle. Obama tapped into that, but it remains to be seen if he can draw those voters to the polls after a rather disappointing three years.

Time will tell, but with some 70 percent of voters between the ages of 20 to 30 supporting marriage equality, Republicans are swimming against the tide. That will hurt them and provides another major talking point for Democrats as the election draws near.  

If Republicans continue down this road, they’ll continue to create the perception that they are not only anti-gay, but anti-poor and, ultimately, anti-middle class.  

Food Laws Aren't the Solution to Childhood Obesity

I understand there’s an “obesity crisis,” especially among young people, but are anti-soda, anti-McDonald’s or anti-anything laws and regulations the answer?

Hardly. A lot of people complain about having government intrude into their lives, but seem to embrace these fabulously intrusive federal, state and local regulations. It’s a slippery slope: What’s next  . . . a tax on chocolate, banning orange juice, a penalty for buying salt? 

Isn’t it a parent’s job to steer kids away from those sodas? Not drive through McDonald’s every day, or any other fast-food place, and see that their kids eat better?

Of course it is. But in today’s world, government officials often think they know better, parental responsibilities be damned. Parents need to act like parents and take responsibility for what they feed their children.

While some argue this type of legislation is needed to stem childhood obesity, I disagree. Some states and localities may add taxes onto soda sales and other “bad” foods. These places say they’ll use the income to fund things like healthcare and playgrounds. I doubt it. Once the money starts coming in, politicians will dump it into general funds so they can continue to spend your money how they want.

Remember the billions of dollars states collected from the tobacco industry (about $250 billion over 25 years)? Those dollars were supposed to go into healthcare and smoking cessation programs, but little has . . . less than 2 cents of every dollar.

Trust not a politician, especially when dollar signs are in the air.

There’s a lot more packaged lousy food and fast-food places around today than when I was a kid (ok . . . no saber tooth tiger burger jokes . . .), but the information about packaged food is right there on the label, right there either in the restaurant or on the web, and certainly up front in the media. It takes a little thought and it takes some responsibility, but that’s not the government’s job.

Eating better is an obvious answer to helping to eliminate obesity, but new laws, taxes and penalties aren't. Besides the fact that there no real evidence they work, food penalties are a bad idea and too intrusive.

I have no problem with the government setting guidelines, but let’s not continue to have Big Brother be our legal food guide with misdirected legislation.

Stalin Aside, Graham's Wrong on Wall Street Oversight

Apparently Lindsey Graham, a Republican senator from South Carolina, didn’t read my “Five Things.” Either that or he felt comparing policy to Stalin’s wasn’t similar to comparing it to Nazi’s.

Either way, Graham’s throwing the newly formed consumer protection agency, already approved and awaiting confirmation of President Obama’s nominee to head it, into the “something out of the Stalin era” was ill-advised and, as usual in today’s small-minded political arena, off the mark.

Let’s remember if we can, that not all that long ago we suffered a deep and painful financial market collapse. Now I’m not a huge fan of regulation, but it seems rather obvious at this juncture that while there were a number of reasons for it (as it spread through Wall Street, banks and the mortgage industry, wiping out investment portfolios and huge chunks of the housing market), clearly a lack of oversight and regulation played a large roll.

Greed is perhaps a fundamental driving force on Wall Street, but greed in and of itself isn’t necessarily a bad thing if viewed within a context of profit. But greed gone bad makes for bad business because it then becomes the only driving force for a company, or, in this case, companies, creating lousy products and pawning them off on other companies as safe and secure.

Without getting into a drawn out debate about the Glass-Steagall Act (which mandated a separation between a bank’s lending and investment businesses), it’s pretty clear the current system isn’t working. One reason is that Wall Street is always trying to create new products to sell and, thus, grow profits. Now there isn’t a thing wrong with profit, but packaging a bunch of crappy high-risk mortgages made for bad investments, often to firms and investors down the sales line. The whole thing was a house of cards . . .  and it collapsed. And years later the markets are still paying the price..

The fact that these products were created, sold and then purchased shows not only a breakdown in regulatory oversight, but a lack of corporate oversight. And it cost U.S taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars to bail out not only government-owed Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, but a slew of banks and investment houses. Fraud abounds.

Lindsey Graham and others would have Wall Street operate without any real regulations. Did we not learn anything? He complains the new financial oversight committee would operate without congressional control. Well, since Congress doesn’t seem to control itself or do too much, this looks like just more political posturing. Reform is here, Lindsey, whether you want it or not. Regulations are not always bad, often they limit bad behavior.

That has nothing to do with Stalin. It has more to do with people’s distrust of bankers, and politicians caring for nothing about themselves and their re-election. Do we not learn anything from history? . . . Even if that history is just a few short years in our past.

Absent Big Thinkers, We Are Stuck with a Pack of Political Gophers

Where are the big thinkers? The people with vision, vision more than a week out. Vision that took us to the moon, built the Hoover Dam, the Empire State Building, the Panama Canal, helped rebuild Japan and Europe after World War Two and thousands of other creative, grand, inventive and often inspiring “visions.”

Now, instead of thinking big, taking a long-term view of our world and trying to develop ways of moving us down a positive road that benefits all of us, makes our country embrace its greatness and all its people, our politicians continue to dive into their little gopher holes and squeak at each other and at us with no thought about anything but that hole and its narrow tunnel connection to other little gopher-filled holes along the way.

Rise up, gophers, there’s a big world out there.

But in an era when even the slightest so-called misstep can anger the base of each party, politicians avoid being bold because being bold doesn’t get them into the general election. At least that’s the way it seems . . . and nobody has enough money to run without that base support.

Imagine, if you will (you may have to close your eyes and really concentrate), a politician standing up and saying, “I’m a moderate. And I believe in America, the diversity of its people and the bright future we have ahead of us. Now we all need to work to turn this ship around and set course that will make us even greater than we are.”

Yeah, then you woke up, right?

Instead we listen to our politicians push an agenda of throwing 12 million illegal immigrants out of the country (how exactly will we do that), continued attacks on women’s health issues (largely by men who can’t imagine their daughters going to Planned Parenthood for a pap test), complete gridlock on the budget, tax reform, healthcare costs or feeding children. These are all big issues, but alas, our small-thinking politicians can’t embrace any real solutions.

Don’t you want to hear real solutions to real problems . . . how are we going to get a few million people back into the workforce? How are we going to stop government from overspending? How are we going to cut the deficit? How are we going to change the healthcare system so it works for effectively for everyone? How are we going to wind down governmental handouts to farms and other businesses? How do we alter Medicare and Social Security so they work now and are viable in the future? How do we grow American businesses and jobs?

That enough for now? If a congressman was reading this he probably passed out half way through. Hey, they get rid of a lot of governments overseas if they don’t work. And with an approval rating under 10 percent, I’m guessing a lot of people here would just as soon throw these bums out and try another bunch. (That’s part of a good case for limited terms for these folks.)

I’ve said it before . . . if these people worked in the private sector, they’d all be fired. They have proved, time and time again, that they are (those both the Senate and the House) unable to do their jobs. Even pushing their responsibilities on to a so-call Super Committee didn’t work. The committee failed to reach and agreement on how the cut the deficit over the next 10 years. By the way, these folks make pretty good money to suck at not doing their jobs.

I still say I could gather a few friends and family and cut a few trillion dollars in about an hour. Then we could restore Social Security and Medicaid (without hurting current beneficiaries), eliminate some of the roadblocks to more efficient healthcare and, after lunch, figure out a cost-effective way for the government to help feed the food-insecure kids in this country.

We face big issues, but I spy nobody willing or able to deal with them or offer substantive solutions to them. Where are the ideas? Attack Planned Parenthood? Deport millions of illegal immigrants? Strip the EPA of any effective power? Change the Constitution to embrace your idea of family?

We are devoid of leaders. On both sides of the political aisle.

Our greatness will continue to come largely from the private sector in the long run, since it will be private industry that ultimately hires workers, builds products and creates solutions. Bringing American workers back to work helps us all, and helps us rebuild in the ever-changing world our small-thinking politicians are unable to embrace.

Merry Christmas Darn It

Nowadays those two words will bring you all kinds of heat. I have no problem with “Happy Holidays,” but, sheesh, aren’t we taking this whole thing too far? I mean, politicians are so afraid of Merry Christmas they’re now calling those green things with ornaments “Holiday Trees.” Apparently politicians fear even the slightest possible thought that they might be inadvertently insulting some unknown voter, no matter the intent.

Too much for me. You want to cover other religions or beliefs, then make sure the symbols of  those are in evidence as well. But Christmas is Christmas, darn it, and wishing someone Merry Christmas should be taken in the same spirit in which it is delivered . . . it’s freakin’ Christmas, have a great time . . . go to church if you like, sing a few Christmas carols if you like, open a few presents if you like, maybe even enjoy a mug of hot cider . . . My wishing you a Merry Christmas is nothing but positive and joyful.

The problem isn’t my saying it, it’s your twisted “everything’s an insult” Grinchy 21^st Century attitude. Lighten up . . . and Merry Christmas

Trump Lowers the Debate Bar Even More

Suppose they held a political debate and nobody showed? Gosh wouldn’t that be great, and it’s my holiday season wish for this political season (well, after my supreme wish that Rick Santorum’s hair would fall out and he’d be too embarrassed and his ego too bruised to continue his verbal plundering of all that is not his).

The notoriously egomaniacal and thin-skinned Donald Trump, he who lords over his brass-polished hotels and Celebrity Apprentice, is holding court December 27 and has summoned the GOP hopefuls to kneel before him as he moderates their verbalisciousness. Two candidates, Ron Paul and John Huntsman, have declined the offer, which immediately prompted the Trumpster to call them “joke candidates.” For some reason they decline to be a part of what will be a very non-presidential sideshow, with Trump as the carnival ringmaster. Drop the bar any lower and a snake couldn’t get under it.

Calling two candidates jokes doesn’t sound like a debate moderator to me, and added to the fact that Trump has said he may run as an independent all meaningful bets are off. Now you’ll recall that Trump was at one time part of the thundering GOP presidential herd. If you’re like me, you have no clue what his political positions were except that he believed President Obama wasn’t born in the US. That, of course, really isn’t a political issue, it’s a hate issue raised to pander to the most obtuse and narrow-minded of the so-called base. That’s not a base; it’s a group of dopes.

Those people will vote for whoever’s running against Obama. What’s the point in continuing to lather them with the same old saddle soap?

So one of my Christmas wishes this year is that candidates continue to just say “no” to the Trumpster. Might be fun, I’ll admit, watching him rip every critic who pops off about his independent run if he chooses to go that way.

Ahh, that would be too much to hope for, I suppose.

More Pet Peeves Confessions (Better Than a Real Confession)

Well, thousands of you have contacted me and want to know more of my pet peeves . . . not really, but even we hermits have our quirks . . . (oh come on, lighten up . . . you know you have dozens of pet peeves, too).

The telephone seems to be an issue for many people . . . not me, of course . . . but really, don’t you hate it when someone you call says . . . “Oh, hey, stranger, haven’t heard from you in a long time. What’s up?” Frack you . . . you could have called me, no?

And forget about returning a call. Under normal circumstances, I’m saying anything outside of three days and you’re rude and late. Someone better have died, given birth, been deployed, be developing a new Iron Man suit or fantastically frantic for them not to return a call in three days.

Don’t you love all these food shows? Yeah, me, too . . . but doesn’t it bug you when a chef has to explain to some judging panel (why do those judges always look like they’re watching a hanging, by the way?) how to eat his or her dish? “Take some of this or that, dip it in the sauce and then just touch the spoon-smeared reduction on the plate  . . .” I just want to be able to eat how I want. What am I, 5-years-old? Yeah, neither are the judges . . . hang him . . .

I gave my wife a custom-made fly rod as an anniversary gift once, just before we headed out west. Could have been worse . . . how many guys are going to give vacuum cleaners to their female partners this year? Bad idea, but you’d think vacuuming was the most pleasurable chore ever to watch all those vacuum ads. Dancing around the living room with some new-fangled colorful vac or racing over the bedroom floor with a steam vac thingie. (Apparently men don’t vacuum.) Go with a nice scarf as a gift instead.

As kind of a marketing guy, I always wonder whether someone actually watches his or her company’s ads before they’re finalized. There’s a nice looking kitchen design company ad set to music that airs regularly on my sat tv, but with no audio other than the music. If I’m not watching, how the heck do I know what the company is? End the audio with the name of the firm, address and phone number.

And speaking of which, every ad should have the company’s full address (don’t assume I know what town your street is in), phone number and web address. Watch . . . a bunch of them don’t . . . well what the heck . . . your ad is probably hitting regionally . . . I’m in New Hampshire watching my dish and have no idea where in Burlington Vermont or Plattsburgh New York XYZ Street is.

I love football, but don’t you sometimes wonder about where the ball is placed after a play? I mean they eyeball the spot up and down the field and then bring out the chain for an exact fractional measurement when it’s close to a first down. So they could be off by a couple of feet on every play except the one that really counts.