I am a Democratic Party leader?

Way back in 2008 I donated ten or twenty bucks to the Obama campaign.  Ever since then I receive pleas for money and for filling out a “survey” from the Democratic National Party.

“OFFICIAL PARTY BUSINESS - OPEN IMMEDIATELY”

The letter, this time “from” Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, includes:

Melvyn, you are one of a select group of party leaders…

I am a Democratic Party leader?  The last time I was an official party leader was in the 70s when I was a Republican precinct financial chair.  Then came Reagan.  I’ve been wandering in the political desert ever since with a couple of forays to support one or another independent candidate.

Now Reagan looks like a liberal and my only choice is pretty much to vote Democratic.  The Democrats are several steps closer to reality and practical governance than the Republicans.  Where are the likes of John Anderson, Arne Carlson, and Bill Frenzel?

I scribbled on a plea for the 2012 Presidential campaign that Obama should depend on his big donors rather than small donors he courted so well in 2008.  I haven’t sent any money since.

Still the pleas come.

The return envelope is labeled:

SURVEY RESPONSE ENCLOSED – PLEASE RUSH

As with all political surveys, the questions and answer selections are biased toward the bias of the party printing the survey.  They are meant to affirm the party’s beliefs rather than shape them.

Well, I will vote in November.  That is a lot more than I can say about many who call themselves Democrats.

Cut spending? Whose responsibility?

I can't find a direct quote, but many Republicans seem to be blaming President Obama for "runaway spending".  But is he spending money that Congress did not authorize him to spend?  I haven't seen any such criticism.

"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the
Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all
Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

"To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;" - U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8

"No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by
Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money
shall be published from time to time." - U.S. Constitustion, Article I, Section 9

So, if President Obama is spending money or borrowing money for which he had no authorization, I haven't seen any such specific complaint.

Republicans in the House are stating that the people sent them to "cut spending".  But one could also say that the people gave the President another term and elected a predominantly Democratic Senate to "increase spending".  Either case overs implies the myriad of reasons people have for voting for particular candidates.  In fact, I would call any claim of "mandate" or a specific mission hubris.

If the Republicans are really serious about cutting spending they would simply pass a budget to their liking.  One would hope they would also cut Federal spending in their own district, but fat chance of that.  Now the next trick would be to get the Senate to go along.  If they could do that, then there would be a budget bill to send to the President.  If he vetoes it, then the House and Senate will need enough votes to override the veto.  These probably don't exist.

So, adults would determine what they can agree on and get that in the budget.  But many in Congress grandstand to please their "base" rather than do some real work for all of the people.

But we shouldn't complain too much.  The government was designed this way over two hundred years ago.

The blame for high gas prices goes to…

Many different players and causes.

Oil is sought in places where it costs more to extract.

There are threats to oil supplies from many sources.  For example, Iran threatens to blockade the Straits of Hormuz.

Threats of war increase the prices of oil futures as many buyers try to lock in prices.  It is ironic that many on the right attack Obama about oil prices but are willing to attack Iran, a major producer of oil.

Although U. S. demand for gasoline is the lowest in some time, world-wide demand is increasing.  Oil and gasoline are traded on world markets, not local markets.

And finally, many U.S. refineries are closing down because they can't be cost effective because of the types of oil they use are in short supply.  See "Angry About High Gas Prices?  Blame Shuttered Oil Refineries", Matthew Philips, Business Week, 2012-02-24.

Do we have a democracy or a plutocracy? Follow the money!

It has long bothered me that the Republican Party has morphed from a "big-tent party" to a "lock-step party".  Instead of being a party that discusses ideas to reach some consensus that fits the party's ideals, the Republican Party has become a party of the checklist.  If you don't agree with each and every item on the checklist, then you are a RINO, Republican In Name Only.

A party with a definite agenda that gets many people to agree with it has an advantage of a party that has a wide range of opinions.  Not every Democrat gets up in arms to save the whales or feels that the world will end if gay marriage is not legalized.  But, because these "wafflers" belong to a party who has a large number of people who support these issues, they have more difficulty defending themselves against a party in lockstep.

It has also bothered me how quickly items can be added to the checklist.  This is not a hallmark of a grassroots movement.  A grassroots movement, at least in a democracy, would be discussing the issues and forming some consensus about them.  This doesn't happen overnight.

Of course, we do have the Glenn Becks and the Rush Limbaughs who have many of their fans at their beck and call.  But somebody has to have an organization that translates these ideas into action.  Or, maybe somebody has an organization that feeds ideas to Beck and Limbaugh.  That is, maybe Beck and Limbaugh are at some hidden figure's or figures' beck and call.

I was overwhelmed when I read "The Billionaires Bankrolling the Tea Party" by
Frank Rich, New York Times, 2010-08-28.  He wrote about how the Koch brothers of Koch Oil have been founding and funding libertarian groups to promote their laissez-faire ideas.  Not only should we follow the money, we should follow the associations.  Some employees of Koch Oil sit on the boards of these "independent" groups.

When you have ten minutes, I suggest that you read Frank Rich's column.

When you have an hour, I suggest you read one of his references,  "Covert Operations: The Billionaire Brothers Who Are Waging War Against Obama", Jane Mayer, New Yorker,
2010-08-31.

When you have a week or two, I suggest you read one of her references, "Merchants of Doubt", Naomi Oreskes, which "chronicles various attempts by American industry to manipulate public opinion on science".  Hm!  Is "junk science" any science that is contrary to somebody's short term interests.

This all makes me think of Robert Heinlein's "The Puppet Masters", an alien race that attached themselves to the backs of human beings and made them do their will.  In this case we have a plutocracy attaching itself to people's minds making the people believe they are defending democracy.

The Senate should defer to the President's choice unless...

a Senator is a member of the opposite party. I couldn't find any direct quote, but I remember when Republicans held the Presidency, Republican Senators, whether they held the majority or not, said that the Senate should defer to the President's choice for the Supreme Court.

Now that they hold neither the Presidency nor the majority in the Senate, many are casting aspersions on President Obama's choice of Judge Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court.

We should note that the "many" who are raising issues with Sotomayor are not in the Senate. Many of the quotes I've seen from Republican Senators are of caution; they plan to ask questions that should be asked of any nominee for appointed office.

Maybe this confirmation will widen the split between my-way conservatives and moderate Republicans who believe in pragmatic governance.

Have you seen President Obama in "Doonesbury"?

Garry Trudeau pictured President George W. Bush as a Roman general's helmet floating over an asterisk. To many on the right this proved that Trudeau was a liberal and should be on the editorial page.

What they forget is that Trudeau is an equal opportunity satirist and lampooner. He pictured President Bill Clinton as a floating waffle with a pat of butter dripping off of it.

When and how will he portray President Barack Obama? A floating Constitution, a wad of money, some symbol behind a podium? A suit, tie, and flag pin? Whatever he chooses, I hope we get a good chuckle and feel, "Right on!"