MSNBC's evening shows should look to "PolitiDose" for the answer, it is there in plain sight. Their hosts over a period of time have asked that question over and over. It is not really hard to understand the republican's M.O.: Personal attacks, lies, false information, hate, their trumped up scandals and constant accusations toward President Obama and the democratic party in general.
The answer is republicans have no record of accomplishments that move the country and its people forward. They also do not have any policy plans or ideas to introduce or explain to the people on the issues. They know the news media is a sucker for any story so they keep feeding the media their crud. And like an obedient child the news media waste time by giving this crud exposure and never hold the republicans responsible for their lack of informing the people of a policy.
Its the old shell game. Keep the news media busy with the republican crud with little time left to expose the republicans ideology and lack of policy or ideas. The ACA is a good example. The news media spent a great deal of time allowing republicans to lambaste the ACA but spent almost zero time asking them to articulate details of their own health plan they said they have to replace the ACA. It must be written in invisible ink.
The republican M.O. is easy to understand if you pay attention because it goes back to the Reagan years. Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43 ran the country a total of 20 years. Yet during that time Rush Limbaugh and the conservative news media used the same M.O. crud tactic against democrats while those 3 President ran the show. Why would the media do that while they ran the country? Well, it was because other than a failed trickle down economic policy, there was no other policy to articulate for the republican party. And that my friends really says it all.
This commentary written by John Lucia
Friday, June 27, 2014
Thursday, June 26, 2014
The Tea Party Republicans: Childish, Extreme, Sore Losers and Non-Productive
Losing an election to a so called "establishment republican" brings out the worst and that is what happened when U.S. republican Senator Thad Cochran beat tea party challenger Chris McDaniel in Tuesday's run off election in Mississippi.
McDaniel would not concede the election, railed against the open primary (even though he was familiar with it) was angry that black democratic voters contributed to Cochran's win and spoke about a third party in the future. McDaniel had the support of Sarah Palin and out side tea party groups that poured in millions of campaign dollars. He won the initial primary vote but the run off primary was his to lose and that he did.
The tea party candidate saw the so called "republican establishment" as main street conservatives willing to compromise. That does not really describe the republican party in congress. If that was so, the "establishment republicans" especially John Boehner and Mitch McConnell would have crushed the tea party's obstruction within the U.S. House and Senate. Those two republican leaders went along with the tea party's demands, that is why the federal government was shut down not very long ago.
Palin and many other tea party leaders are now hinting at starting a third party movement since very few of their candidates have done well in recent elections. They hate Washington, or so they say but want to serve there. They like to invoke the names of our country's fore fathers but our fore fathers if living today would have nothing to do with their phony ideology. They are not serious public servants who want to serve their country to make things better. That can only be done by compromise. No party or individual has all the answers even though tea party people think they do.
When one stops to think about it, it is amazing that President Obama has had some accomplishments in moving the country and its people forward. The so called "established republicans" vowed from day one not to help him and then they let the tea party people in congress intimidate them to not take up bills passed by the U.S. Senate and prohibited other important issues to be voted on.
And all the while our country and its people are paying a price for their childish and extreme ideology.
This commentary written by John Lucia
McDaniel would not concede the election, railed against the open primary (even though he was familiar with it) was angry that black democratic voters contributed to Cochran's win and spoke about a third party in the future. McDaniel had the support of Sarah Palin and out side tea party groups that poured in millions of campaign dollars. He won the initial primary vote but the run off primary was his to lose and that he did.
The tea party candidate saw the so called "republican establishment" as main street conservatives willing to compromise. That does not really describe the republican party in congress. If that was so, the "establishment republicans" especially John Boehner and Mitch McConnell would have crushed the tea party's obstruction within the U.S. House and Senate. Those two republican leaders went along with the tea party's demands, that is why the federal government was shut down not very long ago.
Palin and many other tea party leaders are now hinting at starting a third party movement since very few of their candidates have done well in recent elections. They hate Washington, or so they say but want to serve there. They like to invoke the names of our country's fore fathers but our fore fathers if living today would have nothing to do with their phony ideology. They are not serious public servants who want to serve their country to make things better. That can only be done by compromise. No party or individual has all the answers even though tea party people think they do.
When one stops to think about it, it is amazing that President Obama has had some accomplishments in moving the country and its people forward. The so called "established republicans" vowed from day one not to help him and then they let the tea party people in congress intimidate them to not take up bills passed by the U.S. Senate and prohibited other important issues to be voted on.
And all the while our country and its people are paying a price for their childish and extreme ideology.
This commentary written by John Lucia
Tuesday, June 24, 2014
U.S. Republican Representative Bill Cassidy: Is He A Congressmen Or Is He A Doctor?
It is really hard to tell in his T. V. ads against U.S. Senator Mary Landrieu who he is running against in the November elections. The great majority of his ads that this writer has seen concerns his opposition to the ACA and Mary's vote for the act. He wears a doctors coat in those ads and I often find myself wondering if he wore his doctors coat when he and his fellow republicans in the U.S. House voted to defund the act 50 plus times.
Voters know the doctor/congressmen and his party are ditto heads on the issue and also know where Mary Landrieu stands on the issue. What is silent in the ads is Cassidy's health care plan for the uninsured. He can't even tell his own base which tells this writer he could care less about them and their right to know. Of course, his party has had 13 years to develop a plan and introduce the plan to congress and have failed to do so.
Perhaps Cassidy, the doctor/congressmen knows part of the reason for the escalation in health care cost is due to increases in doctor's fees and that the ACA will bring those costs down to a reasonable level. Conservatives every one knows believe doctors, like other business should not have to abide by any regulations.
The bottom line for voters should be: When is Cassidy going to take his doctors coat off, put his congressmen's clothes on and give the voters some details on those issues that really matter and make a difference in moving the country and its people forward? He has already wasted many months of advertising. It is time for the doctor/congressmen to step up to the plate and offer alternatives instead of personal attacks.
Usually, candidates in their ads point to their own voting records. That does not happen in Cassidy's ads. He could start by reminding the people he voted to shut down the federal government not too long ago. And that really says it all.
This commentary written by John Lucia.
Voters know the doctor/congressmen and his party are ditto heads on the issue and also know where Mary Landrieu stands on the issue. What is silent in the ads is Cassidy's health care plan for the uninsured. He can't even tell his own base which tells this writer he could care less about them and their right to know. Of course, his party has had 13 years to develop a plan and introduce the plan to congress and have failed to do so.
Perhaps Cassidy, the doctor/congressmen knows part of the reason for the escalation in health care cost is due to increases in doctor's fees and that the ACA will bring those costs down to a reasonable level. Conservatives every one knows believe doctors, like other business should not have to abide by any regulations.
The bottom line for voters should be: When is Cassidy going to take his doctors coat off, put his congressmen's clothes on and give the voters some details on those issues that really matter and make a difference in moving the country and its people forward? He has already wasted many months of advertising. It is time for the doctor/congressmen to step up to the plate and offer alternatives instead of personal attacks.
Usually, candidates in their ads point to their own voting records. That does not happen in Cassidy's ads. He could start by reminding the people he voted to shut down the federal government not too long ago. And that really says it all.
This commentary written by John Lucia.
Monday, June 23, 2014
More Confirmation That Understanding The Past Is The Key To A Better Future
Former U.S. Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson wrote a commentary published in the Huffington Post on 6/22/14 titled, "Iraq: The Way Ahead Requires Understanding The Past." Joseph Wilson readers will remember was the person sent to Niger to check out the fiction that Saddam Hussein purchased yellow cake(nuclear material) from that country and reported back no such evidence existed. That put the Bush administration in more denial. His wife, a CIA employee was outed by members of Bush's administration to try and get back at Wilson.
Readers of "PolitiDose" knows this writers position on "Understanding the past is the key to a better future" and expressed that in many past commentary. Wilson in his article stated above explains how that applies to the Iraq situation today. A few things he pointed out was that Saddam told him in one of his visits to Iraq was if he was ever deposed Iraq would break up into pieces and chaos. Saddam ruled with an iron fist but kept the country together. He was a Sunni, the minority party in Iraq. The Shia and Kurds were the other parties in Iraq with the Shia being the majority like they are in Iran and Syria.
Wilson pointed out that President George H.W. Bush (Sr.) understood that and what a break up of Iraq with out Saddam would do to destabilize Iraq and other parts of the middle east. That is why Bush did not seek to remove Saddam after the Gulf War in 1991. In other words Bush senior understood the past and did not want to undermind the future. (Editors note)
President George W. Bush did not understand or pay attention to Iraq's past, ordered the invasion and occupation of that country over WMD that did not exist and there fore undermined and destablized Iraq which was the prelude to what is taken place in Iraq today. What Saddam told Wilson would happen if he was deposed has come true. The three parties in Iraq are being joined by terrorists and other Sunnis and Shia from outside Iraq and playing havoc.
In previous commentary I pointed out how the very first civilization on earth said they were taught that understand the past was the key to the future and that man controlled his own fate. I also pointed out that Bush was not fated to invade Iraq but since he failed to understand the past he fated Iraq into chaos.
Joseph Wilson's article should be read by everyone, including President Obama and future Presidents to gain understanding before they act. And hopefully "PolitiDose" helped plant the seed why a better future for our people is found in understanding the past.
Reference related articles: The U.S., Past, Present and Future published 12/31/08
What will the New Year Bring politically? published 12/28/10
This commentary written by John Lucia.
Readers of "PolitiDose" knows this writers position on "Understanding the past is the key to a better future" and expressed that in many past commentary. Wilson in his article stated above explains how that applies to the Iraq situation today. A few things he pointed out was that Saddam told him in one of his visits to Iraq was if he was ever deposed Iraq would break up into pieces and chaos. Saddam ruled with an iron fist but kept the country together. He was a Sunni, the minority party in Iraq. The Shia and Kurds were the other parties in Iraq with the Shia being the majority like they are in Iran and Syria.
Wilson pointed out that President George H.W. Bush (Sr.) understood that and what a break up of Iraq with out Saddam would do to destabilize Iraq and other parts of the middle east. That is why Bush did not seek to remove Saddam after the Gulf War in 1991. In other words Bush senior understood the past and did not want to undermind the future. (Editors note)
President George W. Bush did not understand or pay attention to Iraq's past, ordered the invasion and occupation of that country over WMD that did not exist and there fore undermined and destablized Iraq which was the prelude to what is taken place in Iraq today. What Saddam told Wilson would happen if he was deposed has come true. The three parties in Iraq are being joined by terrorists and other Sunnis and Shia from outside Iraq and playing havoc.
In previous commentary I pointed out how the very first civilization on earth said they were taught that understand the past was the key to the future and that man controlled his own fate. I also pointed out that Bush was not fated to invade Iraq but since he failed to understand the past he fated Iraq into chaos.
Joseph Wilson's article should be read by everyone, including President Obama and future Presidents to gain understanding before they act. And hopefully "PolitiDose" helped plant the seed why a better future for our people is found in understanding the past.
Reference related articles: The U.S., Past, Present and Future published 12/31/08
What will the New Year Bring politically? published 12/28/10
This commentary written by John Lucia.
Sunday, June 22, 2014
Louisiana's Steve Scalise Elected Whip Of The U.S. House Of Representative
Steve Scalise becme the 3rd. top man in the Republican controlled U.S. House when he was elected to replace Kevin McCarthy who became majority leader replacing Eric Cantor. News commentary in the Times Picayune was varied as to what it means for Louisiana and the country.
This writer sees little change in the U.S. House since the only difference in Scalise and McCarthy is Scalise's right wing tea party ideology is more extreme. Scalise is head of the Republican Study Committee to advance conservative solutions in a way that actually unites the party as a conference. That committee says it has a GOP alternative to the Affordable Care Act worked out and chairman Scalise said he would introduce it to the U.S. House for a vote but that was months ago and has yet to be introduced. So no one knows what it is all about. To top it off, republicans said they will not take it up until after the November elections are over. In other words, vote for me in November and I might tell you what the republican health care proposal is all about after the elections.
Scalise was one of the 3 House members from Louisiana to vote against opening the federal government after voting to shut it down. The other two were Bill Cassidy and John Fleming. Charles Boustany of Louisiana voted to open the government. Cassidy, Fleming and Scalise were also 3 of the 80 republicans to sign a letter to vote against any thing that did not defund the ACA.
Scalise receives most of his campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry. And of course he was against the moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico after the BP spill and blow out that took the lives of 11 rig workers. He also opposed the Levee Boards suit against 97 oil and gas companies for their damage to Louisiana's environment and did nothing to hold them accountable during his 12 years of service in the state legislature.
One can see that Scalise"s study committee is about putting conservative solutions to their ideology and not an American solution which is needed to solve problems. The conservative ideology during the last republican administration in which Scalise served gave the country and its people the second great republican depression. And a more severe conservative ideology by the tea party during the Obama administration has given the country and its people obstruction.
There was a time congressional leaders of their party were judged on their accomplishments, not for their party but for the country. Can any one think of any accomplishments by John Boehner for the country? President Kennedy once said, sincerity was always subject to proof. Well time will tell what Steve Scalise will stand up. The conservative for conservative causes or the U.S representative for the country and its people. Time will tell.
This commentary written by John Lucia.
This writer sees little change in the U.S. House since the only difference in Scalise and McCarthy is Scalise's right wing tea party ideology is more extreme. Scalise is head of the Republican Study Committee to advance conservative solutions in a way that actually unites the party as a conference. That committee says it has a GOP alternative to the Affordable Care Act worked out and chairman Scalise said he would introduce it to the U.S. House for a vote but that was months ago and has yet to be introduced. So no one knows what it is all about. To top it off, republicans said they will not take it up until after the November elections are over. In other words, vote for me in November and I might tell you what the republican health care proposal is all about after the elections.
Scalise was one of the 3 House members from Louisiana to vote against opening the federal government after voting to shut it down. The other two were Bill Cassidy and John Fleming. Charles Boustany of Louisiana voted to open the government. Cassidy, Fleming and Scalise were also 3 of the 80 republicans to sign a letter to vote against any thing that did not defund the ACA.
Scalise receives most of his campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry. And of course he was against the moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico after the BP spill and blow out that took the lives of 11 rig workers. He also opposed the Levee Boards suit against 97 oil and gas companies for their damage to Louisiana's environment and did nothing to hold them accountable during his 12 years of service in the state legislature.
One can see that Scalise"s study committee is about putting conservative solutions to their ideology and not an American solution which is needed to solve problems. The conservative ideology during the last republican administration in which Scalise served gave the country and its people the second great republican depression. And a more severe conservative ideology by the tea party during the Obama administration has given the country and its people obstruction.
There was a time congressional leaders of their party were judged on their accomplishments, not for their party but for the country. Can any one think of any accomplishments by John Boehner for the country? President Kennedy once said, sincerity was always subject to proof. Well time will tell what Steve Scalise will stand up. The conservative for conservative causes or the U.S representative for the country and its people. Time will tell.
This commentary written by John Lucia.
Saturday, June 21, 2014
The Income Inequality Factor: Another First For "PolitiDose."
Robert Reich, former U.S. Labor Secretary in the Clinton administration recently wrote in the Huffington Post how a few CEO's of several large corporations visited with him to express their concerns how middle class income inequality in the United States has harmed the economy, slowed economic growth and threatens future economic stability.
Middle class income inequality and the transfer of wealth from the middle class to the wealthy are one and the same, and if that sounds familiar it is because you read it here first in "PolitiDose" many times over since 2007. Middle class income continues to go no where while the incomes of corporate America, their CEO's and executives continue to skyrocket.
The CEO's who visited with Reich pointed out what every one should know, a thriving middle class is needed for a healthy economy because of their purchasing power to buy goods. With out a middle class, commerce becomes stagnant with less buying power which results in fewer goods being produced. It brings on the domino effect (and I do not mean pizza) of less jobs, a weakened economy and everything that goes with it. Countries with out a strong and viable middle class can be defined as "those that have and those that have not." There is no in between.
I wrote a commentary titled,"Corporate America: Leaving The Average American In The Dust" dated 11/23/07 here in "PolitiDose" and my first two sentence was: "Corporate America has the power to transform the quality of life for its employees and the people of this country. They have failed to do so because of their greed." And today, seven years later, nothing has changed. My brother always said there are only two ways to make money. You can earn it or you can steal it. I do not think those who ask for special treatment and those who are responsible for the income inequality today have earned it.
The CEO's who are concerned about this income inequality have expressed their willingness to pay more taxes themselves and for their companies. The republicans answer to them has been "just voluntary pay more taxes when you file." Serious problems deserve serious answers and actions, something that is in short supply in Congress. The lack of addressing the problem and raising the minimum wage are two great examples.
In this writers judgement the best way to take positive action on the matter is to elect enough democrats to Congress in the November elections to give them control of both houses of Congress. I think the President should be given the opportunity to pursue his policies he has talked about on the subject matter. The republican controlled House will not even let their own members bring up legislation to vote on in order to deny the President an opportunity to move the country and its people forward.
Income inequality and the transfer of wealth has gone on far too long and the slow disappearance of the middle class has to be reversed. Prior to the election of Barack Obama, the republicans controlled the White House 20 or the previous 28 years. They had more than their chance. It is time for President Obama to have his chance to continue to move the country and its people forward with his own policies.
This commentary written by John Lucia
Middle class income inequality and the transfer of wealth from the middle class to the wealthy are one and the same, and if that sounds familiar it is because you read it here first in "PolitiDose" many times over since 2007. Middle class income continues to go no where while the incomes of corporate America, their CEO's and executives continue to skyrocket.
The CEO's who visited with Reich pointed out what every one should know, a thriving middle class is needed for a healthy economy because of their purchasing power to buy goods. With out a middle class, commerce becomes stagnant with less buying power which results in fewer goods being produced. It brings on the domino effect (and I do not mean pizza) of less jobs, a weakened economy and everything that goes with it. Countries with out a strong and viable middle class can be defined as "those that have and those that have not." There is no in between.
I wrote a commentary titled,"Corporate America: Leaving The Average American In The Dust" dated 11/23/07 here in "PolitiDose" and my first two sentence was: "Corporate America has the power to transform the quality of life for its employees and the people of this country. They have failed to do so because of their greed." And today, seven years later, nothing has changed. My brother always said there are only two ways to make money. You can earn it or you can steal it. I do not think those who ask for special treatment and those who are responsible for the income inequality today have earned it.
The CEO's who are concerned about this income inequality have expressed their willingness to pay more taxes themselves and for their companies. The republicans answer to them has been "just voluntary pay more taxes when you file." Serious problems deserve serious answers and actions, something that is in short supply in Congress. The lack of addressing the problem and raising the minimum wage are two great examples.
In this writers judgement the best way to take positive action on the matter is to elect enough democrats to Congress in the November elections to give them control of both houses of Congress. I think the President should be given the opportunity to pursue his policies he has talked about on the subject matter. The republican controlled House will not even let their own members bring up legislation to vote on in order to deny the President an opportunity to move the country and its people forward.
Income inequality and the transfer of wealth has gone on far too long and the slow disappearance of the middle class has to be reversed. Prior to the election of Barack Obama, the republicans controlled the White House 20 or the previous 28 years. They had more than their chance. It is time for President Obama to have his chance to continue to move the country and its people forward with his own policies.
This commentary written by John Lucia
Thursday, June 19, 2014
U.S. Senator David Vitter: Does Any One Really Know Where He Stands?
David Vitter, republican U.S. Senator from Louisiana and other republicans in congress say they are still committed to defund or repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA: Obamacare to republicans) yet in an editorial of 6/18/14 in the Times Picayune appearing before the Press Club of Baton Rouge, Vitter said he would be open to accepting the federal expansion of medicaid offered under the ACA if he becomes governor. That is obviously good news for Louisiana and the uninsured if he wins.
That flip flop defines Vitter's phony ideology. I happen to live in his district and receive his emails and his rant about how bad the ACA is for Louisiana. If there were no ACA there would be no medicaid expansion. So once again Vitter's rant has given way to his support to a program made possible by the ACA. Of course, being a announced candidate for governor of Louisiana he will do most anything.
Medicaid expansion in Louisiana would cover 242,000 who are now uninsured, create 15,600 jobs and would bring in $16 billion in extra medicaid money according to the editorial. That is what Bobby Jindal has rejected so far. Two other parts of the editorial are very revealing concerning Vitter and the republican failure to move the country forward and improve the quality of life.
Vitter said we need to reform and improve medicaid. I have no problem with that but lets see. Nothing was done to do that by republicans during the 8 years of the Bush administration and the 5 years of the Obama administration. Vitter also said the state's budget has been held together in the last few years with sewing yarn and scotch tape. (Actually, it has been that way since Jindal was elected) It was a hint that excepting the medicaid expansion money would come in handy concerning budget matters. Vitter knows of course that Jindal has never really balanced one state budget and that no republican administration has balanced any federal budget since Ike in 1960 and he has been silent on the matter.
President Obama in drafting the ACA that includes the medicaid expansion was very thoughtful. It allowed state governors who accepted the expansion seek waivers to do it their way and waivers have been granted to the governors. Yes, the Obama administration has worked much better to help state governors than those that opposed his policies and the ACA. Their answers are personal attacks.
Democrats have policies that work and are flexible for corrective action in order to move the country and its people forward. Republicans have trickle down economics as part of their ideology that has no relationship that benefits the average American. They also refuse to work with democrats because they want to see failure.
This commentary published by John Lucia.
That flip flop defines Vitter's phony ideology. I happen to live in his district and receive his emails and his rant about how bad the ACA is for Louisiana. If there were no ACA there would be no medicaid expansion. So once again Vitter's rant has given way to his support to a program made possible by the ACA. Of course, being a announced candidate for governor of Louisiana he will do most anything.
Medicaid expansion in Louisiana would cover 242,000 who are now uninsured, create 15,600 jobs and would bring in $16 billion in extra medicaid money according to the editorial. That is what Bobby Jindal has rejected so far. Two other parts of the editorial are very revealing concerning Vitter and the republican failure to move the country forward and improve the quality of life.
Vitter said we need to reform and improve medicaid. I have no problem with that but lets see. Nothing was done to do that by republicans during the 8 years of the Bush administration and the 5 years of the Obama administration. Vitter also said the state's budget has been held together in the last few years with sewing yarn and scotch tape. (Actually, it has been that way since Jindal was elected) It was a hint that excepting the medicaid expansion money would come in handy concerning budget matters. Vitter knows of course that Jindal has never really balanced one state budget and that no republican administration has balanced any federal budget since Ike in 1960 and he has been silent on the matter.
President Obama in drafting the ACA that includes the medicaid expansion was very thoughtful. It allowed state governors who accepted the expansion seek waivers to do it their way and waivers have been granted to the governors. Yes, the Obama administration has worked much better to help state governors than those that opposed his policies and the ACA. Their answers are personal attacks.
Democrats have policies that work and are flexible for corrective action in order to move the country and its people forward. Republicans have trickle down economics as part of their ideology that has no relationship that benefits the average American. They also refuse to work with democrats because they want to see failure.
This commentary published by John Lucia.
Wednesday, June 18, 2014
The Iraq War: Phase II, The March To Baghdad
There would not be a Phase II or march to Baghdad such as taking place now in Iraq if President Bush had not unleashed Phase I, the invasion and occupation of Iraq over WMD that did not exist. The war created Al Queda in Iraq who was not operating in any part of Iraq controlled by Saddam. That unnecessary war destabilized Iraq and allowed outsiders from Iran and other middle east countries, including Al Queda the opportunity to attack and kill Americans.
This writer wrote a number of commentaries in 2007 and later that pointed out that no matter how the war ended, Iran and Iraq would be on the same side and that Bush's misguided judgement that he could remake Iraq in his own warped image would not happen. Phase I was the prelude to Phase II and the so called Hawks and neocons who wanted the invasion are still wrong.
I am reminded while on vacation a few years ago in Alabama there was a Soundoff written to the Mobile Register newspaper dated January 15, 2005. I cut it out and I still have it in my file because I thought it told a great story. Below is the full context. It truly captures the story of the war in Iraq and just how passive the news media and many people have been concerning the war.
SOMETHING IS NOT RIGHT HERE, FOLKS
Our President has just announced there are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and we will now stop looking. People, this is the reason Bush gave for invading a country. Does anyone in this country even care? Thousands of people are dead over this. We are treating it like a footnote to a brief announcement from the White House. What is even more alarming is that he says knowing what he knows now, he would do it again.
President Obama's concerns now during Phase II is to protect our people in our embassy and work toward a settlement with all factions involved and the U.N. That may not even be enough in that part of the world. For sure the President needs to tune out Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham and those who clamored for the war in the first place. They have no creditibility.
The most important move now is for Iraq's elected leaders to step up and move the people to take on the insurgents and drive them out. If they are incapable of a united front outside help will only delay the final out come. Insurgents in that part of the world can lay low and choose their time to act. That is what they are doing now in Phase II.
This commentary written by John Lucia
This writer wrote a number of commentaries in 2007 and later that pointed out that no matter how the war ended, Iran and Iraq would be on the same side and that Bush's misguided judgement that he could remake Iraq in his own warped image would not happen. Phase I was the prelude to Phase II and the so called Hawks and neocons who wanted the invasion are still wrong.
I am reminded while on vacation a few years ago in Alabama there was a Soundoff written to the Mobile Register newspaper dated January 15, 2005. I cut it out and I still have it in my file because I thought it told a great story. Below is the full context. It truly captures the story of the war in Iraq and just how passive the news media and many people have been concerning the war.
SOMETHING IS NOT RIGHT HERE, FOLKS
Our President has just announced there are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and we will now stop looking. People, this is the reason Bush gave for invading a country. Does anyone in this country even care? Thousands of people are dead over this. We are treating it like a footnote to a brief announcement from the White House. What is even more alarming is that he says knowing what he knows now, he would do it again.
President Obama's concerns now during Phase II is to protect our people in our embassy and work toward a settlement with all factions involved and the U.N. That may not even be enough in that part of the world. For sure the President needs to tune out Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham and those who clamored for the war in the first place. They have no creditibility.
The most important move now is for Iraq's elected leaders to step up and move the people to take on the insurgents and drive them out. If they are incapable of a united front outside help will only delay the final out come. Insurgents in that part of the world can lay low and choose their time to act. That is what they are doing now in Phase II.
This commentary written by John Lucia
Cokie And Steve Roberts, And Cal Thomas: Its All About Hillary
The Times Picayune reflection section on Sunday 6/15/14 carried two editorials. One by Cokie and Steve Roberts and one by Cal Thomas. Both editorials concerned Hillary Clinton that missed the mark so much this writer questions their journalistic understanding of the issues they wrote about.
Cokie and Steve's commentary titled,"Hillary Clinton Must Close Warmlth Gap To Be Successful" seems so silly. They have joined the crowd on speculating that Hillary will run in 2016 even though that election is two and half years away. They make the statement that voters want to gauge her tone and temperament, her character and values and that she has always faced a warmth gap. Then they refer to a 2008 wall street/NBC poll that is 6 years old.
The American people have followed Hillary since her husband first ran for President in the early 90's and know her well. She wrote a book called "It Takes a Village", was a U.S. Senator with a voting record, was a candidate for the Democratic Presidential nomination in 2008 and Secretary of State for four years. You can not be any more warm than that. Those who like her will vote for her and "warmth" will not be an issue. Those who do not like her and would not vote for her if she runs could care less about her "warmth" factor Cokie and Steve speak about.
Cokie and Steve then disagree with their own statement when they said Hillary told Dianne Sawer that Bill and her were dead broke after leaving the White House. Then offered it was technically true, but then offered it opened her up to ridicule since she and her husband quickly wiped out their debts. This writer never heard ridicule from the people, only from the news media and journalists. It reminds me of how Fox News uses the word scandal every time they want to stick it to President Obama.
Cal Thomas in his editorial titled, "Former Secretary Has Few Accomplishments To Point To At State Deprtment" devotes a lot of ink to Hillary's new book, "Hard Choices" and like the ditto head act of conservatives, thinks Hillary has not only failed at every thing she has done but thinks if she becomes President it will be a rerun of the Obama administration. Of course thepeople remember her difference with Barack Obama during the 2008 Presidential debates.
Thomas's editorial was for one specific reason and that is to join with other conservative journalists and the Fox News Network to destroy Hilary's chances if she does indeed enter the Presidential race. Oh, one thing more. Cal Thomas asked his readers to trust him. Thats a pretty tall order for a person who takes pleasure in wanting to see the President fail.
Neither editorial had any value of the moment and instead tried to plant a seed in the people's mind that will long be forgotten when 2016 rolls around. Cokie and Steve were off their game big time and Thomas does what conservative journalists do, attack democrats because republicans have no record of moving the country and its people forward.
This commentary written by John Lucia
Cokie and Steve's commentary titled,"Hillary Clinton Must Close Warmlth Gap To Be Successful" seems so silly. They have joined the crowd on speculating that Hillary will run in 2016 even though that election is two and half years away. They make the statement that voters want to gauge her tone and temperament, her character and values and that she has always faced a warmth gap. Then they refer to a 2008 wall street/NBC poll that is 6 years old.
The American people have followed Hillary since her husband first ran for President in the early 90's and know her well. She wrote a book called "It Takes a Village", was a U.S. Senator with a voting record, was a candidate for the Democratic Presidential nomination in 2008 and Secretary of State for four years. You can not be any more warm than that. Those who like her will vote for her and "warmth" will not be an issue. Those who do not like her and would not vote for her if she runs could care less about her "warmth" factor Cokie and Steve speak about.
Cokie and Steve then disagree with their own statement when they said Hillary told Dianne Sawer that Bill and her were dead broke after leaving the White House. Then offered it was technically true, but then offered it opened her up to ridicule since she and her husband quickly wiped out their debts. This writer never heard ridicule from the people, only from the news media and journalists. It reminds me of how Fox News uses the word scandal every time they want to stick it to President Obama.
Cal Thomas in his editorial titled, "Former Secretary Has Few Accomplishments To Point To At State Deprtment" devotes a lot of ink to Hillary's new book, "Hard Choices" and like the ditto head act of conservatives, thinks Hillary has not only failed at every thing she has done but thinks if she becomes President it will be a rerun of the Obama administration. Of course thepeople remember her difference with Barack Obama during the 2008 Presidential debates.
Thomas's editorial was for one specific reason and that is to join with other conservative journalists and the Fox News Network to destroy Hilary's chances if she does indeed enter the Presidential race. Oh, one thing more. Cal Thomas asked his readers to trust him. Thats a pretty tall order for a person who takes pleasure in wanting to see the President fail.
Neither editorial had any value of the moment and instead tried to plant a seed in the people's mind that will long be forgotten when 2016 rolls around. Cokie and Steve were off their game big time and Thomas does what conservative journalists do, attack democrats because republicans have no record of moving the country and its people forward.
This commentary written by John Lucia
Tuesday, June 17, 2014
A Tale Of Two Investments: One Of Corporate Welfare, The Other Of Community Involvement
The Times Picayune carried two stories dated June 11 and June 13, the former titled, "Mega Movie Studio Proposed For Algiers" and the latter titled, "Art Group Investing Millions In New Orleans." It is a tale of one investment, the latter that believes in giving back to the community and paying their own way; and the former of tax breaks for companies seeking Corporate Welfare.
Movie producer Scott Niemeyer wants to build a $63.5 million movie production campus in Algiers according to staff writer Katherine Sayre's article. Niemeyer said he will seek local tax incentives for the project and that he will also seek to raise $49.5 million in foreign investment and the remaining of $14 million he is confident about securing financing.
Niemeyer's company is a for profit business and evidently Algiers has every thing needed except the financing. In other words, tax breaks are the only draw to bring his studio to Algiers. It is a prime example of why economic conditions have been hard on the middle class. Paying taxes like every one else makes common sense and has no relationship for business to make a profit. (Warren Buffet already put that fairy tale to rest.)
The June 13 article by staff writer Doug MacCash was about The Joan Mitchell Foundation, a wealthy art philanthropy that decided to make New Orleans the site of a "artist retreat" where promising painters and sculptors from across the country can commune, honing their skills. Their total investment in the New Orleans economy will be $20 million including other related projects. And how about the following that was reported in the article.
The Joan Mitchell Foundation dosen't compete for state, federal or private funds. Nor does the foundation solicit donations. In fact the foundation doesn't even accept gifts. And the multi-structured company is paying property tax to boot. In other words every thing the foundation has spent in New Orleans has come out of its own deep, paint-stained pockets. (Editors note: What a refreshing attitude.)
The philanthropy is the better investment for the New Orleans economy, its people and for city government. It will bring people here from all over and many would probably stay and practice their skills. This type of art would be better for every day life than the movie artist. They are also paying taxes and are not asking for special tax treatment. The city and state need more business that pays its own way.
If tax breaks are a component of selling the city or state to influence a business to locate here and that business is deemed to have a long profitable stay, then why not execute an iron clad agreement for the business to pay back all tax breaks and incentives? Is there any one out there that thinks that is unfair?
Remember it is business who want nothing to do with government regulations or over sight, but they love those government tax breaks and incentives with no strings attached. This writer believes the city and state should seek out more businesses like the "Foundation" who do not mind paying their fair share of taxes and whose business will contribute to the quality of life for the city, state, the people and for the arts and science.
This commentary written by John Lucia.
Movie producer Scott Niemeyer wants to build a $63.5 million movie production campus in Algiers according to staff writer Katherine Sayre's article. Niemeyer said he will seek local tax incentives for the project and that he will also seek to raise $49.5 million in foreign investment and the remaining of $14 million he is confident about securing financing.
Niemeyer's company is a for profit business and evidently Algiers has every thing needed except the financing. In other words, tax breaks are the only draw to bring his studio to Algiers. It is a prime example of why economic conditions have been hard on the middle class. Paying taxes like every one else makes common sense and has no relationship for business to make a profit. (Warren Buffet already put that fairy tale to rest.)
The June 13 article by staff writer Doug MacCash was about The Joan Mitchell Foundation, a wealthy art philanthropy that decided to make New Orleans the site of a "artist retreat" where promising painters and sculptors from across the country can commune, honing their skills. Their total investment in the New Orleans economy will be $20 million including other related projects. And how about the following that was reported in the article.
The Joan Mitchell Foundation dosen't compete for state, federal or private funds. Nor does the foundation solicit donations. In fact the foundation doesn't even accept gifts. And the multi-structured company is paying property tax to boot. In other words every thing the foundation has spent in New Orleans has come out of its own deep, paint-stained pockets. (Editors note: What a refreshing attitude.)
The philanthropy is the better investment for the New Orleans economy, its people and for city government. It will bring people here from all over and many would probably stay and practice their skills. This type of art would be better for every day life than the movie artist. They are also paying taxes and are not asking for special tax treatment. The city and state need more business that pays its own way.
If tax breaks are a component of selling the city or state to influence a business to locate here and that business is deemed to have a long profitable stay, then why not execute an iron clad agreement for the business to pay back all tax breaks and incentives? Is there any one out there that thinks that is unfair?
Remember it is business who want nothing to do with government regulations or over sight, but they love those government tax breaks and incentives with no strings attached. This writer believes the city and state should seek out more businesses like the "Foundation" who do not mind paying their fair share of taxes and whose business will contribute to the quality of life for the city, state, the people and for the arts and science.
This commentary written by John Lucia.
Subscribe to:
Comments
(
Atom
)