I have no idea what Fox News thinks the are accomplishing anymore.

Fox News, back when it was new and relatively unknown, was really passing itself off as just another 24 hour cable news station.  In that guise, they could sort of be the "stealth Republican mouthpiece", because casual watchers might not really understand that they were getting a big spin on their news.

Now, however, it is all very, very clear about what Fox News is.   They will spin any sort of news they can to make President Obama and the Democrats look bad, even to the point of fabricating stories or taking individual sentences out of context.  They will puff up all sorts of stories that support their cause, like the Tea Party rallies, but totally downplay anything they deem to be "on the other side", such as the Occupy movement.  They will support Mitt Romney in the face of the unsupportable, e.g., his outrageous attack on President Obama DURING the attacks on the Libyan embassy and the consulate in Egypt and his ridiculous statements last week captured on a hidden camera video regarding the 47% lazy bums who will never vote for Romney and never take responsibility for themselves.

So, we all now know what Fox is doing and why.  But who are they talking to?  Their base really doesn't need any more fuel to keep their anger burning brightly.  They are already angry.  I seriously doubt that many undecided voters would be going to Fox to get their news to help them make up their minds.  If someone is going to Fox, I believe that their minds are already made up.  So, is it just money?  Is it just totally ideology driven, such that they don't really care that much about undecided voters or making money off advertising?  Is Roger Ailes so driven by hatred of Democrats, progressives and liberals, not to mention gays and lesbians, blacks, Latinos, etc., that that becomes his primary motivation?  Pure, unadulterated spite?

I know this is an overgeneralization.  There are probably a number of "reasons" why Fox News does what it does.  Maybe not really good reasons, but at least they might be rational ones when examined from their point of view.  But when they start having to rely on taking Obama quotes out of context that are 14 years old, what do they really think they are accomplishing?

I am not a psychologist.  I can only try to explain what I think are nonsensical human actions by my own point of view and hopefully, logic based thought process.  But I think that many people in today's society, and that does include some on the left as well, become so locked in to their own positions that they don't even care that they make sense anymore.  No logic is necessary, rationalization of their position is all that matters.  If they can come up with something, ANYTHING, that they can say to make their position seem to be the right one, then that is all that is required.

And when that happens to a society, it becomes vapor locked.  That is why we have Republican senators and congressmen who will never, ever vote for a bill sponsored by a Democrat.  It doesn't make any difference if they helped write it or if the bill represents a position that the Republican mainstream held during the Bush administration.  It doesn't matter.  All they know is that Obama and Democrats are evil and they can never agree with them.  On anything.  Ever.

So, where does that leave us as a country?  I have no idea, but wherever it is, it isn't good.

I cannot, for the life of me, figure out how Republicans have any support from individual Americans anymore.

Every single thing that the Republican Party does these days is either to A) give massive amounts of power and money to individuals and corporations who already have money and power and B) propose to take away programs and benefits from the middle and lower class. Every single f*cking thing.

Increasing the tax rates on millionaires and billionaires is now apparently some sort of “Third Rail” in American politics (translation: Like the high voltage rail in a subway railroad track, touch it and you die). We cannot even begin to talk about closing tax loopholes for huge corporations, such that companies like GE and Boeing not only don’t have to pay income taxes, they actually get billions of dollars in rebates! And what kind of discussions are we having? Raising the retirement age. Doing away with the federally mandated minimum wage. Getting rid of Social Security, or else privatizing it so that these huge corporations can get their hands on all that money. Gutting public education and all sorts of public services for low income Americans. Getting rid of all unions, not just for public employees. You wait, it will happen.

How can the Republicans possibly keep selling themselves to the American public on being on their side and watching out for the concerns of everyday Americans? This is absolutely insane. During the healthcare debates of last year, what was one of the big anti-healthcare reform rallying cries we continually heard? “Keep your hands off my Medicare!” “Democrats are going to take away your Medicare!” And what does Paul Ryan’s proposed “budget” do? It does away with Medicare as we know it! It turns it into a voucher system that will go directly into the pockets of huge insurance corporations and medical providers!

How can this possibly happen? The Republicans in office must know they are full of crap. They cannot possibly believe they are doing all of this for “The American People.” They just cannot be either that stupid or unaware. Therefore, they must know they are lying through their teeth 90% of the time. I’m sorry, I don’t call people liars very often, but I just cannot see any other conclusion. And I certainly don’t see how the Republican supporters still believe that the Democrats are evil and are the ones that are, in their minds, trying to destroy the country. And how is the big media outlets not calling BS on all of this? Are Republicans so caught up in the prevailing Groupthink that they cannot see what is plainly in front of their collective noses? Is tribalism so rampant that they cannot imagine that “their side” is not the shining example of Truth and Righteousness that they have been told?

This is so crazy. I just don’t think anyone could have ever imagined something like this occurring.

Saturday morning thoughts on the non-government shutdown.

I actually thought that there would be a last-minute agreement reached once it became apparent that the sticking points were funding Planned Parenthood and some heavy-handed restrictions on the EPA. The Republicans were going to look like total fools for shutting down the government over stuff like that. It was no longer about budgetary issues. It was about Republicans trying to foist their agenda on the U.S. through the only branch of the federal government that they control. They were going to get absolutely killed next election. They still might. But I figured, once we got to that point, there would be an agreement. Anything less would have been political suicide, or at least some major self-inflicted wounds.

Great, the government isn't going to shut down. Troops will continue to get paid, 700,000 federal workers (including me) will go to work on Monday morning. But we are going to have to live with the medium to long range fallout of this agreement. I believe the number that the R's and D's agreed to cut from the federal budget from last year's is 38 billions dollars. 38 billion. That's a LOT of money. Now, I am absolutely certain that there are large areas of wasteful spending that could be cleaned up. But 38 billion, all in this year? Where is that money going to come from? There is already a very large amount of what I consider to be damage done to how the government operates. People are going to lose their jobs, services are going to be cut. I am a great believer in the Law of Unintended Consequences. 38 billion, at this point, is still mostly just a number that the R's and D's were arguing about. Very soon, the rubber has to meet the concrete. Where is this money going to come from? I am going to guess our national parks are going to take huge hits, for one thing. I would bet anything that most federal agencies get edicts like "reduce your workforce by X%." There will be lots of social programs that people, here and now, depend on that will be cut or greatly reduced. On and on. We have yet to see the very real fallout from this arbitrary number that people agreed to last night.

And, as for looking toward the future, I've got news for you (if you thought otherwise, and you probably didn't), the Tea Party types did not give up after last night. They will come out fighting that much harder in order to achieve their goals. (Just what those goals are, from the "bigger picture" perspective, aside from "shrinking government", I really don't know.) They are going to want that 38 billion to come from all the programs that they seem to detest; education, environmental protection, any sort of oversight of business and industry, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, any programs which give financial support to the poor, disadvantaged and out of work, etc. And on top of this, they are going to continue to demand more and more tax cuts for the rich and for corporations and an overall reduction of spending and revenue collected by the U.S. government.

Lastly, I find it amazing that all of this thrashing about in the last few weeks was SOLELY about cutting spending. There was not a single word spoken about increasing revenue through letting the Bush tax cuts expire on the rich to very rich, nor was there any discussion about making American businesses (e.g., GE, Boeing) actually pay corporate taxes like everyone assumes that they are already doing. No discussion about closing up tax loopholes. None. That subject seems to be totally off-limits.

There was also no discussion about jobs, other than some very unsupported declarations by the Republicans that jobs would come streaming back when the government's deficit was reduced. I am not an economist, but that assertion makes absolutely no sense to me, and it certainly doesn't to some very smart people who should know, such as Paul Krugman. (I may go try to find a link for this later. For now, you can go do a Google search yourself if you are that interested.)

The Dems, even though they control both the Senate and the Presidency, still have handed the nutjobs running the Republican Party right now a very large victory, even if those self-same nutjobs don't recognize it as such right now. The discussion is solely about spending, not taxes. It is solely about which programs to cut or get rid of entirely. The public will not know who's to blame when they don't get the services they want.

The Dems have found a way to continue on this path that the Tea Party has defined for this country. Oh, they didn't get everything they wanted, but they certainly got a lot. They certainly didn't get enough pushback to think that this approach isn't going to work in the future.

I can't imagine what this country is going to look like in 25 years. Well, I do have my own thoughts on the matter. I hope I am wrong. But I have a feeling that most of the people in this country will look at the state that things are in and wonder how they heck the United States of America ended up there.

I just truly do not understand how middle and lower class people can vote for Republicans.

Republicans all across the country seem to have declared war on the middle class. Everything that they are doing appears to be for the benefit of the wealthy and big business, at the expense of working class Americans.

Here’s the latest example from Wisconsin, via Washington Monthly.

Citing Wisconsin's gaping budget shortfall for this year and even larger ones expected in the years ahead, Gov. Scott Walker proposed a sweeping plan on Friday to cut benefits for public employees in the state and to take away most of their unions' ability to bargain.

The proposal by Mr. Walker, a Republican who was elected in November after pledging that he would get public workers' compensation "into line" with everyone else's, is expected to receive support next week in the State Legislature, where Republicans also won control of both chambers in the fall.

The prospect left union leaders, state and local employees and some Democrats stunned over the plan's scope and what it might signal for public-sector unions in the state.

On Thursday, the newly-elected Republican governor said he would refuse to negotiate with unions, and on Friday, Walker said he's contacted the Wisconsin National Guard, making sure they're prepared to respond to a protracted labor dispute, doing some of the jobs union members currently do.

Even by GOP standards, the scope of Walker's union-busting efforts is striking. We're talking about a governor effectively stripping nearly all government workers of their collective bargaining rights, and then trying to break the backs of unions themselves.

Mr. Walker made several proposals that will weaken not just unions' ability to bargain contracts, but also their finances and political clout.

His proposal would make it harder for unions to collect dues because the state would stop collecting the money from employee paychecks.

He would further weaken union treasuries by giving members of public-sector unions the right not to pay dues. In an unusual move, he would require secret-ballot votes each year at every public-sector union to determine whether a majority of workers still want to be unionized.

And in case that wasn't quite enough, Walker then added that union members would no longer be allowed to negotiate for better pensions or health benefits at all.

The governor is working with a newly-elected Republican-led legislature, and he's expecting lawmakers to pass his anti-union plan quickly.

And here’s the latest of what is going down in Florida.

Florida's Tea Party-backed Governor Rick Scott proposed cutting more than $5 billion from state spending on Monday while also slashing taxes as he laid out his first budget proposal aimed at closing a deficit of nearly $4 billion.

The Republican, a former healthcare executive, proposed saving nearly $4 billion over two years by reforming Medicaid, the health insurance program for poor people.

He also saw savings of $2.8 billion over two years through an overhaul of Florida's relatively healthy state pension system. Scott also proposed cutting taxes by more than $4 billion over two years. This would include a roll-back of corporate income taxes from 5 percent to 3.5 percent and reductions in property taxes.

Critics of the budget plan from Scott, who was elected in November on a pledge to create 700,000 jobs in seven years, said it would cut nearly 9,000 positions from state payrolls and slash billions of dollars from spending on education.

"This budget from the governor is a frontal assault on the quality of life of every Floridian and will not create a single job nor spur our economy forward; instead it takes us further into the economic ditch," Florida Democratic Party Chairman Rod Smith said in a statement.

And, of course, no discussion of this type would be complete without talking about New Jersey’s Chris Christie and his apparent hatred of school teachers.

And, lest us not forget that apparently every single Republican in the country wants to scale back or get rid of Social Security altogether.

Yeah, I know that everyone is hurting everywhere, and all states are experiencing some major budget crises. But why are all the “remedies” always aimed directly at the working class? Why do we NEVER hear about making big business and the upper crust of this country bear some of the burden? This IS the country that allowed them all to amass all those riches, after all. What is wrong with spreading the pain around, especially to those people who can actually deal with the pain?

If it comes down to a choice between middle and lower class people being able to afford housing, food and a relatively stable future for themselves and their children, and a bunch of rich people not being able to afford luxury homes, or a second home in the Hamptons, or a yacht, I know what I would choose.

What is wrong with these people? And why do lower and middle class voters KEEP VOTING FOR THESE A**HOLES?

I just do not understand…

I am actually thinking the unthinkable. It might be better to have the Republicans in charge of everything.

Now, before progressives go ballistic, let me explain.

I have come to the conclusion that the overwhelming priority of the Republicans is to block everything that Democrats want and do to everything they can to upset Democrats. That seems to be the only thing that makes sense. They are voting against many of their own proposals, for God’s sake. “Obamacare” was pretty much lifted from what Mitt Romney did in Massachusetts. The “individual mandate” that requires individual to have individual healthcare coverage was proposed by a bunch of Republicans, including Chuck Grassley. Check out this very pointed segment from Jon Stewart, via Washington Monthly. This is pretty insane. And Republicans have been doing the same thing, over and over again, since President Obama was elected. Say one thing, do another. No shame, all hypocrisy. I am pretty much absolutely convinced that the biggest reason Republicans are such devout non-believers in global climate change is because it IS a big deal to Democrats and progressives. That’s THE reason behind their stupidity and myopia.

So, my theory now goes like this. O.K., let these assholes run the country again. Perhaps, once we’ve removed the “Go Absolutely Fuckin’ Insane At All Democrat ® Ideas!” dynamic, then maybe some sanity will come back into their thinking process. Oh, sure. The U.S. will probably do something really stupid like drop bombs on Iran. But hey, what’s one more war among friends? At least, someone might actually start thinking that maybe giving huge tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires isn’t really all that they thought it was back when Democrats didn’t like the idea. Or maybe they will stop trying to give the farm away to the giant insurance companies during the healthcare debate. They might actually have to explain some of their actions to their constituents. Maybe we might even NOT privatize Social Security.

Hey, it’s just a thought. Nothing else seems to be working. Because, you know, I was just thinking that this country really can’t stand to have one of the major political parties go absolutely nuts when the other party does so much as clear its throat.

Thoughts on Jon Stewart’s “Rally to Restore Sanity.”

It was a great cause, even though Stewart couldn’t define the reason everyone showed up. It was just an attempt at an antidote at all the ridiculous BS that has been out there, but I really do think that Stewart did take Glenn Beck’s rally as a bit of the last straw.

The comedy was mostly tame or not all that funny. I found the “benediction” by Father Guido Sarducci pretty amusing, where he was asking God for a sign when, during a bit of a “roll call” of religions, he happened upon the right one. The music wasn’t much to my taste, I guess, but that was to be expected. At 55 years old, my tastes are not quite mainstream these days. I didn’t much care for the interruption of Yousef’s/Cat Steven’s song, Peace Train, by a Colbert running joke and bringing in Ozzie Osbourne. I mean, the concept was funny, but I would have rather heard the song. Colbert’s poem, read by Sam Waterston, was pretty damn funny.

But all of that isn’t what I was going to comment on. Stewart, when he was getting to the point of the rally, to “restore sanity” used video clips of people saying some pretty extreme things on both sides of the political spectrum, with a generous helping of mainstream media stupidity (e.g., CNN) to illustrate how out of whack our national discourse has become. I agree with all that. I am not pleased when someone on the left goes and says something that I actually might agree with, but they do it in a way that is bound to be incendiary. Joy Behar really had no reason to say that Christine O’Donnell was going to Hell. Jeez. Walking off the set of The View is fine when you are protesting something that Bill O’Reilly said, but then don’t go on and stay something incredibly stupid yourself! That’s just dumb. Keith Olbermann, even though I agree with most of what he talks about, can be just as bad. If you don’t want to look as bad as the people you are criticizing, don’t say inflammatory things. You can phrase things in a different way and make the same point. When you take the flamethrower approach, all you are going to do is make the other side accuse you of the same tactics that you are accusing them of.

So, I get Stewart’s point. Everyone needs to take it down several notches. Only Hitler was Hitler. No matter how much you disagree with the other guy on specifics, they are not “actively trying to destroy the United States.” So, fine. I got that point, and mostly agree.

But when conservatives and Republicans have constantly been accusing liberals and Democrats of everything from supporting terrorism to socialism to treason, with a huge dose of personal insult as they can dreg up, then after about 25 years, it gets to be too much to take. When conservatives have an entire “news” organization including a 24 hour, 7 day a week television channel devoted exclusively to tearing down anyone that doesn’t totally agree with them, then human nature starts to take over. As I have said at this blog before, eventually Ralphie fights back against the bully that has been terrorizing him all these years. (That’s a Christmas Story reference, if you didn’t get it.)

I thought some of the clips from MSNBC that Stewart used yesterday were taken a bit out of context and were not on the same level as the ones that he used from Fox News. I am really glad he didn’t use any clips from Rachael Maddow, as I see her as a genuine sane voice in the wilderness. Yes, MSNBC’s, The Ed Show is very much over the top and should be toned down. But for everyone of those examples you find on the left of the political spectrum, you can probably find 10 to 20 examples on the right.

So, sure. Let’s tone it down, people. Take a deep breath before you say something you know can be used as ammunition against you. But disarmament takes participation by both sides. If one side isn’t going to put down their weapons (not talking about real guns, just following along with the disarmament analogy), then you really can’t expect the other side to say, O.K., keep hitting us with your best shot. We are going to continue to sit here and take it. That’s a very unreasonable expectation.

So, thanks, Jon Stewart. That was a very good effort and may ultimately have some effect. But truly, I doubt it. The country is too far gone. The only thing that I believe will restore some sanity to our political discourse is if something very big happens to cause that correction. We can’t expect people to just agree to be more reasonable on their own. Humans don’t work like that and there is too much money and political force being exerted behind the scenes to allow that to happen.

I think some sort of blow up is going to happen. Or maybe, blow out is a more appropriate comparison. The worn out old tire has been pumped up with too much air pressure and there are danger signs all over. A blow out, at this point, may be inevitable. Hopefully, it is a small one that relieves the pressure. At that point, perhaps we can repair the blow out and then pump things carefully up back to the point of good, sustainable pressure without going overboard.

That’s about my only hope at this point. But Jon, if I may call you by your first name, I certainly applaud you and all the people who were on the National Mall yesterday for trying. Great job.

Photos from Huffington Post. I'm sure they won't mind.

Random thought for Saturday morning.

The U.S. government seems to be really good at indicting famous people, such as Martha Stewart and most recently Roger Clemens. But it seems to really kind of suck at actually going after big time lawbreakers in the government. Torture became standard operating procedure when it broke all sort of treaties the U.S. had signed onto. Politicizing the Dept. of Justice under the Bush administration? No big deal. Illegal wiretaps? Yep, that's O.K. too.

Yeah, there have been a few elected officials that eventually serve time for their misdeeds. Randy "Duke" Cunningham is still in the clink, I believe.

I agree that lying to Congress isn't really a wise thing to do. But really, doesn't the government have anything better to do than go after Roger Clemens?

Will the Shirley Sherrod story be the straw that breaks the camel’s back? Will everyone finally acknowledge the agenda of the right wing media?

I rather doubt it. However, there are some signs of hope. For those who don’t know what this story is about, here are some good links to get the idea of what went down. This one is from Crooks and Liars and this one is from HuffPo.

The roles that Andrew Breitbart and Fox News played in this travesty are so egregious that even moderate conservatives are pushing back. Here is David Gergen, vaid Crooks and Lairs.

Cooper: Given what we now know, should Miss Sherrod have been forced to resign?

Gergen: Absolutely not... absolutely not. Anderson this is ripped away the veil and shown us all that is wrong with politics today. An ideologue injects poison into the Internet, other people rush to judgment on camera and then the administration gave its stamp to beat it and commits this travesty and injustice. What is needed now, the NAACP has at least had the courage to come back and say we were wrong and apologized. Now the administration needs to do the same thing.

I think the President tonight ought to order the Agriculture Department to reopen this case, give this woman a fair hearing and if the facts are as they seem, reinstate her with an apology indeed. I think she deserves a whole lot more than an apology. I think she deserves an honor for her attempts to bring people together.

Here is David Frum, via The Week.

But you’ll never guess who emerged as the villains of the story in this second-day conservative react. Not Andrew Breitbart, the distributor of a falsified tape. No, the villains were President Obama and the NAACP for believing Breitbart's falsehood.

CNN actually spent a good portion of one of its news days to debunk this story. So, finally, maybe everyone is actually beginning to be willing to recognize and point out the extreme agenda Fox News and people like Brietbart have. They aren’t there to report news. They are there to manufacture news that is to their liking and supports their agenda, which is currently to make Democrats and President Obama look as bad as possible. They certainly succeeded in this case, as they did in bringing down ACORN with the same type of video manipulation. That is what they do. They have no other reason for existing, other than making money, of course.

This is why I really hold out very little hope that this country will ever regain anything that looks to be an “even keel.” We have people in positions of power and influence that have absolutely no compunction against manipulating truths and spouting outright lies, as long as it gets them what they want. They don’t really even care if they are caught, because they know there will be no adverse ramifications for them. In several weeks, this little “dust up” will be all but forgotten and they will play their little game with someone else. There are no grownups in the room to stop them, and we certainly cannot count on any of these people to come to their senses on their own volition.

We have media who lie to and manipulate their audience. We have mega-corporations that rape the only planet we have while making obscene amounts of money, and they will lie and cheat in order to be able to make as much money as they can. Even when their misdeeds are out there for the entire world to see, they still cannot make themselves do the right thing. We have politicians that are in the pocket of these same mega-corporations and will vote anyway that their masters want them to. A significant number of elected officials continue to make statements that have people wondering if these elected officials ever made it out of high school.

This country is so screwed. The eight years of the presidency of George Bush only cemented that fact. All this that I am talking about was already around. It all became institutionalized during the reign of George Bush, however. I don’t see any chance of things really ever changing for the better.

Getting back to the original story, I hope that Ms. Sherrod finds another job, one that she finds very fulfilling and provides her the same or greater pay than the job she from which she was forced out. If the Dept. of Agriculture does offer her her old job back (after the appropriate amount of “study”, of course), I hope she throws it back in their faces and sues everyone involved. Fox News, Andrew Breitbart and the Dept. of Ag. Everyone. At least I will come away with some vicarious satisfaction that assholes and thugs don’t always get away with their misdeeds.

John Boehner proposes a moratorium on all new federal regulations.

From Talking Points Memo:

House Minority Leader John Boehner, fresh out of a meeting with business and trade group lobbyists, announced a new idea this afternoon: A moratorium on all new federal regulations, for a year.

"I think having a moratorium on new federal regulations is a great idea it sends a wonderful signal to the private sector that they're going to have some breathing room," he said, according to Greg Sargent.

This guy is the minority leader. He who supposedly speaks for the Republican Party. And here he is, actually proposing that Congress do nothing for a year. Oh, sure they hold hearings and supposedly approve the Presidential appointees (which doesn't seem to be happening either). But isn't that what Congress is supposed to do, make laws? That's why they are called "legislators." And he isn't talking just about Congress, but ALL government agencies that make regulations. That would include the FAA, FDA, EPA, TSA, etc. Everything that is there to protect the America and all her citizens, Boehner wants to put a muzzle on them. I have personal knowledge (as I work for the federal government) that many companies and individuals in industries that are being regulated have taken a position that if there isn't a regulation or guidance (how you comply with a regulation) about something that comes up, then they automatically assume that the government "does not care" about the issue and, therefore, they don't have to do anything about that particular issue. I have seen that time and time again, even on what might be very critical, safety-related issues. And Boehner wants all government agencies to essentially shut down their rulemaking process. That's insane.

"Breathing room?!?" These guys certainly have a much different idea about government than what I was taught in my middle school civics class. And, once again, I wonder what would have been the response of the Republicans and the media if Nancy Pelosi had proposed this in public.

Have a happy and safe 4th of July.

Give a thought to those Americans in uniform that are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. They deserve our respect.

However, you might also want to consider whether or not that the mission these brave men and women are doing has anything at all to do with "keeping our nation free."

That is the fault of our civilian government, not the fault of the men and women of the armed forces.

Photo from here.

“I want my country back!”

That became the Right’s rallying cry last summer during the height of the Healthcare Reform “debate.” Well, you know what? I feel the same way. Although, in realistic terms, I fully realize that my country was never like what I once imagined it to be, I would still like to live in a country where I didn’t have to be fearful every single day of having these stupid, mean-spirited, lying nutjobs getting control of the government. I would like to live in a country that wasn’t run by corporations who compete with each other to see who can gather the biggest pot of money, all at the expense of their customers and the taxpayers who will bail them out, each and every time, when they get themselves into trouble. I would like a country whose ex-president and vice-president didn’t glibly and proudly boast about torturing suspects.

I would like to live in country where sanity and logic ruled the day, not emotions and blind adherence to an ideology, political or religious. I would like to see science put back in its rightful place as a method of finding out how things work and what is going on with the universe, rather than some stalking horse to make fun of and trash just so your side can “win” the debate.

I would like to see a country whose government actually had the best interests of its citizens in mind, rather than moneyed corporations who contribute millions to re-election campaigns, and one that actually respected and lived by the rule of law. One that actually punished lawbreakers, even rich and politically well connected law breakers. A country whose government balanced allowing technological advances in critical industries with firm safety regulations and strict oversight that wasn’t susceptible to bribery and corruption.

I wish I had my country back that actually had a nationwide news media that uncovered the truth about stories and does not make everything into a “he said, she said, you decide” debate. A country whose news media actually felt it was their collective job to act as the official watchdog of the government and report on excesses and wrongdoings concocted by the people in power. A country whose news media didn’t feel compelled to be a cheerleader to get the country into unnecessary wars.

I wish I had a country that was actually enjoyable to live in.

Sadly, no. That is not the country we have, and probably never did have. I suppose it all just feels like it is coming apart at the seams, even though it was always this way. It was just better hidden from view.

Silly rabbit. Trix are for kids.

So Rand Paul thinks that accidents just happen all by themselves?

Here is a recent quote from Mr. Paul on the ongoing BP-caused ecological disaster.

What I don’t like from the president’s administration is this sort of, ‘I’ll put my boot heel on the throat of BP,’ ” Mr. Paul said, referring to a remark by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar about the oil company. “I think that sounds really un-American in his criticism of business. I’ve heard nothing from BP about not paying for the spill. And I think it’s part of this sort of blame-game society in the sense that it’s always got to be someone’s fault instead of the fact that sometimes accidents happen.”

I cannot begin to explain how many misguided notions and outright lunacy those few sentences contain. And to think that this is from who will probably be a U.S. senator by the end of the year is absolutely frightening.

But let’s talk about that bit about accidents “happening.” Paul’s quote makes it sound as if accidents don’t have a cause. They sometimes just appear for no reason and are totally unexpected. This is absolutely incorrect, and this is a very ridiculous thing to say about very complex, man-made technology. This happens to be an area that I know something about.

Since the beginning of the 20th Century, there has been a study of industrial accidents -- why they occur and what can be done to prevent them. If you put in the correct search words, you can find all sorts of books on Amazon that talks about accidents and their causes. This is a very specialized field of study done by a number of very dedicated and intelligent people. Accidents do not just “happen.” There are causes, usually multiple ones, for every serious industrial accident. The response of our society has been to mandate certain safeguards and minimum acceptable safety standards by the Code of Federal Regulations. Every important and potentially hazardous industry in this country is regulated in this manner – aviation, railroads, finance, drugs, mining, nuclear power… The list goes on and on. We do this for the common good of the American people.

When things start going wrong is when companies start taking shortcuts or bypassing these regulations. This is not to say that these regulations are perfect and, if followed, would prevent every accident. That is not true. But it would be much less likely that a catastrophic accident occurs if the appropriate regulations are followed. And, of course, there is always the inevitable pushback from the industry and their lobbyists. Money and political pressure can do wonders to weaken and even remove protective legalization. Alternatively, companies can just ignore the rules and fight tooth and nail when challenged. This appears to be what Massey Energy was doing when a coal mine they owned in West Virginia, the Upper Big Branch Mine, experienced an explosion that killed twenty nine workers. From Wiki:

In 2009, the company, Massey Energy, was fined a total of $382,000 for "serious" unrepentant violations for lacking ventilation and proper equipment plans as well as failing to utilize its safety plan properly.[18] In the previous month, the authorities cited the mine for 57 safety infractions.[19] The mine received two citations the day before the explosion and in the last five years has been cited for 1,342 safety violations. The CEO of Massey Energy, Don Blankenship, has received criticism for his apparent disregard of safety.[20]

Accidents do not “just happen.” There are causes. They might be from heretofore unknown or truly unexpected causes, but there are causes. In the case of the catastrophic explosion about the Deep Horizon oil drilling rig and subsequent oil release from the bottom of the sea floor, it appears that many regulations were not complied with and many warning signs were ignored. Yet, BP and Transocean pressed ahead. The most important considerations were schedule and cost.

There is a concept called “magical thinking.” I even wrote a post about it myself a while back. But this concept seems to have taken firm root in the boardrooms American corporations and the front line management of American industry. The thinking seems to go, “We don’t need to follow these regulations. They are not doing any good and just costs us money to follow them. Nothing bad is going to happen. Trust us.” That’s what it can be boiled down to. “Trust us. Nothing bad is going to happen.”

This is the thinking that has given us the worst ecological disaster in American history, which no one knows how to fix. Even if these geniuses figure out how to stop the huge flow of oil into the Gulf of Mexico today, we will still be faced with decades of the effects of the oil that is already there. This thinking gave us the worst financial meltdown this country has seen since the Great Depression. This thinking gave us twenty nine dead miners in West Virginia.

Accidents occur for reasons, and regulations have been put in place to reduce the likelihood of something going terribly wrong because of the reasons that we know about. Willfully ignoring these regulations in the chase for ever-expanding profits for people who are already rich is obscene.

The corporations in this country, along with the government agencies that are tasked with oversight, need a drastic change of focus and purpose. Regulations are not evil. Accidents do not “just happen.” Unfortunately, I believe that this country is too far gone. Huge corporations are too voracious, too powerful, too willing to do whatever it takes to retain and expand their profits. Following rules are for little people.

You know what I can't figure out?

I can't figure out how the Democrats now holding a 59-41 majority in the Senate "imperils" pretty much everything that the Democrats are trying to do. How did this happen? Whatever happened to majority rules? I haven't researched this or seen anyone else with the numbers, but I would imagine that the times in the history of this country where one party held 60 or more seats in the Senate are very, very few and far between. So, are we saying that 95% of the time, nothing can get done in this country because one party or the other doesn't hold a super-majority in the Senate?

What kind of a stupid system is this? And why does it only seem to apply to the Democrats? Is this what Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin and John Adams really wanted to implement?

The Dems should have taken the Republicans up on their "offer" during the Bush administration of the so-called "nuclear option" which would have done away with the filibuster. Would have served the Rethugs right. However, the Dems will eventually be back in the minority (probably sooner than later, the way things are looking) and they wouldn't want to take away that tool from their future toolbox. No, couldn't do that. Besides, that would upset all these Republicans who are going to keep on calling them mean names regardless of what they do.

I always used to hear the phrase that democracy is messy, but it works. Well, I rather doubt that little platitude is true any more. Democracy seems to have come to a screeching halt, with the transmission laying in the middle of the road. This system is no longer working as it was intended, but no one is going to have the balls to actually try to fix it.