Fly Newt to the Moon

Wednesday, May 2 finally marked the end of Newt Gingrich as a Republican candidate in the 2012 elections. As it is customary with him, the speech announcing that he was suspending his campaign revolved entirely around him, enhancing his "contributions" to the Republican Party where according to his recollection he is the most capable. His speech was full of false statements and presumptions with a hefty dose of disrespectful comments towards the President of the United States.

He began his speech making a recount of his political life, since high school and basically taking credit for almost all the transformation of the GOP. In that regard, he was right, but of course he left out that he is the one that brought hate to the party and single-handedly transformed it into the irrational and extremist party we know today.

(07:40) “…Helping Reagan in the eight years he was president with Bob Walker and others founding the Conservative Opportunity Society.”

Gingrich makes reference that this society developed “a generation of solutions.” What he fails to mention is that the idea for this society was his alone as well as the “solutions,” which basically consisted of attacking the Democrats. The tactics the Republicans were using under the direction of Newt Gingrich, with Newt being the loudest representative of this unethical tactic, which used any means possible, whether they were true or not was irrelevant, what mattered most was destroying the Democratic Party. It is ironic that Newt Gingrich accused the Democrats of corruption… this coming from a guy who was forced to resign due to his improper, unethical and abusive behavior. Nothing has ever stopped this man from being what he is: a narcissist, egocentric son of a bitch that like a pit-bull trained to fight will lock his jaws on the his opponents' neck. How he accomplishes it is unimportant to him, what matters is annihilating them with whatever means necessary. A man that knows not the meaning of marriage, of loyalty and faithfulness, of being there in the good times and the bad times, had the audacity to initiate a witch hunt against Clinton for his extra-marital affairs when he couldn’t keep his own pants up.

(08:39) “…We were able to work with President Clinton on four consecutive balanced budgets for the only time in our lifetime and we did it in a bipartisan manner because we represented the will of the American people not the will of Washington, DC.”

Newt claims that during the Clinton Administration, there was a balanced budget and it was all due to the Republicans in Congress, particularly himself. This is an utter lie, sorry, there is no other way to describe it. The Republicans in Congress during Clinton’s first budget proposal all voted “Nay” and Newt was asked for his resignation by his own party the following year, so in essence Newt had nothing to do with balancing the budget.

(08:53) “From 2001 to 2006 I worked as a volunteer on National Security and Health Issues with the Bush Administration.”

The National Security and Health Strategy that Newt is so proud of having contribute with the Bush Administration was basically a document granting the United States the right to invade a country if this country was deemed to be under a tyrant ruler. It names a list of countries where democracy – as viewed by us – is not part of their system. The Health “issues” were not particularly impressive and the only thing that I can give Bush credit for was funding scientists to find a cure for HIV.

(09:35) “...she’s [Callista] entered an author face in trying to lead and educate, starting with Sweet Land of Liberty, which Ellis the Elephant introduces 4 and 8 year-olds to American History in an effort to fill the vacuum left by all these very modern educators.”

This statement is offensive to all the teachers that are working hard at educating our children, who are underpaid, work long and exhausting hours and who buy school supplies to use in their classrooms out of their own pockets. This so-called book is a distorted view of American History. Not surprisingly, an elephant named Ellis is the ‘narrator’ of this farce and I say not surprisingly because the only connection of an elephant with American History, her fauna or anything else is with the Republican Party. There are many animals indigenous to America, which do not represent any political party that could have been used; instead Mrs. Gingrich #3 chose an elephant, coincidence? I think not. I went through the trouble of purchasing this book to see for myself their interpretation of American History and what was the message that they are indoctrinating our children with. I found that the pilgrims were brave and that with the help of God they survived and celebrated Thanksgiving. No mention of the God that truly helped them and which they later betrayed: the American Indian. No, other than a drawing there is absolutely no mention of the people from whom this land was stolen from. A few paragraphs later, she moves on to the Declaration of Independence and once more she managed to insert the word God by claiming that our forefathers said, “we have rights from God that can’t be taken away.” Further she mentions the American cowboy, going west in covered wagons, of their courage, their pioneering... again, no mention of the American Indian. According to this garbage, this land was empty and for the taking for those “great and courageous pilgrims and cowboys.” And to think that for this piece of shit I wasted $10.00!

Newt asserts that both he and Callista are committed to American History, if an example of their commitment is Callista’s interpretation of it, then what they are committed to is re-writing the American History where the heroes of the story, the “good guys” were the white settlers that came to this land and, while stealing, raping and murdering the natives had the audacity of calling the victims “savages.”

(10:52) “In addition, we’ll spend a great deal of time on religious liberty.” The Gingrichs are also committed to tackle what is so very important to them, religious liberty. This religious liberty issue is nothing more than their liberty to impose on the rest of America their religious beliefs. Forcing upon all of us their austerity and pushing God down the throat of everyone, including those of us that are either Agnostic or Atheist. They want to bring prayer back to schools and governmental institutions. The only “liberty” that matters to them is theirs; the rest of us can literally go to hell. This "religious liberty" is the same that wants to control every uterus in America making contraceptives inaccessible and abortions against the law. I’m telling you, the word liberty serves just as decoration, since their intentions don’t have a shred of liberty in it.

(12:00) “In addition we’re going to go to College Campuses and talk about personal Social Security Savings Accounts for Robert and Maggie’s generation...”

They are on a crusade to brainwash our youth by promoting among them the privatization of Social Security.

(13:04) “Well – Newt goes on - there is no reason you should give to people ninety-nine weeks for doing nothing and this is an important national debate about a country which was founded in 1607 by Captain John Smith saying to aristocrats, not the poor, to aristocrats citing St. Paul “If you don’t work, you won’t eat.”.”

To begin with, every single worker in this country contributes to the unemployment insurance as well as the employer, that money even though it is held in an account by the U.S. Treasury does not belong to the government. Secondly, at a time where the new "people" on the block have shipped our jobs overseas or simply are not hiring to instill in people the idea that it is President Obama’s fault that there are no jobs; to tell these unemployed and desperate people that they are being given money for doing nothing is an insult. Further, I know that Newt is constantly claiming that he wants to romanticize American History, but saying that Captain John Smith said to aristocrats – not the poor – that if they didn’t work they would not eat is misleading. First, even thought I know that the descendants of the pilgrims that arrived in the Mayflower think they were blue blood, they were not. The pilgrims were the unwanted people in England at the time, the troublemakers that were facing prosecution because of their religious views and incorrigible behavior, the Separatists and the Puritans. England basically shipped them to come to the New World and that way getting rid of them. They were not “aristocrats.” However, I do agree that free training in new fields should be offered to the unemployed, but their earned unemployment check should not be withheld pending this training, it should be voluntarily not mandatory. What about if the unemployed is a rocket scientist that NASA laid off? Should he need to be trained into a technical job, like a job in an oil field, in order for him to receive his unemployment check? Ridiculous!

Newt, of course, will devout some time to do what every other Republican is doing: (14:10) repeal Obamacare. That is nothing new; it is in the Republican rhetoric manual, their new political DNA.

Having the personality of a raging elephant, Newt couldn’t resist to insult President Obama and his administration when he said: (14:31) “I will focus on the National Security’s three zones: Radical Islamist who we still don’t have a grand strategy, it was nice that our President broadcasted from Afghanistan, the center for Al Qaeda today is Yemen, I’m sure the White House hasn’t gotten that briefing yet, but they will, eventually. The fact that we assume our opponents are as stupid as our bureaucracy is very dangerous and I think you would recognize we do not have a grand strategy in this zone.“

He is so arrogant that he truly believes that we are all idiots, and that we don't know that the reason why President Obama broadcasted from Afghanistan was to commemorate the one-year anniversary of the death of Osama bin Laden. Actually, Newt was very careful not to mention bin Laden at all because this will give credit to our President; rather he ridiculed the Administration for not knowing where the center of Al Qaeda is, supposedly Newt, who has no security clearance, is better informed than the President of the United States, and only he has a strategy, no one else… and to think there are idiots out there that believe what this man tells them it’s unimaginable, but it is obviously that he does have followers.

(16:49) “…I happen to think that there is a better future than methamphetamine and cocaine and I am going to argue for a romantic American future of doing things that matter that gets to the human spirit.”

I can only respond to his stupid sentence with an equally stupid comment: Wow! Apparently the rest of America believes that a better future entails the use of methamphetamine and cocaine, for all of us to be high as a kite! I think he is confusing Democrats with Paulists, who by the way is a Republican, what a moron!

(17:29) “...we do need to have a national discussion on how to get Congress to be effective. Congress has decayed dramatically in the last twenty years; the Senate in particular has become a stunningly dysfunctional institution.”

But of course that is the Senate in particular the one that has become dysfunctional! The Senate holds a majority of Democrats. Forget that the obstructions have come from the Republicans in the House and the Senate that refuse to collaborate with the Democrats. No, they [GOP] are doing their job, bringing Congress down in order to discredit the system, to make Americans disenchanted with it. That is the same strategy Newt used back in the 90s when he destroyed the reputation of Congress by attacking every Democrat in the House and the Senate. He succeeded back then and that was the only reason why Republicans held a majority for the first time in decades in the 90s; the same tactic they used and why we lost the majority during the 2010 elections and the same tactics they are using during the current elections. Republicans are the main reason why politics in this country became a dirty word.

Newt continued to what I think is a very dangerous and completely un-American statement: (18:05) “That is why, Callista and me, campaign for a republican president, a republican house, a republican senate, republican governors, republican state legislators, you have to recognize America is a complex mosaic of sub-government, the presidency matters, but so do all the other offices of sub-government.”

In other words, he envisions a one party system, a system that is the basis for a dictatorship. This is very dangerous indeed, if we remove the multiparty system that we enjoy in this country, the basis of government foreseen by the founding fathers will be ancient history.

Newt, however, brought to light what I always tell those that are not sure if they should or should not vote for President Obama in the upcoming elections: (18:59) The Supreme Court Judges. Newt did too. He mentioned that if only there is one reason to vote for Mitt Romney it should be because of the kind of Judges he would appoint. That is the same argument I present to the undecided. We already have too many conservative justices that are appointed for life, who have been appointed by Republicans and who have inflicted enough damage to the American people. How? All I have to say to you is, how do you like the personhood of corporations? You don’t like it? Thank your Republican Supreme Court Justices!

The attacks continued but what I think is worth mentioning from the rest of his speech are two things: First, his support for (19:26) Paul Ryan’s proposal and second, his support for (20:48) Scott Walker. Paul Ryan's “Path to Prosperity” is an attempt to eliminate all safety nets from the poor, the elderly, and the needy in favor of those that are wealthy and corporations; Scott Walker has ignored the will of his constituents imposing a kind of dictatorship in Wisconsin, which has propelled the citizens of Wisconsin to demand a recall.

Finally, Newt Gingrich refers to Mitt Romney, most of the time, as Governor Romney while, in contrast he refers to the President of this country as Obama, all the time except for once and that once I really think it was a slip of the tongue. That is completely disrespectful. That is a manipulation to place in people's minds the insignificance of President Obama and to escalate the status of Mitt Romney. I shouldn't be surprised; nothing straightforward, respectful or dignified can ever be expected from this frustrated loser.

Newt’s dream is the colonization of the moon. I propose that we collect enough funds to help him get there… Let’s buy him a one-way ticket to the moon; we could do very well without him on this planet! 

Passing Gas

I find it ridiculously humorous that the entertainers posing as newscasters in Fox News keep blaming President Obama for the price of gasoline.  Equally humorous is the fact that Newt Gingrich keeps promising that if elected he will bring those prices down.  If someone had any doubt of the lies the far right tell, those absurd claims and accusations should be enough to show the world what big liars they are.

First and foremost, crude oil belongs to the oil companies that own the wells, not the government of the United States, unless of course it is offshore drilling. Even in that case, only if it’s within 3 nautical miles off the coast. Nowadays, deep sea drilling occurs at distances greater than 3 nautical miles, so the Federal and State governments don't receive any profit from it. Most of the time the refineries where the crude oil is processed and turned into gasoline belong to the big gasoline companies but not one belongs to the government of the United States.  Then we have the gas stations, who are privately owned and under contract with the gasoline companies.  So far, I am sure, everyone agrees.

The law of supply and demand stipulates the price of a barrel.  The less the demand, the lower the price and vice versa.  Over 82% of the price we pay at the pump goes to pay for the extraction of the oil (68%), the refinery (7%), marketing and distribution (10%) and finally a portion is the mark up for the gas station (1%).  Around 14% of the total price is taxes.  We don’t have to be rocket scientists to see that the bulk of the price comes from the owners of the well, not the government, the refineries or the gas station owners.

President Obama can’t lower these prices.  No president can.  Fox News knows this, Newt Gingrich knows this, Wall Street knows this and most of the 1% knows this.  The average American is so gullible (we know this from past experience, when they believed the infamous "death panels") that they do believe O'Reilly when he states that Pres Obama is driving the prices up or when NG promises to bring them down. These people suffer from what I call “selective amnesia” and even though they are an avid audience of Fox News, they forget not too long ago when George W. Bush was president and gas prices were rising, Bill O’Reilly explained to his audience that no president can change the price of gas... However, now that the president is a democrat, O’Reilly changes the rules to suit his purpose or party.

We want lower gas?  Let’s begin by being smart consumers.  If you are going to buy a new car, do the environment and your wallet a favor and buy a hybrid or electric car.  Try to drive as little as possible and stretch that tank of gas as much as you can and buy the cheapest gasoline brand, most likely that gasoline comes from the same well and the same refinery just under a different label.

Let’s change the supply and demand, remember if we demand less they’ll be stuck with the barrels of oil and will have to reduce the prices to move their product… Walk a little more; it’s good for the environment, your body and the price at the pump.  Pass the gas… you’ll feel better!

Oil companies lobbying in Congress by Party.

Edited by J. Schapiro

A “pill” too hard to swallow

According to a recent article written by Jessica Yellin and Brianna Keilar, both Correspondents for CNN, the White House is trying to adjust the health care policy to appease the Catholic Church and perhaps get the vote of some Catholics. The article claims that this adjustment is due to “an avalanche of criticism.” Apparently, the White House will try to implement the same policy that is currently used in Hawaii for religion institutions, in which women that work for Catholic charities, hospitals and the church can acquire coverage directly from the insurance company at the same price their employers would pay. I do not think it’s fair that women working for Catholic enterprises and who may or may not profess that religion have to be excluded from that benefit, unless the Catholic Church increase their salary to the same amount they would have to pay out-of-pocket to acquire it. However, this modification suggested by the White House is not being accepted by the Catholic Bishops, according to the article the leaders of the Catholic Church will only accept a total reversal on the policy – which means totally removing the contraceptive clause from the health care policy. Who on earth do the Catholic Church thinks they are?

I am so tired of having any religious institution – who pay no taxes, who at no time accept government interference in ANY of their day-to-day business (as it should be), who have no government regulations set in place, to think that the government has no business in their religious matters but that they, the religious institutions of any denomination, have any right whatsoever in changing governmental policies because it does not agrees with their views! The religious groups are overstepping their boundaries interfering with politics – both at a local and national level – forcing their views onto everyone else as if the separation of church and state didn’t exist or if it does, it simply does not apply to them. While the leaders of any religious corporation (that’s what they are) enjoy a life of luxury, no taxes paid, no need to report any of their actions to the government because if the government decided to interfere in any of their business they will cry religious prosecution, they seem to think they have "divine" power and can stick their noses where it does not belong.

Of course, as expected, we have the Speaker of the House, Mr. "Cry me a River" Boehner, accusing this administration of ‘attacking religion freedom." How is that so? How it's making contraceptives accessible, not forcing any woman to take them, an attack on religion freedom? Why is not an attack to the State what religion institutions are doing? Why does this "attack" can only be applied on one direction? I am not surprised either at the holier than God comments coming from all the Republican candidates which are all up in arms about the intrusion of government in religion… Mitt Romney, as usual, is already counting his chickens before they hatch and has added another thing he would do on his first day as President, reversing this clause. Sorry Romney, but you will not be the 45^th President of the United States.

Mr. President, keep the policy as it is! Do not allow religion to change the policies that will affect thousands of women, even millions if the Catholic Church gets its way. It is time for a real separation of church and state, it is time for any religious institution to pay their fair share of taxes – no more getting rich by preaching, no more favoritism. According to their own beliefs, money is sinful… so lets help them release some of that sin, and pay taxes after all, they can’t seem to separate religion and politics so, if they want to be involved in politics they should contribute to the country, financially, as everyone else does!

Romney and the Cuban Connection

The overwhelming win of “Hispanic votes” in this past Florida elections are by no means a true reflection of the Hispanic vote nationwide, actually is far from it. The majority of Hispanic voters in South Florida, Cubans to be precise, are not affected by the immigration laws, as it is the case with the rest of the Hispanic population in Florida or anywhere else in the U.S.

Cubans have been the envy of many Hispanics that pursue a residency in United States; Cubans for decades have been privileged and have enjoyed a preferential treatment, thanks I should add to a Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson, if Cubans touch American land they are welcomed to stay, period. So the radical deportation laws supported by Mitt Romney do not affect them and it looks like they couldn’t care less what happens to the others that are seeking the American dream just like they did. The Cubans that fled to this country for the last 30 to 50 years are in their vast majority Republicans. If you ask them why, it has to do with John F.Kennedy and Bay of Pigs, they felt betrayed by a Democratic president and they will never trust another Democrat. It doesn’t matter that you try to explain the reasons JFK had to back down on his offer to back the Cuban invasion in Bay of Pigs, it doesn’t matter that not two individuals are the same regardless of party affiliation, Cubans are like elephants (they chose the right party, at least the right mascot) they never forget. However, the younger generation of Cubans is seeing things differently and is abandoning in great numbers the views of their progenitors.

I am sure that the fact that Romney can claim that he has family in Mexico and that his father is Mexican born who came to this country as an immigrant is enough to make these older Cubans vote for Romney and not for Gingrich. I am also sure that most of these Cubans don’t know that Romney has never visited Mexico – his claimed roots – that he doesn’t personally know his Mexican family and that his Spanish is worse than any other American that learned Spanish in second grade and never practiced it since. They will not look for these facts and even if told, they will think of it as irrelevant. For Cubans in South Florida all it matters is that he has the support of the strongest life-long political Cuban figures in Congress, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Mario Diaz-Balart, who probably coached him about what to say, after all, they’re experts at milking the Cuban cause for their gain… It is easy for any politician to win the old school Cuban votes, it will suffice to say the same bullshit that has been said for the last 50 years: “Down with Castro’s policies”, “tighten the embargo”, “end the Communist regime in Cuba”; Cubans are either so naïve, so stupid or both that after hearing the same shit for half a century they still believe that anything will be done by an American politician – doesn’t matter which party they belong to! They have yet to realize that is not “good business” for the Cuban sharks, I mean politicians, comfortably sitting in Washington to end that which ails Cuba but that is great to maintain their lifestyle and fill up their pocketbooks, they would be out of business if it did and that works against their benefit, hence they will never do what is necessary to change the current situation in Cuba and they will continue doing what it has been repeatedly proven to be ineffective – the embargo – making of Castro a modern day martyr for the rest of the world.

Are you wondering what Cubans think about The Dream Act? Cubans are the first one to cry out loud – and I mean loud – against deporting these young men and women that were raised here and going to school. They will call the radio stations and proclaim their disapproval in no uncertain terms, Cubans are very passionate in the way they speak, to put it in a nice way, but that outrage disappears when faced with their innate, and somewhat justified, hate for Castro – so they’re willing to ‘sacrifice’ The Dream Act, after all it doesn’t apply to them, if Romney promises that he will remove Castro from the island. The Never Ending Story that Republicans brilliantly use time and time again when campaigning in Miami or South Florida.

Cubans represent only about 4% of the Hispanic population in the United States, according to the latest Census, so regardless of how impressive Romney’s Hispanic win in Florida may seem, it is definitively not a true representation of how the Hispanic vote will be on November 2, 2012.

(this article was first published, with minor differences, in http://technorati.com/ by Independent Thinker)

GOP Response to the SOTU address... What a joke!

Last night as I watched the State of the Union, I felt proud to be a Democrat. I felt proud to have a President that is such a great speaker and that in an election year, is not afraid to ruffle a few feathers.

Obama touched almost every subject that is on everyone’s minds. From a great opening where he touched our hearts as we witnessed the warmth in his embrace to Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, to the recognition he expressed towards our men and women serving this country in the military.

Nothing that Obama said in the SOTU was outrageous. But today we are hearing the expected comments from the Right. Today, I read an article from Los Angeles Times “'Republicans blast Obama for ‘efforts to divide us’” that summarizes what the GOP thought of Obama’s speech. What caught my attention is the ridiculous assertion that Obama is constantly trying to divide us. Really? These people must have a different concept of what dividing means, because for the last 3 years that’s all they’ve done, not Obama. If anything, Obama’s base has been upset because he has tried so hard, and in their opinion, he has conceded too much to the Right in order to get things done, and they say Obama is a divider? 

Mitch Daniels, the Governor of Indiana, resents what according to him Obama insinuated, if we are to believe Gov. Daniels, Obama said that this nation is a nation of ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’, I did not hear anything at all that resembled that statement, but Gov. Daniels said the opposite and answered to his imaginary assumption with “this nation must always be a nation of ‘haves’ and ‘soon to haves’”… that must be a damn joke! For the last 10 years, this nation has become a nation of haves and have nothing, the dream of ‘soon to have’ it’s slowly vanishing and will soon disappear if a Republican wins the elections. For the last 10 years all it has matter for every Republican in Congress is the financial health of the corporations and multimillionaires that keep them where they are, not the working class. The working class is nothing more than the instrument that lines with money the pockets of these Corporations (people now) and multimillionaires; it is true that the tax cuts they have managed to give these corporations create jobs, theirs and trickle down economics – to their bank accounts, not to the working class. So far, in 10 years of these tax cuts, jobs have been decreasing not increasing. If that was true, we would have a 0% unemployment rate, what’s more, we should have to bring people from other countries to fill the vacancies, lies! Nothing could be further from the truth! For Gov. Daniels to even make mention that Obama is ‘pro-poverty’ it’s an insult coming from a party that has blocked every effort this administration has proposed to promote or create new jobs. For Gov. Daniels to be either so delusional or such a great lair as to claim that the GOP is the only hope to “restore America in an upward mobility and equality” it’s in and by itself laughable. When has this country seen any equality or upward mobility during a Republican administration in at least the last 30 years?

Obama knew the Republicans were going to call him a ‘class warrior’. Anyone daring to touch the super wealthy of this country is accused of dividing this country by class or of being a socialist or worse yet, a communist. It is so ludicrous to claim that by Obama not wanting for the margin between the very wealthy and the middle class to be as abysmal as it is now he is dividing the nation, that it would be as ridiculous for someone to claim that is terrible to want to close the gap between an “A” grade student and a “D” grade student. But that’s the GOP for you… Illogical, arrogant and indifferent to the needs of the working class!

Then, we had to hear from the candidates. Mitt Romney used the same rhetoric that the far right uses time and time again and that their stupid followers believe: that Obama wants more taxes, more spending and more regulations, but of course, he doesn’t stop and clarify that the ‘more taxes’ are for the wealthy, not the working class; that the ‘more spending’ is to create jobs and that the ‘more regulations’ is to keep an eye on previous corporate offenders, like the ones that have contaminated our environment; the ones that made thousands of people lose their homes and the ones that brought this nation to the brink of a second depression. No, Mitt Romney conveniently left the explanation out, allowing his followers to think that the taxes he was referring to were the taxes of the working class, the more spending was to fill the pockets of the rich and the ‘regulations’ was to increase the size of government.

Next we have the worse offender, sorry, candidate of them all: Newt Gingrich. I have no idea how he dares to criticize anyone, with a record such as his. For this pig (I can’t call him anything else and I must apologize to the pigs) to claim that Obama is a radical and out of touch with America is offensive. A guy that has no moral values, who was asked to resign from congress and from his position as Speaker of the House for basically stealing and fraudulently issuing checks with no funds; a guy that is the only member of Congress and the only Speaker of the House, in the history of this nation, that had to pay a fine of $300,000 a guy who goes to Tiffany as we go to Walmart, to claim that he is in touch with America but not Obama, is laughable. Certainly the America I live in is not the America Gingrich lives in.

The only one that said the truth, up to a point, was Rick Santorum. He said “Over the last three years, he has made it clear that his values are not our values” – and that is so very true! Obama values his wife, his children, and his family. Obama values the American Dream. Obama values the right to love whoever you chose to love. Obama values the health of this country. Obama values the environment. Obama values the working class. So yes, Rick Santorum was right, Obama’s values are NOT, in any type, shape or form those of the Right, and for that I thank Obama.

That leaves us with Ron Paul. His response was nothing but a long list of complains, not one serious response to any of the points made by Obama in the State of the Union address. We all know that Ron Paul wants to return to the pre-Civil Rights Act era, we all know that he wants the country to run by itself, with little or no government – probably only two people in government if he wins: he, the ‘king’ and his prince, Rand Paul. We would all be so stoned that will not care what is happening around us, probably why he supports making drugs legal. We would return to the Wild, Wild West. All joke aside, his response was just a litany of his usual complains, nothing at all related to what Obama said and of course, he closed his so-called response with the a new complain, the “TSA treatment of his son, Rand Paul”… You know what? I must thank the TSA, if I have to endure getting screened, touched and x-rayed; whom does Rand Paul think he is to be treated differently? I’m telling you, Ron and Rand Paul think they are above the law.

All in all, the response from the GOP was what we all expected. A complete and utterly denial of accepting any responsibility for the state in which this country finds itself, a self-evident negative attitude, a perennial effort to obstruct any help this country needs to move forward, to help the working class to get the jobs that will help them fulfill the American dream; for Republicans the only people that matter, the only people that can have an ‘American dream’ are wealthy people and we, the working ants, should be grateful for the crumbs they let us get.

Wake up America! Remember what got us to where we are today. Obama is good, but he can’t undo what took 8 years to accomplish; Obama can’t perform miracles it is up to all of us, we the people, must work together, roll up our sleeves and help him shape our own future.

Good for the goose… bad for the gander.

What is happening to the far right? Are they losing their strict morals or are these morals upheld only if broken by a person outside their party? This past Thursday, the people from South Carolina attending in person the debate, proudly and fanatically displayed to the world that their morals are far from what they claim; actually they showed how amoral they all are. Frantically applauding and with a standing ovation to the most morally despicable politician in the debate: Newt Gingrich.

Newt Gingrich amoral behavior is nothing new. We all have heard of how in 1980 he ditched his first wife, Jackie Battley when she was having a tumor removed, at the hospital, because he had decided that she was not ‘presidential’ material as she was 7 (some say 9) years his senior. Apparently, he didn’t know about George H. W. Bush Sr. and his wife Barbara… She was not only unattractive but also looked like Bush’s mother and she was a First Lady, once. The truth was simple; he wanted to marry the woman with whom he had been unfaithful with for a while, his mistress, Marianne Ginther who in 1981, soon after his divorce from his first wife became the glorious Mrs. Marianne Gingrich. Newt was not content with having divorced his wife of almost 20 years for a younger woman, the first Mrs. Gingrich had to take him to court to get him to pay child support and alimony – that goes to show what a great dad he is!

At that time, amidst the witch-hunt initiated in the House of Representatives by none other than Newt Gingrich against the then President of the United States, William “Bill” Jefferson Clinton for having an extramarital affair, Newt was one of the most outspoken, repulsive and unforgiving critics of the president, while all along Newt was himself having an affair with an aid. Talk about being hypocritical!

But as it usually happens, he who lives in glass houses should not be throwing stones and such was the case with Gingrich and back in 1996, an investigation was conducted on him, it was found that he had committed over 80 ‘indiscretions’ and far more serious than an extramarital affair. It turned out that he had bounced 22 checks – and the right wants this guy for president during these economic crises? He made book deals with the now ill-famed Murdock; he used taxpayer’s funds for his own personal and political gain. Newt Gingrich can proudly say that he is the one and only member of the House and the first Speaker of the House who, in the history of this country, has not only been accused of ethical wrongdoing but had to pay a penalty of $300,000, and he had to resign in 1997.

In May 1999 Marianne was diagnosed with M.S. and the ever-thoughtful Newt took the opportunity to tell Marianne that he was having an affair with Callista Besek. Isn’t he a loving man? Not content with breaking such news to his sick wife, he allegedly offered her to have an open marriage, apparently he thinks that he is ‘all that’ and women will be willing to accept it in order for him to do them the favor of staying with them. Regardless of what high opinion he may have of himself, Marianne didn't accept and the couple divorced in April 2000.

A few months later, precisely in August 2000, he married his mistress. History tends to repeat itself, doesn’t it? Callista is a Catholic (a “good one”, I guess) and Newt decided to convert to Catholicism – obviously Newt can’t even be faithful to his own religion – and, as a final punch to Marianne, in 2000 Newt asked the Catholic Archdiocese of Atlanta for an annulment of their marriage.  

Now, Callista after suffering a transformation from a ‘normal’ human being to a woman that looks as if she is in a constant state of surprise and wearing a helmet in an apparent effort to look young and presidential enough for her husband; a woman that if we are going to take into account the ‘confessions’ of Marianne about Newt’s proposal for a three-some with Callista, has been willing or has participated in this type of sexual activities must be really concerned with Newt’s new aid, a much younger, vibrant, pretty and natural woman: Lisa Graham Keegan. I am certain that the infidelities of Newt Gingrich didn’t end with Callista, after all, for Newt Gingrich a woman is nothing else but a thing to use and discard when they get sick, old or he gets bored. I for one will not feel sorry for her.

What remains unanswered is, how is it possible that the religious right is supporting Newt Gingrich? What happened to the ‘sanctity of marriage’, to the morals, truthfulness, with ‘thou shall not steal’? The next religious right nut that comes to me with their preaching, I will surely punch them in the face!

Trickle down... Politics?

And as usual, the Republican contenders for the Presidential nomination, after discrediting, insulting, pointing fingers and all the usual exhibition of egos that takes places at political debates, are falling, one by one.

The first one to go, when he couldn’t control the sexual harassments from invading the news and he could no long cover the sun with his thumb, was Herman Cain. He didn’t last long and we all knew he was going to be the first to go, after all, the only reason the RNC ‘allowed’ him to run was to prove that the GOP is not a racist party, the same reason why they elected Michael Steele to be Chairman, regardless of his poor credentials. To be honest, Herman Cain and his ‘999’ plan were not missed but he did bring some sort of entertainment to such a boring group, but his 15 minutes of fame were over pretty fast. So far, he has not endorsed any of the candidates; he says he prefers to endorse “the people” unless by “the people” he was referring to corporations, one might never know. Some people belong more to the entertainment industry than the political arena, but then again, these debates resembles more a circus than a serious political debate.

But we still had Michele Bachmann and of course, we can’t forget about Marcus. The two provided us with so much fun during the campaigns! The comedy shows were having a blast at their expense, after all, Michele seemed eager to provide fresh material every time she was in front of the cameras, I think comedy writers never had it so easy, they didn’t have to make things up, Michele made sure of that. But, as it happens when something is too good, she too had to quit – we must not forget that as entertaining as she was, she was running for President of this country and I think people were amused, entertained for a while but finally they realized it was time to get serious. It was no surprise when after she announced her resignation she endorsed Ron Paul; after all, birds of a feather flock together.

At that time, everyone thought that Rick Perry was going to call it quits, but the cowboy decided to stick to his guns and continue in the race… some people are too dumb or too stubborn or both to know when to leave.

Jon Huntsman was kind of an enigma to me. While we must admit that he is an intelligent, well educated - he even speaks Mandarin, experienced (certainly more than the rest of the pack), he was dignified even when the others were attacking him and then, for reasons I don’t know, he changed tactics and decided to attack Mitt Romney by saying that Romney likes to fire people and he didn't. He was doing pretty decent until then, holding to third place but he had the charisma of a stone. And after South Carolina he decided to quit and endorse the very candidate he chose to criticize: Mitt Romney.

And today we are blessed with another drop out, Rick Perry. It was not a surprise to anyone; actually we were surprised he lasted longer than Huntsman if only by a few days. Perry didn’t bring any substance to any of the debates, except to show his homophobic tendencies, his flip flopping (remember, he started his political career as a Democrat), and his constant display of either bad memory or what most of us suspect, a complete lack of knowledge on most subjects. Besides the entertainment contributions made by Perry, he will not be missed. He was prompt to offer his endorsement to none other than Newt Gingrich. We must forgive him, with that endorsement he confirmed what we knew all along, Rick Perry is an idiot.

Now is down to four. We all know that Rick Santorum is next; he is an improved version of Rick Perry. I am sure he will endorse Ron Paul; he can’t endorse an adulterer or a Mormon.

Ron Paul will be gone too. Regardless of his followers, the RNC will not let him get to the end of the race because of what he is proposing – small government, legalizing drugs, etc. - goes against what Republicans really want. So he will be history, again, and Paul will endorse Mitt Romney.

The last two candidates that will remain till the very end will be Romney and, yikes! Gingrich. Romney is charismatic, good looking, energetic and has enough money to take the race all the way to the end. Also, Romney serves as a proof that the GOP is open to all creeds, just as they allowed Cain to run to prove that they’re not racists. Sure! Gingrich will be fighting all the way, there is much money to be make afterwards with his Super PAC, books and his so-called documentaries – so the longer he stays, the more money he’ll make, but he knows he will not be the republican presidential nominee, he is not in the race to win the position but to win money and lets not confuse the two. Mitt Romney will be the republican candidate for the presidency, and I am glad about this, he is no contender to debate Obama. Romney is too arrogant, as a speaker he is awful and he will be debating a great one. At the end, indirectly, Mitt Romney will be endorsing Obama!