Liberty and Justice for All!

First: Some background reading (and listening).
Barack Obama came under fire from the so called “liberal media” for making supposedly misleading statements about John McCain’s stance on embryonic stem cell research. The “Fact Check Desk” over at ABCNEWS.com tells us where that Obama’s ad is misleading for saying:

John McCain doesn’t understand that medical research benefiting millions shouldn’t be held hostage by the political views of a few

They also claim that the Obama ad is misleading because it makes the assertion that McCain currently opposes embryonic stem cell research. Other sites also criticize Obama for saying that McCain’s stance is more strict than President Bush’s stance.

So let’s look at McCain’s history and why Barack Obama and his campaign might say such a thing. Because when it comes to embryonic stem cell research, John McCain has flipped and flopped more times than the fish at the end of Epic.

Before 2001, John McCain opposed embryonic Stem Cell research.  As it is stated in the article, in February of 2000 McCain and 20 other Republican Senators wrote into the National Institutes of Health to request that they ban students from using embryos in their research.

However, in 2001 John McCain flipped and went on Meet the Press and asserted a change in his point of view and had since voted several times (as recently as 2007) in support of the research. This is why the “fact check desk” asserts that the Obama ad is misleading. But is it?

Because McCain has since flopped and on his campaign website it clearly states:

 As president, John McCain will strongly support funding for promising research programs, including amniotic fluid and adult stem cell research and other types of scientific study that do not involve the use of human embryos.

So let’s look at this more closely. In February of 2000 (do I need to remind everyone what McCain was doing in February of 2000) McCain comes out in opposition to the research. Now, during another presidential election, he is again coming out in opposition to the research. In between he did cast votes in support of the research. So who is the real John McCain? It is impossible to tell, because he is spending much of his time flipping and flopping in order to get support.

All we can do is look at what McCain says about his stance today at this very moment. That stance would prohibit federal funds from being spent on any research on embryos. President Bush restricted funding from stem cell lines coming from new embryos, but allowed funding for stem cell research on existing lines. From the wording on McCain’s own campaign literature, he would not allow funding on any stem cell lines (existing or not). So it is absolutely clear that McCain’s stance on his website is in full opposition to the research and that opposition is, in fact, stricter than President Bush (as Obama correctly stated).

It seems like those at the “fact check” desk need to do a bit more fact checking.

Initially posted at my Brack Obama for President blog.

Before I go into the plans of both candidates, let look at the facts of our healthcare system today.

Fact 1: There are over 40 million people in this country that are uninsured.

Fact 2: Those people allow their health problems get to a point where they need to go to the emergency room for care.

Fact 3: Hospitals cannot turn away people in an emergency.

Fact 4: It is generally cheaper to treat a condition early than late, making preventive care much cheaper than emergency care.

Fact 5: Hospitals, not wanting to take a loss, will pass on the costs of unpaid emergency care to those who can afford to pay, making the cost of healthcare rise.

And we need to go over one little fact that Republicans like to ignore. Barack Obama is not proposing one government run healthcare system!

Now, that being said, it is obvious that we currently pay for the healthcare of those who are uninsured because the costs associated with their emergency care are passed on to us in the form of higher insurance premiums. So let’s see how the candidates deal with that issue as well as their other ideas.

Barack Obama has a plan for those 40+ million uninsured people. He will create a plan that is similar to what Congressmen have and allow those uninsured people to opt in. Yes, this will cost us tax dollars, but we should see a net increase in income and here is why. The extra money we pay in tax dollars to cover that plan will be less than the money we save in reduced insurance premiums.

Obama’s plan, unlike some others that existed, allow people to purchase or keep private insurance plans if they so desire. So if I like my current plan (which I do) I get to keep it! (Read the full plan here)

Now, lets look at John McCain’s plan. First and foremost, if you read his plan you will notice that he is pushing high deductable HSA plans. HSA plans are fine for some people but not for everyone.

Now, McCain would eliminate the tax incentive that businesses get for providing healthcare to their employees and would instead give money to individuals ($2500) or families ($5000) to get their own coverage. The “remainder” of those funds would go into an HSA. The only way his HSA plan would work is if the total cost of the insurance plus the deductible equaled the tax break (and we all know that wont be happening anytime soon) .

What is even more flawed with McCain’s plan is that by eliminating the tax benefit, employers may drop insurance coverage. The insurance coverage that employers get is typically negotiated for lower price and no health screenings for coverage. Without such negotiation, people would wind up paying much more for their health insurance than the $5000 John McCain is proposing. In fact, the average healthcare cost for a family of four is over $12000 (according to the National Coalition on Health Care).  And their cost is the average employer based healthcare plan (which comes at a reduced negotiated group rate).  So basically we will wind up with more uninsured people.

So what is John McCain’s plan for the uninsured? His own website states:

As President, John McCain will work with governors to develop a best practice model that states can follow - a Guaranteed Access Plan or GAP - that would reflect the best experience of the states to ensure these patients have access to health coverage.

In a nutshell, when it comes to the uninsured, John McCain has no plan. Period.

The choice is clear folks. All McCain wants to do is promote health savings accounts and has no plan for the uninsured. Barack Obama as the better, and more complete, healthcare plan.

Cross posted at my Barack Obama for President blog.

Go play the “Guess how many times Rudy says ‘global terrorism’” game and if you win, you get a free “No Way! No How! No McCain!” t-shirt.

In showing how the Republican party does not quite understand the real world, not only did the Republicans affirm their quest to obtain a constitutional ban on abortion, they also removed the reductions of abortions from their party platform.

So let me get this straight. The party who claims to be pro-life and wants to protect embryos is only caring about criminalizing abortion and not worrying about reducing their numbers? How is that for not being genuine?

Republicans also affirmed their hatred of homosexuals by continuing their support to ban gay marriages. I am sure that marriage defenders David “who would Vitter do” Vitter and Larry “toe tapping” Craig will be leading the battle charge on this one. I’m shocked they are not calling for both a return to Jim Crow laws and a constitutional amendment to keep women in the kitchen and out of the voting booth. Could the Republican Party be any more archaic?

Cross posted at Barack Obama for President.

John Kennedy is complaining that Landrieu hasn’t committed to debate on his timetable. Her response?

“Sen. Landrieu looks forward to a series of debates with Mr. Kennedy in October when the important work of this Congress is completed. Meanwhile, she will be travelling to every part of the state to discuss the merits of the New ERA energy proposal, which is a very significant piece of legislation that will lower gas prices and transition the country to alternative fuels and energy independence.

“In the meantime, if John Kennedy wants to debate before then, he should debate himself given that he has taken both sides of every issue.”

Excellent.

Yes, Landrieu should debate and it seems that she will do it in October. Seems like Kennedy is making much ado about nothing.

That is an old quote from The Gipper himself, Ronald Reagan. And the Louisiana Republicans have dusted that old tired line out to try and convince current Democrats to turn over a new leaf (just like John N. Kennedy did).

Of course there is probably some truth Reagan’s statement. See, the Democratic Party stopped being the party that used the mantra of “states rights” in order to keep black people as second class citizens and started to become the party that fought for civil rights legislation, equality, and liberty.

Reagan, on the other hand, announced the official start to his campaign in Neshoba County Mississippi, the site where three black civil rights activists were murdered in 1964. Reagan campaigned on the “states rights” platform and utilized the “southern strategy” to attract the racists who also felt that the Democratic Party left them too. Since Reagan felt that the place where three black civil rights activists were murdered was the best way to start off his “states rights” campaign then sure, the Democratic Party left him behind … in the dust.
You can see the front and back of the flier (or should I say f-liar) my wife received in the mail today.

Not only does the f-liar have a picture of the Gipper, but it also has one of the Governor himself. It asks Democrats to “join Bobby Jindal in the Republican Party”.

Most noticeable are the prominent Democrats that are pictured on the f-liar. You have Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Kathleen Blanco and everyone’s favorite Bill Jefferson. Absent is Mary Landrieu (who is likely to win re-election), Mitch Landrieu (who got more votes that Jindal statewide) and other Louisiana Democrats who tend to be a tad bit more Conservative on the issues than those pictured (with the exception of pro-life Blanco whose only difference with Jindal on the pro-life stance is that she has a heart and would allow exceptions for rape and the life of the woman).

The f-liar says what “Democrats Believe In”.

The first lie is that we believe in no new oil exploration. Well, there are 10,000 oil leases that are not being drilled on yet. Seems to me that the Democrats would not have allowed those leases to be opened if they are opposed to new drilling.

The next lie is that Democrats support Amnesty for illegal aliens. The truth is that Democrats in Congress supported a plan that would require any person here illegally to get back in the line and pay a fine for their crime before ever getting a chance at citizenship. Forcing someone to pay a fine does not sound like amnesty to me. Of course, the Louisiana Republican Party and Florist Gump himself forgets that Republicans don’t want illegal immigration to go away because that would mean their corporate buddies would have to hire people at the minimum wage. I would also point out that the plan Democrats supported was called the ________ - Kennedy Fair Plan. Anyone? Anyone? The McCain – Kennedy Fair plan. So if this plan is so called “amnesty” then I guess anyone who supports McCain wants “amnesty” too!

The next lie is that Democrats support tax increases on the middle class. This is, again, untrue. Democrats support eliminating the bush tax cuts for people making $200,000 and above. In fact, here is Obama’s tax plan.You can plainly see that he wouldn’t increase taxes on the middle class.

In fact, when I campaigned for Congress in 2004 I proposed that we give a housing tax credit to everyone and not require it be itemized. Obama supports:

establishing a universal credit for the 10 million homeowners who do not itemize their deductions

Good to see someone else agrees with me. 

They tell the truth about Government run health care. Democrats do support that. Of course, if you want to look at failures in Government run healthcare you only need to look at the tenure of Bobby Jindal and his time as head of the Louisiana Department of Health. During his “leadership”, Louisiana’s health ranking dropped to dead last. But that is just typical of Republicans. They cry about how awful government is and then spend their entire political careers proving it

The f-liar asks “what do you have in common with these Democrats”? Well, if I had to make a flier of my own, it would probably look like this. (Well, actually I would spend a lot more time on it, not do it in paint, and not base it off the old one, but you get the point).

Anyway, it sure seems that the Republicans are scared that they won’t be able to get John “the liberal candidate in the 2004 Senate race” Kennedy to beat Landrieu. I am happy my wife got the f-liar. It was good for a laugh and it is good to see the Republicans wasting money on that garbage.

It is time that the Times Picayune gave credit where credit is due. In it’s recent article (Demos vow to erase state share of levee cost) the Times Picayune reported that Bobby Jindal sponsored the legislation that allowed Louisiana to collect offshore oil royalties. This is factually incorrect. Bobby Jindal did sponsor legislation to get us a share of oil revenues and that bill passed the House. However, the Domenici-Landrieu bill was passed in the Senate, emerged from the conference committee unchanged, was passed by the House (in lieu of Jindal’s legislation) and was signed by the President. It was Mary Landrieu, and not Bobby Jindal, who got us a fairer share of oil revenues.

John Neely Kennedy*.

He probably felt that he would be able to ride the Republican coat tails of Bobby Jindal by defecting to the Republican party and running against Mary Landrieu. Unfortunately for him, Jindal proved that he had no spine and that he was willing to go against both the will of the people and the promise he made during his campaign.

Yes there are other losers. Jindal lost the respect of many of his fiscal conservative supporters. Several legislators are getting recall petitions submitted against them with more likely to come. The Media is being criticised for not doing their job in the 2007 election. But Kennedy was going for statewide election against a Democrat in a state that is turning redder and redder as we speak. The support of Jindal would have helped him immeasurably. Now, the support of Jindal will likely hurt JNK more than it helps. And while i never actually thought that JNK could win, the likelihood of him winning now is much less. And that, my friends, makes me smile.

* speaking politically only.

Back in March I discussed how the terrorism card has been played far too many times and that eventually it would backfire. I also questioned when the American public would stop being scared by Bush’s comments on terror threats and start realizing that Bush’s policy on terrorism has failed to make us safer.

Now an adviser in John McCain’s camp stated that a terrorist attack would help McCain’s campaign. McCain backed away from the statement (likely because he didn’t want to look like he actually wanted a terrorist attack to happen). However, this line of thinking falls follows the thinking of the previous post.

If a terrorist attack happened, it would not be a sign that we are still unsafe so we need to elect the Republican to keep us safe. It would be a sign that the Republican policy on keeping us safe has failed us and we need to change our way of thinking.

Now, I am not going to speculate on how the American public would actually vote if we got attacked by terrorists again. However, if the American public is foolish enough to believe that electing McCain (who follows Bush’s failed ideas on keeping us safe from terrorism)  after a terrorist attack will make us safer then God help us all.

Cross posted at Obama for President.

John McCain, proving that he is losing touch with reality, came out against the supreme court ruling that even suspected terrorists have the right to question their incarceration by saying:

I think it’s one of the worst decisions in history, … It opens up a whole new chapter and interpretation of our constitution.

So let me get this straight. The conservative court actually upholds the right of all people to habeas corpus and McCain questions it as being one of the worst decisions in history?

Let us look at a couple of BAD SCOTUS decisions, shall we?

Plessy v Ferguson: You know, the whole “separate but equal” ruling that gives people a warm fuzzy feeling (I think it is nausea) inside? I wonder where McCain stacks the recent decision against Plessy.

Dred Scott: Back before our country was enlightened enough to realize that black people are people too, we had the Dred Scott verdict. Scott was not allowed to challenge his status in federal court. Where does McCain rank this in his list?

Another disturbing part of this article was the comment by fellow Republican and freedom hater Lindsey Graham who stated:

Americans are going to be shocked to find that that mastermind of 9-11, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, now has the same legal standing as an American citizen.

What Graham doesn’t understand is that as a country we should strive to be better than those who would attack us. Nobody here is going to say that Khalid is a good man. However, even the most vile of murderers deserve a fair trial and a day in court. It shouldn’t matter if the person is a citizen or not. We should strive for greatness and part of what makes us a great nation is the fairness of our court system. The ruling today returns a small portion of the fairness that had been stripped. To know that McCain would turn back the clock and rule that non-citizens are not worthy of equal access to our court system just proves he is not suitable to be our next President.

This will also be posted at my Obama for President blog.