Posts Tagged ‘Response’

Socialist Party USA Response to the State of the Union 2012

Monday, January 30th, 2012

Obama’s State of the Union – Too Little Too Late

by Stewart Alexander, 2012 Socialist Party USA Presidential Candidate

The phrase that came to mind immediately upon hearing President Barack Obama’s State of the Union speech is “too little, too late.” After spending the last few years coddling the banks and the richest 1%, Obama has the nerve to now call for “economic fairness.” To him, this means tweaking payroll taxes and making a rhetorical call to reverse the Bush tax cuts for the rich. For working people in America real fairness means the right to a job, a guarantee of healthcare for all and an end to the Military Industrial Complex. Obama won’t deliver this. That’s why I am running for President against him.

Job creation has been and will continue to be the most obvious way that Obama has sold out working people throughout America. These decisions were made early on in his administration when he made the conscious decision to pour billions of dollars into the Banks that had funded his campaign instead of using those funds to create an emergency employment program to put people back to work. The result is that Americans have experienced nearly three consecutive years of more than 9% unemployment and nearly double that when those workers who given up looking for jobs are counted. This has meant real human suffering for millions of people.

Although Obama has hailed the recent decline in these same unemployment rates, a closer look at the numbers reveal the hollowness of his claims. Economist Doug Henwood has paged through the Unemployment report and discovered that much of the reduction is due to the effects of holiday seasonal employment and, in particular, a shift to online purchasing for Christmas gifts. Of the 200,000 jobs created in December, some 42,000, or over 1/5, came from the hiring of extra couriers and messengers. Bars, restaurants and healthcare companies picked up the bulk of the rest of the new hires. Hardly the manner in which we want to grow the economy.

The jobs program that the Alexander/Mendoza 2012 campaign is proposing calls for the creation of a Full Employment economy. We have a three-pronged approach. First, we want to create an Emergency Jobs Program that will put millions of workers back to work immediately in fields like environmental cleanup, infrastructure creation and maintenance, and education. Second, we support proposals to publicly fund a worker owned and managed cooperative sector. This will serve to not only put people back to work, but to re-build the manufacturing capacity of our country. Finally, we want to fund job training programs that lead to job sharing or job splitting, where workers will work less yet retain the same amount of pay and benefits.

A serious restructuring of the tax code that allows us to take back the wealth created by our work and accumulated by the 1% is key to funding our job creation plan. We want more than Obama’s proposed payroll tax cut. We deserve more than just reversing Bush’s economically suicidal tax breaks for the rich. We need a radical restructuring of the way in which we think about wealth. The great riches of this society need to be put to use to help us all – to make life better for the 99% and create new opportunities for work, relaxation and community.

This is why we propose creating a progressive tax structure where the rich pay far more than the average working person. In a democratic socialist society neither Obama nor Romney would be allowed to pay an effective tax rate of 26% and 17% respectively. Corporate taxation, financial gains taxes and personal income taxes will be modernized – all loopholes will be closed and the rich will pay a steep tax on their income. This is what economic fairness looks like to a socialist.

If Obama’s proposals for “Economic Fairness” are hard to believe, his attempt to present his Presidency as one of peace is simply a farce. The hands of the Obama administration are dripping with blood. He has approved a brutal Drone war on the people of Pakistan that has resulted in massive civilian casualties. He has accelerated the war in Afghanistan, which has increased casualties among soldiers and terrorized the civilian population driving them into the political arms of the Taliban. And Obama has continued to take an aggressive political stance on Iran thereby moving the country closer to another war.

All this, plus a clear continuation of the Bush era security state policies. Obama’s approval of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) annihilates centuries of civil rights protections. The President now has the right to indefinitely jail any citizen in the America without having to work within the protections of habeas corpus. Added to the NDAA is the fact that, as I write this, Bradley Manning is rotting in a jail cell. Manning is Obama’s prisoner – a moral testament to the President’s commitment to continue the job of restricting civil liberties.

My campaign is staunchly anti-militarist. This means that I commit to bringing the troops home now through the elimination of all foreign occupations and the closing of all foreign military bases and I aim to dismantle the Military Industrial Complex. My campaign calls for an immediate 50% reduction in military spending. We think that democratic socialism offers the best hope for the creation of a world based on peace and solidarity. Eliminating the security state will move us a long way in that direction. America should be a model for civil liberties not a test case for how many rights can be restricted.

I am writing this also to encourage voters to take a serious look at my campaign. They will find that socialist politics are clearly distinct from the politics of the 1% peddled by politicians such as Obama, Romney, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul. Under their leadership, the State of the Union is neutered – reduced to an exercise in cheerleading for the politicians that have faithfully towed the line for their corporate benefactors. The proposals of the Alexander/Mendoza campaign are made in the interest of the 99%. We think Americans deserve a clear choice come November. We will be working hard to make that possible. Join us in making a demand for jobs, peace and freedom in 2012!

Blogger PostDiggDeliciousEmailFacebookFarkFriendFeedGoogle BookmarksGoogle GmailLinkedInRedditStumbleUponSlashdotShare

Independent Political Report

Response to 5 Questions for Atheists

Friday, January 6th, 2012

Answers to Silvermage85′s 5 Questions for an Atheist.

The Democratic Republican

Fourteen LNC Members File Joint Response to Judicial Committee Appeal

Sunday, July 31st, 2011

Fourteen members of the Libertarian National Committee (LNC) on July 28 submitted their response to the appeal filed by the Wes Wagner group claiming to lead the Libertarian Party of Oregon (LPO). 

The June 19 appeal by the Wagner group claims that the LNC Executive Committee’s recognition of the Reeves group on June 18 was a constructive disaffiliation and should have required a three-quarters vote of the entire LNC. 

The nearly 70-page set of documents (Document 1 of Response by LNC) (Document 2 of Response by LNC) (Appendix Assembly of Response by LNC) submitted by Chairman Mark Hinkle – and signed by a broad cross section exceeding three-fourths of the eighteen-member governing board – denies that Wes Wagner could be a party to an appeal because Wagner has not been the chair of the LPO since May 21 and states that no disaffiliation took place. 

The LNC response describes its actions as necessary to protect the autonomy of its Oregon affiliate from a “rogue board of directors.”

The comprehensive submission provides a timeline of events, along with a number of arguments and documentation in support of its conclusions that

  • There exists a distinction between disaffiliation and recognizing legitimate officers
  • There are numerous reasons as to why the LNC needs to ascertain the identity of officers of affiliates to remain in compliance with its bylaws
  • Acknowledging legitimate officers elected by LPO members in accordance with their bylaws is not a violation of affiliate autonomy
  • Wagner’s own public statements reveal he believes his board does not have the authority to amend the bylaws
  • There exists a clear rationale for why LPO’s bylaws must lead one to conclude that the group of officers led by Tim Reeves are the legitimate officers of the LPO
  • Wagner’s position is at odds with the very state law he claims as justification
  • Not recognizing the officers led by Tim Reeves would have been equivalent to disaffiliating the long-standing LPO – without the required ¾ vote – and affiliating with a newly created organization, with a different set of bylaws and different set of members

Blogger PostDiggDeliciousEmailFacebookFarkFriendFeedGoogle BuzzGoogle BookmarksGoogle GmailLinkedInRedditShoutwireStumbleUponSlashdotShare

Independent Political Report

A Response to Paul Ryan’s War on Medicare

Thursday, June 16th, 2011

I am 64 years old.
I have private health care insurance from Blue Shield.
I am in excellent health and take no medications.


The cheapest plan Blue Shield
health insurance plan available to me is their Spectrum 5000 plan;
Premiums for Blue Shield= 00 per year.
Deductible for Blue Shield= 00 per year
That means I have to pay 00 in premiums and 00 out of pocket before the plan even begins to cover a dime of my doctor visits or medical care.
A total of ,000 per year before.

In two months I will be on Medicare.
Premiums for Medicare =00 per year
Deductible=

This means I will pay out of pocket and have all my doctor visits and hospitalization COMPLETELY COVERED for 00 a year.

Compare the two plans. Now tell me why I would want a private insurance company to be a middle man between me and my doctor?

Anyone who is covered by private insurance knows that:
1. Every year your deductibles, premiums and co-payments go up…. and your coverage goes down.
2. Insurance companies have become more aggressive about finding creative ways to challenge claims and deny benefits.
3. at least 20% of every private insurance dollar is lost to administrative costs: CEO and executive salaries, advertising, sales reps etc.

Medicare covers 40 million Americans and is administered by 4000 employees. The “CEO” makes just 0,000 a year. Administrative costs are just 2% and the government drives such a hard bargain with doctors and hospitals complain that health care providers complain they aren’t being paid enough.

Only the foolish can believe that private insurance companies are going to run Medicare more cost effectively than it is being run now. Don’t be fooled.

When you are in your last years of life and require expensive and frequent medical care…the private insurance companies will expect you to mortgage your house and spend down your retirement savings to pay your medical bills.

You won’t have a dime to leave to your kids.

From an original report at: http://blogs.bostonmagazine.com/boston_daily/2011/06/13/the-7-most-awful-truths-you-need-to-know-about-paul-ryan%E2%80%99s-war-on-medicare/

The Democratic Republican: Politically Social