The leaders of Congress have very possibly crossed the line of what is ethically acceptable for leaders of our nation. On two instances in November the Republican controlled Congress has changed the rules of procedures, in the House Rep. Tom Delay (Majority Leader) from Texas is facing indictment for campaign finance violations. In reaction, House Republicans moved to change a rule requiring for any indicted leader to resign that post. In the Senate, leaders showed their determination to maintain strict dominance not only on procedures, but also on remarks by senate members. Sen. Arlen Specter who is to be Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee which confirms presidential appointments of judges, made a statement saying that “When you talk about judges who would change the right of a woman to choose, overturn Roe vs. Wade, I think that is unlikely." The GOP and the religious right demanded immediate clarification by Specter, who satisfactorily did this in order to maintain his position as judiciary committee chair.
The question of ethics is raised because these rules are in place to assure that the minority is not suppressed. One would surmise this attempt to suppress the Democratic, liberal, and progressive voices in Congress is an attempt to suppress the free will and expression of citizens of our nation. In addition these rules assure that a criminal is not occupying a position of leadership; House leaders seem to have swept this principle aside. In addition, if partisan bickering and procedural technicalities are the only tool the minority can use to keep the majority in check then why not allow them? There is no sound logic nor ethical premise in the recent moves by the Republican majority in Congress, except for the reality of their disregard for a system created to enforce a balance of power, which assures against tyranny of any majority regardless of ideology.
We must address this issue and call our leaders on this inappropriate behavior. Congressional GOP leaders and even our President insist on crossing ethical boundaries which further deteriorate values of the world's most powerful secular nation. As the leading party in Congress claims ownership of morals and values we cannot stand by and allow for such unethical practices to occur, no matter how miniscule they may seem. And for the matters at hand, it is simply not ethical, nor prudent for Congress to jeopardize its ethical integrity. This Congress which is the only body capable of maintaining the pure essence of true American democracy.
The public must also be made aware of ethical violations within the "Peoples House". President Bush's administration paid journalist with Tax Payer dollars to promote its political agenda. It also brought someone named "Jeff Gannon" inside the White House press core. His real name is James Dale Guckert. “Mr. Gannon” has no credentials as a reporter, reported for right wing organizations named Talon News & GOPUSA, used a fake name to acquire a daily press pass, and is reported to be linked to pornographic web sites. “Mr. Gannon” was allowed inside the White House press core even before Talon News was established. Who allowed for this to happen? Who authorized it? Who permitted for this breach in security to slip by? Who disregarded the integrity of the “People’s House”? Who was the link in the White House to this male prostitute? They used this person, “Jeff Gannon” to ask "soft ball" questions and to show more support of Bush's policy within the press. Furthermore do you remember the “minor” White House scandal involving Former Ambassador Joe Wilson that disappeared off of the radar? Someone within the White House leaked the name of a CIA agent to punish and to intimidate Wilson for his opposition to the credibility of intelligence leading to the war in Iraq. This agent was Valerie Plame, Joe Wilson’s wife. “Jeff Gannon” , someone who did not belong in the White House and has no reason to be have access to confidential government information is reported to have been involved in the leak of this Highly Classified Covert government information. The White House and the President must be investigated for these illegal and unethical practices. We cannot allow for these partisan games to infect the integrity of the White House and we also cannot allow for Scott McClelan's reputation & position as Press Secretary to remain unchallenged.
The collective policies of President George W. Bush and their failures, riddled with ethical disregard, is forcing the nation to engage in a discussion of impeaching our first U.S. President for incompetence.
Friday, February 11, 2005
Thursday, February 03, 2005
Why All the hype about Social Security?
This is in response to comments questioning opposition to Bush's effort to reform Social Security. First off I must say that this vision has the potential to be beneficial, and even supported if it were solely in the interest of the public good. That means beneficial to citizens in All income levels and with the option of not risking your guaranteed retirement in investments. Furthermore how dare we support a proposal that is sold to us as a crisis with urgency to act "Now" when approaches to changing such a crucial program should be thorough?
Social Security if managed correctly should be a Self Sustainable Program. In other words it should pay for itself, and if it doesn’t that is the fault of Congress and the President and we must hold them accountable for mismanaging our money, and we must oppose efforts to put our retirement in the hands of corporations. What logic is there in this especially with the current state of the stock market, and numerous white-collar scandals? Social Security IS NOT a social welfare program; Americans work hard to build this safety net. Please be real about this: Example #1) what significant investment can a single person with children making $20,000 a year contribute to an investment account? Bush’s WILL NOT benefit American citizens in lower to middle incomes. Furthermore ALL Americans already have the ability to invest for their retirement. Social Security is a safety net above this already present opportunity.
The collective plans of President Bush termed “Ownership Society” are not accounting for or giving due attention to crucial economic factors that effect all of us. Out of pocket expenses are increasing and at a rate higher than your income. Health Care is a major drain on individuals, families, and businesses. Health Care cost account for half of all bankruptcies. The president is linking all of his plans to work, but there has been a net loss of jobs and decrease in wages/salaries. And accessibility to good paying jobs as especially needed for these personal investment accounts are not accessible in all segments and cultural groups in our diverse nation. The increasing National deficit that Bush pledges to reduce in 5 years; Bush will not be president in 5 years, and he has been in office for 4 years already with no efforts to reduce to reduce the deficit. The Trade deficit.
It is the duty of our nation’s leader to keep partisan agendas away from such vital matters as our livelihood, and retirement. Conservatives, moderates, and liberals will unite on this issue for this our money, our hard work, and our retirement. I trust this in the hands of a government guarantee rather than a gamble with profit driven corporation.
Social Security if managed correctly should be a Self Sustainable Program. In other words it should pay for itself, and if it doesn’t that is the fault of Congress and the President and we must hold them accountable for mismanaging our money, and we must oppose efforts to put our retirement in the hands of corporations. What logic is there in this especially with the current state of the stock market, and numerous white-collar scandals? Social Security IS NOT a social welfare program; Americans work hard to build this safety net. Please be real about this: Example #1) what significant investment can a single person with children making $20,000 a year contribute to an investment account? Bush’s WILL NOT benefit American citizens in lower to middle incomes. Furthermore ALL Americans already have the ability to invest for their retirement. Social Security is a safety net above this already present opportunity.
The collective plans of President Bush termed “Ownership Society” are not accounting for or giving due attention to crucial economic factors that effect all of us. Out of pocket expenses are increasing and at a rate higher than your income. Health Care is a major drain on individuals, families, and businesses. Health Care cost account for half of all bankruptcies. The president is linking all of his plans to work, but there has been a net loss of jobs and decrease in wages/salaries. And accessibility to good paying jobs as especially needed for these personal investment accounts are not accessible in all segments and cultural groups in our diverse nation. The increasing National deficit that Bush pledges to reduce in 5 years; Bush will not be president in 5 years, and he has been in office for 4 years already with no efforts to reduce to reduce the deficit. The Trade deficit.
It is the duty of our nation’s leader to keep partisan agendas away from such vital matters as our livelihood, and retirement. Conservatives, moderates, and liberals will unite on this issue for this our money, our hard work, and our retirement. I trust this in the hands of a government guarantee rather than a gamble with profit driven corporation.
Wednesday, February 02, 2005
Health Care Vs. Social Security
I cannot agree with or support the President’s efforts to re form Social Security especially at the cost of ignoring our nation’s Health Care Crisis. Health Care is not affordable therefore not accessible, and should be made a public good.
In addition if managed correctly Social Security should be a Self Sustainable Program. In other words it should pay for itself, and if it doesn’t that is the fault of Congress and the President and we must hold them accountable for mismanaging our money, and we must now oppose efforts to put our retirement in the hands of corporations. What logic is there in this especially with the current state of the stock market, and numerous white-collar scandals? Social Security is not a social welfare program; Americans work hard to build this safety net.
It is the duty of our nation's leader to appropriately manage this program not gambled with it. Below is a break down of Social Security surpluses (this information is provided by the THOMAS/Library of Congress):
`(A) for fiscal year 1999, $127,000,000,000;
`(B) for fiscal year 2000, $137,000,000,000;
`(C) for fiscal year 2001, $145,000,000,000;
`(D) for fiscal year 2002, $153,000,000,000;
`(E) for fiscal year 2003, $162,000,000,000;
`(F) for fiscal year 2004, $171,000,000,000;
`(G) for fiscal year 2005, $184,000,000,000;
`(H) for fiscal year 2006, $193,000,000,000;
`(I) for fiscal year 2007, $204,000,000,000;
`(J) for fiscal year 2008, $212,000,000,000; and
`(K) for fiscal year 2009, $218,000,000,000.
I urge you to contact your representatives and the President and tell them to not gamble with our retirement and to focus on making Health Care Affordable & Accessible.
In addition if managed correctly Social Security should be a Self Sustainable Program. In other words it should pay for itself, and if it doesn’t that is the fault of Congress and the President and we must hold them accountable for mismanaging our money, and we must now oppose efforts to put our retirement in the hands of corporations. What logic is there in this especially with the current state of the stock market, and numerous white-collar scandals? Social Security is not a social welfare program; Americans work hard to build this safety net.
It is the duty of our nation's leader to appropriately manage this program not gambled with it. Below is a break down of Social Security surpluses (this information is provided by the THOMAS/Library of Congress):
`(A) for fiscal year 1999, $127,000,000,000;
`(B) for fiscal year 2000, $137,000,000,000;
`(C) for fiscal year 2001, $145,000,000,000;
`(D) for fiscal year 2002, $153,000,000,000;
`(E) for fiscal year 2003, $162,000,000,000;
`(F) for fiscal year 2004, $171,000,000,000;
`(G) for fiscal year 2005, $184,000,000,000;
`(H) for fiscal year 2006, $193,000,000,000;
`(I) for fiscal year 2007, $204,000,000,000;
`(J) for fiscal year 2008, $212,000,000,000; and
`(K) for fiscal year 2009, $218,000,000,000.
I urge you to contact your representatives and the President and tell them to not gamble with our retirement and to focus on making Health Care Affordable & Accessible.
Health Care Crisis
I have written the President numerous times; stressing the Health Care crisis our nation is experiencing. My views are not partisan or subject to any political agenda. I urge you to pressure the President, his staff, and Congress to work towards resolving this problem in the interest of the public good.
The problem is very simple, the COST of health care is to high. All the solutions, no one has, but the direction should be at regulation of the insurance and the health care industries. Measures like tort reform and not holding insurance companies responsible for their policies that are aimed at gaining profit but lacking protection for the livelihood of their customer are highly questionable of their motives.
Until recently as a Christian, and because of 911 I gave President Bush the benefit of the doubt and I was registered an independent until 2004. Now I believe and it should be clear to you, rather rich or poor, that President George W. Bush truly does not have the interest of the general public in mind. I regret to say this. What is wrong in that White House?
Here is an article giving empirical research to support my views:
http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/02/pf/debt/health_bankruptcy.reut/index.htm?cnn=yes
Action must be taken to preserve the health of America, Now!
The problem is very simple, the COST of health care is to high. All the solutions, no one has, but the direction should be at regulation of the insurance and the health care industries. Measures like tort reform and not holding insurance companies responsible for their policies that are aimed at gaining profit but lacking protection for the livelihood of their customer are highly questionable of their motives.
Until recently as a Christian, and because of 911 I gave President Bush the benefit of the doubt and I was registered an independent until 2004. Now I believe and it should be clear to you, rather rich or poor, that President George W. Bush truly does not have the interest of the general public in mind. I regret to say this. What is wrong in that White House?
Here is an article giving empirical research to support my views:
http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/02/pf/debt/health_bankruptcy.reut/index.htm?cnn=yes
Action must be taken to preserve the health of America, Now!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
