Dysfunction, incompetence, and inconsistent.

The President had a good week.

He has gotten his Supreme court nominee onto the court, at great cost to the republic, but he got it done. The sacrificing of the filibuster, a long-held tradition of the United States Senate, and any hope of a less polarized congress was the casualty. He doesn’t care too much. That has been his dysfunction, he doesn’t care about much.

On Monday, he said he didn’t care about whether Assad stayed in power in Syria or not, Friday he wages war against Assad and possibly Russia. We could call it inconsistent, you might give him a pass on that since I might have changed my mind considering the atrocity unleashed by Assad, but I wonder if he thought the whole thing through. It doesn’t look like it.

The real inconsistency is his work on his health care plan, he said “everyone covered for less money, go to any doctor you want,” to negotiating with the “Freedom” caucus to take away health insurance from possibly more people than had gained it under the Affordable Care Act, with the likelihood of higher premiums with less coverage. All he wants is a win.

As of today, of the 553 key positions that must be approved by the Senate Trump has only nominated 24. There are 28 more who have been announced but not yet sent to the Senate for approval. This is only part of the 1200 positions that require Senate approval. There are another 3800 or so total political appointees that have not been sourced. The reason for this is some kind of loyalty test that many potential candidates have failed. What about qualifications for the job? Is he willing to substitute competence for loyalty? Just that he hasn’t made the appointments is incompetent.

With the failure of their health care bill and any compromise on the horizon. Any tax bill looks to be just another fight among the Republicans, I don’t hold out much hope that the Republicans will be able to govern at all for the next 2 years. They’ll get some small things done. Repeal any climate saving rules for the oil and coal industries that were imposed by President Obama, make some rich people richer by making it easier for banksters to siphon off money from our retirement accounts. But they won’t be able to pull off the big transfer of power and wealth to the already obscenely rich and obscurely powerful.

I feel that If Mr. Trump survives his first term, and we have not had a nuclear event, a major war, or a financial meltdown, I am expecting one or more of these. I will consider his presidency a success. The United States will have dodged a bullet.

The best part for me, of this dumpster fire of an administration, is that we may never again have to hear “why don’t we let a business man run the government” Clearly that is a bad idea.

Refuse to use Plastic.

We all hate plastic. We hate plastic food containers, plastic water bottles, plastic shopping bags, plastic product packaging (I really hate blister packaging), and all the little crappy toys and nick-knacks that we see in every convenience store. We hate plastic in the oceans, in the landfills,  anywhere in the environment and the chemicals from plastic in the food chain.

My wife Peggy and I are eco consumers. We use reusable bags, bottles and cups. In our household we don’t buy anything or at least resist purchasing items with plastic packaging, and if we have to we will pay more for something not packaged in plastic, or at least in recycled/recyclable plastic and everything that can, does go in the recycling bin. We use bar soap, bar shampoo, bar shaving soap & a brush and refill glass bottles for other household products. Lately we have been relaxing some because our city started accepting any plastic with a recycling label, numbers 1-7. Most, but not all packaging is one of those so we've been buying more things in or made from plastic.

Then I discovered the Plastic Pollution Coalition website through some tweets I've been receiving. This opened my eyes (again) about the serious nature of plastic pollution. The realization that only 93% of recyclable plastic produced is recycled. Even when it is recycled, it’s energy intensive, and the new product is still many times, thrown away.

My question for the reader is should we discourage recycled/recyclable plastic? Peggy and I have a small online store that sells some recycled plastic items, bowls & utensils and we sell BioBags biodegradable plastic-like bags for the kitchen. They are all great products, but are they equally bad for the environment as virgin plastic? My thought is no, but they may not be much better for the environment than virgin plastic.

While I still think that as a nation & society, in the mean-time, we need to recycle all plastic that exists, but we really have to stop making any new plastic.

We as consumers need to demand better packaging options from wherever we buy anything. Write that letter to Costco, Target, & Wal-Mart to stop selling items packaged in plastic or items made from virgin plastic. If you buy durable items like benches, picnic tables or waste baskets, buy ones that are not plastic preferably or made from recycled plastic as a second choice. Look for the products that have recycling information on the package, if there isn’t any, don’t buy it.

We as citizens should pass laws to limit the manufacture of virgin plastic. Until plastic can be recycled and re-recycled like aluminum cans, no consumer item can be made from virgin plastic. All plastic products and packaging should have recycling information on it. More money needs to be spent on recycling programs and more research into the health risks that plastic in the environment creates. Existing plastics need to be recycled into fence posts, telephone poles or something that doesn’t get thrown into a landfill or worn down into microscopic bits that end-up in our food, water, and us.

Chemicals from plastic are in our food chain, therefore in us and in our children. It may be a small thing for one person to write a letter or use a reusable cup, or recycle a yogurt cup, but when all of us do it we become a market force and it makes the governments and corporations react in a positive way.

First They Came After Me

First they came for the communists,
I did not speak out;
As I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I did not speak out;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
As I was not a trade unionist.
When they took the Jews,
I did not speak out;
As I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

These words by Rev Martin Niemöller have stood as a warning to pluralistic societies all over world.

With a constitutional amendment on the ballot in Minnesota that proposes to deny some people the right to marry the person they love, this poem needs to be brought to our attention again. This poem should serve as a Red flag whenever a segment of our society is denied rights.

I am not a homosexual. I find the thought of gay sex a distasteful as anyone can, but I also know what it is to love someone with all your heart. There is not one way to express love.  No one can say to me the way I make love to my wife is wrong or evil, because it is born out of love.

Some people say that allowing gay marriage will make their marriage less in some way. I know it will make our marriage stronger and more important because we will share the institution with everyone.

I hope someday soon the Niemöller poem can be revised to:

They freed the homosexuals
I am not gay
But I spoke up.

Speak-up! Vote against this amendment.

Tax the Rich

As our State begins a shutdown due to the pigheadedness of Republicans, it’s time to understand who they are fighting for. I have heard a thousand times “Don’t tax the job creators”. But let’s think about that statement. We are suffering from unprecedented unemployment, corporations and banks are swimming in money, but they are not creating Jobs, why? Because consumers are tapped out, the middle class is cutting back because so many of us are unemployed or under employed we’re not spending any money. The rest of us are afraid we’ll lose our jobs next. Business is having a hard time finding customers. In spite of the improvements in manufacturing, we’re still at about 80% of capacity. If I owned a business I wouldn’t hire anyone if I didn’t think I could keep them busy.

The problem is not that businesses don’t have the money; the problem is that there is no demand.

So if Consumers can’t feed the economy and business can’t or won’t invest, who will make the investments to keep the economy going? Like it or hate it, the only institution able to kick start the economy is the government.

So the idea that 90% of the people in our state should suffer higher tuition, poorer roads, less police & firemen, larger class sizes, less help for the elderly, higher property taxes, have to cut back our family budgets further, and lay off thousands of state workers, so some fat cat can keep a couple percent of income tax is stupid.

To be fair, not all business owners are swimming in money. Many are existing hand to mouth just like many of us. Also, not all, in fact MOST of the wealthiest Minnesotans are NOT business owners. So to tax the wealthy will not affect most businesses and we can create a mechanism to filter out those that are businesses.

So write your legislators and encourage them to move on the budget and stop protecting the wealthy at the expense of the remaining 95% of citizens.

Birds of a feather

My wife and I happened to be in Washington DC when the Rolling Thunder motorcycle parade began it’s endless procession around the mall with Sarah Palin on one of the Harleys. How fitting it is that these two have come together. A half term governor of Alaska who toys with the conservative right and the press for attention and fame, and the cadre of Harley riders who will trailer their bikes across the nation to ride in parade formation, rev their engines, seeking attention, and pretending to be bad boys.

To be fair Rolling Thunder does help veterans and look for missing POWs/MIAs.  As a motorcyclist I would be happy to be part of the demonstration, but I would have ridden there. I also would have been very pissed if I found out after the fact that the event was co-opted by any presidential candidate let alone, an incompetent Sarah Palin.

4 Steps to Restore Our Democracy

Our nation has endured many dangerous and demanding times. When we thought the Democracy might be torn apart from external and internal forces we have come together and met every challenge before us. One advantage we have, that has helped us in our times of need, we have been able to elect leaders that fit the times and were willing to sacrifice political capitol to make correct and courageous decisions that brought our nation and our democracy through these crises.

We now have challenges on many fronts. Some of these crises are overblown but many, too many, are in need of real solutions, solutions that take political courage and may require unpopular legislation. We have an ever growing national debit. We have an un-winnable war and one or two brewing. We have Public health and Social Security programs that are on the verge of going bankrupt. Our children are failing in our schools at an alarming rate. We have India and China who are poised to eat our economic lunch, and China may not as malevolent a world leader as the US has been. We have a potentially civilization ending environmental crisis that, if you choose to believe the people who do know, this crisis will have direct affects on our population within 50 years. Oh and there’s terrorism, nuclear proliferation, and the Middle East. All of these crisis, and I’m sure you can add a couple more, need timely and smart solutions for this country and the world to survive.

With the political climate of the last 30 years we cannot eliminate the best ideas or exclude the best people from serving in public office. I believe it is true that qualified candidates for public office and for leadership positions remove themselves from consideration because of the risk involved in public life. The risk of having to carry water for a special interest when that person does not agree wholly in the message or path that interest forces the elected official to pursue. The risk of ruining a family or a career if past indiscretions are aired in public, or just the idea of having to schlep around you district or state in order to raise money to get elected every two years. I also believe that the best ideas are left on the table because the political environment won’t tolerate them or because they come from one unpopular train of thought or doctrine.
Below are 4 ideas that I hope will fix or at least move our political process forward. These are changes in the law that other more knowledgeable people than I have proposed many times in the past.

We need the can-do spirit and attitude that we employed 30 years ago, where government, if needed could move quickly and decisively on behalf of the American people and the world. This IS the best country in the world and it is time we decided if we want to keep it the best, and if we are willing to make the investments and sacrifice we need to make it so.

 
Reinstate the Fairness Doctrine
The Press is the 4th branch of our government. It keeps elected officials in check, and if it’s doing its job, it prevents any one entity in our society from controlling any part of our government without a complete examination in the public eye. Sunlight is the best disinfectant. Unfortunately parts of the press have been co-opted by the powerful and power hungry. All major newspapers and television networks are now owned by large corporations and they are exerting control on stories and investigations by those press affiliates. Rather than examining the pros and cons of an idea or group, some parts of the press is playing cheerleader on behalf of powerful interests and the already wealthy.

After the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords it should be clear to all Americans that our political environment has become distorted and overly adversarial. Even though the shooter turned out to be apolitical, just the fact that this is the first thing everyone assumed (including myself) was the motivating cause of the shooting, shows an amount of guilt that the media and elected officials are holding onto. We cannot continue to demonize each other the way we have for the last 30 years.

The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, that required the holders of broadcast licenses to both present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was, in the Commission's view, honest, equitable and balanced. One rule in the Fairness Doctrine was called the “Personal Attack Rule”, this rule applied whenever a person (or small group) was subject to a personal attack during a broadcast. Stations had to notify such persons (or groups) within a week of the attack, send them transcripts of what was said and offer the opportunity to respond on-the-air. I think that would be fair and it would help tone down the rhetoric we see on television and talk radio.

Many other parts of the doctrine would be useful today. One rule banning a single company from owning multiple of broadcast stations, and newspapers in the same market. This would guarantee more ideas in the marketplace. The idea of the Fairness Doctrine was to make as many ideas available to the electorate as possible. When the rule was repealed in 1987, it was thought that with cable TV and later the internet, many new ideas would be available and the doctrine was no longer necessary. However what happened was this; points of view and opinions began to monopolize channels, stations and whole corporations, with one point of view or another. And now the electorate is segregated, conservatives watch FOX and to a lesser degree, liberals watch MSNBC and we are beginning not to trust each other. Hostility is the next step. People naturally gravitate to the channel or source of news they agree with and both are denied an honest and fair representation of the other, or many other sides of any issue. Worse yet not only is one side promoted over the other, but the other side on some programs are castigated and demonized as extremists and evil people. Sometimes you’d think people with a different opinion from the hosts of a political program would steel from your mother and kill your children. You’d think that people would be able to see through this type of blatant hyperbole but there is always someone who isn’t in on the joke, like Byron Williams who took Glenn Beck up on one of his rants and tried to kill the CEO of the Tides Foundation, a non-profit in San Francisco, or as could be the case, shoot a congresswoman.

In any case, some rules about journalism need to be applied to the current media landscape. We cannot continue to allow the people of these United States become further alienated from each other.

Public financing of all Congressional Elections
The reality of a congressmen’s life, unless they are independently wealthy, is that he or she is a professional beggar. Every two years they press the flesh of lobbyists and other contributors, in order to build a campaign fund to ward off the next challenger. If this congressperson is in a competitive district, or his/her party is becoming unpopular that becomes a full time job unto itself. The lobbyists are more than happy to fund an incumbent, but for a little assurance of getting their way, they may fund the challenger too. I don’t want my representative selling himself to lobbyists for campaign funds; I want him to learn about issues I care about, learn what his constituents want and need, and work the levers of government on OUR behalf, not on behalf of anyone with a fat checkbook.

The other problem with our current campaign financing system is that even if your Representative is an honest person and not willing to trade a campaign contribution for a vote or favor. However if a large contributor/lobbyist calls this congressman after the campaign, he WILL pick-up the phone. I don’t know if you have ever tried to call your congressman lately, odds are, at best you’ll be speaking to an aide, more than likely an intern. Back to the qualifier at the beginning of this section, if they are wealthy, we have to be sure they don’t have an ax to grind in government. This is not always true, but it can be.

The most important advantage of Public Financing is it keeps politicians honest.
Public financing of campaigns is the only way we can take the begging out of the job description and give Representatives the time to do their job well. It will also make the office more competitive. The effort to make public office term limited was a lazy way of not being able change representation. People were frustrated that the same person held an office for decades. But what if that person was doing a good job? What if the people liked what he or she was doing? Do we just force them out anyway? Public financing for congressional campaigns would make it easier for the citizens to change representation without a draconian rule that kicks them out no-matter-what.

Redistricting by Fair and Non-Partisan Committees
Every 10 years after the census, every political boundary, from precinct to congressional district, is re-drawn to reflect changes in the population. In most states this is decided by the state legislature. The thing is they (Statisticians in the legislature) know pretty well how everyone votes, and can estimate likely voting down to the street level. Precincts, neighborhoods and streets are traded and altered to create friendly or unfriendly legislative districts for incumbent officials.

It’s more like the elected officials are choosing the voters than the voters choosing the elected official.

In Minnesota, after the legislature takes a crack at this puzzle, the Governor gets to approve the plan. If he doesn’t, the plan goes to an appointed judicial panel. This is good because Judges are less political and trained to be fair. California Doesn’t even let the legislature try; the task goes directly to a panel of judges.

More states need to move to this type of system. It will prevent abuses like the Texas redistricting that happened 2 years after the first redistricting in 2002 where Tom Delay illegally funneled money to state legislature elections to win the Texas legislature, so they could re-re-district the state to create more “Republican” congressional districts. It worked! The following election Republicans picked-up 5 seats.

While you can say, this is someone taking advantage of the existing rules to benefit their party (with the exception of illegal funding). It is not good for the Democracy. It’s not right that once in power; a party can ensure their grip on power and thus taking that choice away from the voters.

Rewrite the Legal Definition of Corporations
Corporations are a great invention of our society. They provide the tools for entrepreneurs and innovators to build organizations that provide needed services and products to consumers and create capitol for further investment in other enterprises. They are intended to be a tool of the Democracy for the benefit of society. Since the turn of the 19th century Corporations (and I’m sure before then) the national government has become a tool to some degree of the corporations.
I own stock in corporations through mutual funds like thousands of other citizens. And while I think it is extremely important to vote and get involved with your government to try to make a better world. It may be more effective to use the proxy ballot I get every now and then and vote for or even lobby a member of the Board of Directors on one of the companies that I own, in part. If you can influence BP or GE to make a serious investment in renewable energy it may do more good than getting a congressman elected. And that of course is the problem.

In politics, if you show up, you make a difference. If you vote, you make a difference. Corporate board elections are very complicated and closed. As a small shareholder I’m not invited to a shareholders meeting. The only reason I get the proxy ballot is because the corporation is required to send me one. And it is a proxy, not an actual ballot. Of course the more shares (money) you own the more votes you have. Corporate governance is not very democratic.
Case in Point: The Citizens United v Federal Election Commission case in the Supreme Court needs to be reversed. It is a travesty to Democracy. That decision makes money equal to speech and those with more money are now able to speak, yell really, with a bull horn, out of every speaker in the country literally, whereas us mortal Citizens are only able to have $2300 worth of speech. If money is speech then only those with money will be heard. If corporations can contribute an unlimited amount of money to any or all campaign(s) and I can only contribute $2300 (like I can afford to donate that amount). That makes them more of a citizen than me. They have more “voice” than any human citizen and can afford to use it.

Just the fact that there are corporations that are “to big to fail” should cause some unease at the size of these companies, and the might they have to influence elections and the direction of our country. Their only purpose is to make money for their shareholders, NOT for the health or good of the Country. The Citizens United ruling must be reversed. Corporations should have LESS say in the governing of the Democracy than human citizens. Corporations are supposed to be a tool of society, not the other way around.

I add this suggestion with some reluctance for two reasons: While Corporations have started wars, assassinated democratically elected leaders and manipulated our government with ease to the benefit of themselves and in many ways harmed the society at large, they are the economic driver in our country. They are why we are rich and happy. Corporations are an Integral part of our society. The second reason is honestly, I am not an expert. I am not exactly sure how the law should be changed. I only know corporations should not have as much influence over our government either with campaign contributions, or the billions of dollars they spent on lobbying elected officials.

In most cases CEOs and other corporate officers and board members are inclined to do the right thing. But they are only human. If a CEO can get a Senator or congressman elected to change a policy or regulation, and that allows a corporation to create more profit for the shareholders, it’s just a good investment. Really isn’t that all that matters?

In Conclusion
To me the political atmosphere in this country is so much more toxic than it was 30 years ago. Conservatives are whipped into a frenzy every evening and liberals are amazed at the lengths Republicans will go to win. It seems that politicians aren’t working for the middle class or the average American, they’re working for someone else who we can’t see and don’t really know anything about. These changes will be very hard to enact because there are some very selfish and moneyed forces out there that would rather keep things just the way they are.

These suggestions I believe, are some basic changes that would help our country deal with the major issues before us, and strengthen our Democracy in the process. They are mechanisms that protect us from corporations, the wealthy and elected officials themselves. They will make a better informed electorate and more honest elected officials. These ideas are not particularly clever. They are not something new that no one had ever thought of before. These are old ideas that are in essence going back to what the country did in the 1950s.

Oil leaks are a sticky business

I’m afraid it’s time for me to criticize my President. The President whom I have campaigned for, supported and loved since he became a candidate.

The Deep Horizon Oil Spill fiasco is completely out of control. This morning the situation was not compared to Bush’s Katrina but to Carter’s Embassy Hostage Crisis. The difference is not subtle.

While Bush demonstrated that he didn’t have an interest helping New Orleans during Katrina. He appeared to be lazy and didn’t care, like it wasn’t his job to do anything. When he did finally figure out that it was his job, he was totally ineffectual and incompetent.

Jimmy Carter on the other hand didn’t have any control over what happened to the hostages in Iran. He made the struggle with Iran his only concern after the revolution. He didn’t have the resources to negotiate with a regime of this kind that the world had never had to deal with before. He was destined to fail we see in hind sight, and he owned it. The problem is when a President of these United States says he’s going to do something; the people expect and demand action.

President Obama’s issue is that, besides the federal government not having the expertise or equipment to stop the oil leak, it’s beginning to appear that we also don’t have the resources, capacity, or command structure to keep the oil off the beaches.

The fact that BP, a major contributor of the president’s presidential campaign, can tell the EPA that they plan to continue using a dispersant that the EPA has ordered them to cease using gives me pause. Is BP an example of a corporation with its hooks into the federal government so-far that they have rendered the government ineffective? Like a bystander? A proverbial man leaning on a shovel watching other people work? I’m afraid that is the impression we’re beginning to get. It certainly isn’t what I had in mind.

The Government is giving the orders and BP must follow them.

My advice for the government is two fold. One, get a court order to stop BP from using any more dispersants, or at least unapproved ones. Two, the federal government should start hiring those out-of-work fishermen (and anybody else) to start stringing boom, skimming oil, let them get involved in the clean-up.

Another thought is that I don’t like about the whole idea of dispersants. Isn’t the idea to clean this thing up? Not to hide the problem, but to actually retrieve the oil from the water. Instead of trying to disperse the oil, we should be trying to collect it into one place. Dispersants are old thinking that the “solution to pollution is dilution”. Not so. We have to REALLY clean this up. We should be mixing the oil with straw, or any kind of biomass to soak-up the oil. That would make it easier to pick-up and dispose of it. I also think it could be more effective and easier to do.

In the end, President Obama has been a good president. He has done a lot of good for this country. He’s smart, engaged and has some great ideas. I just wish he’s think out of the box on this issue and start kicking BP in the ass some more.

Tell Republicans to GET TO WORK!!!

If I were a Republican I would be ashamed of my party right now. They are trying to prevent the Dems from doing anything, so much for being the loyal opposition. The Democratic government was elected to fix all the wrongs of the Bush era. But between Health Care and Jim Bunning’s recent standoff, to financial sector regulation, energy and environment legislation, deficit reduction and of course any job bill, they are all held back by Republicans.

Why do Republicans want the job if they won’t want to do any work?

In health care reform, The President has bent over backward to include republican ideas. He has included some ideas from Republicans that aren’t very good in my opinion and dismissed ideas that should be included (like the public option) in order to gain their support. At every committee level the Democrats invited Republicans to offer input and more than half of their amendments were included into the bill. The bill has most of their ideas in it including tort reform and a national exchange where insurance can be sold across state lines, but they still won’t vote for it.

The reason for the attempt at bipartisanship is that Democrats did not want to treat Republicans like they were treated when Republicans controlled both bodies of congress. Shut out.

Republicans are working for the short run. In a myopic strategy they are only working for the next election. They don’t see the long term. If they want the right to govern again they have to have the long term in mind.

In spite of all the bluster over the deficit, I believe if they were in control again they would run up the deficit again as they did under, George W. Bush and Reagan/Bush. History is not an ally to Republicans. Citizens remember that Democrats and Bill Clinton were the only recent government to end deficit spending and begin to re-pay the debit.

If you are a Republican please encourage your representatives to GET TO WORK! We need to get health care done and then energy/environment, jobs and banking regulation. Please stop holding up progress and get to work!!!

Why the health care bill should pass.

What I think has not been said enough and/or really misrepresented is that health care reform is the first step in trying to contain our national debit. The bill according to the CBO will reduce spending by 100 billion dollars over 10 years. Teabaggers say they are concerned about government spending and the national debit and in the same breath say they don’t want any changes to Medicare. Republicans have been trying to gut Medicare for 40 years. I don’t understand why they don’t take this opportunity to do what they have wanted to do. Medicaid & Medicare are in hard financial straits. They will not be collecting enough money to support their obligations in a few years. If we don’t do something soon both programs will need emergency funding or leave millions of seniors and disadvantaged to suffer in the streets.

I believe this president will get our financial house in order but health care is the elephant in the room (excuse the pun). It has to be tamed because it is the largest entitlement program the US operates and is loosing money the fastest. If we can’t get health care under control everything else is window dressing? It has to get done!

The sooner we get past this issue the faster we can get to jobs and banking regulation. Americans need to get these two tasks done. They are angry and frustrated that they haven’t been dealt with. Banking and Health Care are two issues that business leaders are waiting to see what the future holds. They can’t react until something is done and the longer these issues hang in the public eye, the more they wait to do anything, including investment and hiring.

Besides, I think everyone is sick of just hearing about it any more. I know I am. The problem is Republicans are already talking about ditching the bill entirely. The selfish bastards have an issue in the short run. But it may come to bite them in the ass if they continue to stonewall. If Dems ask them again publicly and loudly for constructive input and they refuse to support any health care bill while the democrats are in the majority then they are again only working for their political gain and not for the American people.

Introduction

This is a little therapy for me to write about what makes me pull my hair out when I watch TV talking heads who's only aim is to win for themselves, their party, or their industry. I'm a news junkie, mostly a political junkie. I am an unabashed Liberal. I am so happy we have elected a true liberal to the presidency that I have begun to believe that the American people had perhaps paid a little attention in 6th grade social studies after all.

My father always said "All things being equal people will do the right thing" I believe with my whole heart that American Citizens are good, hard working, smart people who just want to make the world a better place for their children and our country.

As I write my rant. The Minnesota Vikings are playing the Dallas Cowboys. Every Minnesotan is brought up to have two favorite teams, the Vikings and whoever is playing the Cowboys. This resentment is not from the Cowboys beating us more often than not, which they have. The real reason is That back in the '80s someone asked "Why is there a hole in Texas Stadium?" the reply from a Dallas linebacker was "So God can watch his favorite team play". I believe this was repeated by Tom Landry, the Dallas coach. This and the "Americas Team" moniker just demonstrates the kind of smug immodest bragging that is unbecoming for anyone, especially if they're from Scandinavian stock.

This is one reason that today's Republicans drive me crazy. The arrogance and hubris is only exceeded by the incompetence. They are trying to stop Democrats from moving this country forward. After more than eight years of "Freedom Fries" and Defense of Marriage bullshit that has wasted the valuable time of the American people, to live up-to the pledge of our forefathers to make this country the "City on the Hill" that everyone else can aspire to.

We all want to make this country the best it can be for everyone. So when you hear some talking head saying or implying that he's so American, patriotic or religious. Is he really trying to say someone else isn't? When some middle aged guy starts crying on TV because he thinks the government has lost its way, is he really being outrageous to attract more viewers? If anything I would want readers of my amateur spewing to become critical consumers of infotainment and to demand better opinion & news coverage. And to help me do the same.

Thank you, Gary.