Democrats Have the Upper Hand

Tonight John Boehner, Speaker of the House, was unable to obtain a vote in favor of his “Plan B” to avoid the fiscal cliff. This is surprising to me as the only people who would experience a raise in their marginal tax rates would be those with annual taxable incomes of over $1 million.

So Mr. Boehner confirmed to everyone that he does not speak for the Republican Party caucus when it comes to tax and budget legislation. This leaves one slim chance for the Democrats to prevent falling of the cliff. To accomplish this will require some Republican congressmen along with some Democratic congressmen that would result in a majority. It is the opportunity for the President to push through legislation that would be more favorable to him with some compromise.

This can only happen with GOP participation. That is the big “IF.” The consequence of failure will be some sad days in January.

There is one thing we know. This entire situation was caused by our broken political system. Not just American but the rest of the world is wondering, what has happened to the United States?

End of the world on December 21, 2012? The end of the world has been predicted before

Suggestions that the world is about to end have been made from time immemorial. Sixteenth-century French oracle Michel Nostradamus, various religions, an astrologer with a syndicated newspaper column — even a former U.S. presidential candidate — have all claimed to know when the world will end.

On April 7, 1894 St. Louis, Missouri faith doctor J.S. Willis predicted Jesus would return to Earth Thursday March 6, 1896, at 3 p.m. (Jerusalem time). But before then, Willis promised, the world would be ensnared in a series of wars and revolutions.

During the 1950s, Jeane Dixon, an astrologer who had a syndicated newspaper column, gained fame for her psychic predictions. She wrote in the May 13, 1956, issue of Parade Magazine that the 1960 presidential election would be won by a Democrat who would die in office. (John F. Kennedy was assassinated Nov. 22, 1963.) After foretelling Kennedy’s murder, Dixon later predicted there would be a planetary alignment on Feb. 4, 1962 that would herald the world’s destruction. (She also said the Soviets would put the first man on the moon.)

Television evangelist Pat Robertson in 1980 predicted the world’s destruction, according to the book Salvation for Sale, an Insider’s View of Pat Robertson’s Ministry, written by Gerald Thomas Straub, a former producer of The 700 Club. “He’s had it up to here and the hour of His wrath has come,” Robertson was quoted as saying during a Jan. 1, 1980, staff meeting. “Now if I’m hearing Him right, things are starting to happen. What is started over in the Middle East is not going to stop short of a war.” The war, Robertson said, would herald the end of the world.

During the late 1980s, Elizabeth Clare Prophet stoked fears when she warned of nuclear Armageddon that would come with a nuclear strike by the Soviet Union against the United States. More than 2,000 followers left their homes and flocked to her church’s compound near Yellowstone National Park. There they began stockpiling weapons, food and clothing in a system of concrete and steel shelters.

Only last year, Harold Camping, who ran a non-profit radio chain, spent millions of dollars to buy billboard space across the U.S. and print millions of pamphlets warning of doomsday. Camping, who earlier predicted the world would end in 1984, said he used a complex formula relying on numbers in the Bible to conclude the world would end May 21, 2011.

In 1961, a physicist at the University of Illinois named Heinz von Foerster calculated that, on or about Friday, Nov. 13, 2026, the world’s exploding population would become so dense that everyone would be “squeezed to death,” according to the New York Times.

This Has to Be the Time for Gun Control

Author Robert Shrum in the Daily Beast

How many children have to die, how many innocents have to be lost in a mall or a theater or on a neighborhood street, how many presidents or political leaders or prophets like Dr. King have to be shot down in a fusillade that wounds history itself, before America protects the first of our founding inalienable rights—to “life”—which surely comes before the “liberty” of carrying a cache of weapons. And that demands gun control—and I’m not using a politically convenient phrase like “gun safety legislation.” Some guns are outright unsafe—assault weapons—and all guns are unsafe in the hands of some people.

We as a society are hostage to the thugs of the NRA—which actually stands for the National Rampage Association.

Republicans who claim to defend the “right to life” profit politically by defending the moral wrong of a wholesale arsenal of death inflicted on the already living. The religious right that has allied itself with the gun lobby defies Christ’s warning that those who harm the children would be better off thrown into the sea with a millstone around their necks. Shouldn’t the protection of life begin not with a fertilized egg, but with human beings who are truly and fully alive?

And on the other side, politicians who know better, including most Democrats, cower before the threat of electoral retaliation—and invoke the rationalization that it is too hard to pass anything in Congress, even a ban on assault weapons or closing the gun-show loophole that lets criminals and the deranged shop for firearms without any background check. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said today is “not the time” to talk about policies that at least in theory President Obama supports. Oh yes it is. If not now, when? If not the president, who? As he spoke in stricken terms, he seemed to comprehend that—and that he holds the office Franklin Roosevelt described as “pre-eminently a place of moral leadership.”

No measure short of banning all firearms could prevent all shootings. But we can take practical measures that would save many lives. Who among us, who among our children, could be the next to be killed in an unexpected moment of unspeakable horror? So now we will shed a tear again. And in the phrase of Robert Kennedy, who himself would soon be a casualty instead of a president, we should “say a prayer for ourselves and for our country.” And we should have the courage to do something for our country, too. We should look into the anguished faces of parents outside that Connecticut elementary school—faces now tragically incised on our national consciousness. We should recall events from that darkness at noon in Dallas nearly 60 years ago to the carnage at Columbine and Aurora. Those faces and events matter more than the scorecard of the National Rampage Association.

Let us resolve that half a century and more of this country as a killing field is more than enough. Let us refuse to let this day of dying fade into memory and the malaise of resignation to things as they are. Let us stand against the odds so that countless others who otherwise would never even know the cause of their slaying or the name of their executioner may instead live, laugh, and find love and not hate.

Today Barack Obama spoke his heart and the nation’s—and called on us to take “meaningful action regardless of the politics.” Maybe at last, this is the time; it must be the time. The massacre has come too many times.

90 Guns for every 100 Citizens

Re-posted November 5, 2013

Shooting in New Jersey Mall and at LAX

Gunman kills himself after terrorizing New Jersey shopping mall

Three dead, including gunman, in Oregon mall shooting in December 2012. Killings like this happen so often that few even pay attention.

I have written about this situation before. The United States has 90 guns for every 100 citizens, making it the most heavily armed society in the world. This has been reported by news agencies repeatedly.

U.S. citizens own 270 million of the world’s 875 million known firearms, according to the Small Arms Survey 2007 by the Geneva-based Graduate Institute of International Studies.

So is it any wonder that when Americans become angry they grab a gun, go to the mall or their church, and start shooting at everyone in sight. It is a society of frustrated people who want their way in everything.

Argument with your spouse, kill her/him. Argument with your boss, kill him/her. You look suspicious as you walk through my neighborhood I will kill you and ask questions later.

Well it’s all about Second amendment rights. The NRA (National Rifleman’s Association) says, Defend Your 2nd Amendment Rights, Help Protect Hunters’ Rights. There is nothing in the Second amendment that says you have the right to bear arms for your protection or to hunt. It does say, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

The problem is the people of the United States. They really believe that their freedom hinges on their right to own weapons. Sales have dramatically increased in the past four years because many believe that the Obama administration has plans to enforce new gun controls. No laws have been suggested or proposed. Still, there are those who continue to believe that their weapons will be confiscated. The gun manufacturers are happy with this situation.

It is a puzzle to me that a nation of so many wise and smart people believes that owning a gun is a necessity of life.

December 7, 1941 Changed the United States Forever

In this Dec. 7, 1941 photo provided by the U.S. Navy, sailors on a small boat rescue a USS West Virginia crew member from the water after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. (AP Photo – U.S. Navy)

—————————————————————————————————

Yes, every year there are commemorations of the bombing of Pearl Harbor in Hawaii. We honor those who are still alive from that historic day. Ceremonies occur in many parts of the United States.

The real impact was not just America’s entry into WWII. The bombing of Pearl Harbor changed America’s attitude about the rest of the world and its place in the world. The United States surrendered its non-intervention policy (isolationism) that had survived since its inception to a position of leadership in world affairs that exists to this day.

President George Washington, in his farewell address, advised the nation to have “little political connection as possible.” This recommendation was followed up in 1823 with the Monroe Doctrine and reaffirmed in the Polk Doctrine, announced on 2 December 1845. http://www.answers.com/topic/nonintervention-policy#ixzz2ER92HSBw

William Seward, Secretary of State under President Lincoln wrote a letter to one William Dayton in 1863 defining The American Doctrine of Non-intervention in which I quote, “Our policy of non-intervention, straight, absolute, and peculiar as it may seem to other nations, has thus become a traditional one, which could not be abandoned without the most urgent occasion, amounting to a manifest necessity.”

Even after WWI the United States returned to its non-intervention policy when it refused to join the League of Nations (an organization similar to the United Nations).

Since WWII there has been the Korean War, Vietnam War, America’s total support for Israel, America’s intervention in Lebanon (241 marines killed), Kuwait (first Gulf War), Iraq War, Afghanistan.

The U.S. has 737 bases around the world, of which 295 are considered “major military bases,” and has military personnel in 153 countries. Since the middle of the twentieth century the American State has intervened hundreds of times in the affairs of other countries, overthrowing elected leaders and invading sovereign countries. http://tfboyle.hubpages.com/hub/Non-Intervention-A-Foreign-Policy-for-the-American-Citizen

Here we go again! Today the United States is considering involvement in Syria because there is an indication that their government may be planning to use sarin gas. “What you should know about sarin gas, the chemical weapon believed to be in the Syrian regime’s possession.” This is part of an article in the Global Post.

Is it Manifest Destiny or are we Americans just too sympathetic to not aid and abet our fellow man?

Los Angeles – Long Beach Harbors Resume Operations

Work resumed today, Wednesday, at the nation’s busiest port complex after a crippling strike was settled, ending an eight-day walk-off that affected thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in cargo.

Is everybody Happy? Today the answer is YES but the future is looking bleak for these import facilities. This is a serious situation for the 10,000 dock workers.

Los Angles cargo terminal, photo taken on April 29, 2011 at 2:30PM . 1/50 second at f7.1 using Panasonic DMC FZ28 camera. The sky was that blue and cloud free. The sea was that blue. Hey, It’s Los Angeles!

The immediate effect was the redirection of ships to other ports. One of those ports is Ensenada, Mexico. Ensenada is in Baja California lying 125 kilometers (78 mi) south of San Diego on the Baja California Peninsula. With a population of more than 279,000 people a major part of its economy depends upon tourism. It also has a deep water port for commercial shipping that received more than 3 million metric tons of freight in 2010. When cargo is unloaded in Ensenada it is not done using unionized workers. Truckers are not unionized. When the goods are transported into the USA there are no tariffs thanks to NAFTA. So why won’t some shipping companies continue to use Ensenada rather than the Los Angeles area ports now that the ships have been diverted?

Currently Hyundai makes shipboard cargo containers and truck trailers at its nearby Tijuana plant, and two other Korean conglomerates–Samsung and Daewoo–make TVs and other electronic products at plants in Tijuana and San Luis Rio Colorado near Yuma, Arizona. Daewoo and Samsung have announced plans to expand their manufacturing operations in Baja California, and Hyundai has told the Mexican delegation that it is mulling the possibility of building a steel plant in Mexico.

I am guessing that ever more business will not be returning to the California ports.

There is another more serious threat to the Los Angeles-Long Beach port facilities. The Panama Canal Overhaul. When completed some of the largest ships in the world will be able to traverse the canal. The canal’s new set of locks will allow a ship with a 160-foot beam to pass with ease. The current canal can accommodate only ships that are no more than 106 feet wide and 965 fee long. Some of the largest ships in this category, with containers stacked seven-deep on their decks, look like they’re barely able to squeeze through today’s locks. Currently vessels traversing the canal can carry a maximum of 5,000 20-foot containers. With the new locks completed the canal will be able to handle ships three football fields long that hold 13,000 containers.

The result of the enlarged canal locks will mean ships from China, Japan and other Asian nations can more easily set their destination on the Atlantic and Gulf costs of the United States. When those Panama Canal improvements have been completed who will be shipping their cargo to California?