5 things I hate about the Republican Party

My parents are Cuban and migrated to this country in the early 70's for political reasons. My father is a staunch anti-communist, and a die-hard member of the Republican. I have been a member of the Republican party since 1992 (I voted for Clinton that year), but I've been seriously contemplating leaving the party. The following 5 reasons are most to blame for my disgruntlement towards the GOP.

(The following list is in no particular order).

1. The George W. Bush Era:

The Republican Party has certainly changed since the Barry Goldwater/Reagan era, and President George Walker Bush will forever be the face of that change. His era of rule featured the following gems: TARP, Increased federal spending [1], Harriet Miers nomination to the Supreme court, failure to privatize social security, and a host of other hits. And no, Iraq, Gitmo, and "torture" is not on my list. My disdain for the presidency of George W. Bush is mainly due to his utter contempt toward fiscal conservatism, and his adherence to collective policies toward the end of his administration .

2. Arlen Specter:

My contempt for the tool that is Arlen Specter could not possibly grow any bigger. The senator from Pennsylvania has a long history of upsetting conservatives within the GOP on such topics as: Abortion, The Clinton Impeachment, and some health care measures [2]. While I do disagree with his stance on abortion, my disdain for Mr. RINO himself are due to the following reasons:

• His 46 % rating (lifetime) by the AFL-CIO. His rating was 64 % in 2008 [3]

• Mr. Specter is a fan of bailouts. He voted 'Yes' on The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Obama's bailout), voted 'Yes' on The Auto Industry Financing and Restructuring Act of 2008, and voted 'Yes on The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (Bush's bailout).

Need some the tax payers money? Specter is your guy, the louse.

3.Talk Radio Personalities:

Talk radio is a major influence within the conservative movement (shocking, I know). Although such "conservative" radio personalities as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, and Mark Levin are not directly affiliated with the GOP, they are as much a part of it as Moveon.org, Dailykos.com, and Air America are apart of the Democratic Party. It's a new age in politics.

Yes, my political interests are within the same spectrum as the above mentioned personalities, however my anger with them comes from their lack of venom, and fury they show the GOP (although less with Beck than the others). They do criticize the GOP from time to time but it is tame compared to how they speak of the Democratic Party. These personalities should take note of how Michael Savage does things. Mr. Savage has called congressional Republicans "gangsters", and even called President Bush "a fiscal socialist".

I may disagree with some of Michael Savage's stance on certain issues, but no one can call him a shrill for the Republican Party. Can the same be said for Hannity or Limbaugh?


4. "Cronyism, Nepotism, Rascalism":

Homer Stokes, a reform candidate running from governor of Mississippi in the movie "O Brother Where Art Thou", had a popular phrase that he would use to describe Pappy O'Daniel, the incumbent: "Four more years of cronyism! Nepotism! Rascalism! Of service to the interests". Yes, it does sound like Washington, doesn't it? The Republicans had their own issues with rascalism. Here's yet another list.


• Florida Congressman Mark Foley and his sexually explicit e-mails and instant messages with former pages[4].

• Jack Abramoff's, a former Republican lobbyist, scandal in where he was found "guilty of fraud, tax evasion and conspiracy to bribe public officials.[5]

• Randy "Duke" Cunningham, former congressman from California, plead guilty to bribery charges in 2005.[6]

And a host of others....

5. Embracing Keynesianism :

If there is anything that draws my ire these days it's the Keynesian school of economics. One of the tenets of Keynesianism is the state creates policies in order to stabilize a "bad business cycle"[7]. An obvious example of this was the wasting of over 700 billion by Bush with the first bailout.

Friedrich August von Hayek, Nobel Prize winner in economics in 1974 and a very influential figure in the Austrian School of economics was a great critic of Keynesianism. He stated that:

Keynesian policies to combat unemployment would inevitably cause inflation, and that to keep unemployment low, the central bank would have to increase the money supply faster and faster, causing inflation to get higher and higher. Hayek’s thought, which he expressed as early as 1958, is now accepted by mainstream economists[8]

Hayek also believed the Keynesian policies would lead leads to totalitarian abuses, due to the need for centralized planning. John Keynes, the creator of Keynesianism, surprisingly echoed that concern:

The theory of aggregated production, which is the point of ['The General Theory of Employment Interest and Money'], nevertheless can be much easier adapted to the conditions of a totalitarian state [eines totalen Staates] than the theory of production and distribution of a given production put forth under conditions of free competition and a large degree of laissez-faire."[9]

The fact that Republicans, specifically President Bush and his administration, would embrace such failed fiscally policies is the biggest crime, in my eyes, that they have committed against all people who believe in liberty, limited government, ,and free markets.

I wonder what Barry Goldwater would think about the current state of the GOP if he were alive today. Actually, I think that would put him back into his grave.

Stem Cell argument: Take 1

I'm beginning to understand how this all works. Not stem cell research, rather, HOLLYWOOD. I understand the basic premises behind stem cell research and what some of the ultimate goals are with the new Obama initiative, but I'm really beginning to understand the entertainment industry, politics and their involvement in all things legislative. The Stem Cell research debate simply gave more saliva for angry dogs to spit but the issue, when presented by political pundits, sounds like all the rest.

It goes like this:

• There is an election where candidates appeal to certain masses with distinct differences concerning science, abortion, war and ways to spend money.
• Pundits take sides, stumping for certain candidates, with most acting objective but always clouded by bias
• One guy wins
• The winner then changes laws and enacts bills
• The stars of the entertainment industry, in all walks, come out with opinions and jokes to bump ratings.

And then they do it all again.

Morality surrounds the backbone of our society and nothing can be manipulated as easily as a good debate on grey areas of life. For every self-righteous soul, there are people opening their mouths looking for and easy buck, spotlight or another fifteen before they fade to oblivion.

From the esteemed halls of congress to a NBC/Fox/CNN studio set, the cast of characters all are in it for one thing: Popularity.

Bill Mauer vs. Ann Coulter: Let the debate for student president begin.

At the Citi Performing Arts Center’s Wang Theatre last night, two people with sharpened politically incorrect exploiting and opposite views within each dueled in a way that made the AP press quote them. Their publicists should get bonuses.

Coulter talked gracefully about Republican Queen Nancy Reagan’s support for stem cell research, "Nancy Reagan was so madly in love with Ronald Reagan, if you told her that we could bring Ronald Reagan back to life, cure Alzheimer's by disemboweling everyone in this audience, she would say 'do it.'"

Maher shot back with some witty lefty zingers. He decided to sling at current Homecoming King Rush Limbaugh by saying, “We all say crazy s--t when we're high. I think it's interesting that he is now the undisputed leader of the Republican Party. It shows how clueless they are. They went looking for the future and they found radio.”

I wish I could be as witty and filled with hard lined opinions as those folks.

Rush Limbaugh is the real genius, though. Nothing like a Democrat as President to revive his career but in fairness, he did pull out the ultimate weapon in the political entertainment industry; anti-American sentiments. Of course the “Anti-American” claims can be argued until your face turns red and blue so bear with me. When Rush said he wanted Barack Obama to fail he became the focus of the Obama administration for a couple of days, thus making him the greatest news maker this week has ever seen.

Oh the excitement…

Recovery Plan meets Political Web

President Obama's campaign of "hope" has quickly turned to the presidency of finding ways to get things done. After getting the roughly $800 billion stimulus bill passed, the Obama administration appeared successful on both counts, on paper.

Looking a little closer and you see Obama's victory came despite very little support from Republicans. In fact, only 3 republicans in the House voted for the bill (he needed two to get bill passed), despite some tax cuts he threw in to appease his rivals.

Furthermore, perhaps the sexiest candidate for the Republican party for president in 2012 has discussed rejecting federal funding. No, not Governor Palin of Alaska, who is technically the 'sexiest' but rather Lousiana Governor Bobby Jindal, who has an excellent way of communicating with voters. But he is not going to reject all funding, rather, just part of the millions that will go towards welfare and those people who have lost their homes due to the economic crisis.

This has Democratic patsies in an uproar, claiming that yet again Republicans are insensitive to the poor in Louisiana. This accusation has fallen of deaf ears for me personally because I've heard the "Republicans don't like poor people" argument before and realize it can't be personal, rather, it stems from fundemental disagreements.

Still, the hardline stance of defiance by Jindal has to be seen as political gamery. A good boy or girl would go along with the people, who have elected Obama and the other officials who approved the bill. But in this case, Jindal and a few of his cohorts seem to want as much attention as possible.

The strategy may pay off.

Remember the Iraq war? You know, that war that is still going on. Well, back in 2003 when Obama was still in diapers, he was one of the few that took a viament stand against the war, calling it a "dumb war." That stance alone helped him win the Democratic election, while Hillary Clinton was left holding the Bill's she helped Bush 43 pass.

So in fairness, maybe Jindal truly thinks this is a dumb Bill. Or maybe he thinks certain parts are wastefull. Regardless, it's an opportunity to represent the 'other side' despite what many economic strategists have said; a stimulus bill is needed.

Compare Jindal, who must be Rush Limbaughs BFF right now to Governor Crist of Florida and you can see why Jindal is doing what he's doing. Crist supports the Bill to a large degree and has now been called "D Light" (as in Democrat Light) by Bush 41, who at 84, still has opinions. Already you can see the Republican debates taking form for 2012, as both Jindal and Crist are likely to be in the running.

Whether Jindal allows people in his state to receive the funding, or if it will go to other states instead, the cards have been dealt and now we are waiting on the dealer to help reveal all of our fates.