Dear Republicans (an open letter):

I’m on welfare. For the past two years, I’ve been a beneficiary of the Earned Income Tax Credit. I’ve been laid-off, on and off, for a few months now, and it will probably become permanent fairly soon; thus, I have claimed unemployment benefits and will probably secure quite a bit more in the coming months. I may apply for food stamps in the near future, as we’re having quite a bit of trouble affording groceries. If I lose my job outright, my family and I will most likely receive Medicaid. So, I’m quite a free-loader, huh? Let me explain how I got here.

I have a Bachelor’s degree in Physics, graduating Magna Cum Laude. Upon graduating, I was ready to get a job in my field and be a productive member of society. Unfortunately, no one hired me, and the only work I could find was a part-time tutoring position, making $12/hr with no benefits. This led me to get into education. I got a Master’s in Teaching, with certifications in science and math. The job market for that was tough as well (despite what you hear about so-called “teacher shortages”), but I did manage to land a couple jobs and I made a living and supported my family for a few years. Then, a little over two years ago, my wife and I moved out to Southwestern Michigan for personal reasons.

When I got here, I took a job in a factory, on an assembly line, making $9.50/hr. This was supposed to be temporary, just to keep me afloat until I secured a better-paying job. I looked and looked for teaching jobs, and didn’t get so much as an interview; with the declining population this area is actually losing teaching jobs. I looked for anything else I could get. A job search that lasted about one year yielded three interviews and no offers. (I stopped spending -- wastinh -- too much time searching about a year ago, and decided I’ll go back to school to do something else when I can.)

So, I’m still making $9.50/hr. (What, did you expect a raise for a blue-collar worker in these union-busting times?) My wife’s in school, so the only money she’s bringing in is from student loans, which we will of course have to pay back. I’m trying to stay afloat. I bring home $340/month, $100 of which goes to day-care. So, I’m supporting a family of four on $240/month. Until recently, I actually brought home somewhat more, because I worked all the overtime I could get my hands on; however, with the faltering economy those opportunities have dried up recently. I’m paying rent, utilities and groceries. (We rely on my wife’s student loans for all car-related expenses.) We generally keep up, but it’s the unexpected costs that kill us -- when the car breaks down (mass transit would help), or when I get $2500 doctor’s bill for diagnostics on my oldest daughter (national health care would really help), etc.

So, I’ve become a free-loader. I’m relying on other people’s hard-earned tax dollars to support my family. What a lazy piece of crap I am. All you Republicans reading this have a right to be disgusted. And, those Republicans who are business owners in southwestern Michigan, you should teach me a lesson! You should hire me! That’s right, make me work for a living, instead of stealing your hard-earned money! Don’t let me be a free-loader! You should pay me enough so I disqualify for any federal aid. Isn’t that ingenious? You have a way to actually stop me from taking your tax dollars!

I’ll pretend that I’m very upset about it. I’ll act as though I’m so damn lazy, I don’t want the job and wish I was still on welfare. (I’m not a good actor, but I’ll try.) You could brag to all your Republican friends that you are personally saving them tax dollars by preventing someone from being on public assistance. Wouldn’t that be incredible?

What I can do for you? I have great interest, and at least a little expertise or coursework, in all of the following areas: Education, Physics, Engineering, Mathematics and Statistics, Computer Science, Economics, and Environmental Studies (liberal, hippy shit), so surely you’ll find something for me to do. In the end, you’re paying me anyway, so you might as well have me do something for you.

You don’t want me on welfare? Give me a fucking job!

Sincerely,
GOPBasher

On edit: If anyone on DU would be so kind as to donate a couple bucks in my name so I can get my star back, I promise to give back to our community here when I'm back on my feet. (Or, when I collect food stamps, just to piss off the Right.)

At the Republican Convention, Governor Sarah Palin openly, and very sarcastically, mocked Barack Obama for having been a community organizer. She mocked him for being a man who turned down potentially very lucrative jobs as a top Harvard Law graduate in order to help people find work on the south side of Chicago. We heard barely a peep out of the media, and this convention speech gave the GOP their bounce and current lead in polls.

Fast forward a bit. Barack Obama talks about issues – yes, actual issues that affect our lives – and uses a very common metaphor to describe John McCain’s policies, the media has a field day, insinuating that Obama called Palin a pig. Of course they all knew what Obama meant: McCain’s faux embrace of “change” is only superficial, as his policies are almost exactly the same a President Bush’s. But Republicans don’t want to talk about that. They want to talk about anything except the issues, so they lie, distort, distract.

And of course, plenty of Republicans have used this phrase as well. But the media doesn't find that very important either.

looks down on religion.

The Right Wing Propaganda Machine is in hyper drive right now. (Right now, they're attacking Obama, as they think he'll be the nominee; don't worry, they'll be back at Hillary, like they have been for sixteen years, if she gets the nod.) But the Machine never fails to amaze me. Really. Look at how inconsistent their attacks have been.

First, they say Obama is a Muslim, which, for some reason, constitutes an attack in and of itself. To them, there's something inherently wrong with being a Muslim. They hate Muslims, and they are going to insist that Obama is labeled a Muslim, even though he isn't and it shouldn't matter anyway.

Next, they say Obama's CHRISTIAN pastor is unacceptable; he said terrible things that aren't patriotically correct. Fall in line with Big Brother, gang up on Obama, and don't forget the pitchforks.

Finally, they say Obama's an elitist who looks down on people of faith.

I got it! So, he's a Muslim AND he's a Christian with bad, bad pastor AND he's a hardcore atheist who looks down on people of faith. Cool! Don't forget telling people he's also a militant Buddhist (which is an oxymoron).

The sad part is, there are millions of Americans who will believe those three things simultaneously! It's probably the same people who think that global warming is just a natural cycle that occurs over hundreds of thousands of years, even though they think the world is only 6000 years old.

Bush Cites “King Peter of Narnia” As Favorite Historical Figure

President Hails Fictional Nation as “Great Democracy”

In a rare interview with Democratic Underground Press (DUP), President George W. Bush cited “King Peter of Narnia” as his favorite historical figure. Asked what historical figure has most influenced his own governing philosophy, the president said, “King Peter was definitely my favorite, he was a heck of a leader.” Bush praised Narnia as a noble nation of free people, led by a valiant king dedicated to protecting its freedom.

“Narnia was a great Democracy,” Bush declared, “And like all great Democracies, they had a great King who was put there by God to tell everyone what to do and who to kill.”

“You can’t just trust Democracy to just ordinary people,” Bush explained. “That’s why we have Jesus, or Aslan for the Narnians, to put God’s will into people ... you know, sort of put God’s will into place, with people He wants for certain things, like for king or president or whatever.”

When told that The Chronicles of Narnia, the series of novellas written by C.S. Lewis, was a work of fiction, Bush responded that he “never quite understood much math,” but believes that the Narnians should be honored for their achievements. “They may have been just a fraction, as you say” Bush explained, “But if you think that somehow dimishinizes their accomplishments, and all the things they accomplished, and, kind of, you know, puts down the things they gotten done, such as defeating the evil White Witch and all, then I respectfully disagree.”

Bush also dismissed criticisms that Narnia was a Monarchy, not a Democracy, as “liberal media spin.” “Narnia was a great country with lots of noblenessity, with one heck of a nobly king. That’s why he was the high king and why he was such a great country. And when their freedom was under attack by freedom-hating people, you see, they were at war with some extremist folks, and so they didn’t bother much with little details and facts. (King Peter) just said, ‘Bring it on!’

“I try to model myself after the great King Peter. I know who our enemies is, and I’ll do whatever it takes to defend them ... defend us from them, from those who would take away our freedom.”

The interviewer held out a map and asked Bush to point out Narnia. “It’s in a different world,” Bush insisted. “It might be where Saddam hid his weapons.”

Responding to the same question in a DUP interview in February, Vice President Dick Cheney responded: “Attila the Hun. Fuck you.”

I got this idea from some email that was being forwarded around the internet that said, "A Day in the Life of an Anti-Government Conservative." This is similar, but I wanted to point out a few things that email did not.

The Life of an Anti-Government Conservative

Meet Bob. He’s a conservative, meaning he doesn’t believe the federal government should play any role whatsoever in the economy. The free market is absolutely perfect, never fails, and should be left alone to maximize productivity and, by extension, human well-being. Washington should never do anything at all other than provide for a common defense from foreign enemies. Anything else just amounts to stealing money from the hard-working American people. That sounds swell.

Bob was born 1970. Growing up, he had it pretty good. Bob’s father, who worked in a local factory, was in a union that was able to negotiate for a living wage and good benefits because the big, bad, federal government protected workers’ right to organize. They weren’t rich, but they didn’t worry about necessities. His mother only worked a little, so she could be home with the kids when they weren’t in school, and she made the lowest possible wage for working in the United States. However, because some big-government liberals passed a big-government minimum wage law, it was still enough for a few extras. He was educated in a nearby public school, which some left-wing radicals decided would be run with government money.

The factory was not far from their house, but the family didn’t have to worry about breathing toxic air, because some damn, big-government dweebs in Congress passed a series of clean air acts. (They also passed a sweeping clean water act in 1972; this forced the factory to stop dumping mercury in the nearby lake, which had once been a source of tap water for the town, but no longer could be.)

On a few occasions, Bob’s father was laid off due to downturns in the market. This never put them on the street, however, because of unemployment insurance, the socialist government program.

In 1988, Bob went off to college. He knew he couldn’t afford a private school, so he chose a public school, where he had to pay far less in tuition because some tax-and-spend liberals insisted that these schools receive money from tax-payers. He also secured plenty of financial aid and some federally-subsidized student loans, because those same bleeding-heart cry-babies fought for government handouts for higher education.

In 1992, Bob graduated and found an entry-level job in his field. He started climbing the corporate ladder, got married and had kids. Life was good. His third child was born with a disability but, because of some left-wing loonies, was able to be educated in the same public schools with everyone else.

In 1998, while speeding down an Eisenhower-funded highway because he was late for a meeting, Bob got in a serious car accident. He escaped with only minor injuries, however, because some dirty, smell, liberal hippies had long-ago passed a law required cars to have seat-belts and other safety features.

In 2004, Bob realized his energy company had been overcharging him. After repeated calls to their costumer service center in India, he realized he couldn’t take care of it on his own. So, he got Big Government’s help. Because of consumer protection laws, he was able to get it resolved.

In 2005, Bob’s father retired and started collecting his social security and signed onto Medicare. Social Security, the largest government program in human history, was signed into law by the commie-pinko-leftist, Franklin Roosevelt. Medicare was established by a bunch of socialist, commie, Castro-loving leeches in 1965. He also received a pension that was negotiated by his union.

It’s November 4th, 2008, and Bob and his father are sitting in a restaurant, having some burgers, after having voted earlier in the day. They’re not worrying about health dangers posed by the meat, because the Food and Drug Administration does a good job in ensuring accountability in food companies’ products. The two are discussing the election, saying they voted Republican, once again, to “get the government off their backs.”

Then they drove home on the roads our tax dollars paid for.

Supporters of Both Candidates Are Killing Us

Remember when this was going to be our year? The unpopular war and deep economic turmoil made the country ripe for a Democratic victory in the presidential election and increased majorities in both houses of Congress. So, why is the presumptive Republican nominee beating both Democratic candidates? The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll on March 25 shows McCain ahead of Obama, 50% - 41%, and Clinton, 48% - 43% (poll 1).

That same poll reveals the major reason. Only 71% of Democrats say they’d vote for Clinton in the general election, and just 64% say the same of Obama (poll 1). Neither can even get three-fourths of their own party. That makes it more or less impossible to win a general election, and it’s what one would expect from long, negative, dirty primary campaign. All that negative advertising has its effect, you know. It drives up the negative ratings of the other candidate, now at 52% for each (poll 1). The problem, of course, is that such a strategy will help one’s candidate win the primary, but will kill one’s party in the general election. So, we did it once again, fellow Democrats; we never fail to shoot ourselves in the foot and commit political suicide. We just find new and cooler ways of doing so.

We have other problems, of course. This year, they started when the Republicans settled on a nominee fairly quickly, and he, John McCain, essentially started his general election campaign. Furthermore, of all the GOP candidates running, he was, by far, the most electable. (With Romney or Huckabee, I don’t think we have anything to worry about.) McCain has tremendous appeal among independents, and that’s his political strength. Furthermore, we did not nominate our most electable candidate; polls early in the primary season showed that John Edwards always faired better against the Republicans than other Democrats. Still, we would be able to overcome these problems with a united Democratic party.

Imagine how the numbers in the general election trial heats would start moving if all (or, at least, 90%-95%) of the supporters of each candidate would vote for the other in the general election? In other words, the source of my greatest angst is also the source of my greatest hope. If we can unite for the general election, we’ll win. An extensive Pew Research Center poll in the first two months of 2008 showed the Democrats with huge advantages in party identification. Fifty-one percent of Americans either consider themselves Democrats or are independents who lean that way; just 37% are Republicans or independents who lean toward the GOP (poll 2).

The damage is not yet fatal, but primary that lasts until the convention surely will be.

Poll 1: (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_con... ).

Poll 2: http://pewresearch.org/pubs/773/fewer-vote...

Me as a candidate

If I were to run for public office, you would see (or hear, actually) a great deal of unusual candor (mainly because I know I wouldn’t have a chance of winning anyway, for various reasons). At any rate, when the inevitable investigations into my personal life and background started catching fire in the media, you would probably hear answers from me such as these:

“Yes, I have.”

“Of course I inhaled; what fucking moron doesn’t inhale? There may have been a few times when I forgot to exhale, because I was so anxious to finish my beer.”

“I did it a myriad of times. I don’t remember exactly. You see, I’ve smoked too much pot to remember how much pot I’ve smoked.”

“Yes, that’s true.”

“Because I was drunk and it seemed fun and/or funny. Let’s say fun(ny).”

“That’s because partying is fun. You should try it sometime; perhaps you wouldn’t be so uptight.”

“Nope, no other illegal drugs for me, but let me tell you, people tripping on LSD are fucking funny.”

“Yes, I have. I loved strip clubs back in the day, except for how fucking expensive they were.”

“Shit, are we live? Fuck, I’m sorry. I’ll watch my language.”

“Why the lap dances were my favorite part, of course. I think that’s fairly typical.”

“When that becomes your business, I’ll gladly let you know.”

“Yes, that is a true statement. I did threaten to hit this particular manager of this unnamed business with my car and then piss on his face.”

“Well, they had a habit of screwing over customers. Then, he really, really screwed over a customer I hold near and dear to my heart: me.”

“How about this, if you promise not to screw me out of $500, I promise I will never piss on your face.”

“My relationship with my wife is not your fucking business, asshole, and if you ask that question again, I’m going to piss on your face.”

Etc.

As you can see, I’m probably not the most electable person in the world. If only they’d ask me about my ideas for energy independence.

There they go again. The Republican party knows that if the nation focuses on the actual issues, they’ll lose. So, they’ll distract, attack and, of course, distract by attacking. That’s the reason we see Fox News talking about Jeramiah Wright roughly 45 hours per day. They don’t want to discuss the war, the economy, the environment, health care, energy, etc. So, they’ll just attack the shit out of the Democrats – right now, they’re focusing on Barack Obama because he is more likely going to be the nominee and, furthermore, they’ve already spent sixteen years attacking Hillary Clinton.

The Right’s attacks on Clinton are the reason her favorability ratings have been extremely high for a long time, and now they’re making sure Obama catches up to her. They’ll be sure to pounce on everything they possibly can. The Wright controversy illustrates it perfectly. They scoured everyone in Obama’s life to find anything, absolutely anything, to distort and attack. The closest they came to Obama was his pastor, and the worst thing they can find on this pastor is a 30-second sound bite of him making unpatriotic comments. If you examined every person in my life, and tried to find every proven record of quotes from them, I’m pretty sure you can come up with a great deal of terrible quotes. That means nothing. But, that’s it; they’ll just talk about this 30-second rant for the rest of the damn campaign, instead of a serious discussion about the issues.

Why must this be their strategy? In my first journal entry, I summarized the disaster of the Bush presidency. Well, to use the expression we’ve heard just short of a trillion times on Fox News lately: the “chickens have come home to roost” for the Republican party. A pew research center poll conducted February 20-24 illustrates their problem. The survey asked which party could do a better job handling each of twelve separate issues. The Democrats won on eleven of those issues, their sole losing issue being, “Dealing with the terrorist threat at home” (38% - 45%). The Democratic party won the following: “Making wise decisions about foreign policy” (45% - 40%), “Dealing with immigration” (43% - 38%), “Making wise decisions about what to do in Iraq” (47% - 37%), “Dealing with taxes” (49% - 37%), “Improving morality in the country” (44% - 34%), “Dealing with the economy” (53% - 34%), “Improving the educational system” (55% - 26%), “Reforming the US health care system” (56% - 26%), “Reforming government in Washington” (50% - 25%), “Dealing with the nation’s energy problems” (57% - 23%), and “Protecting the environment” (65% to 21%). (http://pollingreport.com/prioriti.htm .)

A USA Today and Gallup poll on February 8 – 10 showed the Democratic party with a 56% favorability rating with just 38% of people holding an unfavorable opinion. That same poll showed that just 41% hold a favorable opinion of the Republican party, and 52% hold an unfavorable opinion. (http://pollingreport.com/institut2.htm#Dem... .)

Yet, McCain currently holds small leads over each of the two Democratic nominees. Now, there are some other reasons for this. First of all, McCain is the one GOP candidate who appeals to independents; none of the others did. Furthermore, the Democrats are locked in long, bitter primary campaign, which is hurting each one in the general election. However, the biggest factor is the GOP propaganda machine, which is on the attack, and making sure that no one is paying attention to, you know, the pesky little “issues.”

Candidate X is running for president and stands a good chance of winning. With this in mind, there is something everyone should know about candidate X. Journalists have uncovered shocking footage of candidate X’s pet twinkie, Pickletoots, making incendiary remarks about ceramic (and sometimes marble) tiles. Furthermore, Pickletoots denounced his home country, Plupiter, for its apparent disregard for the rights of all things that contain high-fructose corn syrup. (Source: Voices in my head.)

In November, please do not base your vote on trivial and insignificant issues, such as war, debt, economic stagflation, the health care crisis, the energy crisis, the financial crisis, the fiscal crisis, insolvency of entitlements, the trade deficit, the plunging dollar, the middle-class squeeze, wage stagnation, climate change, ecological problems, energy dependence, the raping of constitutional rights or America’s support of dictators. Just think of Pickletoots’s diatribe, which is, according to Historians and Cosmologists, beyond any remote shadow of a doubt, the single most important issue in the 15-billion year history of the universe.

Remember, we don’t need peace, freedom, prosperity and sustainability; what we need is a candidate whose pet twinkie didn’t make inflammatory remarks. Please vote accordingly.

Thank you, and God Bless America.

http://openletterstopresidentbush.blogspot... /


President Bush's budgeting has been so disastrous that, despite starving social programs such as SCHIP and his own education program, he still ran record budget deficits and increased the national debt by over 50%. Even in the latest budget, his last (thank God), the budget deficit is running at some $400 billion. Now I know he'll want to blame the Democratic Congress, like Reagan did, so here’s what I’ll do: I’m going to focus on the first six years, when the GOP had total control of Congress. From 2001 to 2006, you Republicans had the majority in the House of Representatives. And the Senate was in the GOP’s hands for five of those six years, with the Democrats holding just a paltry single-seat majority for less than a year after Senator Jim Jeffords switch parties. So, we can safely blame this all on Bush and his party.



He and the Republican Congress slashed taxes, increased government spending (though certainly not on important domestic programs) and fought two major wars. The result? They added about three trillion dollars to the national debt in six years. To be more specific, we’ll look at the first six budgets prepared by Bush and the GOP Congress, FY 2002 – FY 2007. On September 28, 2001, at the close of FY 2001, the national debt stood at $5.807 trillion, roughly 57% of that year’s GDP, and on September 28, 2007, it stood at $9.008 trillion, roughly 68% of that year’s GDP. (Source: Treasury department web site, http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?... ). That’s an increase of roughly $3.2 trillion in six years, or we can look at it as an extra 11% of our GDP. That is a gargantuan increase for just a six-year period, over five hundred billion dollars per year. It’s a good thing that they're all “fiscal conservatives.” How bad would it be if they were “fiscal liberals”?

$3.2 Trillion Dollars in Six Years!

That’s how much more our kids have to pay back because they're a bunch of scumbags who can’t take care of money.

The two biggest causes of this fiscal crisis he gave us are the tax cuts and war/defense spending. In this post, I want to focus on the revenue side of the equation, i.e. the tax cuts.

Right off the bat, we have a problem here. When, in this nation’s history, have we ever cut taxes in a time of war? He passed your first tax cut before 9/11. It was the wrong move then, as we should have used that historic surplus to finally start paying of the national debt, which would have shored up Social Security as well. It became an even worse move after the tragedy of 9/11, as a responsible leader would have tried to revoke the tax cuts to pay for the coming war on terror. As if that wasn’t bad enough, he continued to cut taxes well into your first term, even after the new spending on the Department of Homeland Security, the war in Afghanistan, the (ridiculous) war in Iraq, and the massive increases in defense spending. Quick memo: throughout our history, we have always raised taxes in time of war, to gain the necessary funds to fight it, and also to ask for shared sacrifice from the population. He asks everything from our troops and nothing from the rest of us.

At this point, I want to launch a pre-emptive strike against the right's next talking point. They love to claim that the tax cuts actually increased the government’s revenue, so that we can have tax cuts and all that spending. Hurray! The only inconvenience is that they are completely lying when you say that. Other than that, it is a pretty good point. Here are the actual numbers. The government’s total tax receipts in fiscal 2001, the last year budgeted by President Clinton, were $1.991 trillion. Right after Bush took office and passed his initial tax cut, the revenue fell. It dropped to $1.853 trillion for fiscal 2002 and to $1.782 trillion for fiscal 2003. That’s in absolute dollars; in real terms, it’s worse. If we use constant FY 2000 dollars, so that we adjust our analysis for inflation, government receipts fell, over that period, from $1.946 trillion, to $1.779 trillion to $1.669 trillion. Because they have excuses for everything, they insist that initially, the revenue fell simply because of the recession of 2001. While there was a brief recession, it did not last long and there was an actual slight increase in GDP over the course of fiscal 2002 and fiscal 2003. So, the revenue was down despite economic growth, dropping a whopping 14.2% in real terms over the course of just two years. That’s not just a dip in revenue; it’s a fall off of a cliff.

In fiscal 2004, the revenue finally increased a little from the previous year, both in real terms ($1.880 trillion), and in constant 2000 dollars ($1.722 trillion), but both were still below the fiscal 2001 level. In FY 2005, total government receipts finally surpassed the FY 2001 level in absolute terms, hitting $2.053 trillion. That total is, however, still under the FY 2001 levels after adjusting for inflation; in constant 2000 dollars, FY 2005 government revenue was $1.833 trillion. In FY 2006, government revenue hit $2.178 trillion, remaining slightly lower than FY 2001 levels in real dollars, at $1.906 trillion. In 2007, government revenue finally overtook the 2001 levels in both absolute and real terms, $2.344 trillion and $1.987 trillion, respectively. It took six years for revenue to reach the FY 2001 levels. Under normal circumstances, economic growth should always result in increasing government revenues, so it should have increased every single year of his presidency in real terms. If not for those tax cuts, my kids would have far less debt to pay back.

In the budgets prepared during President Clinton’s two terms, FY 1994 to FY 2001, government revenue increased in absolute and real dollars every single year until the very last year, when it took a very small dip.

(Source for government revenues: White House budget website. http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy200... )

This is my belated response to the State of the Union speech. I’ve been working seven day weeks, sometimes twelve hours. So, I’m going to go ahead and forgive myself for my lateness.

This is from my blog (http://openletterstopresidentbush.blogspot... /), where I write about president Bush in second-person point-of-view, basically an open letter to him.

Dear President Bush,

Nice final State of the Union speech. I think this speech nicely highlights how completely and utterly out of touch you are with what is happening in our country. First, let’s look at domestic issues.

You hardly mentioned the health care crisis. You said: “We share a common goal: making health care more affordable and accessible for all Americans.” First of all, do you really share that goal, because you’ve done absolutely nothing over the past seven years to hold down health care costs. They have been soaring, far outpacing inflation.

We have 47 million uninsured; we have millions more underinsured. And the costs of our health care system are hurting businesses and even fully-insured middle class families who are having trouble even keeping up with co-pays and deductibles.

You’re next statement: “The best way to achieve that goal is by expanding consumer choice, not government control.” Really? We already have a privatized system, and that is exactly what is sending costs through the roof. We have to pay for profits all along the system, and we have to pay for ridiculous marketing campaigns from pharmaceutical companies, and we have to pay for incredibly complex billing processes from insurance companies, etc.

Let me make an example out of that country you hate: France. They spend far less on health care as a percentage of their GDP, only about 9% to our roughly 16%. Yet, they cover everyone, and we only cover 6/7 of our population. And the quality is at least just as good. They’re better in every measurable statistic, from the child mortality rate to life expectancy. This is precisely because they have a very simple government-based system. Everyone pays, everyone benefits, case closed. They don’t waste money on ridiculously complex billing process, or idiotic drug commercials, or unnecessary profits. Right, I know, France, like totally sucks, because they like totally didn’t help us jump Iraq after school.

You mentioned, as one method of holding down health care costs, limiting lawsuits. Perhaps alcohol permanently impaired your memory. You already did that, liming lawsuits to no more than $250,000 and, just as we all said, that did not even come close to helping bring down health care costs.

You also talked about taxing and spending. You want to make your tax cuts permanent. Let me ask you a question, when the hell in the history of this country have we cut taxes in time of war? It’s your tax cuts in the midst of fighting two wars that are responsible for adding three trillion dollars to the national debt in your time in office, the vast majority of which was with a Republican Congress. That debt has accumulated despite starving domestic programs.

Oh, but you said you’re cutting $18 billion of “wasteful spending.” Wow! That totally helps after we spend that much in about nine weeks in Iraq.

And as for the domestic economy, you said, “wages are up, but so are food and gas.” This is an interesting way of putting it. Wages have not been keeping up with inflation throughout your term, which means that real wages are decreasing. The real cost of living, furthermore, is increasing even faster than the official inflation rate. Food and energy (especially oil/gasoline), which are necessities, are not only increasing, as you said, but increasing much faster than the CPI.

And you said, “Our security, our prosperity and our environment all require reducing our dependence on oil.” You think? You know, some of us were saying this before it was cool. Then you flaunted the bill that will increase efficiency standards to 35 mpg by 2020. The following criticism is aimed not only at you, but also the Democratic Congress. This bill does not do nearly enough, as global peak oil production, if it hasn’t already passed, is coming soon. This is one of the most serious economic challenges we’ve ever faced, as oil prices will continue to sky-rocket as they have been. On top of that, more and more of the oil that is produced will come from overseas, further hurting the economy in the form of higher trade deficits and a weaker dollar. Plus, more and more of our oil imports will come from despots we don’t like, because that’s where the oil is. (It’s like someone upstairs is trying to tell us something.) That’ll cause major national security issues. Drilling for oil causes ecological problems that threaten our sustainability. And of course, we have those pesky greenhouse gases, the emissions of which will continue to accelerate, while you wait, arms-folded, for China and India to act first.

And the new energy act also called for more corn-based ethanol. This is joke of historic proportions. It takes roughly the same amount of energy to raise the crops as we get in return. There is very little, if any, net energy. (The ratio of energy we get out to energy we put in is approximately 11 to 10). Plus, when looking for a silver-bullet, we generally don’t want something that competes directly with food, which will strangle supply and raise the costs of both food and fuel. But, of course, farmers have a lobby, so let the money talk! Onward with corn-based ethanol!

Cellulosic ethanol and other biofuels (biodiesal, methanol, butanol, etc) show far more promise. And they have many sources that don’t compete with food; for example, biodiesel can be made from algae or switchgrass that grows on land unsuitable for growing food crops. None of those has a big lobby, however.

On foreign policy, you stated again that we are always on the side of democracy and freedom. So, why do we still support the regime in Saudi Arabia? Oh yeah, they have oil. You talked about success in Afghanistan, but didn’t mention that since we took our eye off the ball there, concentrating our resources in Iraq, the Taliban has made a resurgence. On Iraq, you again tried confusing American by talking about Al Qaeda in Iraq as if that’s the reason we went in. One more time, for the benefit of morons so fucking braindead that they actually still believe you: Al Qaeda was not in Iraq before the fall of Saddam; they’re in there now. In fact, Saddam and Osama Bin Laden were enemies, because Saddam was far too secular for Bin Laden’s taste. Once again, Saddam was secular and hated the theocrats. They were enemies, not friends. We helped Al Qaeda by overthrowing Saddam. You see they’re both evil, and the enemy of our enemy is not necessarily our friend. Sometimes, they’re both our enemies. You Republicans can’t seem to get that through your head.

And you continued beating the drums of war on Iran. Awesome! Let’s have more dead and wounded troops, more dead and wounded innocent civilians, more hundreds of billions of dollars on our national platinum card, further damage to our nation’s image in the eyes of the global community. And, don’t forget to ask nothing from the rest of us!

That’s our Bush: “War for the soldiers, tax cuts for the rest of us!” What a pig of a president.

We have exactly one year before this piece of crap leaves office. One year to go. Breath. Perhaps meditate, or do yoga (if you ever get some time off of working your three jobs to pay for groceries and transportation –i.e. gasoline -- to get to those three jobs). Get some therapy (unless you’re one of the 47 million uninsured, or the millions more underinsured, or the majority of the remaining “middle class” who still have a hard time affording health care even with insurance). If you’re religious, read the scriptures of your chosen theology (but make sure it’s one of those nice passages about loving others, the golden rule and how everything will turn out fine, not the ones about killing everyone different than you, because that may make you want to vote Republican, which would make things worse than they are). Another option is prescription medication (though that tends to put more money in big pharma, which gives money to the Republican party, and then ... ok, you see where I’m going).

Damn. I’m trying to think of ways we can feel better, but our current leadership took them all away. Alright, here’s what I’m going to do. I’m going to quickly summarize that past seven years. I’m going to dive in, and try my hardest to simply accept the harsh reality of the unmitigated disaster that has been the Bush presidency. I’m writing in second person point-of-view, in a letter form, as if I’m talking to President Bush himself. Here we go; wish me luck.

Dear President Bush,

You haven’t fooled me. I see right through your smirk, you know, the one you wear every time you’re lying. It’s funny that approximately 30% of the people have yet to see that. Yes, you can fool that 30% all of the time, and you can fool 90% some of the time (such as September of 2001), but “you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” That’s your harsh reality, Sir. And your legacy will be this:

•An unnecessary, unjust, immoral and illegal war based on outright lies
•Gross incompetence in handling that war
•Rampant corruption and cronyism
•$3 trillion added to that national debt in seven years, the vast majority coming in the first six years, with a “fiscally conservative” (say that with straight face) Republican congress (this debt coming despite cuts in social programs, such as SCHIP)
•Soaring trade deficits, hitting $763.3 billion in 2006
•A severely weakened dollar
•A health care crisis you did nothing about – sky-rocketing costs leaving 47 million uninsured, millions more under insured and even fully insured middle class families in dire straights in the event of serious medical problems
•An energy crisis you did nothing about – especially the continued reliance on oil, the rapidly escalating costs of which are tricking throughout the economy
•Failed educational policy
•A severely degraded environment, jeopardizing the ecological sustainability necessary for future prosperity
•Stagnant wages among all workers, even degreed professionals, and steadily disappearing manufacturing jobs
•Severe restrictions of liberties essential to democracy, such as freedom of speech and religion
•A massive raping of the constitution of the United States, even as you wrap your smiling skull in a flag
•Imprisonment without any actual charges, without any representation, without any hope for those who may not be guilty of anything
•Use of torture
•Katrina
•The Valerie Plame incident
•Cutting veterans benefits while simultaneously creating many more veterans
•Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay
•A war on science, which is essential to human prosperity
•“Mission Accomplished,” and “Bring ‘em on,” you infintile jackass
•The list goes on and on

I’m not sure if a worse president is even theoretically, let alone practically, possible.

Sincerely,

(Name deleted for fear of NSA killing me for exercising my first amendment right)