Paul LePage: Resign Already!

Let's cut to the chase: Paul LePage should finally do what's best for the people of Maine and resign as
Governor, effective immediately. Of course, the likelihood he'll see the wisdom in this suggestion is nil. Nonetheless,
a strong case can be made.
His first term in office amply demonstrated the fact that he is incapable of behaving like a rational
human being. Instead, he repeatedly embarrassed himself--not to mention the people and the state of Maine.
Nationally, he was widely perceived as a bullying demagogue who refused to engage in open discussion; let alone recognize the value in ever searching for compromise.
As the curtain rose on a second term (a fact that in itself defied all laws of logic)there were those who
somehow expected-- or hoped-- for a more contrite and diplomatic Paul LePage. Unfortunately it has quickly
become apparent that nothing has changed.
LePage had long been eager to risk the well-being of the state on the altar of Tea Party economics, and he quickly proposed a constitutional amendment to eliminate Maine's income tax. Then, incensed that Democrats in the legislature had the temerity to oppose him, he vowed to veto every bill sponsored by a Democrat until he got his way. The Legislature remained unwilling to force Maine onto the same road to financial ruin that Kansas is currently treading. Their Tea Party governor Sam Brownback rammed through deep income tax cuts that have resulted in a large budget deficit-- and not the huge growth in economic activity and revenues that he'd promised. Nevertheless, LePage threw a public tantrum (disguised as a press conference), complete with fake Christmas trees and plastic pigs. No one could be certain what it all meant, but it did make the national news where LePage--and Maine--once more became laughingstocks. LePage carried through on his threat and vetoed ten bills (nine of which were subsequently over-ridden), followed by sixty four line item vetoes aimed at derailing the bipartisan budget that had been presented for his signature. All sixty four vetoes were over-ridden by the Legislature in record time. Even many Republicans had reached a breaking point and were exasperated by his behavior.
LePage remained on a roll, however. When he discovered that the Good Will-Hinckley School (a boarding school for kids with complex academic, social, behavioral and emotional challenges) planned to hire Mark Eves (who also serves as the Democratic House Speaker) as President, he suffered a meltdown and notified the school's board that if they hired Eves they could kiss $500,000 in state funding goodbye. It was estimated that this might trigger an additional loss of $2 million in private funding--more than enough to threaten the school's survival. To no one's great surprise, the offer to Eves was rescinded.
Any story involving blackmail is likely to catch the media's attention--and this was no exception, but Maine was embarrassed yet again.
In all likelihood, Mr. Eves will sue Mr. LePage (at the very least LePage violated the First Amendment prohibition against using state funds to exact retribution against political opponents), so the story and the national fallout won't be going away anytime soon.
Now, as a result of such impetuous and arrogant behavior, discussion re: possible impeachment has naturally surfaced.
But Maine is saddled with failed policies that have left our economy ranked anywhere from 38th (America's Top States for Business) to 47th or 49th (Business Insider and Forbes, respectively); we can ill afford additional distractions courtesy of the Cirque du Paul LePage. If he really wants to do the right thing, he should resign. By stepping aside he could still the political waters, assist in healing the almost irreparable damage done to the relationship between the Blaine House and the Legislature, and pave the way for future bipartisan progress. The state of Maine deserves no less.

Ted Cruz for President???

I suppose we ought to thank Ted Cruz for effectively undermining what remains of the ultra-conservative “birther” movement by announcing he’s running for President (of the United States). None of his “red meat” supporters will be likely to do much talking about Kenya any longer, since Canada presents a much more serious issue. Ted Cruz is not (as the Constitution specifies) a “natural born” citizen. Heck, Donald Trump is already yapping about this one. However, this is something for constitutional scholars to debate, and I defer to their judgment.
Meanwhile, California’s iconic governor Jerry Brown has pummeled Cruz over a series of ignorant statements and for falsifying facts pertaining to global warming. Brown concluded by stating “It’s shocking, and I think that man has rendered himself absolutely unfit to be running for office.” Climate change, however, is merely the tip of the Cruz iceberg (my apologies).

I would argue that Ted Cruz can, in all fairness, be accused of treason. Among the definitions provided by Merriam Webster: “the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance (presumably not Canada); or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign’s family.”
In fact, Ted Cruz and his cronies recklessly and knowingly pursued an action (shutting down the American government for purely partisan purposes) that inflicted a $24 billion blow to the economy of our country. He chose to do this at a time when the economy remained in a somewhat fragile state, recovering from a devastating recession. His actions could have triggered dire consequences, and Cruz was clearly hoping he could bring the Obama administration to its knees. Fortunately for the rest of us, he achieved little more than to provide both pleasure and solace to the enemies of our republic. Cruz was more than willing to inflict financial pain on his fellow citizens (American, not Canadian) since he enjoys one of the apparent perks of being a Senator; he’s also a millionaire.
Cruz has served as an opportunistic thug in the short time he’s been a Senator. Apart from shutting down the government (alienating members of his own party), his greatest “accomplishments” include: opposing immigration reform, vilifying gay Americans, acting as a lap dog for the gun lobby, opposing aid for victims of Superstorm Sandy, and, in particular, nattering on incessantly about his plans to repeal the Affordable Care Act. He seems to relish the thought of separating millions of Americans from their newly acquired healthcare coverage. No wonder he’s invited obvious comparisons to the late (though not lamented) Joseph McCarthy—demagogue extraordinaire.

Ted Cruz for President? “Unfit” barely scratches the surface!

A Remembrance of Paul LePage

In hindsight, we probably should have seen it coming, but it all seems so surreal now. He had been elected Governor with roughly 38% of the vote, fueled by the self-proclaimed Tea Party, a demoralized Democratic state party that many feared was intent on shooting itself in the foot, and an independent whose outsized ego was not yet readily apparent.
The warning signs were immediate, and all too frequent. Given the state’s economic malaise, Governor LePage somehow determined that his first act of any consequence ought to involve abducting a mural (under cover of darkness) from the Department of Labor—ostensibly because one of his supporters astutely recognized it as an example of North Korean-style propaganda (not for what it actually was—a depiction of labor history). While the 62% of Maine voters who’d opposed him did their best to ignore him, the Governor nevertheless provided comedic relief to a country in need of a good laugh.
Unfortunately for Maine’s hard-working people, and anyone interested in constructive and civil political dialogue, it became increasingly difficult to keep his irrational pronouncements and occasional tantrums out of the hands of the media. After all, if a good story proves elusive elsewhere, it’s tough to ignore the one that drops right into your lap.
While on the campaign trail, he assured his supporters he’d tell President Obama to go to hell. Once in the Blaine House, he assured anyone who’d listen that the President hated white people. This was undoubtedly around the same time he was telling the NAACP they could “kiss his butt” for daring to question his decision not to attend Martin Luther King Jr. Day events in Bangor and Portland. Donald Trump’s notoriously thin skin resembled elephant hide when contrasted with that of former Governor LePage.
It wasn’t long before major policy failures such as completely bungling a deal with Kestral Aviation that would have brought up to 600 new jobs to the Brunswick area (apparently Maine was not “open for business”) became lost in a sad circus sideshow.
In response to the Maine Board of Environmental Protection banning BPA (and its link to numerous health issues in young children and fetuses) in all reusable food and beverage containers sold in the state, LePage rejected the science and suggested the worst that could happen was that “some women may have little beards”.
One could assume there are many ways to take on the IRS without offending millions of other people, but Governor LePage had clearly eluded his handlers yet again when he likened the IRS to the Gestapo. He was allegedly discussing that agency’s role in enforcing the Affordable Care Act that had just been upheld by the Supreme Court, but who can be certain?
Who can forget his comment regarding Vaseline, or the lack thereof, in criticizing Democratic State Senator Troy Jackson during deadlocked budget negotiations?
His words and deeds had pretty much warned us the day was coming. He told us his greatest fear in the state of Maine was newspapers, and while sitting in a fighter jet simulator he wistfully expressed the desire to find the Press Herald building “and blow it up”. His aides maintained he was “clearly joking”.
But then along came Sovereign Citizens. The FBI still considers them a domestic terrorist organization that (among other things) believes the government perpetrated the 9/11 attacks, the Sandy Hook school shootings, and is plotting a Christian holocaust via mass collection of firearms. So, why did Governor LePage choose to meet with this group? His handlers maintained it was reasonable to expect he’d meet with a wide range of constituents. They offered no explanation, however, as to why he then met with them eight times.
Mike Tipping, author of “As Maine Went: Governor Paul LePage & the Tea Party Takeover of Maine” revealed LePage bought into several of the Sovereign Citizen conspiracy theories, had a sheriff look into a number of their demands, and had his legal staff draft an opinion on the group’s contention that Democratic leaders of the state legislature should be arrested and executed (for “treason”, naturally).

After the outcry surrounding this particular story, things seemed to plummet downhill quickly for the former Governor. He turned up one morning outside the headquarters of the Maine Army National Guard in an agitated state, red-faced and furiously chain-smoking Camels. No one present could fully understand his rather incoherent demands, but he apparently believed he had the authority to issue arrest warrants for Justin Alfond, Mark Eves, and a host of other political opponents. He clearly expected the National Guard to carry out these arrests. It will always be remembered as a very sad moment by all who witnessed it as the former Governor and a handful of hardcore supporters were corralled and gently led away.
In hindsight, it was a very good thing that Governor LePage made sure the hospitals in Maine were paid the money they’d been owed. As a result, we can all be sure he’s getting the excellent care, and rest, he so clearly deserved. One thing’s for sure, things have certainly been much quieter since Governor Michaud was elected back in 2014.

I.M. Muhral
Somewhere in Maine
August, 2017

Is Senator Ted Cruz a Traitor?

Full Definition of  TREASON:

1)  the betrayal of a trust : treachery.

2)  the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance, or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family.

If these are accepted definitions, courtesy of Merriam-Webster, I wonder if Ted Cruz could be viewed as a traitor?
Cruz advocated for the shutdown of the government of the United States; it would seem like a fine line between overthrowing and shutting down a government. One can argue it was his goal to remove, or eliminate the government of the nation to which he owes his allegiance (not Canada in this instance).
In addition, he knowingly advocated an action he recognized would cause great financial harm to the Republic—and to its citizens. Among the many voices calling on Cruz and his cronies not to pursue this course of action was the editorial page of “The Wall Street Journal”—hardly a mainstay of liberal ideology. Yet Cruz recklessly and knowingly pursued actions that delivered a $24 billion dollar blow to our nation; certainly weakening us in the eyes of potential enemies.
Given the fact that his net worth is estimated between $204,951 (hardly plausible) to $3,526.994, Cruz certainly wouldn't feel the economic pain he’s more than willing to inflict on his fellow citizens.

Ted Cruz has clearly established his reputation as an opportunistic bully—opposing aid for the victims of Hurricane Sandy, taking an incredibly hypocritical stand on immigration reform (this native of Canada opposes a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, and urges construction of a massive border wall—while still failing to prove his U.S. citizenship), lobbying for the gun industry, and vilifying gay Americans. He also made the outrageous comment that Chuck Hagel’s nomination as Sec. of Defense was “celebrated by the Iranian government”. In fact, his behavior and line of questioning throughout these hearings drew widespread condemnation and fitting comparisons with Joseph McCarthy.
Even if one were able to set aside these and other “highlights” of his short reign of terror in the Senate, the question remains… has Ted Cruz engaged in treasonous acts against the United States of America?

Bill Clinton's Common Sense

     I'll admit it right up front:  after the Monica Lewinsky affair, "common sense" was not an attribute I thought I'd ever assign to Bill Clinton.  But here we are in 2011, and the Tea Partiers are clearly determined to bring about the downfall of our nation, while the Republicans are falling all over themselves carrying out Tea Party edicts.  In other words, these folks are incapable of offering constructive ideas in the face of our economic stagnation--just more of the same:  when in doubt, surrender more of the nation's wealth to those who are already sitting pretty.
     On the other hand, in a recent Newsweek article Mr. Clinton offered up numerous common sense ideas for job creation.
     To begin with, he argued that in lieu of tax credits for start up companies, Congress should once again allow these credits to be converted into cash equivalents for every employee hired.  This had been a part of President Obama's energy policy, but last December the Republicans in Congress refused to extend this benefit--in effect saying "this is a spending program, not a tax cut... we only approve tax cuts."
     The former President maintained that the way we produce and use energy today could result in the same massive job growth that information technology provided during his administration.  He estimates, for example, that retrofitting buildings all across America would create over a million new jobs.  Citing the Empire State building project--which saw hundreds of jobs created, greenhouse gas emissions cut substantuially as overall electricity usage decreased by close to 40%, Mr. Clinton then argued that since 7000 jobs are created for every billion dollars in retrofitting, the construction industry would be kept busy for years--with effects from a million new jobs rippling all through the economy.  Schools, colleges, hospitals, state, county, and local government buildings throughout the country from coast to coast are ripe for retrofitting.
     While infrastructure initiatives would result in massive job creation, there aren't the votes in Congress to pass another stimulus package.  Clinton believes we need to unlock that money and take steps to get U.S. corporations to invest some of the $2 trillion they've accumulated. (Clinton points out that TARP and the stimulus saved us from a second Great Depression.  It worked, but didn't entirely "fix" the economy since an $800 billion stimulus simply couldn't fix a $3 trillion hole.) Mr. Clinton maintains that cutting government spending with the economy currently receiving so little private investment is incredibly risky, and will further increase the deficit as tax revenues fall.
     With regard to corporate taxes, Mr. Clinton acknowledges ours are the second highest in the world.  He advocates lowering the rates while simplifying the tax code and broadening the actual tax base.  This way, all
corporations will pay a reasonable amount of tax on their profits.  In other words, lower the rates to be competitive, but eliminate the loopholes that cause widespread discrepancies.
     Clinton is certainly ready to support individual state initiatives if that's where good ideas are originating.  While noting there are 3 million posted job vacancies (and filling them faster would make a huge difference to the economy) he cites a Georgia program where after vacancies go unfilled for a certain period of time, the state offers businesses money to train potential employees.  During the training, companies aren't yet employers, so they don't have to start paying Social Security taxes, or benefits.  Potential employees are trained the way the company desires, then they hire those who successfully complete that training.  Lag time is reduced, and a job vacancy is filled.
     In addressing the issue of rules and regulations that can often delay shovel-ready projects by up to 3 years, Mr. Clinton states that the federal government should be able to issue waivers(where there are no environmental concerns) to the states to speed up the starting time for construction projects, for example.
     There you have it, a number of solid, thoughtful ideas.  Pretty refreshing, wouldn't you say?  Alas, I doubt they'll ever be given the very serious consideration they deserve while the "nattering nabobs of negativity" (thanks you Spiro Agnew) Boehner, Cantor, Ryan, McConnell, etc. carry out their plans to undermine the President by any means necessary.  I suspect they'd rather torch the country than "compromise", or worse yet, have to forego the media spotlight.

Rick Perry "Superstar"

     Governor Rick Perry's entrance into the 2012 presidential race carries with it an abundance of questionable claims.  He maintains that the economic "success" of Texas is a direct result of his policies.  A closer examination of this "Texas miracle" is certainly in order!
     As of August, 2011 Texas does have an 8.2 unemployment rate, which is lower than the national average of 9.1%.  However, there are 25 states with a lower unemployment rate than Texas.  According to a March, 2011 report by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 9.54% of hourly paid workers in Texas are paid below the minimum wage versus a 6 % national average.  As of 2011, 26% of Texans do not have health insurance, versus a 17% national average.  Hmmm, not a great start here.  I'm sure it gets better!
     In 2009, Perry signed Grover Norquist's pledge to oppose and veto any/all efforts to increase taxes.  In past years, Perry had utilized a variety of tax mechanisms/increases to pay for public schools.  Now, in 2011, Texas ranks 50th in the nation in "kids" with a high school diploma by age 25.  Texas has the 43rd lowest high school graduation rate, ranks 49th in verbal SAT scores, and 46th in average math SAT scores.  It looks as though the Perry/Norquist tandem has cost kids dearly.
     Perry has supported tort reform to limit malpractice lawsuits against doctors, and in 2003 he sponsored a constitutional amendment to cap medical malpractice awards.  While this doesn't help "the little guy", the giant pharmaceuticals (among others) most likely appreciate it.  That brings us to 2007, when Perry issued an executive order mandating that Texas girls receive HPV vaccince (which protects against human papilloma virus--deemed to be a contributing factor in certain strains of cervical cancer).  Gardisi, manufactured by Merck, was the only HPV vaccine approved by the FDA at that time.  Apparent financial links between Merck & Perry have been reported, including a $6000 campaign contribution and Merck's hiring of former Perry Chief of Staff Mike Toomey to handle its Texas lobbying work!
     Naturally, Perry does not believe there is valid scientific proof of global warming.  He opposes any regulation of greenhouse gas emissions citing the "devastating implications" for the Texas economy.  He has attacked the Obama administration's handling of the recession, and turned down $555 million in stimulus money for unemployment insurance.
     He has labeled the Texas economy as "recession proof", yet has taken 23 foreign trips (to bolster business) from 2004-2010, trips that included a vacation on Grand Cayman and an "education policy retreat" in the Bahamas.  To date, the state of Texas has footed over $1 million to cover the cost of "security details".
     Governor Perry does achieve a high "success rate when it comes to executions.  As of August 10th this year, 234 have been carried out since Perry took office.  He's apparently so fond of the process that in 2004 he vetoed a ban on the execution of mentally retarded inmates.  He certainly appears to struggle with the concept that individuals who are likely innocent ought not be executed. http://missingmistersmith.blogspot.com/2011/07/rick-perry-for-president-really.html
     Perry has a long history of making questionable remarks; recent examples include suggesting Texas might secede, accusing the Federal Reserve of treason, and stating Chairman Ben Bernanke would be treated "pretty ugly" if he ventured into Texas. 
     Looked upon by many as the GOP's savior, he does fit the bill in many respects.  In addition to positions outlined above, he's anti-choice, gets an A-plus rating from the NRA, and he demonstrates a keen ability to cloak himself in religious right trappings & dogma.
     However, a close examination of his record should serve as a wake-up call for the rest of the country.  It tells a far different story than the one Rick Perry likes to spin.  I, for one, pray earnestly for public scrutiny!

Judson Phillips, Tea Partier Extraordinaire

     Like many of my contemporaries, I've struggled with identity issues from time to time.  Now, thanks to the Tea Party Nation's one and only Judson Phillips, any questions I may have had have been resolved, once and for all.
     This weekend, while campaigning in Wisconsin for one of the Republican state senators facing a special recall election, Mr. Phillips spoke these words:
     "I will tell you, ladies and gentlemen, I detest and despise everything the left stands for.  How anybody can endorse and embrace an ideology that has killed a billion people in the last century is beyond me."
     So there you have it, spelled out clearly for all to behold.  I am, quite simply, a mass murderer... guilty of genocide.  Thank you, Mr. Phillips, I will cherish this knowledge forever.  Heck, I may even chisel these words onto stone tablets, since you certainly possess the moral authority of the ancient prophets.  Don't you?
1)  You who states that only landowners should have the right to vote.  Wrong.
2)  You who referred to those protesting against Gov. Scott Walker's policies (and thereby exercising their rights to free speech and assembly) as "Nazi storm troopers".  Wrong.
3)  You who immediately labelled Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' would-be assasin as a "leftist lunatic".  Wrong.
4)  You who endorse openly carrying weapons at political rallies.  Wrong, and see #3 above for potential consequences.
5)  You who openly admit to religious intolerance ("I have a real problem with Islam") and deem a congressional candidate "unfit" because he's a Muslim (Keith Ellison in Minnesota's 5th Congressional District).  Wrong.
     Thank you, Mr. Phillips, for contributing nothing of substance or value to the national discourse and for making me prouder than ever to be a liberal.

Tea Party Treason?

WordNet Dictionary defines treason as:  A crime that undermines the offender's government.  Disloyalty by subversive behavior.
"The Economist", a widely respected "outside" voice, reports "the Federal government now has to borrow about 40 cents of every dollar it spends.  A prolonged inability to meet 40% of its obligations would sow economic disarray, trigger litigation, and raise doubts about its ability to meet any obligations."
Closer to home, New York's Sen. Charles Schumer cites projected August revenues of $172 billion and obligations of $307 billion.  This means that huge areas of government spending would go unfunded and we'd be faced with impossible choices.  "If we fully pay Social Security, Medicare, the troops, and interest on the debt, you'd have no one guarding our borders, inspecting our food, or manning the air traffic control towers.  America would come to a grinding halt."
Tea Party leaders in the House of Representatives such as Bachmann, Jordan, and Buerlke have opposed all efforts to arrive at a reasonable compromise which would significantly deal with the debt ceiling and debt reduction.  In their extremist zeal they've even voiced their opposition to John Boehner's recent non-starter of a proposal.  They openly advocate in favor of defaulting, consequences be damned.  If the Tea Party prevails, the country faces grave financial harm, and as defined above, I would maintain their actions constitute treason.  In the name of their extremist agenda, they're apparently more than willing to see their fellow citizens suffer.  Disgraceful, to say the least.  Is it also criminal?

Tea Party Gone Berserk

It's Sunday evening, March 21st, and the Senate's version of the health care bill has now been passed by the House of Representatives. Additional debate will take place in the House over the next few days concerning a number of revisions to the bill, and the Senate is poised (according to Majority Leader Harry Reid) to accept those proposals.
Citizens who oppose the expansion of coverage to the roughly thirty-two million Americans who currently struggle without that protection are free to vent thier frustration in voting booths this November. In fact, that participation is to be expected and welcomed in our democracy.
Unfortunately, many of the so-called "Tea Party" protestors exhibited anything but democratic tendencies this past weekend as the House debate reached its climax. Their "true colors" (to borrow from the Cyndi Lauper tune) included a disturbing mix of racism, homophobia, threats of violence, and spit. Grassroots "patriotism"? I don't think so.
Congressman John Lewis, a leader in the civil rights movement who has represented Georgia's 5th congressional district since 1987, was repeatedly subjected to the n-word. Congressman Emmanuel Cleaver, representing Missouri's 5th congressional district, in addition to being a United Methodist pastor, endured the same treatment, but was also spat upon.
Congressman Barney Frank, who has represented the 4th congressional district in Massachusetts since 1981, and who is a noted gay rights activist, was subjected to the f-word several times over the weekend.
Not merely content with personal abuse, however, the tea partiers touted several particularly menacing signs during their protests. Perhaps the most disturbing example, and one that had been duplicated several times over--so it wasn't a case that "merely"involved a single mis-guided individual--featured the image of a handgun with the legend: "if Brown can't stop it, a Browning can". The threat of violence is clear. It's 2010, and yet, it seemed all that was missing was the white sheets.