Fascinating View on Health Care by Ron Paul

Whatever side you are on, you have to appreciate Congressman Ron Paul for putting a serious, credible Libertarian view on health care and the war in Afghanistan.  Republicans should learn from him rather than isolating him and his ideas. His perspective on “Corporatism” vs. Capitalism is very powerful. Check out the video above. It is worth the 10 minute investment. Oh, and a special note to Larry King… you don’t thank a sitting Congressman for being on your show by saying “Thanks Ron”.

Debate Series Aims to Inform Discourse

The Fairfield Citizen just did a story on our upcoming debate event, the National Debate Series. Check it out here.

Here are some of our favorite quotes from the story:

Kimball and Gaudet have a singular mission: to bring civility and intelligence back to political conversation.

“It’s so much easier to spew rage than to engage in intelligent conversation,” Kimball said. “There are a lot of people who are fed up.”

When Kimball says “a lot of people,” he refers, in part, to the growing audience he and Gaudet get for their weekly podcast, “PoliTalk.” Available at iTunes and other online podcast hosts, PoliTalk is typically an hour-long conversation between the two men, both of whom name the weekly National Public Radio show “Car Talk” as their chief inspiration.

“We’re trying to inform and entertain,” Gaudet said, “when I think others are trying to inflame and entertain. Rush (Limbaugh) makes $30 million a year. I’d like to have that. Anger sells. But if we can change the tone of the discussion, I think we all benefit.”

“We get a lot of good information that we bring to the show, without making it sound like insider baseball,” said Gaudet, whose career has been spent mostly in marketing, technology and media. “We can have conversations that appeal to a broad audience, and, in a sense, an under served audience. [Other, more partisan shows] are preaching to the converted. We’re preaching to the convertible. That’s always your swing vote.”

Where’s Ross Perot When We Need Him?

What happened this past Tuesday night might cause a massive shift in the political landscape over the next five years. It could also be the catalyst for something that is much needed in American Politics today. But it’s not what you think.

You will hear in the coming days and weeks that the Republican victories were a vote against Obama. That this was a referendum against a far left agenda. That the Republican Party is back with a vengeance, and the Democrats have much to fear in terms of next years congressional elections, as they ponder how to vote on a sweeping program inclusive of government run Healthcare.

For the Democratic side, you will hear spin and back peddling. You will be confused as to why if you logged onto CNN.com yesterday AM, you only saw a single line about the elections on the front page. But you saw a lead article explaining why “the change we need” is taking so long.

And this is all true. But there is a greater truth, a greater opportunity.

Last night while watching election coverage on FOX, I saw that FOX convened a voter focus group in Virginia. Granted, most of the folks who are going to show up are probably conservatives, but there seemed to be a good mix of Democrats and Independents as well judging from the dialogue.

The commentator asked a really interesting question, I will paraphrase because I don’t recall his exact words. “Who is just angry at our government?” Three fourths of the hands in the room shot up as if they had just been offered free money to whoever raised their hand first.

Then the commentator asked, “Of those who are angry, who voted for Bob McDonnell?”. Every single person who claimed to be angry – voted for the Republican McDonnell.

The anger in America has shifted. The anger and protest that elected a Democratic President, has moved in favor of the Republicans. A protest vote against government is now a Republican vote.

Now let’s do the heavy lifting and thinking. Is this really a swing to the Republican Party?

No its not. It is however validation that government, as it currently exists, is not working for the American people. It is a referendum in favor of a third party, and against both parties. If the anger can shift so fundamentally, in 12 months, against an incredibly likeable President, then it means far more than a shift in political party momentum. It means its time for a viable third choice.

Let Election Day 2009 be the day the Americans collectively said “We’re mad as Hell, and we are not going to take it anymore”

We need change, and not the change that either party can provide.

What do you think?

Guest Blogger – Jeff Hine

Episode 57 – Pick an Option… Any Option

This episode of PoliTalk offers lots of options for listeners. The first half of the show features a discussion of the options facing the President for the war in Afghanistan. Glenn explains why there are no good options, and Jeff tries to completely change the discussion by offering up a totally different option. The options get more clear when it comes to health care reform and the future of the public option. Glenn explains why the public option, as positioned now, will ultimately work for the President…and Jeff explains why it might not…and why Hillary Clinton may have been a better option to lead this debate. Always entertaining and informative, it’s PoliTalk, your  weekly political podcast.

Join us in Boston on November 10, 2009! Register now, visit http://nationaldebateseries.com

You can get the PoliTalk Podcast on  iTunes and Zune

Time for a Main Street Recovery

2009 promises to be a very good year for Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein. According to Wall Street estimates, his firm is expected to finish the year with $46 billion in revenues. In fact, it has already set aside $11 billion for its year-end bonuses, which is an average of $773,000 per employee.  Things are looking up for Mr. Blankfein, just a year after passing around a tin cup looking for taxpayer-funded bailout money.

2009 promises to be a very bad year for many small businesses. Drive down Main Street in Monroe and you can see the impact of the Great Recession – empty stores, vacant buildings and a large tract of land that was once going to be the town’s centerpiece of economic development, which now sits empty.

To understand what’s happening in towns like Monroe today, you have to go back to 1929. In response to the stock market crash of 1929, Sen. Glass and Rep. Steagall authored legislation that prevented banks from going into the investment business and taking working people’s hard-earned money and losing it. Sound familiar?  Glass-Steagall provided stability for the next 60 years, letting banks simply be banks, until the Reagan revolution and its chief economic proponent, Alan Greenspan, Chair of the Federal Reserve, began a sustained effort to undermine it. At about the same time, the financial industry started to pour buckets of money into lobbying and campaign contributions, spending $350 million in the 1998 campaign cycle alone. Then in November 1999, at around the same time banking giant Citicorp proposed a merger with Travelers insurance, which owned Soloman Smith Barney brokerage, Congress officially repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, making that new financial colossus legal.

With rules changed and regulations eased, Wall Street found new ways to make money, through complex financial instruments called derivatives and credit default swaps. These “too big to fail” bank-brokerage-insurance-financial conglomerates began to do the equivalent of walking into a casino and putting it all on red. Eventually our luck ran out, and they lost their bet.

The tragic irony is that taxpayers, like those who own small businesses,  bailed out the likes of Lloyd Blankfein. To return the favor, the Blankfeins of the world turned their backs on small business owners, making it harder for them to get loans for their business, instead using the money to continue making the same kind of risky bets that got us into this problem in the first place – and nobody’s stopping them.

During the campaign, President Obama said, “we cannot only have a plan for Wall Street. We must also help Main Street,” saying that “tough new regulations on financial institutions” are needed. He can make good on his words by resurrecting Glass-Steagall, enacting comprehensive financial reforms.  We can’t have a full economic recovery until you can drive down Main Street in Monroe, Conn. and see those once closed store fronts thriving, and small businesses, which are the engines of our economic growth, fueled by credit from banks. Wall Street has its recovery. Now it’s time for Main Street.

Episode 56 – Goldman Sachs and the State of Financial Regulation

2009 is proving to be a very good year for Wall Street, but times are still tough for people on Main Street. While the Dow passed the 10,000 mark and Wall Street bonuses will be very big, unemployment remains very high and businesses, especially small ones, are hurting. Jeff and Glenn explain why financial reforms may hold the key to encouraging economic recovery helping Main Street! And why the Administration needs to focus more on helping small business and less on Wall Street pay packages and Fox news. Always entertaining and informative, it’s PoliTalk, your weekly political podcast.

Join us in Boston on November 10, 2009! Register now, visit http://nationaldebateseries.com

You can get the PoliTalk Podcast on  iTunes and Zune

Did I Hear That Right?

In all the noise and anger over TARP, Recovery, and Healthcare reform, we as a nation discovered something far more acidic and corrosive to our democracy than any of the so called “socialist” agenda of government control.

It was late one night, and I was half watching, and half not, switching between the Yankees, CNN, Fox, and Discovery Channel, when I heard something that stopped me in my tracks. Thank goodness for Tivo, I stop; I rewind, and listen again, thinking I must have heard it wrong.  But I hadn’t….

What was it you ask that I heard, and we as a nation discovered?  Our Senators and Congressmen don’t actual read bills before they vote on them.

It’s difficult to do in a blog, but this would be the scene of the movie where there’s a long uncomfortable pause of disbelieve.  The characters would just look at each other and say “did that really happen?”  “Did he just say that they never actually read the bills that they vote on”?

Am I the only one who had a “you’ve got to be kidding me” moment?  The sad part is that I, like the rest of America, got sucked into the next sound bite, completely forgetting about the fact that billions of dollars of taxpayer money have been spent in government programs in the past 12 months, detailed in documents that our elected representatives don’t even understand themselves.  It was not until I was thinking of ideas for this post that I recalled the horror of learning how irresponsible government had become.

Sadder still was the fact that the press is not talking about this.

If an employee of a company entered into a contract with a supplier without reading the agreement, they’d call it something like “fired for cause”.

If it was the Military, and a General did not read a rules of engagement pact put together with a local authority, it might be called something like “gross dereliction of duty”.

So what do we call it when the officials that we elect to make decisions for us, and allocate our tax dollars, have no idea what they are signing up for when they vote?

In defense of this quirk in our system of government, insiders tell me that the legislative staff reads the bills.  Or more accurately the staff is briefed on the bill by lobbyist who wrote the bill, and then the staff briefs the lawmaker. Did I really just write that?  It does not seem it could be true?

So I leave it to you, the online politicos. What do we call it when our Senators and Congressmen act like sub prime mortgage buyers with no money, and don’t bother to read the fine print?

What are your thoughts?

Guest Blogger – Jeff Hine

Episode 55 – Politics of Afghanistan, Health Care Reform and Las Vegas Room Rates

Following up on last week’s in-depth discussion of Afghanistan, the PoliTalk boys turn their sights back home to talk about the political implications of what’s happening over there. They wonder what our end game is, and how various options will play politically back home. Moving to discuss the politics of another hot button issue, they explain how room rates at Las Vegas hotels are tied to the fate of health care reform.  They also explain why they are on a crusade to counter the hate-filled sensational bombastic rhetoric found on most political talk shows, and encourage their listeners to invest in and help re-brand the nature of political discourse. Always entertaining and informative, it’s PoliTalk, your weekly political podcast.

Join us in Boston on November 10, 2009! Register now, visit http://nationaldebateseries.com

You can get the PoliTalk Podcast on  iTunes and Zune

Obama Gets Nobel Peace Prize, Glenn Gets the Evil Eye

President Barack Obama

At 6:15am this morning, I walked into my exercise class and three women were talking. One said,

Did you hear Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize?

I said,

Well that’s impressive… what did he win it for?

The look on their faces was like I had just hit a puppy with a bat. Is it just me or isn’t there usually an accomplishment associated with the Nobel Prize? So, I did some research.

The Norwegian Nobel Committee said,

Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama’s initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.

Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world’s population.

Okay, I get it, the committee is in love with the idea of Obama versus and tangable accomplishments. Setting a tone is great and necessary, but its strikes me that the end goal of peace should be the bar. Then again, I am not on the selection committee. As for me, I am happy for President Obama. He is certainly gaining worldwide recognition and it can’t hurt us on the international front for having a sitting president having this credential early on in his term. So to President Obama, I say Bravo. Oh, and can we get some resolution to the healthcare problem? Thanks.

To the Norwegian Nobel Committee, I say… what are you thinking? I get that peace is not medicine or physics where you can point to a tangible discovery or breakthrough. However, your award now seems to be more of a political statement rather than one that is predicated on accomplishment.

Past Nobel Prize Winners:

• 2009 – Barack Obama
• 2008 – Martti Ahtisaari
• 2007 – Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Al Gore
• 2006 – Muhammad Yunus, Grameen Bank
• 2005 – International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei
• 2004 – Wangari Maathai
• 2003 – Shirin Ebadi
• 2002 – Jimmy Carter
• 2001 – United Nations, Kofi Annan
• 2000 – Kim Dae-jung
• 1999 – Médecins Sans Frontières
• 1998 – John Hume, David Trimble
• 1997 – International Campaign to Ban Landmines, Jody Williams
• 1996 – Carlos Filipe Ximenes Belo, José Ramos-Horta
• 1995 – Joseph Rotblat, Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs
• 1994 – Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres, Yitzhak Rabin
• 1993 – Nelson Mandela, F.W. de Klerk
• 1992 – Rigoberta Menchú Tum
• 1991 – Aung San Suu Kyi
• 1990 – Mikhail Gorbachev
• 1989 – The 14th Dalai Lama
• 1988 – United Nations Peacekeeping Forces
• 1987 – Oscar Arias Sánchez
• 1986 – Elie Wiesel
• 1985 – International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War
• 1984 – Desmond Tutu
• 1983 – Lech Walesa
• 1982 – Alva Myrdal, Alfonso García Robles
• 1981 – Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
• 1980 – Adolfo Pérez Esquivel
• 1979 – Mother Teresa
• 1978 – Anwar al-Sadat, Menachem Begin
• 1977 – Amnesty International
• 1976 – Betty Williams, Mairead Corrigan
• 1975 – Andrei Sakharov
• 1974 – Seán MacBride, Eisaku Sato
• 1973 – Henry Kissinger, Le Duc Tho
• 1972 – The prize money for 1972 was allocated to the Main Fund
• 1971 – Willy Brandt
• 1970 – Norman Borlaug
• 1969 – International Labour Organization
• 1968 – René Cassin
• 1967 – The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section
• 1966 – The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section
• 1965 – United Nations Children’s Fund
• 1964 – Martin Luther King Jr.
• 1963 – International Committee of the Red Cross, League of Red Cross Societies
• 1962 – Linus Pauling
• 1961 – Dag Hammarskjöld
• 1960 – Albert Lutuli
• 1959 – Philip Noel-Baker
• 1958 – Georges Pire
• 1957 – Lester Bowles Pearson
• 1956 – The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section
• 1955 – The prize money was allocated to the Special Fund of this prize section
• 1954 – Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
• 1953 – George C. Marshall
• 1952 – Albert Schweitzer
• 1951 – Léon Jouhaux
• 1950 – Ralph Bunche
• 1949 – Lord Boyd Orr
• 1948 – The prize money was with 1/3 allocated to the Main Fund and with 2/3 to the Special Fund of this prize section
• 1947 – Friends Service Council, American Friends Service Committee
• 1946 – Emily Greene Balch, John R. Mott
• 1945 – Cordell Hull
• 1944 – International Committee of the Red Cross

Episode 54 – Afghanistan Explained

In what might be the most substantive and engaging episode of PoliTalk, Lt. Col. Joseph Alessi Ph.D., chair and professor of Military Science at the University of Pittsburgh, walks us through what is really going on in Afghanistan. To understand the current political decisions, you have to understand the complex history of this country, and to do that, you need to listen to Joe. The McCain campaign had “Joe the Plumber.” At PoliTalk, we have Joe the Scholar, who offers a fair, balanced view of the region and explains why if you don’t learn from history, you’re doomed to repeat it…and nowhere is that lesson more vital than Afghanistan. Always engaging and informative, it’s PoliTalk — your weekly political podcast.

Join us in Boston on November 10, 2009! Register now, visit http://nationaldebateseries.com

You can get the PoliTalk Podcast from  iTunes and Zune