In a study that reveals the GOP pledge to protect business interests at all costs, the Center for Media and Democracy recently analyzed 800 bills supported by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). This secretive group consists of big businesses and conservatives who influence state legislatures around the country to lower wages and taxes on business, and weaken environmental protection that could crimp profits.

Undoing efforts to address climate change is a major priority of ALEC sponsors such as Koch Industries, Exxon Mobil, Wal-Mart, AT&T and Peabody Energy. For example, they created a model law – State Withdrawal from Regional Climate Initiatives – that is being introduced by state lawmakers to curb carbon reduction mandates and overturn cap-and-trade deals.

The GOP’s efforts don’t stop here. Because they believe private property should be the basis for environmental policy, owners become the only protection for the environment. According to the GOP, only self-regulation and a laissez-faire market can provide protection. Toward this end, House Republicans created a rider for the 2012 appropriations bill (H.R. 2584), consisting of items to weaken environmental regulations by cutting funding and rolling back rules.

While the Senate would have to confirm the changes and President Obama would have to sign the bill, it’s unlikely that such changes will pass. The bill continues to change; nevertheless, the attempt reveals GOP plans to roll back environmental protections agreed upon by both parties over the past 40 years. The GOP promises more jobs and recovery from the current depression as a reward for such actions.

“Many of us think that overregulation from the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) is at the heart of our stalled economy,” said Mike Simpson, Republican from Idaho. The bill cuts up to 18 percent of the funding from the Forest Service, the Department of the Interior and the EPA, and was voted out of committee by House Republicans.

The bill is loaded with a promise to business to end regulation and leaves only the profit motive to determine the use of land, water and wildlife.

By blocking regulations the GOP would allow:

– Automobiles to stop increasing gas mileage after 2016, and allow them to spew fine particles that cause cancer into the air.

– Pesticide manufacturers to use false and misleading information on their labels, and chemical companies and agriculture to dump pesticides into the waterways.

– Uranium mining in the Grand Canyon.

– The cement industry to pump cancer-causing dust into the air.

– Increased levels of arsenic, formaldehyde and other cancer-causing substances in the air, soil, drinking water, and sediment, as well as allow increased ammonia emissions from power plants.

– Oil conglomerates to ignore health-based air quality standards offshore, and make it more expensive for citizens to challenge government actions regulating oil extraction companies.

– Increased storm water discharge from commercial and residential construction sites, mountain top removal water to run off into streams, and prohibit the EPA from forcing Florida to enforce the state’s Water Quality Standards.

– Increased ash from the burning of coal, and methane from manure piles.

– Lawsuits over grazing on public lands to proceed more easily, livestock to move freely across government grazing land, and prevent reviews of grazing permits.

– Alaskan western red and yellow cedar to be cut and sold for shipment overseas.

– Unlisted endangered animals to be hunted and killed, and wolves to be de-listed from protection.

– Endangering of bighorn sheep by allowing more livestock to graze in their habitat.

In addition, the GOP would:

– Eliminate the regulation of livestock waste runoff or disposal.

– Allow greenhouse gas producers, such as coal plants, to continue emitting for one year, and bar lawsuits during this time.

– Prohibit funding for listing or protecting any new animal species under the Endangered Species Act.

– Block any updates to the Clean Water Act, and prevent regulation of cool water intake facilities.

– Limit public appeals of Forest Service timber harvest plans.

– Provide financial breaks for mining companies, and prevent any new hard rock mining regulations.

– Allow Texas to implement its own cap-and-trade system without Federal input.

– Prevent boat inspection safety checks on the Yukon River.

– Prevent the EPA from adopting water ballast requirements that stop the intrusion of invasive species into the Great Lakes.

– Force the EPA to ignore Clean Air Rules for power plants, and ignore the public health benefits of the Clean Air Act.

– Block the designation of Federal land to be set aside as wilderness areas.

– Require detailed records to be kept and quarterly reports on any gas or oil permits not allowed.

These efforts make it clear that Republicans ignore the role of deregulation of financial institutions that sunk the economy and robbed millions of Americans of their jobs and their savings.

They hope voters will forget President Bush and the Republican role in this disaster, blame the depression on Obama, and give them the presidency in 2012. They destroyed the economy once and they can do it again-this time taking the environment with it.

Maybe the five largest oil conglomerates reported $35 billion in profits the first quarter and Exxon alone reported $11 billion in profits the second quarter, but so what? Three quarters of Americans may want to end the deductions, according to a Wall Street Journal poll, but Republicans, who promise the party stands up for the little guy, held tight to their position.

After beating myself up, I figured I deserved it for being a typical American. Why shouldn’t the oil companies continue to get huge tax write-offs? After $200 billion in profits, they need the extra $4 billion the U.S. gives them in write-offs every year. Taxpayers will pay for their deductions: We can just cut Social Security, Medicare, and education funding, plus food stamps for poor and starving, to make up the difference.

Oil conglomerates have a right to increase the cost of my gas to pay their CEOs more, and continue to buy up smaller oil companies so they don’t have any competition and can charge me even higher prices. That’s capitalism, the American way. Besides, these oil companies might hire somebody some day instead of increasing dividend checks to their wealthy stockholders. We don’t want to kill jobs.

Voting for the Republicans as we do, we deserve a good whacking. As a matter of fact, the more I think about how stupid I was for supporting this system, the more I want to make myself pay. I think I’ll go out and hit myself over the head with a brick, not once but twice.

As an American, I worship the freedom to pay higher prices at the gas pump so the CEOs at Standard and Exxon and British Petroleum can continue to rake in $1 million a hour in salaries and bonuses. America stands for free enterprise, the right for workers to compete in a dog-eat-dog downward spiral to see who will work for the lowest wage. It’s the American way!

These conglomerates have a right to make as much profit as they can. Where would we be without all the rich people that make America great? They could all move someplace else and we’d be left looking like some poor South American country.

I will always stand up for my right to be pushed around and intimidated. None of that liberal-elitist-socialistic thinking for me. If everyone isn’t armed, what happens to my right to be shot? Luckily, we now have more guns that people, so my chances of being shot increase, making me even more American.

No unions for me either. I won’t pay some official just so he can bargain to increase my paycheck. I’d rather compete with Wal-Mart and MacDonald’s on an equal footing, me bargaining for my wages and working conditions against them. For every dollar more I might make in wages, some poor investor might have to stop driving a Porsche or vacationing in Boca Raton. It’s not fair to me, so I think I’ll just go whack myself again.

Now the job-killing FDA wants drug companies to stop marketing drugs that do nothing and cost a fortune. Not fair! Genentech could lose $1 billion a year in revenue from selling Avastin just because a few thousand people died from its toxic side-effects. Regulation is never good; it undermines American profits. Just because owners lied and cheated is no reason to take Avastin off the market. It’s my right, as a consumer, to navigate, my way through 100 pages of 2-point small print to see if a drug will kill me. I don’t need a nanny government telling me what’s good for me.

Medicare? I say allow me to pay whatever health insurance companies want to charge me or I can go without. My Republican representatives want me to pay more for Medicare and get fewer services; that’s the way the system works. So what if 45,000 people die every year because they can’t afford medical care? I have a right to choose to go to the doctor or not, depending upon how much money I have; that’s my unfettered freedom. So what if my life is shortened by twenty years?

Education? Why should I have to pay for someone else’s education? I have mine; they can get their own. Let’s remember individual rights. I have a right to be as dumb as I want. Why should I worry about other people’s kid’s education? All this politically-correct thinking that I’m my brother keeper is boloney. I’m a good Christian and worry about my own soul. Just keep the state out of it. It’s me against the socialists, but thank God I have the Republican Party to protect me. As a matter of fact, I think I deserve another good whack!

The Tiffany revelation includes $500,000 owed on all his past wives wedding rings. Plus the 23-year-older man had to shower the younger women with diamonds to get her attention.

In this Republican-midgets-for-President season, Gingrich may become an also ran, brought down by his high living, expanding waistband and oversized ego. Others suffered similar falls: “hockey mom” Sara Palin was caught spending $150,000 on a wardrobe paid for by the Republican Party, and Democratic working class hopeful John Edwards was cut low after revelations about his $400 haircuts.

An anachronism trying to make a comeback, Gingrich authored “Contract on America,” a mafia-style hit list capitalizing on middle-class anger at Democrats for assisting minorities. Gingrich used their support to phase out the middle class, in favor of the rich and well-connected.

Known in Washington as a compulsive loudmouth, Gingrich cherished goals of shrinking the government to maintaining roads and a strong national military, promoting buyer-beware free enterprise, and reducing the country with a Victorian Age morality.

As Speaker of the House, Gingrich said he wanted to make people take care of themselves without any help from the government. He thought people should have to suffer. “That’s the way it should be,” he told voters in Georgia. He believed that the wealthy should be able to enjoy their luxury homes, their foreign cars and high-priced jewelry without having to help anyone else or give a penny to government, except for minimal services.

Newt Gingrich told young Republicans: “I think one of the great problems we have in the Republican Party is that we don’t encourage you to be nasty.”

True to his word, Newt Gingrich and a group of his right-wing cronies reshaped the Republican Party, gained control of Congress in 1994, and pursued a mean-spirited extremist agenda aimed at issues like eliminating Federal nutrition standards for public school meals and stymying a meat inspection system designed to protect the public from deadly E. coli bacteria. He led the Republicans in attacking Medicare and Medicaid and attempted to overturn clean air, clean water, and all environmental regulation. He denounced the Environmental Protection Agency as the ‘”Gestapo,” drastically cut taxes for billionaires, and refused to raise the minimum wage to $5.25 an hour.

Gingrich played an important role during President Clinton’s impeachment trial, when he pledged, “I will never again, as long as I am Speaker, make a speech without commenting on this topic.” Congressman Tom DeLay of Texas, Gingrich’s minority whip at the time, praised Gingrich for “doing the Lord’s work in the Devil’s city,” evidently Washington, D.C.

While Speaker, Gingrich fought with other ultra-conservatives who insisted on radical cuts in the federal budget. He called them “perfectionists” who didn’t understand political compromise. Nevertheless, he’s credited with shutting down the government because the president made him ride in the back of Air Force One. Later, he played a key role in designing and implementing commercial radio ads against President Clinton and promoting his impeachment, while Gingrich himself was conducting a six-year-long illicit affair with his current wife.

One political scientist from the University of Richmond said, “He thought he could take over Western civilization because he was Speaker and the Republican Party was his army.” By the time Gingrich stepped down from the speakership of the House, 18 percent of voters saw him favorably while 43 percent gave him an unfavorable rating.

Besides pioneering nasty politics in Washington, Gingrich also pioneered unethical elections by using tax-exempt groups as a private piggy bank. The House Ethics Committee fined him $300,000 for promoting Republican Party goals with taxpayer funds and lying about it. Gopac, Gingrich’s former Republican political action committee, gave him money for his 1990 Congressional campaign and he used Gopac consultants to develop his legislative agenda, while yet another consultant was his main political strategist. Former Republican senator and presidential candidate Bob Dole, a lobbyist for the tobacco industry, offered to loan Gingrich $300,000 to pay his fine, interest free.

Additionally, Gingrich angered small business owners, who were targeted by a National Republican Congressional Committee telemarketing campaign to extort $1000 donations in exchange for “national leadership awards” from Speaker Newt Gingrich’s office. The speaker’s promises of fame, influence and power are not illegal per se in politics, but they would be investigated if done by a private company.

At the time same he was violating the law, Gingrich was promising to cut taxes in half and capital gains to 15 percent, goals since achieved by Republicans, who are unabashedly calling for even lower rates as a goal in the coming election. Now Gingrich is back on the campaign trail, accompanied by a wife draped in diamonds, and claiming he’s fiscally conservative. He pays his bills because he’s become rich promoting himself among reactionary, right-wing groups. If you’ll only elect him president, he promises to increase his Tiffany account to $50 million.

American politics are getting more bizarre and in some cases, borders on the nutty. Current politics include Republican legislatures in Texas, Arizona, Georgia and Minnesota fighting for their “rights” to reject energy efficiency light bulbs, while South Carolina will manufacture their own state’s rights incandescent bulbs.

Alaska wants to eliminate Federal protection of salmon, polar bears, seals and wolves in favor of “state sovereignty.” Dozens of states pledge to roll back “Obamacare,” and protect their citizens’ right to high-priced monopoly healthcare. A GOP legislator in New Hampshire recommends sending the disabled and homeless to Siberia where it’s cheaper to live.

Americans have always relished smears, scandals, and partisan struggles that appeal to the lowest common denominator. A fierce national anti-intellectualism, fear of losing social position, and an economy run into the ditch by greedy bankers are driving the public to look for answers. The Tea Party and their Republican sycophants used this by making the Federal government the enemy to win recent elections: They are having a field day.

Important issues they’ve tackled include expanding the rights of gun owners, portrayed by the National Rifle Association as oppressed victims of government regulation. These oppressed victims bought 200,000 more guns than usual in 2010, to make a total of 200 million to 350 million guns in the U.S. Despite 30,000 deaths a year and 70,000 injuries caused by these guns, the NRA insists, “guns save lives.”

In Florida, NRA supporters seek to impose a fine of $5 million on any doctor who asks patients if they own guns. In South Dakota, NRA supporters want to require every adult citizen to purchase a gun. Georgia is about to allow guns in bars, churches and political events; Arizona allows anyone to carry a concealed weapon without a permit; and Utah has named an official state firearm, soon to be followed by Texas.

NRA supporters in nine states seek to legalize guns on school campuses. In Montana, Radio Shack is giving away a gun with every purchase of Dish Network, and in Missouri a car dealer is offering a free AK-47 with the purchase of a new vehicle.

Congressional Republicans forced “gun rights” into the healthcare bill to prevent the collection of “any information relating to gun ownership.” Congress refuses to ban ammunition clips that hold 40 bullets and fire two shots a second, and the NRA refuses to meet with President Obama because he has “spent a lifetime trying to destroy the Second Amendment.”

In another effort to “save the country,” GOP legislatures are attacking illegal immigration. Georgia wants to charge any undocumented resident caught driving drunk with a felony, condemn immigrants for stealing “job opportunities” from citizens, and make it a crime to “transport” or “harbor” illegal immigrants. Several states seek to bar illegals from college and prevent them from marrying U.S. citizens. Alabama would make it illegal to rent to an illegal immigrant, and several states want to pass laws requiring employers to check with a Federal citizenship database before hiring anyone. One GOP legislator says he wants to “make South Carolina a very hostile place for those who are in this country illegally.”

Meanwhile GOP presidential contenders support a moral crusade to save America:

• Mike Huckabee of Arkansas blames the economic downturn, crime and high school drop out rates on our “morality.” He wants America to “rediscover God” and worship evangelical Christianity.
• Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi lauds the White Citizens Councils of the Civil Rights days and pledges that we should do “everything that we can do to stop abortion.”
• Newt Gingrich claims, “religious belief is being challenged by a cultural elite” that wants God “driven out of public life.” He places moral values at the top of the U.S. agenda, as important as the economy and national defense.
• Michele Bachmann promises to increase the importance of social moral issues and says, “Social conservatism is fiscal conservatism.”

Working people are not faring well in the business-supported GOP push to dominate politics. In Nevada, the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce is seeking to repeal the state’s $8.25 minimum wage. Darrell Issa, Republican from California, wants to outlaw any states minimum wage higher than the Federal minimum wage. Wisconsin overturned the rights of state workers to collective bargaining, and Republican governors around the country are laying off thousands of workers, privatizing government jobs and firing schoolteachers.

Republican Congressional leaders abolished committees on global warming and ended recycling programs in the House cafeteria, claiming “green” initiatives are too expensive and compostable utensils melt in hot soup and break in salads. The GOP wants to end cheap government mortgages by abolishing Fannie Mae because it competes with for-profit banks. They also seek to abolish the EPA, along with government support of Planned Parenthood and National Public Radio; and Republican Ron Paul wants to abolish almost all government agencies.

Is the GOP creating a new role for America as a laughing stock of the world, or is American simply becoming one giant loony bin?

Unfortunately too many Americans share this perception. While the commentator sounds daffy, headlines raise questions about the deep divisions that threaten to rip America asunder. Examples abound. They reveal political forces at work, common sense pushed aside, and ordinary people ignored.

Despite empty praise about the U.S. being “the best county in the
world,” an International Monetary Fund comparison of the advanced economies of the world, focused on income equality, employment, democracy, life expectancy, well being, food security, prison population, and student performance, ranks the U.S. 33rd. Do these trends bode well for the future?

Meanwhile, we convert public policy to a dollar value. For example, policy makers are currently debating the price of a human life. As the price of a human life appreciates, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce argues for changing the rules from a cost-benefit analysis, which they’ve always advocated as necessary to prove the benefit of any proposed regulation, to a standard more favorable to business. Should money be the deciding factor when making decisions about public safety?

Recent scientific studies link heavy precipitation and floods to
global warming. Proving the planet is warming was difficult in the
past because scientists said it was hard to distinguish between
climate change and extremely bad weather, hence computer modeling, scoffed at by climate change deniers. Will we wait too long to curb our carbon footprint before catastrophe strikes?

The House Judiciary Committee in South Dakota overwhelmingly approved a law making a homicide “justifiable” if committed in the defense of an unborn child. Touted as a way to discourage abortion by allowing doctors to be killed, the law was shelved, but not before invoking public anger on all sides. Should politicians debate the moral right to kill based on an individual’s religious preferences?

The Obama Administration conducted a study to determine what would happen if terrorists set off a nuclear bomb. While this is a highly unlikely event, the report engenders fear that leads to trading freedom for security. Supposedly, staying in your car after a nuclear blast cuts lethal radiation by 50 percent. Should the U.S. return to Cold War days when children were taught to crouch beneath their school desks in case of nuclear war?

Texas Republican Governor Rick Perry proposes to cut the state
education budget by $5 billion, eliminating junior colleges,
scholarship programs, and cutting teachers’ benefits. He plans to lay off almost 10,000 state workers, but saves money for abstinence-only programs in a state that ranks third highest in teenage pregnancy, 47th in literacy, 49th in verbal SAT scores, and 46th in math scores.  Can Texas prosper with an even less educated population?

An additional 42 states cut college funding, resulting in higher tuition and fewer students. Arizona eliminated preschool for 4,328 children; Colorado slashed 5 percent, or $400 per student, from its budget; and Michigan reduced its spending $165 per student. Hawaii is shortening its school year by 17 days; Missouri eliminated school busing for 565,000 students; and New Jersey cut programs for 11,000 students. Some states attack teachers’ unions and cry for more cuts, raising questions about the role of public education in our society.  Should we support public education?

Although conservatives call for more cuts, none of them mention
Republicans forcing President Obama to protect the high incomes of  our nation’s wealthiest. The deal to extend Bush tax cuts creates a deficit of $3.7 trillion over ten years. While such cuts are supposed to create jobs, America’s 500 largest non-financial corporations are hoarding $2 trillion in cash and corporate profits grew 36 percent in 2010, while hiring plummeted. Tax breaks are used to increase CEO pay and expand corporate monopolies. Does this support the common good?

More than 30,000 people die in the U.S. from gunshots every year and over 60,000 are wounded. With almost a million people shot every decade, the National Rifle Association resists even common sense laws to regulate guns. Is this about “the right to bare arms” or is it an orgy of self-destruction?

While a cartoon claims, “Americans are not ready for Egyptian-style democracy,” we move beyond democracy and the ability of voters to influence public policy. We now have a corporate-controlled and operated government, influenced by over 10,000 lobbyists. Is this progress?

Corporations continue to promote a survival-of-the-fittest,
laissez-faire, free-enterprise capitalism, pushed by brilliant
marketing firms employing think tanks to sway public opinion. Did their globalization, anti-tax, deregulation, and privatization agenda create the wealthy elite and the deep depression?

Far from being “on the road to ruin,” America is engaged in a huge
struggle over its future. Will we become a society devoted entirely
to business with radically different living standards for rich and
poor, or will we pull together to make a better life for all? Which
will fulfill the great promise of America?

The only problem is they are looking in the wrong place. Their real target is closer to home-a shock to some but that’s what new investigations reveal when they find Republicans openly flaunting the law and thumbing their noses at regulations.

Not only do we have Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices using their offices to promote ideological political agendas, but also hiding their politically-funded income from public view.

Antonia Scalia is the latest to cross the line with an announcement that he plans to address the Tea Party Caucus in the House of Representatives. The New York Times Editorial Board accused Scalia of becoming a “Justice from the Tea Party,” for his planned participation in their caucus seminar. This isn’t Scalia’s first breech of court practices.

Scalia also spoke at a Koch Industries retreat, sponsored by two billionaire brothers with a history of supporting extreme right-wing positions that promote libertarianism, pollution, deregulation of all markets, abolition of income taxes, as well as sponsoring attacks on climate change theory. The Koch brothers are well-known financiers of right-wing groups such as the Tea Party and benefactors of a recent Supreme Court decision.

The allegations against Scalia drew attention when Common Cause, a liberal advocacy group, raised questions about the participation of Scalia and Justice Clarence Thomas in last year’s Citizens United Supreme Court decision allowing corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money on political campaigns, thus overturning years of judicial precedent.

Normally when judges are personally involved in cases before the court, they recuse themselves, because they cannot give an unbiased opinion when they have a conflict of interest. Supreme Court Justices are legally exempt from this requirement, but few justices push their involvement with extremists as Scalia and Thomas have.

Thomas’s breaches of judicial ethical practices are worse. Thomas’s wife received almost $700,000 from the Heritage Foundation, a think-tank dedicated to pushing a conservative agenda that attacks welfare, taxes, government regulations, civil rights, social security, unions, and various forms of government assistance.

Additionally, Ms. Thomas founded Liberty Central, a radical Tea Party group dedicated to ousting Obama and defeating health care reform, and received $550,000 from the group. She refuses to disclose who provided the funds, raising the question that the money could be used to influence Thomas’s decisions in Court cases.

Thomas defends himself, claiming he ignored $1,250,00 in income because he “misunderstood filing instructions” in the 1978 Ethics in Government Act. The president of Common Cause says he finds his excuse “implausible;” but Thomas’s explanation also raises questions about his mental ability to understand simple legal instructions, let alone the complex issues that come before the Supreme Court.

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) revealed even more egregious and illegal political misconduct in a detailed, 112-page report “Political Activities by White House and Federal Agency Officials During the 2006 Midterm Elections.” The independent federal investigative agency is empowered to oversee the political activities of government employees in accordance with the Hatch Act. The OSC makes sure officials do not use their offices to promote politics in government workplaces or to coerce government employees into participating in political campaigns.

The report found that the Bush White House and Karl Rove conducted political briefings of appointees in federal workplaces during work hours, coordinated their activities with the Republican National Committee, and paid the expenses of high-level federal officials to attend political events supporting candidates, illegal activities under the Hatch Act.

The Bush White House conducted 75 political briefings, involving 20 government agencies, gave employees secret RNC email accounts, and materially assisted the election of Republican candidates. The findings came after an investigation that reviewed over 100,000 pages of documents, including secret emails, and interviewed more than 80 Bush appointees. The results found “that the electoral success of the Republican Party, and possible strategies for achieving it, were often on the agenda.”

The Hatch Act specifically prohibits “engaging in political activity while on duty or in a federal workplace.” A large number of White House appointees violated the act by “coordinating, presenting, or attending the briefing.” These political briefings mobilized appointees during the election season with information about “the overall political climate, the economic landscape, the President’s job approval ratings, and the current and predicted makeup of Congress.” The White House emphasized a clear message that appointees’ activities were “appreciated.”

The political briefings were mandatory and their nature clear. For example, the White House wanted to brief the U.S. AID to “keep the troops informed, motivated and activated as we move forwards toward the fall elections.” Eleven different Power Point presentations, containing an average of 20 slides, included specific instructions that focused on particular political races and geographic districts critical to the Republican Party. The slides specified calls for volunteers and actions to be taken, including a 72-hour mobilization before the elections.

The report clearly finds that activities were no simple “get out the vote” campaign, but included illegal actions by federal agency heads, the White House, and major Republican Party officials, orchestrated by Karl Rove.

With such clear-cut evidence, should we hold our breath until a case is brought against Rove and the others involved? Will Bush be indicted in the case? Will the Tea Party and the newly invigorated Republican Party rush in to make government bureaucrats pay for their crimes? Or will charges ever be brought?
Will Republican followers ignore GOP transgressions and continue blithely attacking Obama? Is there justice in America for one all, or only for some?

This latest superpatriotic call seeks to revive a concept dragged from the dustbin of history by George W. Bush.

Bush resurrected American exceptionalism as an excuse for his destruction of Iraq, and the unilateral disregard for the rest of the world. Under Bush, the U.S. overturned international treaties, denounced the U.N. and international cooperation-except when to America’s advantage-and rejected legal views routinely accepted around the world. Bush and his neocon cheerleaders claimed that the U.S. has its own set of rules, judgments, and solutions to every issue, based on national advantage. Many of today’s politicians, urged on by Fox News, are replaying these old arguments.

Exceptionalism reaches back to historic national decisions that were similar to the invasion of Iraq: dropping the atomic bomb on Japan; clearing out indigenous people to make room for white settlers; and enslaving Africans to build and run plantations. Those in favor of such moves claim God gave America a unique right to rule, and ignore the rest of the world, because we are special.

In one way, exceptionalism is merely another weapon now being used to undermine President Obama and pave the way for the GOP to capture the presidency in 2012. The term also justifies conservative policies, such as unbridled capitalism, limited government, abolishing taxes, and imposing Christianity on the nation.

Let’s examine the concept. A 2008 Brookings Institute conference on American Exceptionalism outlined the ways Americans diverge from world opinion. Some 75 percent of Americans are proud of their country, while only a third of Germans and Japanese are. Half of Americans consider a public safety net important while 75 percent of Europeans do. Two-thirds of Americans believe success comes from individual effort, while the same proportion of Europeans believes success is the result of forces beyond their control.

Above all, America is deeply rooted in religious belief. Half of Americans believe God is essential to morality, while only a third of Europeans do. Forty percent of Americans go to church once a week, while less than 10 percent attend in Europe. Do these characteristics justify America forcing its will on the rest of the world?

The notion of exceptionalism includes the boast that America is the greatest nation on earth. Perhaps because few Americans read newspapers or travel abroad, they cannot adequately judge the truth of this claim.

Corporate controlled politicans claim America has “the greatest healthcare system in the world,” only to reveal their ignorance. The World Health Organization ranked the U.S. 37th among nations in healthcare performance in 2000, although we pay more for less service. Numerous studies reveal that the U.S. is mediocre in treating illness. For example, compared to the G8, the U.S. has the highest infant mortality, the most mothers who die during childbirth, the most lives lost that could have been saved, and the worst in treatment of cancer. The U.N. rates the U.S. even worse: 74th in healthcare performance. And in 2009, the C.I.A. ranked the U.S. 49th in life expectancy in the world.

Nor is the U.S. “the greatest” in essential categories. The U.S. is second after the European Union in GDP, 41st out of 130 in public debt, has the worst balance of trade of any country, and is 32nd in student math, reading and scientific performance. We do have the greatest wealth disparity in the world. In 2007, our top ten percent controlled 72 percent of the wealth, while the bottom 50 percent controlled 2.5 percent. The poverty rate increased from 12 to 14 percent since 2004, and the current recession has left over a quarter of the working population either under-or un-employed.

The U.S. does have the most expensive military in the world because we spend almost as much as the rest of the world combined. We also spend more on our for-profit medical system-two and-a-half-times more than the world average.

Pointing out an anomaly of historic development is one thing, but adopting “exceptionalism” as government policy ignores the disastrous failures in Iraq and Afghanistan, the meltdown of the world economy, huge national deficits, and the rise of Iran and China on the international scene.

Flag-waving politicians like Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Mike Pence, and Newt Gingrich use the concept of “exceptionalism” to prove how much they love America. Such hyper-nationalism, usually tied to a Christian God, denies our common humanity with the rest of the world, undercuts international cooperation, and promotes an arrogant disregard for world opinion.

It remains to be seen how Americans will react when they realize their imperial ambitions in the New American Century-a neocon dream of world dominance-is a hollow myth. America lived beyond its means for too long and now must accept its place in a new world. China, the E.U. and even small countries increasingly challenge America’s role in the world. Will the U.S. become isolationist, engage in more militaristic adventures, or join the nations of the world to push for world peace? We shall see.

The Federal Election Commission found no evidence that Senator John Ensign, Republican of Nevada, did anything wrong. His lawyer claims the decision is “one step closer to the truth.” Ordinarily this would be considered corruption, but in today’s world we accept it with a smile.

At a time when Americans are depressed, under and unemployed, unhoused, and their welfare is ignored by Congress, the political elite works overtime to keep citizens entertained with a strange type of twisted black humor.

If only this were an isolated case, but it’s not. Politicans are taking tips from reality TV to aim at the lowest common denominator-more like a pie in the face than keen wit. Take, for example, the new Congressional Tea Party Caucus, with 53 members, founded by newly elected Minnesota Representative Michele Bachmann. Her recent gaffes include: tirades against “gangster government” usurping private enterprise; attempts to employ a born-again evangelical minister to teach Congresspeople about the Constitution; and claims that Obama’s trip to India cost taxpayers $200 million a day. She goes through staff members like she puts runs in her nylons.

Lawrence Jacobs, a political science professor from the University of Minnesota, explains that she’s not just some off-the-wall kook, but speaks “in code” to a “conservative, grass-roots” base. Her crazy statements merely show her authenticity. Do people find this embarrassing? No. It’s acceptable nuttiness, given our right-wing extremists.

Republicans are not the only ones jumping on the humor bandwagon. President Obama is pushing hard for a new nuclear arms treaty. In order to get rid of nuclear weapons, he supports building new factories to build more and better nuclear bombs.

The factories will produce over 80 new bombs a year and have an $85 billion price tag over 20 years-despite a single building in the complex that broke ground in 2004 for $660 million and wound up costing almost $6 billion, a sort of knife-in-the-ribs-of-the-public humor. Forget that the chosen site lies within a mile of a major earthquake fault. We need to know that the bombs will actually work when we use them, except we won’t use them because we are trying to get rid of them. This type of black humor straight out of Dr. Strangelove.

Even minor politicians wield humor with behind-the-back parlor tricks. Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York wants to appoint Cathleen Black, a wealthy media executive, to run the troubled city school system. Her children attended expensive private schools and she has absolutely no experience in education, yet she’s eminently qualified, according to Bloomberg. Her qualifications include her seat on the Coca-Cola board, as it fought attempts to end childhood obesity by discouraging school children from consuming sugary drinks, and her role as the newspaper industry’s chief lobbyist in upholding their right to encourage consumers to smoke, get cancer, and die.

Bloomberg is joking when he talks about transformative change because what he really means is drastically cutting public school budgets and eliminating thousands of New York City teachers. How can he keep a straight face? When you’re worth $18 billion, spend over $200 million in three terms to get elected, and give your campaign workers almost $3 million in bonuses, no one tells you that you’re full of BS.

Even Tea Party true believers are in on the shenanigans. Take their stand on race for example. They were nowhere to be seen when the Supreme Court appointed Bush to the presidency instead of ordering a recount, or when Bush invaded Iraq and Afghanistan, wiretapped us illegally, shipped six million jobs overseas in the interest of “globalization,” or went $10 billion in the red after arranging a $2 trillion in tax cut for the wealthiest one percent. Only after Americans elected a black president did they begin foaming at the mouth and demanding that we return to the Constitution of 1779-although so far they remain mum about slavery.

Now they deny they are racist and fight back with quotes from Booker T. Washington and Martin Luther King, claiming white people are the ones being discriminated against. Hard to believe but it’s revealed by a Public Religion Research Institute Poll of hundreds of thousands of online polls designed to detect prejudice. Over 60% of white tea partiers, 56% of white Republicans, and 50% of white independents claim that they, not minorities are being discriminated against today. U.S. minorities must find these assertions rolling-in-the-aisle funny.

Without even getting into the corporate-generated opposition to global warming, fundamentalist nonsense about “the Rapture,” or the U.S. printing money to buy our bonds back from ourselves, the joke is on us. Our standard of living may be headed for the toilet, but we can still laugh. It’s as if Marie Antoinette said, “Give’em humor.”

“There’s no excuse for accepting people with abnormal hair color in today’s day and age,” fumed Paladino, who is setting a record in the amount of disrespect aimed at large voting blocks. “They can always dye their hair to fit in. It’s the American way.”

The Orthodox Jewish leaders Paladino addressed all signed pledges that they were not now, nor had they ever been “friendly to red-haired people.” Previously the leaders petitioned Congress to expel from the U.S.A. all “those people,” along with their friends and supporters. Republicans quickly authored a bill to order the Immigration Service to stop and question all redheads living in this country and to track their movements on an ongoing basis.

“I refuse to allow my children, even the illegitimate ones, to play with redheads at school, and I vehemently protest their inclusion in public schools,” said Paladino. “If they insist on being different, let them go back to Russia, some Muslin country, or wherever they came from.”

Paladino apologized to the group for allowing a redhead to serve him once in a restaurant, although he added, “The Bible declares people with red hair will be servants to the rest of mankind for eternity and toil in the fields forever, so I used to think it was okay if they waited on me. Now I get physically ill when they are in my presence.”

Immediately after his comments, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Fox News sent congratulatory messages, applauding Paladino for “a clear statement that will protect a vulnerable public in this age of Obama overreach.”

Saying she’s pleased to “find a man with some backbone,” Sara Palin invited Paladino to a meeting this week, where she may offer him the vice presidential slot on her upcoming run for U.S. president. Ms. Palin and Mikey Huckabee, her former choice, recently had a falling-out when Sarah belittled hush puppies, a delicate cuisine item in Huckabee’s home state, Arkansas.

“Paladino is expressing views that are dear to the hearts of all Americans — the freedom to belittle, reject and even hate those who look and act differently,” said Mike Caputo, Paladino’s campaign manager. “We have to remember that he’s a capitalist and a Catholic, and we should not expect Christian behavior from him.”

Before his meeting at the synagogue, Paladino told newsmen not to “swallow the lies my campaign tries to spread about how I’ve become all warm and fuzzy.”

“I’m the same irascible, quick-to-anger, crotchety, petulant prick I’ve always been,” Paladino assured the all male audience. “I’m a builder, I’m rich and I’m used to pushing people around and getting my way. That’s why the Tea Party picked me over those redhead-loving freaks, the Democrats. They’ll be sorry they were ever born!”

Paladino stated that once he’s elected, he will order the New York City and State Police Departments to round up not only redheads, but anyone else he decides to dislike. He plans to send them all to Guantanamo, Cuba, after he expands the facilities.

Democrats in New York City called for a day of resistance to tyranny by asking all supporters to stay indoors next weekend. “People are simply too tired and too preoccupied with web texting to join a march anymore,” said Joe Snoop, vice chair of the Upper West Side Democratic Club. “So we’re going all-out to stay in.”

While only 11 percent of Americans have confidence in Congress, Obama is still the most popular politician for good reason. The St. Petersburg Times, which tracks campaign promises, found that Obama kept 91 and made progress on 285 of his 502 2008-campaign promises. Fourteen were “broken,” while 87 are stalled. Of his most significant 25 promises, 20 were kept or remain in process.

Of these significant promises, Obama is on track to ramp down Bush’s Iraq War: He ended the F-22 boondoggle; banned torture; insisted the military policy of “don’t ask, don’t tell” end; increased budgets for AmeriCorps and the national parks; and induced Pakistan to control Islamic terrorists. He also ended the Homeland Security pork barrel for states with minimal terrorist threats, his economic stimulus package prevented a deeper depression, and 16 million poor people have Medicaid for the first time.

Intransigent conservatives hold up other progressive policies. The on-going GOP stalemate led Democrats to pass bills with slim margins and delay issues such as immigration reform, global warming, campaign finance reform, and energy policy. The GOP blunted the economic stimulus, reform of the monopoly-controlled healthcare insurance industry, and financial reform.

Americans expect more because they haven’t noticed the extent of the structural transformation after thirty years of laissez-faire capitalism run amok. Economic and governmental restructuring proves difficult to reverse, partly because conservative members of both political parties promoted many of the changes.

Corporate lobbyists are spending hundreds of millions of dollars to prevent or water down reforms. In addition, Democrats gained a majority in Congress in the last election by supporting ultra-conservative candidates in traditionally Republican districts. These interests now demand more conservative programs.

The GOP moves to the right, driving out moderates. They rail against RINOs, or “Republicans in name only,” demand doctrinaire purity, refuse to compromise, and do everything in their power to stymie Obama. They hope voters will forget that the GOP created the economic mess, and become so fed up with infighting that they will avoid the polls at the next election. By counting on staunch supporters-nationalists, anti-abortionists, racists, the old and the wealthy-to vote, they hope to gain a majority in Congress and defeat Obama’s agenda.

Lacking new ideas, the GOP continues to resist change-the House has passed over 300 bills, which the GOP Senate minority will not take up. The party promotes the same policies that got us into the economic mess: no taxes and no regulation. By giving corporations a free reign, they believe that a mythical free economy will solve all of our problems.

Hardy bands of corporate-sponsored fringe groups, plus a supportive Supreme Court, propose taking the country back to 1776. This odd group of libertarians, religious fanatics, tax refuseniks, gun nuts, and gay bashers, support a strict return to their interpretation of the Constitution, and promise to repeal all progressive legislation.

Meanwhile, progressives are disillusioned with a lack of progress. They accuse Obama of: pandering to Wall Street bankers; pitting state school systems against each other to win federal money, promoting merit pay for teachers, and pushing charter schools; backing down on a government-run alternative to monopoly health insurance; and increasing the war effort in Afghanistan. They disagree with Obama’s failure to prosecute war crimes by Bush, Cheney and the CIA; his crackdown on immigration, which exceeds that of Bush; and the dropping of legislation guaranteeing workers the right to organize.

They rail against Obama’s methodical responses and cool exterior, which lack the passion needed to rally public support for overcoming the power of lobbyists in the insurance and banking industries, which each spent over $1 billion to derail reforms.

Despite a myriad of problems, including the greatest man-made environmental disaster in U.S. history, the BP spill in the Gulf of Mexico, jobs and the economy remain the most important issues for Americans. Over fifteen million Americans are out of work, home foreclosures continue, and job creation lags behind job losses.

Americans resent the rich who are doing well. In 2009, the top 25 hedge fund managers received pay totaling $25 billion, more than they received before the economic collapse. After accepting a bailout, six large banks are increasing their political and economic power, increasing their proportion of asset holdings by 300 percent since the mid 1990′s (now 60 percent of GNP).

In 2008, nine banks receiving TARP funds paid their CEOs $32 billion in bonuses while they continued to engage in high-risk gambles on derivatives and option contracts, resisted oversight, and refused to write-down their losses from bad loans. The economy remains adrift and volatile.

There’s a huge crisis of faith and a lack of confidence in the U.S. Working people, forgotten by the media, are demoralized. They did not benefit from the economic boom, but are paying the price of its failure. Corporate money is hijacking politics, aided by the Supreme Court and the GOP. Resentment grows. While America wallows in the Bush-Cheney Era of reactionary politics, the prospects for progressive change may well slip away.

One of the earliest revivals of the Tea Party involved 100 people meeting in Seattle to protest the stimulus bill passed by Congress to keep the U.S. from descending into another Great Depression. After bloggers and libertarians spread a call for protest on the Internet, the media blew it into a major event.

Right-wing groups poured funding into the nascent movement. These groups included: Americans for Prosperity, a pro-tobacco, anti-healthcare and anti-tax lobbying organization; and FreedomWorks, a lobbying firm devoted to opposing taxes, immigration, healthcare reform and solutions to global warming. Koch Industries, an oil, mineral, ranching and securities conglomerate, funds both of these groups, while the Sarah Mellon Scaife foundation, with interests in oil, industry and banking, funds FreedomWorks.

After Fox News began promoting the Tea Party as a social movement, their crowds grew. Fox News entertainer, Glenn Beck, invited viewers to “celebrate with Fox News,” by attending tax protests in Washington on April 15, the date federal tax returns are due.

A mere 3,000 Tea Party supporters attended the rally and grabbed the headlines. More people rallied across the country in support of Single Payer Healthcare Reform but they received few headlines. After much smaller groups of Tea Partiers protested in several cities, right-wing entertainers such as Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly giddily talked about “a growing movement” for weeks. Soon Republicans Sarah Palin, Dick Armey, Ron Paul, Grover Norquist and Newt Gingrich jumped on board, hoping to revive their failed political careers.

Seldom has so much been made about so little. Supporters claimed the Tea Party was “a nonpartisan grassroots movement,” but the reality is far different. Not only was the idea supported by right-wing money and promoted by the right-wing propaganda mill, Fox News, but it also garnered no new support. When asked, 18 percent of Americans replied that they identified with the Tea Party. Only 20 percent of those sent money, or about four percent of the public, while 78 percent have done nothing in support.

Essentially, the Tea Party is a new face of the same old right-wing, reactionary forces that have long been working to turn America into a more religious, racist and militaristic country with an unregulated free enterprise system, weak government and low taxation.

Analysts predicted midterm elections would reveal grass-roots support for the Tea Party, but only a handful of candidates they supported won, while two-thirds of registered voters stayed home. However, a poor showing at the polls by this vocal minority doesn’t mean all is well in the U.S.

According to a comprehensive New York Times/CBS News poll, the majority of Tea Party supporters describe themselves as being “very conservative” and more conservative than most Republicans on social issues. They almost always vote Republican and 60 percent favor George W. Bush Jr., compared to 40 percent of the general public. A majority are men who claim the government favors the poor and twice as many as the general public feel Black people get “too much attention.” Almost 50 percent heard about the Tea Party on TV, 80 percent are white, and 60 percent are older than 50. Ninety percent are pessimistic about the direction of the country, disapprove of Obama, and believe America is becoming socialistic. Seventy-five percent want to have smaller government.

Many Tea Partiers live on Social Security, benefit from Medicare, and are frightened. Although they reported their personal financial situation as “fairly good” or “very good,” 55 percent of those who identify with the Tea Party fear someone in their household will lose their job in the coming year. Two-thirds say the recession caused them economic hardship and forced them to make life changes. In summary, it’s fair to characterize the Tea Partiers as fearful old, white, right-wing Republican men.

Progressive forces are organizing to promote social change in the interests of working people, minorities, gays and lesbians, young people, and immigrants, but they confront unified opposition groups with lots of money behind them. These moneyed interests, in addition to the conservatives of the Baby Boomers generation, are currently holding off real change. Coupled with GOP obstructionism in Congress, America is deadlocked. What catastrophe will come to break the deadlock is anyone’s guess.

That’s the learned conclusion of two economic experts who debated paths to recovery at the 2010 Panetta Institute Lecture Series in Monterey in March 2010.

Harvey Pitt, former Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman, and Robert Reich, former Secretary of Labor, find troubling signs in the economy, including high unemployment, risky long-term debt, frozen credit markets, overvalued bank assets, and a failed regulatory system.

Neither addressed why they call the economic downturn a “recession,” when it’s a depression that Sylvia Panetta said could “end up rivaling the Great Depression.”

In the past, both men supported the reconfiguration of the American economy through cheap credit, monopoly control of markets, rising concentrations of political power, the dominance of banks in the economy, and shipping American’s jobs overseas. By the end of their discussion, it became evident that both men continue to support the boom and bust cycles of neo-liberal capitalism. They would like to reduce the risk to the overall economy but not restrict growth.

Nevertheless, their sobering assessments find long-term problems and a fractious political system that makes any positive Congressional solutions almost impossible. Beneath the surface ran very different assumptions about the development of the economy.

A Bush appointee, Harvey Pitt pushed deregulation, whitewashed the SEC investigation of Cheney’s Halliburton illegalities, and refused to release the SEC report on Bush’s insider trading scheme. He recently founded the Kalorama Partners, which advises corporations on avoiding problems with regulators, and was forced to resign as SEC chairman due to his cozy ties to the Big Five Accounting firms during the Enron scandal. One Congressman described the SEC under Pitt as “a total shambles,” and the GAO found Pitt’s leadership dysfunctional and chaotic. Yet, now he’s a recognized expert on the economy.

During the debate Pitt said, “the regulatory system totally failed,” even though the New York Times reported him “watering down corporate governance reforms mandated by Congress” when he headed the SEC. Pitt criticized the stimulus package for giving money to companies “whose conduct created the problem in the first place.” We could have “gotten more bang for the buck” by putting money into the hands of voters.

Reich agreed with Pitt, although he quickly pointed out that no one fully grasped the problem at the time or “knew how bad things would get.” The $800 billion stimulus “was not large enough,” and although it preserved two million jobs, Reich would like to have seen more of it invested in infrastructure instead of shoring up failed banks.

The men reserved a great amount of criticism for Capital Hill gridlock, although their views of the causes were at odds. “I’ve been in Washington 42 years, and in my view it’s the worst it’s been,” said Pitt. He mused that a Democratic majority was “a prescription for disaster,” because they could pass “pet projects” with no need to compromise.

Reich pointed out that bipartisanship “changed dramatically with Newt Gingrich” in 1994, which led to “incredible polarization.” Obama’s tendency to compromise cannot overcome Republicans hostility. By compromising on healthcare, and environmental and regulatory reform, Obama is losing his followers and undermining his electoral mandate.

Reich asserted that Obama should keep his campaign promises and push through his agenda. Without reform, healthcare costs are “on the way to 20 percent of GDP,” which will “eat up the economy.” The financial sector is becoming “so complicated, no one understands it,” and the anti-government, anti-spending public won’t allow us to spend our way out of the recession.

Both men decried political animosity and gridlock, with Pitt reminiscing about the days after 9/11 when everyone pulled together. Reich asserted that the middle class cannot pull together because they are demoralized by the wage stagnation of the past 30 years. Meanwhile, the 400 wealthiest households increased their income 31 percent in 2007. “How can people pull together when the rich are taking the lion’s share?” Reich asked.

In 2001, the wealthy averaged $131 million per household, but by 2007, they increased their incomes to $345 million per household. Thanks to the Bush tax cuts, they paid 17 percent in taxes, less than many middle class families pay. “It cannot work if the middle class isn’t sharing in the wealth,” said Reich.

Like an out-of-touch grandfather, Pitt claimed such talk leads to “class warfare” and suggested that “everyone must pull together.” He wants leadership that “gets people working together toward common goals” and warns against oversimplifying issues.

The back-and-forth exemplified larger issues in the on-going economic debate. Unfortunately, the exchange didn’t provide any new light on the subject. Much more interesting is the radical restructuring of the economy that is going on behind the scenes. Reich pointed out that people who lost their jobs were pushed into lower-paying jobs and that full employment is years away. Meanwhile, the banks are getting richer, the gap between rich and poor is widening, corporations are consolidating power, and property is being redistributed upward. After Bush’s mismanagement, the economy may never recover its health from before the downturn.

“It’s the only thing we could all agree on,” said Senator Barf McConnell, GOP minority leader. “All candidates will have to adhere to NO! before they receive party support, and we will continue looking for new things to disapprove of.”

Emerging after a secret meeting in Confusion, Wyoming, party luminaries such as Glenn Dreck, Sarah Failin, Dick Army, Mick Steal, Betty Boop and Nuke Grinrich thanked local residents of the least populous state in the union for guaranteeing their isolation from ideas, while they met to hammer out differences.

The group rejected mottos including “Railin’ with Failin,” “Ignorance is Bliss,” and “Make No Appointments-Have No Disappointments,” to settle on a simple NO! as the best way to represent the party in the upcoming elections.

“Party unity is the best we can do,” said Bobby Tightwad, a GOP leader from Utah. “By saying NO! we escape the corrupting, humanistic influences of Western Civilization to forge a new path.”

The new motto reflects the party platform: Republicans reject the stimulus fund, healthcare reform, bank regulation, gun laws, water conservation, abortion, affirmative action, amnesty for immigrants, gay marriage, global warming, drugs, masturbation, government debt, fuel economy, picking your nose in public, pay-as-you-go, and taxes on the rich.

A proposal to require Republican candidates to agree with all 17 NO! positions in the platform and add three more of their own choosing before being endorsed by the national party was narrowly defeated.

“There are only so many ways to say NO! and we wanted to cover them all,” said McConnell. “If we can’t deliver for our favorite lobbyists, we risk becoming totally irrelevant.”

A number of dignitaries made appearances during the meeting, including Benito Mussolini’s granddaughter, Alessandra Mussolini, who told the group, “It’s better to be a fascist than a faggot.” She also suggested the GOP get more money from people like Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, the richest man in Italy, to sway votes.

Republican hopeful Curly Fiorina, who is spending $878 million of her own money to buy a senatorial seat in California, bragged that she’s only voted six times in her entire life, including two votes in kindergarten. “NO! is the most important qualification for office this year and I whole-heartedly support it,” Fiorina said.

Disgusted with the GOP because they didn’t choose her Fox News Tea Cozy Principles, Grimy Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, said she plans to enroll in The Duplicity Christian Academy in Los Asses, Texas. “I’m a great soul, who never got around to politics because I had to keep my husband awake,” said Thomas. “Now I’m fresh to lead a citizen’s revolt and take our country back to 1638.”

Glenn Dreck admitted that he considered leaving the party after his “English Only” motto was rejected. He may join Rush Limburger when he moves to Costa Rica to collect socialized medical benefits, or he may start his own group, “Jesus Love Me-Not You.”

“If English was good enough for Jesus, it’s good enough for America,” said Dreck. “Only English speaking Republicans can join, as if there are any other kind.”

Nuke Grinrich is considering starting his own football team to fight godless atheists and secular humanists headon. “It’s another head-pounding-in-the-toilet day for me and I’m feeling nasty,” said Grinrich. “I can’t even find any liberals to yell at in Wyoming, so I have to yell at a herd of cows.”

Other mottos vied for a place in the new GOP lexicon. Tim Potty-Matter of Fox News Addicts Anonymous suggested, “Ignore It and It Will Go Away.” Ron Paul and Hick Hackberry joined Potty-Matter in putting forth the theme, “Protect Delusion,” a central tenet of the popular flat-earth movement that opposes teaching about evolution and global warming. “We’re a party of big ideas, as long as we agree with ‘em,” said Hackberry.

Mitt Romney, former governor of Massachusetts, said he embraces the new motto and suggested Fox News embrace it as their own. “The GOP needs a policy similar to those of credit card companies: We reserve the right to change the rules at anytime,” said Romney. “That’s why I should be the next president.”

At the end of the meeting, Sarah Failin unveiled a plan to take her new group, The Saran Wrap Girls, on the road to sing gospel songs in Texas, Arkansas and Alabama. “We will incopulate the new motto in all our songs,” said Failin. “We’ll be singing old favorites mostly; “It’s No Secret What the GOP Can Do,” “The Wonderful Grace of Republican Tax Cuts,” and “The GOP Reigns.”

“We’re here to stay,” Failin said. “You can’t boil us like frog legs.”

Far from protecting individual liberty or promoting free enterprise, these forces uphold monopoly control of health care insurance that has a stranglehold on American consumers. And they pay huge sums to control the debate and twist legislation to their advantage.

Since 1998, over 400 mergers left two conglomerates in control of the huge health care insurance industry. Mergers allowed insurers to raise prices, buy influence in Congress, and redistribute cost savings to shareholders. Consolidation increased rapidly. Between 2004 and 2005, 28 health care mergers, valued at $53 billion, outpaced the number of health care mergers in the previous eight years combined.

Low interest rates, leverage and lax anti-trust enforcement by the Bush Administration allowed conglomerates to take control of the health insurance in the U.S. A 2009 report from Fortune Magazine reveals that the revenue of the top two companies account for $142 billion or 36 percent of the health care insurance market, while the top four gross $202 billion, almost three quarters of all health insurance.

“During the Bush administration, there were no enforcement actions against health insurers’ anticompetitive, deceptive or fraudulent conduct,” David Balto, senior fellow, Center for American Progress, told the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation in July 2009. “There was tremendous consolidation in the market, and the Justice Department simply required minor restructuring of two mergers. There were no cases against anticompetitive conduct by health insurers.”

Health insurance monopolies do business under pseudonyms to hide their identities and project a false impression of competition in the industry. The largest, UnitedHealth Group, reported $81 billion in revenue in 2008 and sold products under such names as OptumHealth, Ovations and AmeriChoice. WellPoint, the second largest, has revenues of $61 billion and insures 35 million people under Unicare and Blue Cross/Blue Shield. Concentration is even greater on a state-by-state basis.

A 2006 study by the AMA found that health insurance is “highly concentrated” in 94 percent of the states, and in a majority of the nation’s largest metropolitan areas a single insurer controlled more than half the business. A 2007 study by Health Care for America Now found that in 38 states, the top two insurers control 57 percent or more of the market, and in 15 states one insurer controlled 60 percent or more of the market.

Facing the monopoly power of UnitedHealth Group and Wellpoint, smaller firms cannot compete: Aetna ranks third with $31 billion in revenue, and Humana is fourth with $29 billion. Of the 14 health care insurers, the smallest eight have yearly revenue of less than $12 billion.

Such concentration stands in stark contrast to a “free enterprise” system where companies compete to lower costs and provide consumer choices. Instead, monopoly control raises prices unilaterally and controls every aspect of clients’ health care. No wonder insurance premiums increased an average of 87 percent in the past six years, according to FamiliesUSA.

Economists point out that most wage increases went to pay for health insurance from 2000 to 2009. For example: In New York, the cost of health insurance increased 93 percent, while wages increased 14 percent; in California, health insurance increased 109 percent, while wages increased 26 percent; and in Texas, health insurance rose 80 percent, while wages rose 11 percent. Insurers also have “monopsony” power to dictate prices and coverage terms to hospitals and doctors, with profits redistributed to shareholders. Profits increased apace.

According to SEC filings, the major health insurers increased their profits over 400 percent from 2000 to 2008. Overall, profits rose from $2.4 billion in 2000 to $13 billion in 2007. CEOs were paid accordingly; their pay reaching 468 times that of the average American worker, with money left over to lobby against reforms.

According to the National Institute on Money in State Politics, the health care industry paid almost $400 million to politicians in state governments in the past six years. The Center for Responsible Politics discovered the industry spent over $1 billion in the past two years to oppose real reform. As the debate progressed, important consumer protection provisions were whittled away.

“Although the overwhelming majority of the American people support it, there’s no public option, no end of the anti-trust exemption for the health insurance industry, no option for people over 55 to buy into Medicare, no ability of the government to negotiate drug prices or import cheaper drugs from Canada, and no real regulation of health insurance premiums,” said Zack Kaldveer, spokesman for the Consumer Federation of California. “Yet, Congress is mandating everyone to purchase an overpriced product from a corrupt system. If premiums continue to rise, we’ll be stuck wasting money on an unsustainable health care system.”

The insurance monopoly is pouring millions of dollars into creating misleading catchwords, carefully chosen to guide our opinions. Reforms are needed to protect consumers from a vast monopoly, slowly draining our paychecks into for-profit conglomerates. Without strict controls over these monopolies, we will be stuck with the same old predatory system.

Asserting that doctors drink more than other professionals, Dr. Doug “XO” Henley, CEO of AMA, said doctors know more about health than most people do because they have a degree in medicine. “We are doing our bit for healthcare reform,” said Henley. “Drinking advice is too important to leave to untrained amateurs.”

“Bottoms Up!” is the motto of the joint-advertising venture, scheduled to kick off in high schools and colleges around the country during the spring. Leading experts say the campaign will help build arm muscles and tone bodies that do little more than click iPhone messages.

“Young adults are the only binge drinkers left in a country of old fogies,” said Sara Failin, former Alaska governor, recently hired to lead the campaign. “Young people and the GOP stand against all government regulation, so this campaign fits my bid for president reliantly. Youth wants choice so, ‘Give it to’m! Yubelchachacha!”

The announcement follows a controversial $1 billion alliance between Coca-Cola and the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) to triple sales and promote Coke as a healthy alternative to water. Coke hopes to increase daily average consumption of its beverages from 2 to 10 gallons a day within the year. Toward this goal, the Family Physicians website is promoting a dozen new brands from Coca-Cola.

On the website, easy-to-read tables compare the nutritional value of water with Coke brands such as Bacardi mixers, Joy Juice, Drunkn’Eat, Vomit, and Flush. Although a number of doctors resigned from the AAFP over the contract with Coke, AMA members will split $200 billion among themselves to head off internal criticism.

Leading liquor producers contributed funds to form the partnership, which experts claim is a bargain, considering the liquor producer’s anticipated increase in sales. The AMA also expects an increase in business from the side effects when they release a number of new recommended diets, including a new “all liquid” diet, consisting of nothing but Coke products. The move is considered “a God-send” by business forces that watched consumer spending nosedive in every category except the smartphone.

“This is a win-win for everyone,” said former vice-president Dick Cheney, the newly-hired president of Eat, Drink and Forget about Global Warming, a new Washington lobbying firm. “The American people can afford to charge the expensive new varieties of Coke to their credit cards under our new improved capitalist system.”

Cheney’s firm is working to deregulate drinking and driving, encourage the use of concealed weapons in bars and on highways, and overturn any “repressive laws” on liquor, such as anti-drinking laws while duck hunting. The Texas state legislature has already passed a law requiring that customers in bars, churches, schools and government offices be armed at all times. “I always carry a double gauge shotgun in case anyone mouths the least disrespect,” said Cheney.

Cheney is also organizing a series of liquor-sponsored music and shooting events, planned for spring break in the central downtowns of the nation’s largest cities. Shooting ranges will be constructed, police placed on furlough and medical fees tripled during what Cheney describes as “the GOP’s answer to the recession.”

Cheney, Failin, Condi Rice and a dozen unemployable Bush White House lawyers are developing a Drinking Olympics, which will include chugalug contests, guess what you just drank raffles, target practice with images of Democrats, and innovative sports for college dropouts who cannot afford tuition.

“Do not forget the weapons of mass destruction,” said Cheney. “So what if we couldn’t find’em in Iraq. It only proves they are still hidden. If I could turn loose a million drunken Texas Republicans in the U.S., we’d find those weapons.”

The Obama Administration is taking advantage of the opportunity in several ways. Every soldier on active duty at 489 military bases around the world, as well as 25,000 secret bases constructed during the Bush Administration, will be given a special four-gallon-a-day ration for Coke and spirits. Secondly, with unemployment rising and college enrollment down to keep taxes low, recruiters expect to enroll millions of young men and women during the “Bottoms Up!” rallies.

According to medical experts, this is only the beginning of AMA sponsorships. Consumers can look forward to new health initiatives from McFluffy Burgers, the Cocaine Operators of Columbia, the Afghanistan Smack Dealers Association and cigarette companies, all interested in increasing their revenue with new healthcare initiatives across the U.S.

According to a recent report by the Marin Institute, a California-based alcohol industry watchdog, a rush of buyouts and mergers in the last years of the Bush Administration has left two overseas giants in control of 80 percent of American beer consumption.

“How beer is marketed and sold in this country will never be the same,” said Charisse Lebron, corporate responsibility & advocacy manager at the Marin Institute. “Anheuser-Busch InBev and MillerCoors, controlled by parent companies SABMiller and Molson Coors Brewing Company, are all that really matter in the U.S.”

America is the world’s most profitable beer market, yet the U.S. has lost what was once a competitive industry. As recently as 2004, ten companies fought over world consumption; today Belgium-based InBev (Anheuser-Busch InBev) controls 25 percent of the world’s beer market. SABMiller, the second largest brewer with 15 percent of the market, is a London-based conglomerate that formed when South African Breweries acquired U.S.-owned Miller in 2002.

From 1947 to 1995, the number of large brewers in the U.S. fell 90 percent. As recently as 2003, American-owned Anheuser-Busch was the world’s largest beer company, with 12 breweries in the U.S. and 15 overseas, producing the world’s most popular beers: Bud Light and Budweiser. In 2004, the world’s third and fifth largest brewers, Belgian Interbrew and Brazilian AmBev, merged to create the world’s largest beer producer, AmBev.

In the buyout frenzy of 2008, AmBev bought Anheuser-Busch for $52 billion to become InBev and control the popular beers: Budweiser, Michelob, Stella Artois and Bass. Yearly sales for InBev topped $40 billion in 2008, surpassing SABMiller-Miller Lite, Miller Draft, Henry Weinhard’s-with $21 billion in revenue.

Today InBev is a behemoth with 151 beverage plants and 120,000 employees worldwide. The new company sells four of the top ten beers in the world, produces the first or second most popular beers in over 20 markets and ships beer to over a hundred countries.

In 2007, to better compete with InBev, SABMiller announced a joint venture with Molson Coors, the world’s fifth largest beer producer. Headquartered in Chicago, the newly formed MillerCoors is controlled by its parent companies, London-based SABMiller and Canada-Colorado-based Molson Coors, which reported gross profits of 70 percent in March 2009. SABMiller corporate leadership forms half of MillerCoors’ board and receives 58 percent of the profits.

Although microbreweries are growing in popularity-there were 1,300 in 2006-they represent a mere ten percent of total beer sales. There’s no way they can compete with the giants, who dominate the market.

Approved in record times by President Bush’s Federal Trade Commission, these beer mergers have a number of drawbacks. Charisse Lebron, author of the Beer Duopoly Report, predicts that American shareholders will have difficulty attending annual meetings overseas. Less shareholder involvement could lead to lower environmental and labor standards, while InBev and MillerCoors replace local beer distributorships with direct distribution from the brewery. The current three-tier system of alcohol sales and distribution was established 75 years ago to prevent aggressive sales tactics and give states oversight of alcohol.

“We advocate for the distributors because they are community based, have been around a long time, and are attuned and accountable to consumers and regulators,” Lebron said.

An even more troubling problem arises over taxes, especially with government facing reduced tax revenues. Federal alcohol excise taxes haven’t been raised since 1991 and, adjusted for inflation, have lost 40 percent of their value. State taxes are similar: Wisconsin hasn’t raised its alcohol tax to keep up with inflation since 1969 and has lost 83 percent of its value. Maryland’s alcohol excise tax was set in 1972 at 9 cents a gallon, but would be 38 cents a gallon if it were adjusted for inflation.

“Increasing taxes is the number one most effective way to reduce underage drinking and overall harm,” said Lebron. “The beer companies know that and are fighting it, despite the fact that alcohol harm in California alone amounts to $38 billion a year. In the U.S., it’s over $200 billion a year. Industries that cause harm, such as alcohol and tobacco, should be financially responsible for some portion of that harm.”

The beer duopoly is spending large amounts to prevent tax increases. The Marin Institute estimates that in 2009 alone the beer lobby defeated bills to raise alcohol taxes in 14 states that cost taxpayers $2.6 billion in revenue. If alcohol taxes were adjusted for inflation nationwide, it would add $6 billion to tax coffers. Beer producers spend lavishly to defeat tax bills: On the national level, InBev spent over $1.5 million in 2008. Additionally, InBev, MillerCoors, and its parent companies, spent almost $6 million lobbying state and local governments. They threaten state legislatures with closed breweries and lost jobs if taxes rise.

Americans are discovering that companies that once served their interest now determine their lives. Although some continue to support unregulated “free enterprise,” others find that powerful monopolies now determine government policy. It’s time to limit political contributions and control lobbying.

Will the once high-flying American wealth machine continue to produce the vast inequalities of the past?

Only two years ago, Steve Forbes, CEO of Forbes magazine, declared 2007 “the richest year ever in human history.” During eight years of the Bush Administration, the 400 richest Americans, who now own more than the bottom 150 million Americans, increased their net worth by $700 billion. In 2005, the top one percent claimed 22 percent of the national income, while the top ten percent took half of the total income, the largest share since 1928.

In June 2009, the Merrill Lynch Global Wealth Report estimated the number of the world’s wealthiest people declined by 15 percent, the steepest decline in the report’s 13-year history. The number of millionaires in the U.S. fell by 19 percent to 2.5 million people.

Analysts tell us the economy is being restructured, but how will the disparities in wealth between the rich and the poor play out?

“The source of wealth has changed over the past thirty years; corporations have become the engine of inequality in the U.S.,” says Sam Pizzigati, associate fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington D.C. “In the past, wealth came from ownership: Today it comes increasingly from income.”

The highest incomes come from executive pay at top corporations. In 2007, the ratio of CEO pay to the average paycheck was 344 to one, lower than the record 525 to one ratio set in 2001, but substantial. This year’s ratio is estimated to decrease to 317 to one. In the 60s, 70s and 80s, the average ratio fluctuated between 30 and 40 to 1.

Over 40 percent of GNP comes from Fortune 500 companies. According to the World Institute for Development Economics Research, the 500 largest conglomerates in the U.S. “control over two-thirds of the business resources, employ two-thirds of the industrial workers, account for 60 percent of the sales, and collect over 70 percent of the profits.”

Corporations systematically created a wealth gap over the last 30 years. In 1955, IRS records indicated the 400 richest people in the country were worth an average $12.6 million, adjusted for inflation. In 2006, the 400 richest increased their average to $263 million, representing an epochal shift of wealth upward in the U.S.

In 1955, the richest tier paid an average 51.2 percent of their income in taxes under a progressive federal income tax that included loopholes. By 2006, the richest paid only 17.2 percent of their income in taxes. In 1955, the proportion of federal income from corporate taxes was 33 percent; by 2003, it decreased to 7.4 percent. Today, the top taxpayers pay the same percentage of their incomes in taxes as those making $50,000 to $75,000, although they doubled their share of total U.S. income.

“Over the past 30 years, the income of the top one percent, adjusted for inflation, doubled: the top one-tenth of one percent tripled, and the one-one-hundredth quadrupled,” says Pizzigati. “Meanwhile, the average income of the bottom 90 percent has gone down slightly. This is a stunning transformation.”

Meanwhile, wages for most Americans didn’t improve from 1979 to 1998, and the median male wage in 2000 was below the 1979 level, despite productivity increases of 44.5 percent. Between 2002 and 2004, inflation-adjusted median household income declined $1669 a year. To make up for lost income, credit card debt soared 315 percent between 1989 and 2006, representing 138 percent of disposable income in 2007.

According to Pizzigati, the wealth disparity is the result of corporations squeezing more profits from workers.

“In the past corporations laid off workers because business was bad,” Pizzigati says. “But over the past few decades, downsizing has been a corporate wealth generating strategy. Today, CEOs don’t spend their time making trying to make better products: they maneuver to take over other companies, steal their customers and fire their workers.”

Progressive taxation used to prevent the rich from capturing a disproportionate share of national compensation, and the labor movement, which represented 35 percent of private sector employees and today represents 8 percent, once served as a political force to limit excessive executive pay. The Reagan backlash cut the top income tax rates, and saw the creation of right-wing think tanks that spent $30 billion over the past 30 years, propagandizing for deregulation, privatization, and wealth worship.

Bubble economies over the past 30 years helped CEOs pump up their income, and efforts to corral their pay are weak and ineffective. CEO pay may fall during these economic hard times, but disparity isn’t going away. Without a strong movement for change, the wealth gap will only increase in this downturn.

“There won’t be a restructuring of the economy unless we take on executive compensation,” concludes Pizzigati. “Outrageously large rewards give executives an incentive to behave outrageously. If we allow these incentives to continue, we will just see more of the reckless behavior that has driven the global economy into the ditch.”

The fear is so great that state authorities estimate that last month 120,000 Arkansas churchgoers purchased handguns, rifles, automatic rifles and even used Soviet tanks and an aircraft carrier to protect themselves from crazed worshipers, who take the Bible injunction, “an eye for an eye,” literally. The FBI expects shootings in churches to rise 800 percent this year as unemployed executives fight for control of church coffers.

Currently Arkansas only excludes concealed weapons from churches and bars. Common wisdom in the state is: “Beware a man who owns one gun-he probably knows how to use it.” The average man in Arkansas owns 35 guns, a requirement of citizenship.

The National Center for Disease Control estimates that 30,000 deaths a year result from disputes over religious superiority. Under former President George Bush, Justice Department officials estimated that allowing concealed weapons in bars under a new Drunks Can’t Shoot Straight program, could cut yearly deaths from firearms in half.

Urged on by the Southern Baptist Church, Witness for the Dead Christ, the NRA and a plethora of Pentecostal denominations, voters flooded the state capital in Little Rock with petitions to allow concealed weapons during worship services. A political battle ensued-many legislators carry concealed weapons during debates in the state legislature, but no gunfire erupted during the session-and the Senate rejected imposing state authority over churches.

“Let’em make up their own minds if’en they want to carry guns in church,” said Robert E. Lee XIV, director of the Concealed Big Bore Association. Lee pointed out that 42 states in the U.S. allow churches to decide whether worshipers should carry firearms. “Churches don’t no longer cotton to none a them idears of layin’ down with no lambs,” Lee said. “Today we’re all preachin’ musclear Christianity. Member the Crusades!”

After defeating the bill by asserting freedom of churches to decide whether to arm worshipers, the National Rifle Association pledged support for church members who feel naked in church without their handguns. The NRA’s “Never Enough Guns” program, in conjunction with the Charlton Heston Dead White Guys Rule Foundation, provided free gift certificates for “a gun of your choice” to “white males over the age of 50.”

“People like them big guns and thar takin’em off the shelves fastern I can put’em up,” said Joe Joe Wiggins, owner of Joe’s Pool Hall, Beer Joint, Dance Hall and Used Gun Emporium in Mayhem, Arkansas. “They’re coming from all around here. We even fixed up the basement to look like a church so they can get’em some target practice.”

While there are almost no restrictions on firearms in Arkansas, ex-Nazis, skinheads, KKK-members and other Aryans with arrest records will receive “get out of jail free” cards provided by the NRA and the Pacific Foundation for Legal Fabrication. “We are honored that Mr. Heston can still fight for our freedom from the grave,” said Ray Gun Young, president.

The opposition defeated the measure because Southerners traditionally object to government forcing moral decisions on religious institutions. “Sometimes shootin’ someone is okay accordin’ to the church,” said Billy Wing Wright III, president of Southerners for the Old Rugged Cross.” The state cannot take away church control.”

Nevertheless, security remains an issue. Some churches are resorting to placing machine guns in strategic locations in case church members become unruly during services.

“A lot of them teenagers ain’t recognizin’ the authority of their church elders no more,” said Reverend Yahoo Johnny Johnson, minister of McDonald’s Airport Salvation Church in Halfwitt, Arkansas. “Why my flock is supportin’ the deacons, vice ministers and other faithful carrin’ guns to keep’em in line.”

To help roll back the sexual revolution of the 1970s, the Bush administration spent over $1 billion on abstinence-only programs. Thousands of sermons, workshops and other propaganda reinforced the message. Under the pithy slogan ABC (Abstain, Be faithful, use Condoms), ultra-conservative religious groups, such as Focus on the Family, American Family Association and Concerned Women for America, promote marriage as a solution to everything from suicide to poverty and self-worth issues.

“How could an aggressive minority successfully push the most grotesque message of abstinence, and why are 95 percent of Americans who claim to have had premarital sex unable to admit it publicly?” asks Dagmar Herzog, a professor of history at the City University of New York.

She became interested in the topic from her studies in European history that revealed: Far from discouraging sex, the Nazis promoted it among both married and unmarried Aryans. At the same time, they targeted Jews, who supposedly engaged in “dirty sex,” and “immoral” supporters of the Weimar Republic, and enlisted German Protestants and Catholics to clean up the “sex mess.”

“The conservative evangelical sexual politics of the 1990s and early 21st century are totally new,” Herzog says. “Premarital sex was perfectly normal in the South when I grew up. The churches weren’t hung up on sex back then so I knew that this new sexual repression was recent.”

In Sex in Crisis: The New Sexual Revolution and the Future of American Politics (Basic Books), Herzog shows how the origins of today’s anti-tax, anti-government movement began during the Civil Rights era when the government revoked the tax-exempt status of the religious-oriented Bob Jones University that first denied admission to African Americans and then banned interracial dating. The “cultural war” strategy also coincided with the AIDs epidemic and gays and lesbians coming out of the closet.

Far from being anti-sexual, today’s evangelicals push “a hyper-sexualized” message, complete with Christian pornography and bragging about having great sex. Evangelical sex advice books emphasize the dangers of sex outside marriage, but revel in titillating sexual details. Even if they aren’t interested, Christian wives are told to be “available” to their husbands at all times, especially for “quickies.”

“Although the evangelical movement is contradictory and hypocritical, it’s important to understand that it’s pro-sex,” says Herzog. “The evangelicals promise physiological orgasms, called ‘soulgasms’, which combine psychological orgasms, a close emotional connection with the spouse, and the blessing presence of God in the bedroom. At the same time, they’re homophobic and hostile to all sex outside marriage.”

To develop a strategy to focus on state and local legislation that would target homosexuals and gay rights, leaders of Focus on the Family, the Eagle Forum, Traditional Values Coalition, the National Legal Foundation and other Christian political groups met in Colorado in 1994. Most importantly, they decided to shift their tactics away from strictly religious messages to adopt the secular language of fermenting fear and disgust of disease. Subsequently, religious conservatives turned their attention to pushing abstinence. Their message would adapt to the new age and human potential movements with talk of self-help, individual empowerment, self-improvement and personal perfection.

Playing on increased primal sexual anxieties that include confusion about the relationship between sex and love, and doubts about one’s own attractiveness to one’s partner, doubts that increased with exposure to Internet porn and Viagra, evangelicals promoted a relentless no-sex-outside-marriage program.

In 2006, the Department of Health and Human Services issued sex-education guidelines that mandate teaching about “the potential psychological side effects” of sex, such as drinking, disease, depression and suicide. Money for abstinence education discouraged sex among unmarried Americans between the ages of 19 and 29.

This assault on sexuality doesn’t work. According to surveys conducted by evangelicals, 95 percent of adults admit to having premarital sex. Half of all Christian men claim to be addicted to Internet porn, along with 20 percent of Christian women. Adolescents who take the abstinence pledge wait 18 months longer to have sex, but girls are much more likely to become pregnant when they do have sex.

In contrast, Europe teens are taught that sex is natural, healthy and pleasurable. They get free contraceptives, medical care and counseling. Despite what Americans would call a permissive society, some would say sinful, American teenage girls are three times more likely to get pregnant than those in Sweden and four times more likely than those in Germany. American teens are 70 times more likely to get gonorrhea than those in France or the Netherlands.

Presenting premarital sex as “risky behavior” hides an intrusive and insidious attack on sexuality. Far healthier would be to recognize human autonomy and self-determination of sexual expression. America needs comprehensive sex education, contraceptive distribution and counseling to overcome the destructive social and personal effects of sexually repressive religious morality.

“Reproductive rights and sexual self-determination are human rights,” Herzog says. “We need to affirm humans’ rights to sexual expression, sexual pleasure, and the freely chosen formation of intimate relationships.”

This abstract ideology is having a practical impact across California and the nation. In the face of a budget crisis, Governor Schwarzenegger ordered massive layoffs and unpaid furloughs of state workers. Over 238,000 employees are being forced to take off two unpaid days a month, beginning in February. Over 10,000 were fired this year and thousands more could lose their jobs.

The city of Watsonville closed its offices until January 5 in an effort to save $561,000. Many city services, such as the public library, will simply lock their doors, while so-called essential services-police, water and garbage-will continue to operate.

California suspended $4 billion in highway, school and other infrastructure construction projects. Nationwide over 5,000 transportation projects are being put on hold. These cuts only worsen national and state unemployment. California’s joblessness jumped to 8.2 percent, the third highest in the U.S., and reached 9.5 percent in L.A., threatening a long and deep recession.

The California Republican minority adamantly opposes raising taxes to provide state services and urges deep cuts in education and social programs, such as mental health and children’s funds. They advocated cutting legislative pay 5 percent but welfare payments 10 percent. GOP minority leader Mike Villines of Clovis, denounced efforts to begin what he calls “an illegal tax increase package that is a blatant attempt to silence California voters.”

Such thinking is typical. A recent letter to the New York Times calls government schools, roads, hospitals, research, loans and housing “excesses.” The writer denounces, “a gigantic, bloated government,” and calls for a return to “America’s founding principles: individual rights, property rights and the pursuit of happiness, with government only in the form of military, police and courts.”
The GOP’s 2008 Platform declares, “government should tax only to raise money for its essential functions” and not “as a tool for social engineering.” Their goals include making permanent Bush’s tax cuts for the rich, passed in 2001 and 2003, and ending federal income taxes. Social services and charities are left to “the vital role of religious organizations,” which are also chartered to promote “patriotism.”

Facing the worst financial crisis-which many economists blame on the Bush Administration-since the Great Depression, Congress and the incoming president are calling for a massive financial stimulus. Even Bush demanded the hasty signing of a $700 billion bailout for over-leveraged banks. The basic problem of balancing budgets stretches across 44 states and the federal government and, while presidents and their parties are not always in agreement, GOP party stalwarts appear to be on a path to destroy all government.

Eliminating social services for the most needy and monies for California schools, which already rank near the bottom nationally for funding per pupil, is not only shortsighted, it’s cruel and inhumane. Elected in reaction to high budgets of the Davis Administration, Schwarzenegger failed to control the GOP legislature and primarily cut funding to balance the budget.

This scenario is playing out across the country, although Republicans, stymied in cutting necessary social services, are inventing a new way to finance government–selling off or leasing state assets. Across the country, states are selling or leasing the public domain so politically friendly private businesses can profit. Minnesota is contemplating selling the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport and the state lottery, to bring in $3 billion. Massachusetts may put the Massachusetts Turnpike up for sale, and New York is considering putting the Tappan Zee Bridge, the lottery, toll roads, and public golf courses, parks and beaches up for sale.

Where will this trend end? Indiana leased its toll road to an Australian-Spanish partnership for 75 years. Chicago wants to lease the Midway Airport and the Chicago Skyway toll road, parking ramps and parking meters to private business. Pennsylvania leased its turnpike and Texas is proposing a private toll road system. Water, sewers, libraries, schools, unused properties and other public assets are also being considered for privatization. By selling off or leasing assets, states will allow private companies to cut employees, raise prices and increase profits, providing the states with one-time revenue while raising the costs for citizens.

Similar to the bank bailout plan, privatizing public property socializes risk and privatizes profit. Decisions about expansion, hours of operation, staffing and maintenance will be left to for-profit businesses–the very opposite of publicly owned, controlled and operated facilities. Business argues that they can operate more efficiently but anyone who subscribes to cable TV knows the power of a business monopoly.

The only way to stop the destruction of government appears to be to defeat Republicans who march in lockstep as solidly as the Nazi or Communist parties in America’s former enemy states. The old mantra of “no taxes, small government” is frayed, out-of-date and cavalier when applied to public services. This is a time to rededicate America’s future to cooperation, problem solving and controlling private greed for the benefit of the public.