Reality Bites

"Reality has a well-known liberal bias." Stephen Colbert

2006 White House Correspondents' Association Dinner

While the quote above is from the fictional character that writer and comedian Stephen Colbert plays on TV, it still has a ring of real truth to it.

With less than two weeks remaining until the 2010 midterm elections, money from anonymous sources continues to flow into the campaign coffers of candidates all over the country. While there is some flowing into war chests of both major parties, the overwhelming dollar amounts are flowing into Republican hands.

Like other observers of politics, we're not naive enough to think that those shadowy donors will remain anonymous after the elections. They'll expect political favors, as any donor always does. For example, the millions of individual donors to the Democratic Party and Mr. Obama didn't just cough up their hard-earned money two years ago because they didn't know what to do with the few dollars they had left when the Bush economic programs tanked.

For those Republicans who are certain that their side will at least win a majority in the House of Representatives, we think they're in for a rude awakening over the next two years if they expect the kind of change they propose.

If we simply look at the basic outline of the 2011 Federal budget, as syndicated columnist Eugene Robinson points out, where exactly do the supposed paragons of economic virtue in the Republican party plan on cutting?

Mandatory items - items that it would take a two-thirds majority of both houses of Congress and the President to override - comprise two-thirds of the budget. So there won't be any cutting going on there. What's left are a long list of supposedly discretionary items - like food inspection and air traffic control - as well as items that the Republican Party leadership has already put "off-limits" from potential cuts, including military spending and homeland security.

As we've said before, anyone who posesses basic math skills is aware that if no serious cuts are allowed, the government will have to find additional revenue - which means raising taxes, even to a small degree, if the budget is to look like Republican and Tea Party candidates claim they want it to be.

The invisible donors of millions won't be the only ones looking to string up Republican lawmakers if the GOP wins a Congressional majority. Those on the far right who claim to want the health care insurance reform law killed will also be livid in two years if their unrealistic demands aren't met - which they won't be. Some Congressional Republicans have already admitted that repeal of the health care insurance reform law won't happen, no matter who wins.

We wish all of our potential legislators good luck in achieving any goals that will move this country forward. But we'd be remiss if we didn't remind them: if you insist on pouring blood in the water, don't be surprised if you get bit when you swim with the sharks.

The Dangers Of Fanaticism

We are two weeks from the midterm election today, an election that may have far more importance in the future than we know at this present time.

As we hope you've gleaned from our other writings, no one on the Daily Felltoon staff believes that government is worthless or should be destroyed, unlike many in the Tea Party and on the extreme right. Nor do we think government should do everything for everyone. There is a balance, a place in the middle where people of different sides can agree on many things. If nothing else, we can usually agree to disagree.

Than again, none of us are fanatics.

While there are no fanatical candidates with any serious chance of winning in any geographical areas near us, there are plenty of fanatical candidates running this year in races throughout the country. What concerns us most is about these candidates is that they don't seem to know what the laws they'll be working with actually say - and they don't seem to care.

As syndicated columnist Frank Rich pointed out earlier this week, the media continues focusing on the insanity of Christine "I'm not a witch" O'Donnell, or the bigoted Carl Paladino who uses violence as a threat, or even the Ayn Rand acolyte, Rand "Aqua Buddha" Paul. Yet there are other candidates who truly represent a clear and present danger to the ability of our government to govern going forward.

Take Alaska GOP Senate candidate, Joe Miller.

Over the weekend, after a debate held on public property, at a public school in Alaska, a reporter for an online news outlet followed Mr. Miller. The reporter was still in the public school, on public property, and well within his rights. The reporter did what reporters do - intensely continue questioning the subject, until the subject gets away. Mr. Miller's private security guards had other ideas, however - and they handcuffed the reporter, claiming they had the right to arrest him. Further, as other reporters began covering the detainment of the first reporter, candidate Miller's guards began getting needlessly physical with other reporters.

Leaving aside the appalling hubris and disregard of the law required for a private security firm to claim it has the powers of the police, ignoring for a moment the illegal detention and assault of private citizens - reporters or not - there is a reason that freedom of the press - the media, these days - is one of the items explicitly enshrined in our First Amendment.

When you go to the voting booth in two weeks - or if you're filling your ballot out right after you hop offline - some of the key items American citizens need to know are who the candidates really are, what their opinions are on important issues, and what their character tells us about how they might vote on future issues.

As we've said repeatedly, while we hope everyone votes, we also hope that everyone is well educated on all issues and well informed on all candidates appearing on their ballot. The only way a person becomes that way is through the effort of hard working journalists and members of the media.

Any candidate for public office who thinks that attacking the media is an acceptable campaign tactic has a lot more to learn about the United States.

Starting with the First Amendment.

Just Plain Clarity In DC

It should be no surprise to anyone who has ever written a paper for a professor or is involved in the media, that writing well is NOT an easy skill to master. Every member of our staff has been writing for many years now, as part of their professional obligations, and the commentary you're reading now still goes through multiple edits every day.

When our legislators craft laws, they're often acutely aware of all the less-than-ethical lawyers and lobbyists who will be looking to weasel their way through loopholes in any law that's passed. Unfortunately, that means lengthy and highly specific wording is a requirement in most government documents.

Still, only an extremely tiny fraction of the documents issued by the U.S. federal government are written laws. As of last week, President Obama signed a bill into law simplifying the rest of them.

H.R. 946 - The Plain Writing Act of 2010 - wasn't a sexy law and despite this hyper-partisan atmosphere before the midterm election, was an incredibly bipartisan bill. Sponsored by Democratic Representative Bruce Braley of Iowa, the bill practically flew through Congress, even though thirty-three House Republicans voted against it.

It's not as though this is a new idea. Members of both parties have been attempting to get something like this bill passed in one form or another since the 1950s. Yet it took until this past week to accomplish yet another law that many others in Washington, DC have tried and failed to get passed. We're certain this won't be the end of the effort to simplify government documents - and it certainly won't be a law that lawyers looking for loopholes will shy away from.

Nonetheless, we think this is yet another example of the kinds of positive change that can happen in government when members of all political parties work together.

It's simple.
Really.