Tag Archive for 'paul-broun'

Counting It Down! GriftDrift on the Election!

Once again James Williams (GriftDrift) and I, engage in vain musings about the ups and downs of politics, national and state. If our predictions turn out to be correct, America will be as surprised as we are! But there is hope, hope this will all be over in 12 days.

Summarizing an interview with James is like walking through a chicken coop, there is just too much stuff out there to see it all. Thus, I suggest you listen to this one, if you really want to get the flavor of James’ keen insight into all things political. Me? I am just there for the ride, mostly.

We do cover the implosion of the McCain/Palin campaign, if it can still be called a campaign. It’s just too bad that somewhere between this year and last year, McCain lost his mind. The interview with Brian Williams ought to be interesting.

And then there is the Georgia political scene with hints of a massive voter turnout. Everyone reports that early voting lines are heavy and seem to favor the Democrats. Obama has a chance to carry Georgia, but McCain still leads in the polls. The question is how accurate are the polls this year? It may all depend on voter turnout and the under 30 voters. At least Georgia is not a “red” state. On most maps we are now pink, which doesn’t exactly please any of us.

James thinks Jim Martin has a slightly better chance to beat Saxby Chambliss than Obama has to carry the state. James commented on Martin’s aggressive campaigning this time around, something that he has not been know for. According to Pollster.com, it is dead even. It is just too close to call.

And then there are 3 Congressional races: Jim Marshall (D), the incumbent, went out on a limb when he voted for the baleout. His opponent, Rick Goddard (R), made it a big issue in their debate. James attributes Marshall’s vote on the baleout as a vote of consceince, something he thought was best for the country even though he might suffer for it in the election. I regret that I was not able to get interviews with either Marshall or Goddard.

In the 10th we have Republican incumbent Paul Broun, whom James believes will win against his Democratic challenger, Bobby Saxon. I interviewed both Broun and Saxon. Broun is a sound bite Republican, who does not, in my opinion, understand the function of government.

James did not have much to say about the 12th Congressional District. He believes that John Barrow, the Democratic incumbent (who voted against the baleout), will prevail over challenger John Stone in a “not as close as last time” race.

There is plenty more in the interview, but in an effort to get this posted timely, I will just have to let you listen for yourself.

 
 James Williams, GriftDrift Blogger [30:47m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (68)

Paul Broun, Congressman, GA 10th

I always enjoy interviewing politicians, particularly when the are campaigning. This interview with Congressman Paul Broun (GA 10th) was recorded early in the week of the Republican National Convention, before Sarah Palin was announced as McCain’s choice for VP. Too bad! I wish I could have asked about that one.

Paul was gracious, but I am not sure I was. I don’t know what it is, an allergy maybe. Maybe, it is the fact that before he ran for Congress, Paul was a lobbyist for Sarfari Club International. My fear is, once a lobbyist, always a lobbyist. Sorry Paul, but I think lobbyists are the worst thing we ever invented in this country, at least the ones that shovel money to politicians.

Things started off cordially, and then Paul said those magic words: original intent. Damn, how I hate it when someone who isn’t a lawyer and who hasn’t studied government says they believe the Constitution should be interpreted according to its original intent. I even hate it when a lawyer, a Supreme Court Justice even, says it. It is so much BS. I don’t think George Washington had any idea how government should deal with 90% of the challenges we face today, except that I know he wouldn’t approve of the secrecy that the Bush administration prizes so highly.

And then, when original intent is followed by other sound bites like: leave money in people’s pocket, relieve the regulartory burden on business, get government out of people’s lives, etc., and I am close to a stroke. Okay everyone, government is cancelled, now go get on a plane that the FAA doesn’t inspect and quit griping about all the plane crashes.

Paul says we are spending our grandchildren’s future, as if it isn’t the Republicans, his party, that is doing the spending. The truth is that all of our budget problems in this country are the result of spending the Social Security Trust Fund money for non-social security purposes and the cost of Medicare. But, you can rest assured that neither Paul, nor any Republican, nor any Democrat have enough original intent to fix Social Security and Medicare.

Paul and the Republicans say they want to put money back into the hands of the people, but they won’t put money into the hands of the people by raising the minimum wage and make the corporations, who make millions from the sweat of the working man, pay for it. They just want to cut taxes and run up the deficit. I don’t get it Paul. I just damn don’t get it.

Paul attempted to give me a history lesson in what the Constitution meant, you know, way back then in 1789 when the Federalist Papers were written. He has read them and even keeps a copy on his desk in Washington. I dare anyone to read them and find an answer to any problem we face today. Just ain’t there. In fact, if I remember correctly, those Federalist wanted a strong central government, which seems to be exactly the opposite of what Paul and the Republicans want. They want no government telling them what to do.

Paul wants to restrict the federal government to the 18 things he says the Constitution allows the federal government to do. I wish we could, but it was the Republican, Teddy Roosevelt, who decided in the early 1900’s that big business would kill you if the government didn’t carry a big stick when it came to monopolies and unions. The Republicans today love to mention Teddy, but he wouldn’t recognize them. Actually, I am pretty sure he would be ashamed of the whole lot of them. TR was the original regulator of business because he recognized that the federal government was the only thing big enough to counter the power of the robber barons like the Fords, Vanderbilts, Morgans, DuPonts and a host of others. Yes sir, Teddy was a real Republican who tamed the big corporations rather than living off them.

I always ask free market, small government people like Paul, if they think we need the Food and Drug Administration. A lot of them, including Paul, feel compelled to condemn any regulartory agency of the federal government, including the FDA. He doesn’t think we need the FDA because the 50 states are quite capable of regulating the same food and drugs, should they choose to do so. I wish that were true Paul, but we both know the states won’t do it. Further, if you know anything about economics, you know that if 50 states passed 50 different standards for the quality of milk, the milk companies would be talking about the expense of complying with 50 different laws, rather than one. That is precisely why we have one federal government. One nation, one law! Now that’s patriotism!

Paul thinks the American consumer would be just as safe if the drug companies could make any drug they want and sell it to the rest of us without having to prove to anyone that it is a safe drug. Paul thinks corporate America will make sure it doesn’t sell us bad drugs, just like they won’t import cheap toys from China with lead in them that will kill our children. I am sorry Paul, but what world are you living in?

This position, this blind faith in the market, is such a naive position, it is difficult to even listen to it. Paul repeatedly says he is in favor of accountability, but he doesn’t want the federal government to be the one that makes corporations accountable. He would be fine with the states doing exactly the same thiings that the federal government does. He just doesn’t want the federal government to do them because the Federalist Papers told him so. I need a page reference!

Now ask yourself, what sense does it make to say it is okay for the states to regulate business, but not okay for the federal government to do it? I will tell you why Republicans love this idea. Paul can claim ignorance, but I bet he knows it as well. Republicans know that if the responsibility to protect us from corporate misconduct is left up to the states, they won’t do much, if anything, at least not until it gets so bad the people just won’t stand for it. Corporations are bigger than states. They have more money than states. They tell states what to do, not the other way around. Take away federal regulation and corporations would run rampant, they would have a field day with all sorts of mischief. But that is exactly what Paul wants.

I recommend to Paul (and anyone else that is interested) that you put down the Federalist Papers for a while and read “Doubt is Their Product” by David Michaels. It will literally make you sick to read how corporate America fights tooth and nail to keep OSHA, EPA, FDA and other regulatory agencies from protecting us, particularly the American worker.

I am sorry Paul. I am no socialist. I am a vigorous capitalist, but I am also a realist. No doubt there are bad regulations, and there are inefficient government agencies, but the remedy is to fix the problem, not come up with some BS idea that we don’t need government to protect us from business excess.

At the end of the day, Paul and I agreed to disagree. We did agree that the public discourse was something worthwhile. However, I still think his position is nuts.

Sorry Paul, but I sincerely do! I am sure he thinks the same of my position. Fair enough, but the real question is: What do you think?

 
 Paul Broun, Congressman, GA 10th [30:43m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (205)

Interview with James Williams, GriftDrift Blogger

James kicks back in Moultre, Georgia and tells us about the Supreme Court argument last Friday in the Genarlow Wilson case, together with a history of the case and the issue which faces the Supreme Court. He also tells us about the incongruity in the position of the legislators who overwhelmingly thought the law the gave Wilson 10 years in prison ought to be changed, but who won’t do anything to save Wilson from the effects of the previous law.

And where would any discussion be without some talk about Dr. Paul Broun’s surprise victory in the 10th District Congressional race, which James says will be the topic of study and analysis for several years. After all, don’t mess with Athens!

Stir it up with commentary about the YouTube debate and presidential candidates and you have all the opinions you need to get through this week.

 
 James Williams, GriftDrift [28:55m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (367)