OUR NATIONAL SHAME VIOLENCE AGAINST CHILDREN

Why is the problem of violence against children so much more acute in the US than anywhere else in the industrialized world, asks Michael Petit, President of Every Child Matters.

Over the past 10 years, more than 20,000 American children are believed to have been killed in their own homes by family members. That is nearly four times the number of US soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.


The child maltreatment death rate in the US is triple Canada's and 11 times that of Italy. Millions of children are reported as abused and neglected every year. Why is that?

Downward spiral


Part of the answer is that teen pregnancy, high-school dropout, violent crime, imprisonment, and poverty - factors associated with abuse and neglect - are generally much higher in the US.


Further, other rich nations have social policies that provide child care, universal health insurance, pre-school, parental leave and visiting nurses to virtually all in need.

In the US, when children are born into young families not prepared to receive them, local social safety nets may be frayed, or non-existent. As a result, they are unable to compensate for the household stress the child must endure.

In the most severe situations, there is a predictable downward spiral and a child dies. Some 75% of these children are under four, while nearly half are under one.
Geography matters a lot in determining child well-being. Take the examples of Texas and Vermont.
Texas prides itself in being a low tax, low service state. Its per capita income places it in the middle of the states, while its total tax burden - its willingness to tax itself - is near the bottom.
Vermont, in contrast, is at the other extreme. It is a high-tax, high-service state.
Mix of risks
In looking at key indicators of well-being, children from Texas are twice as likely to drop out of high school as children from Vermont. They are four times more likely to be uninsured, four times more likely to be incarcerated, and nearly twice as likely to die from abuse and neglect.

Texas spending

• $6.25 billion (£4.01bn) spent in 2007 on direct and indirect costs dealing with after-effects of child abuse and neglect
• $0.05 billion (£0.03bn) budgeted in 2011 for prevention and early intervention

Source: Univ of Houston, TexProtects

In Texas, a combination of elements add to the mix of risks that a child faces. These include a higher poverty rate in Texas, higher proportions of minority children, lower levels of educational attainment, and a political culture which holds a narrower view of the role of government in addressing social issues.

Texas, like many other traditionally conservative states, is likely to have a weaker response to families that need help in the first place, and be less efficient in protecting children after abuse occurs.
The sharp differences between the states raises the question of an expanded federal role.
Are children Texas children first? Or are they first American children with equal opportunity and protection?
Blame parents?

A national strategy, led by our national government, needs to be developed and implemented. For a start, the Congress should adopt legislation that would create a National Commission to End Child Abuse and Neglect Fatalities.

And no children's programs should be on the chopping block, federal or state. Children did not crash the US economy. It is both shortsighted economic policy and morally wrong to make them pay the price for fixing it.

But instead as the US economy lags, child poverty soars, and states cut billions in children's services, we are further straining America's already weak safety net.

Inevitably, it means more children will die. The easy answer is to blame parents and already burdened child protection workers. But easy answers don't solve complex problems.
And with millions of children injured and thousands killed, this problem is large indeed, and it deserves a large response.

So if I understand the GOP rhetoric protecting the unborn is a priority. No exceptions. But their concern stops at the delivery room door? There are kids suffering beatings and starvation and worse. Where is the concern for them? Who will protect them? Unborn need society's protection, but the living children don't? I JUST DON'T GET IT.


























.

Eric Cantor Screws The Jobless And Remains The Worst Congressman In America

There are times when decorum and goodwill in politics become so onerous that even the most sedate observer must say enough and address outrageous behavior with candor and conviction. For the past nine months, Republicans have deliberately opposed any measures that create jobs or help America’s struggling economy despite their promise to make job creation their highest priority. The Republicans’ Draconian spending cuts would have cost millions of jobs, and the deficit reduction frenzy did nothing to help the economy and in fact, was responsible for S&P’s decision to downgrade America’s stellar credit rating because Republicans refused to take a balanced approach of spending cuts with revenue increases. Throughout the 112^th Congress, Republicans have portrayed President Obama as an ineffective leader who is responsible for the nation’s debt as well as the sluggish economy and high unemployment numbers.

The president has attempted to work with Republicans to help the economy and it has not paid off except for securing a 13 month unemployment benefit extension and an increase in the nation’s debt ceiling. Republicans have obstructed the president and Democrats’ attempts at creating jobs 15 times because they want more Americans destitute and are hopeful that their policies will increase the number of Americans living in poverty. So far, they have been very successful at keeping the economy stagnate and millions of Americans jobless and instead of feeling shame, they are rejoicing over the horrible conditions they have caused. It does not matter which Republican in Congress one examines, they are all vile human beings who are fortunate millions of Americans don’t converge on their offices to physically throw them out on the street where they belong.

John Boehner and Mitch McConnell are liars of the first order and master obstructionists, but it is Eric Cantor who may be the worst congressman in America. Cantor has shown his abject contempt for the American people every time he opens his mouth; he is undoubtedly a master fellatrix. Cantor is a callous piece of garbage who demanded that any disaster relief for victims of tornados, flooding, and hurricanes be offset by spending cuts to programs that help the poor and elderly. His heartlessness at denying disaster relief even touched his constituents and it is curious why the vile little maggot did not face a recall election. Now he says Republicans are not going to vote on the president’s jobs bill because the GOP representatives have their own plan that features deregulation as its main job-creating policy.

During a meeting with reporters on Monday, when Cantor was asked if the President’s jobs bill was dead, he answered yes, and then he said, “It would be a lot more helpful for the president to focus on areas of commonality rather than targeting House Republicans through campaign-style tactics and perhaps he can start compromising with us.” What? Perhaps President Obama can start compromising with you? The president has compromised with Republicans at every turn and the lying dog Cantor knows it. For Republicans, compromise means President Obama must obey the worthless Republicans, and suggesting the president start compromising is the most ire-inspiring statement Cantor has made. He was either pandering to the Republican faithful who are too cognitively challenged to look back at the past two-and-a-half years to analyze for themselves whether or not President Obama compromised with Republicans in Congress, or he is so used to lying for the sake of lying that he thought it would be clever to assail the President for not compromising.

When the President first announced his plan to jumpstart the economy and create jobs, Cantor said “Anything that is akin to the stimulus bill is not going to be acceptable to the American people.” According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the first stimulus created 3.3 million jobs and business owners said it was the biggest boost to their businesses they have seen in many years. Cantor does not speak for the American people, and millions of unemployed Americans would most likely dispute Cantor’s assertion that Americans prefer to stay unemployed rather than accept a good-paying job building roads, bridges, schools, and hospitals the President’s jobs bill will produce. Cantor is just a vile little piece of work and there is other way to frame it. He touts Republican’s jobs plans that includes more tax breaks for the job-killing rich people as well as environmental deregulation to help the oil industry.

There are no Republicans worthy of representing the American people because they are vile human beings, but Cantor is the worst. He is a liar, a contemptible manipulator, and the king of all fellators in America. Sure, McConnell, Boehner, and the rest of the Libertarians posing as Republicans are worthless maggots, but Cantor is a perpetual piece of garbage. He could have spouted his deregulation and tax break memes all day long, and it would have been just Cantor being Cantor, but when the Gumby-looking, excrement-eating liar said President Obama should compromise with Republicans, he went too far and has inspired disgust, rage, and an honest appraisal that finds Eric Cantor is the worst congressional representative in America, and to top it off, he hates the American people.

When there is a choice to be part of the solution of a problem does he ever ask him self why he turns a blind eye to doing good rather than his normal mean self? Why does he want America to fail? I JUST DON'T GET IT.

Why the Kochs Want to Make Chris Christie President

Neither Romney nor Perry has done the one thing that truly excites the Koch brothers and their fellow deep-pocketed Christie fans: take on the public sector unions in a big way. 

 

Photo Credit: AFP

 

When Texas Gov. Rick Perry, currently the frontrunner in the Republican presidential nomination contest, and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie made a pilgrimage in June to a Colorado gathering of wealthy right-wing donors convened by billionaires Charles and David Koch, one man clearly impressed the brothers much more than the other.

 

Introducing Christie, who delivered the keynote address to the Koch Industries gathering, David Koch gushed. "With his enormous success in reforming New Jersey, some day we might see him on a larger stage where, God knows, he is desperately needed," said Koch, according to secretly recorded audio files of the event obtained by Brad Friedman of the Brad Blog.

Yet Christie, foe of teachers and their unions, had made it plain months before in no uncertain terms: he was not running for president. "[S]hort of suicide, I don't really know what I'd have to do to convince you people that I'm not running," Christie told a group of reporters in February. "I'm not running."

His protestations aside, a new push for a Christie candidacy by a handful of high-flying Republican political donors -- including Koch, the moneybags behind the Tea Party aligned group, Americans for Prosperity, and countless other right-wing organizations and efforts -- has the political world aflutter at the prospect of the pugilistic former prosecutor on the debate stand. Republican luminaries including Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol have suggested Christie enter the presidential contest, and even Karl Rove has publicly mused on that possibility. Further stoking the speculation, Christie last night delivered at the Reagan Library a speech that sounded for all of the world like the rationale for a Christie presidential candidacy.

Recent stumbles by Texas Gov. Rick Perry on the presidential campaign trail have widened the opening for a late entrant into the race for the GOP presidential nomination, a course that former vice presidential candidate and former Alaska governor, Sarah Palin, is said to be considering. But the money and momentum for an October surprise candidacy these days is on Christie.

Uniting a small group of big-money donors, dubbed the "Draft Christie Committee" by New York Times reporter Nicholas Confessore, are two things: a hatred for labor unions and a desire for a Republican win in November 2012, something they seem unconvinced that either Perry or former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney can deliver.


There's little doubt that Christie is reconsidering his earlier decision to stay out of the presidential race. "It's real," former N.J. Gov. Thomas Kean told Robert Costa of the National Review Online. "He's giving it a lot of thought. I think the odds are a lot better now than they were a couple weeks ago." Kean, says Costa, is an "informal adviser" of Christie's. Yesterday, Christie hit the stump on behalf of Republican candidates -- something he does in addition to traveling to California to deliver what was billed as major speech in Simi Valley last night.

When, during the question-and-answer session that followed the speech, an audience member asked Christie if he was running for the Republican presidential nomination, the governor first chided the audience for not getting to the subject until the second question, but refused to say he wasn't running. Instead, he referred his audience to the Politico Web site, where the front page featured a video that strings together clips of his many past denials. (The text under the video reads: "New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has made it clear he won't run in 2012 — a decision he might be reconsidering.")

So my question is this. When did we become a country where two privileged brothers determine who sits in the White House? Is this what the founding fathers hand in mind? I think not.

It is obvious the train is off the track with no one thus far able to stop it.  I JUST DON'T GET IT... 

 

 

 

 

 

HOUSES ON SESAME STREET ARE FOR SALE!

He’s Coming For Our Kids! Glenn Beck And His New Children’s Show ‘Liberty Treehouse’

Gather up your kids, wrap their heads in tin foil, activate any and all parental control blocking devices and maybe they’ll be safe from Glenn Beck’s new children’s program “Liberty Treehouse.” Starting this Monday at 4 p.m. on Glenn Beck’s pay-for-view network, GBTV, Liberty Treehouse will begin indoctrinating a new generation of Tea Party tykes during an hour long program targeting the 10 to 14 year olds in your home. Raj Nair will be hosting the “news” presumably Beck-style, which means a dab of entertainment, a little bit of preaching and a whole lot of conservative crazy talk with absolutely no factual evidence to support it. While Beck, himself, is not on the show, (at least for now but there maybe a chalkboard in his future plans), Liberty Treehouse leads into his 5 o’clock time slot. GBTV’s head of programming, Joel Cheatwood, thinks it may be a good thing if the kids stay on the couch, joined by their parents, and continue to watch Beck as their program ends. Regular contributors are expected to deliver information on science and history but given Beck’s fact-revulsion to both, it seems unlikely that these segments will survive beyond the initial weeks of programming unless they adapt. Undoubtedly, the show will entertain liberal adults for the usual reasons but given Beck’s mainstay beliefs that “progressivism” is the cancer eroding away the Constitution, it is unlikely that liberal parents will want their children to have anything to do with this program.


So, if you found Scooby Doo too frightening, were a bit concerned about Mr. Rogers, his sweater and what he was actually up to, have been ticked off that Hannah Montana/Miley Cyrus grew up and became a bit slutty— Never fear, Glenn Beck is here!

It would be sad if he were an average  disillusioned man. However, his paranoia is viewed as normal by his followers that will allow, no demand, their kids watch propaganda labeled as news..

Somebody other than a mouth breather help me out here...I JUST DON'T GET IT 

Republicans Use Herman Cain To Hide Their Racism

Sarah Palin calls him “Herb Cain, the Flavor of the Week.” Other people know him as the pizza man or the winner of the Florida Republican Straw Poll. No matter what you call him, Herman Cain has made a name for himself. What is particularly interesting with Cain, is that so many bigwigs in the Republican party have thrown money at him when he is unelectable in the party. Herman Cain isn’t unelectable because of his hatred for Muslims and homosexuals, or even his disastrous economic plan knows as “9-9-9.” Herman Cain is unelectable in the Republican primary because of the one reason that shouldn’t matter at all, the color of skin.

The truth of the matter is that the Republican Party has a large base that is still prejudice. The deep seeded hatred not only lies within the conservative south, but across the country toward African-Americans and minorities. It doesn’t only hid in the shadows. It is still clear as day. So the question must be asked, why would the Republican hierarchy pour so much money into a candidate that they know wouldn’t get enough support from such a big part of their base? The answer is simple, illusion. Anytime a Republican politician makes a racist statement, the defenders on Fox News, across the radio air waves or on the internet, cry reverse racism and come to the defense of the bigoted statement made by their ignorant party member. The Republican party uses Herman Cain to hide their parties love of pre-civil rights America. They simply use Cain for show. Cain makes outrageous statements that appeal to some in the Tea Party and comes out with plans and policies that only the radical right could embrace. Herman Cain is there for one reason and one reason only, to attempt to fool independent Americans that maybe the Republican party isn’t so racist after all.

Herman Cain recently said that African-Americans have been brainwashed into voting for Democrats and that if he ran for President that he would get at least half of their votes. What is interesting about that comment is that it’s far from the truth and Cain knows that. African-American voters have voted in majority for Democrats because the Democrats have been the party that has fought for their best interests for the last 50 years while the Republican party wants to do nothing but cut programs that are essential in many African-American communities. The GOP hold on to being the “Party of Lincoln” but those days are long gone, and the parties have flipped on many issues. Herman Cain is not qualified to be President of the United States, and the color of his skin has zero to do with that assessment. What is sad is that either Herman Cain knows the truth or he is the one being brainwashed.

It is sad that a person could want something so badly, like becoming President of the United States, that being used to a different end by those who would never support him , is unseen by the dreamer. I know why I don't get his ignorance but why doesn't he get it? Mr. Cain, you are a pawn in this GOP controlled game.