Modern Whig Party of Maryland

Paging Congressman Hoyer...

2009-09-02T01:08:00.004-04:00

I might as well yield to the inevitable, and write a post on health care. It's not that I shy away from discussing controversial topics, it's simply that I like to discuss more either on foreign affairs, or on Maryland state affairs (but of course the General Assembly is not now in session). But every self-respecting political blog needs at some point to discuss the health care issue. It's just inevitable that it will since not only are so many people are talking about it, but that everybody needs it.

Yes, everybody needs health care. With the population of the United States aging (in other words, the population growth rate is shrinking, we will eventually have the same problem with ours that caused the near collapse of the Japanese economy--too many old people and not enough young people born at the previously regular rate) more and more people need more and more expensive forms of health care. I work at a retirement community and I see it all the time: as you age, you need these more expensive forms of health care because your immune system's strength and its ability to fight off diseases decreases, the risk of cancer is higher and surgeries get more complex and well, expensive again.

Clearly, doing nothing, or leaving the problem entirely in the hands of unrestricted, unregulated private industry is suicide, as the GOP seems to want to do. But on the other hand, having a single-pay, Euro-Anglo-Canadian nationalized system is the wrong way to go as well (this is why we need a moderate movement in the United States, the "solutions" both parties come up with is always extremist in the worst). You think that the British system is great, just because everybody is covered? there's a tradeoff: what good is "being covered" if you automatically disqualify for a kidney transplant at age 45 in the UK? Some of my father's friends live in Michigan, right across the US/Canada border. Canadians hop over the border all the time make use of American doctors (many belong to US insurance companies like Blue Cross-Blue Shield) because they are covered so well by the Canadian national health care system. Sometime when you are really bored and have a hankering for C-SPAN, turn on Prime Minister's Questions on certain nights of the week (see the C-SPAN schedule at www.cspan.org to find out when it's on) to listen to Gordon Brown answering questions to members of the British House of Commons. Half the time, they're bitching about some health care issue or other, or lack of funding for the system, or basically how lousy it is in general. Just like the Democrats, the Labour Party talks about how their health care system is some sort of miracle of the modern world where everyone's covered and no one dies of cancer. It seems that Her Majesty's Government draws many similarities in attitude--and success at its own initiatives--as its American counterpart.

Recently, Steny Hoyer, the Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives and a congressman from this state (thanks to gerrymandering, he's been in office 29 years--see my May post on "The Redistricting Scam" for more info on this diabolical crime against the People), held a town hall meeting in Waldorf, MD on the health care issue. According to the Baltimore Sun, he hailed the meeting as "a wonderful celebration of democracy." Of course, he didn't say that after the meeting by which time it had turned tumultuously against him and his party's health care policy, mind you. One surgeon from Edgewater asked him if there would be malpractice caps, to which he said he certainly expected the issue to be considered (a political way of saying it might be gotten around to, if there's time). Under Democratic Party health plans, he said "you keep what works and fix what doesn't." Well, not quite, Congressman. You lied when you said "Democrats want a more efficient Medicare with stronger benefits." The Democratic Congress has CUT the budget for Medicare Advantage, something that one in five Medicare patients make use of. Does he think we're stupid?

It's interesting (and refreshing as well) to see that the Baltimore Sun is not always necessarily the mouthpiece of the Democratic Party, if one of its recent articles is any indication (though maybe I'm wrong!) The journalists of the Sun might have backed Barack Obama during the election, but they're certainly giving it second thoughts, now. According to the Sun, by the way, the crowd was three times larger than the one that booed Senator Ben Cardin. Seems like most Americans are not buying the Democratic Party's "myth busting".

So what to do?

Has anyone not considered one option that I might proffer, for the government to pay private insurers to insure the uninsured and those who do not qualify for Medicare and Medicaid? Then Congress could pass legislation to make private insurers "play fair" with patients. Possibly even eliminate crippling deductibles and the standard "we'll pay 85% of your $100,000 operation, despite the money you already fork out every month" that insurance companies have. Paying 85% of an expensive operation is bullshit: it most likely means that the patient won't be able to fork out the remainder and actually get the operation done (and possibly die as a result). Clearly, doing nothing is just as expensive and hazardous to your health as doing what the Democratic members of Congress want. Even if the "death panels" are indeed a myth, as key Democrats so readily insist, Americans these days do not want the government controlling the bottled oxygen they may one day breathe, figuratively speaking. Back in 1994, when the Congressional debate over the Clinton health care scheme was raging, it was due in part to a large lobbying effort from American insurance companies that helped to kill it (and of course, it's noteworthy that a Democratic Congress killed a Democratic president's health care plan, not merely a bipartisan struggle). It's not crooked lobbying that's got Americans PO'd; not this time!

This time, it's a grassroots movements of Americans who are standing up and saying they will not go gently into that night, and will not stand for the government dictating the very air they breathe. There IS a third way out there, but the sad thing is that few congressmen from either party have the balls to examine it, nor the will to do so, since our country suffers from another medical disease, political-bipolar disorder. Maybe the government should pay for ITS own prozac to cure it, not ours. I wouldn't trust them to give me an aspirin for a mild headache.

Good night,

Colin Bisasky
maryland@modernwhig.org

I'm So Ronery

2009-08-05T08:33:00.002-04:00

So, I understand that Bill Clinton has negotiated to secure the release of American journalists who would have otherwise scored a 12 year hard labor sentence in a North Korean jail, after "making an appeal" to North Korean Chairman Kim Jong Il.

Boy would I have loved to have been a fly on the wall for that conversation.

'nuff said.

More to come, later.

Website www.mdwhig.org, and other issues

2009-07-28T02:16:00.004-04:00

Dear Friends,

The website at www.mdwhig.org has been discontinued. We originally were using a program called "campaignsitebuilder.com" to create web pages for the Modern Whig Party but were disappointed with their look/feel/abilities, so a template is being designed for the state chairs to use. I will try to have the new site up as soon as possible, and using the same domain name as the previous site, if possible. In the mean time, this blog will have to suffice...and I promise I will try to keep up more with events and so forth on this blog until such time as we have a more professional website up for the State of Maryland.

A lot has been going on lately in our nation's capital. A health care bill is in the works, which Obama said he wants on his desk by August 1. Um, excuse me? Did you just TELL Congress how fast to work? Oh boy you really must not have been in Washington very long, Mr Obama! "I want it on my desk" indeed. What are you, a schoolmaster demanding a high school freshman hand in his term paper on time? Is that what you really think of Congress? Someone PLEASE give this man a copy of the Constitution and ask him to read it. There's something in there about separation of powers and limited presidential authority. He must've skipped over that one. And PS, you'll not get anything on your desk from Congress within a time frame presidents prefer. That's the nature of Congress. If the presidential seal shows a bald eagle, the seal for the Congress ought to show a gigantic snail. That's about how fast it works. In short, Mr President, you'll be lucky if you get it by NEXT August 1!

Health care is indeed a hot topic. We at the Whig Party believe it is fundamentally wrong to leave people out in the cold without health care and die as a result. On the other hand, we do NOT believe in having a single-pay system like Canada or the UK. If you think it's paradise in the Great Frozen North Kingdom; you're wrong. There are Canadians who belong to American insurance companies. They come right over the border and get quality health care when their government decides that they, a possible cancer patient, can wait six months for an MRI or CAT scan, or 12 months for a heart transplant. In the UK, you automatically disqualify for a kidney transplant if you're over 45 years of age. No kidding. there needs to be a middle of the road solution, one which would partially use the free market and maybe even co opt insurance companies to cover the uninsured. Then, for those still insured under insurance companies, Congress can pass legislation to make them "play fair" with their customers.

We in the Whig Party do not believe, like some Republicans, that doing nothing is the best (or only) option. If the Republicans don't want to electorally shoot themselves in the ass, they can contribute a solution now, or in 2010 (if they win congressional elections by then, and by recent polls, there's a slight chance they just might pull it off then or in 2012) by which time the health care problem can be solved on more conservative terms. But don't worry, they won't do it. And the Democrats will make a mass populist appeal (ie, shameless vote-grabbing) by dangling carrots in front of the electorate's eyes and we'll end up with a single pay system that helps nobody. Nice job, guys. That's what happens when you have a polarized system: you must choose between one extreme or another. And the people in the middle (who I firmly believe are actually the majority these days) will lose the most.

It seems that the protests in Iran are getting nowhere, just as I predicted. Probably a good thing Obama decided not to intervene, it would've just made things worse and drummed up support for Iran among the Arab states, which the Arab League wouldn't particularly like (hey, wanna screw Iran? lay off--don't engage Iran like Obama nor taunt it like W--and let the Arab League plant the seeds of Iran's destruction...there's been bad blood between Persians and Arabs for centuries and it's no different in the 21st century) especially considering it destabilizes the rule of jackasses like Hosni Mubarak and the Saudi Crown (not necessarily a bad thing but trust me, you don't want a revolution in the Magic Kingdom...not yet at any rate). Let the Arabs deal with the Persians, just like it's been done for centuries. The amazing thing, was that Saudi Arabia and Iran were BOTH on the US side in the Cold War for decades...they hate each other. Why do you think Iran is not a member of the Arab League? Just ignore Iran and let the Arabs screw them over. Worried about Iran getting the bomb? I wouldn't. The Israelis will take care of it; much in the same way they took care of Iraq's bomb program in 1985...by blowing it off the map with a few F-15's and a couple of smart bombs. Obama's previous policy of engaging in talks with Iran is just stupid, though I do agree with his not interfering with the election revolts, for which the GOP criticizes him.

Yet another reason for needing energy independence...

I also would like to apologize for being so sparse in my posts. In the future, I will try to make one per week at LEAST.

Warmest regards,

Colin Bisasky, state chairman

Reset your time stamps...

2009-06-22T16:23:00.000-04:00

The Iranian secret police are looking for people using Twitter and blogs that have the GMT+3:30 time stamp....so set your blogs and Twitter to Tehran time, and confuse these thugs even more! It'll make it that much harder for them to hunt down and destroy innocent people trying to make a difference. I realize I said Obama shouldn't interfere, but here's a harmless way to do it, as someone suggested to me. Certainly a lot less harmful than direct intervention, and if enough people do it, it might help protect the people in Iran whose only "crime" is wanting a better life.

---Colin

Protests in Iran

2009-06-22T10:03:00.001-04:00

Dear Friends,

I thought that I ought to write a post on the current situation in the Islamic Republic of Iran.

As you know by now, Ahmedinajad was declared to have been re elected in a fraudulent election. Protests throughout the country have exploded and many have been killed by security forces.

Now, most Americans are (naively) hoping for the protesters to overthrow the government of Iran, which is led by a non-elected Guardian Council of senior clerics, headed by the Grand Ayatollah, Khameini (successor to the Grand Ayatollah Khomeini, whose revolution established the current Islamic Republic). This will probably not happen. During the last revolution, Shah Pahlavi's government was overthrown (the Shah was absent for cancer treatment in the United States) when protesters filled the streets and hunted down the Shah's ministers. But what really did it was not so much the protests, but the fact that the security forces (army, secret police, regular police) defected from the government and sided with the people (ie, they did nothing to interfere with the popular revolution).

Take as a case in point the Ukranian "Orange Revolution". Did the people packed into the city squares really overthrow the fraudulent president? No, it was that the army and police decided to allow the protesters to ground things to a halt. Had the army sided with the fraudulently-elected president, Kiev would have run red with blood, and the "revolution" would have been nipped in the bud.

So in order for the protesters in Iran to pull off some sort of popular version of a coup d'etat, the military must decide not to interfere with it. There is no such thing as a truly civilian coup d'etat; it just doesn't happen. It all hinges on what security forces do (or don't) do.

So before Americans jump the gun and decide to hold their breath and wait for a popular coup to reenact (and reverse) the 1979 revolution, let's wait to see what Security Forces will do in this backward country before making any predictions.

My own (pessimistic) predictions are, that the Guardian Council will either put down the protests with the Army, or, to avoid an embarassing international PR disaster that that would cause, declare Ahmedinajad deposed and announce the real winner of the election (have a recount or something). In either case, the Army will not defect, and the people's "democratic revolution" will be stalled.

Now, let's hope that the CIA or other contacts other countries (since we have no relations with Iran officially) may have, encourage the Army not to interfere with the protests. Maybe even defect. But that's highly unlikely. And any direct involvement the United States may have in Iran's protests would only lead to more bloodshed and a harsher, more effective, reaction by the police and the army.

I offer my hopes and my prayers to the besieged people of Iran, in hopes that one day the word "Islamic" may be struck from the title, and the name simply to be the "Republic of Iran". The Islamic Revolution was the result of the US policy of supporting jackasses like the Shah in the name of fighting communism. Let's not interfere and legitimize the reaction of the unelected Guardian Council to repress its own people. Sit back, and watch...that's all we can do. I hate to say it but it is one of those cases we just cannot interfere and make things worse. I call on the American people, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, to pray for the safety and freedom of the People of the REPUBLIC of Iran, which one day, it will be called. The very panic of the senior clerics in Iran is proof that will one day happen. But we have to wait for the right opportunity to interfere. The Republicans are wrong to criticize Obama for not "doing anything". There is nothing to do in this case. I hate to say it but the President is right in this case in what he's doing: condemn it publicly but not interfere directly.

Now is not the time for that. All we can do is watch, and again, pray for these poor people. Again, I really hate to say that. I can't wait for these jackasses to be on the run just like the Shah. One dictatorship was replaced with another in 1979, which is usually the case with a coup d'etat.

Mr Ahmedinajad and Mr Grand Ayatollah, if you're listening, you're both jackasses whose days are numbered.

Warmest regards,
Colin
maryland@modernwhig.org

A Little Humor

2009-06-21T14:38:00.000-04:00

Dear Friends,

Just a little humor to pass the time for the moment, while I am working on somehow transferring this blog onto the www.mdwhig.org website....in the mean time, I promise to come up with more new posts regarding current events and so forth.

LAWRENCE LIVERMORE LABORATORIES DISCOVERS HEAVIEST ELEMENT KNOW TO SCIENCE

The new element, Governmentium (Gv), has one neutron, 25 assistant neutrons, 88 deputy neutrons, and 198 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312. These 312 particles are held together by forces known as morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons. Since Governmentium has no electrons it is inert, however, it can be detected since it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact.

A tiny amount of Governmentium can cause a reaction that would normally take less than a second to take from four days to four years to complete. Governmentium has a normal half life of four to eight years. It does not decay, but instead undergoes a reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places. In fact, Governmentium's mass will actually increase over time, since each reorganization will cause more morons to become neutrons, forming isodopes. This characteristic of moron promotion leads scientists to believe that Governmentium is formed whenever morons reach a critical concentration; this hypothetical quantity is known as critical morass.

When catalyzed with money, Governmentium becomes Administratium (Ad), an element that radiates just as much energy as Governmentium since it has half as many peons but twice as many morons.

Hope you liked and I'll get more posts for you to read ASAP---

Colin
maryland@modernwhig.org
www.mdwhig.org

New Website

2009-06-16T00:42:00.000-04:00

The new Maryland party website is up and running, though it's still under constant construction and update. The blog isn't on there, so I'll still be running this blog occasionally, but other things will be on the website.

The address is www.mdwhig.org

Racism is Racism...Period

2009-06-02T15:40:00.001-04:00

Dear Friends,

I am glad to see that President Obama will appoint a minority to the Supreme Court of the United States. I firmly believe in racial and sexual equality, and that all men [read, all men and women] are created equal.

However, in the same spirit of racial equality, I am displeased to hear a comment from Sonia Sotomayor, the nominee for Supreme Court justice, namely: "A wise Latina judge would make better decisions than white men."

I'm sorry, say again? Did she really say that?

I firmly believe that racism is racism. Period. No matter which race it comes from and which race it is directed to, it's still racism. But of course, you can't tell that to the Left, who believe that as long as the person or comment is politically correct (that is, if a minority or female said it and not a white male) it's fair game to say and it's not racist, and if you dare to call such a comment racist, you must therefore be a racist yourself.

Now the Right on the other hand, will pleasantly find new ammunition locked into their firearms this week with a comment like that. Only in this case, they'd be right to object to something like this (as distasteful as I find siding with the Right, in this case, their objections would be perfectly valid to me; pigs must be showing up on FAA radar at this moment and they're not the only pigs).

Please, senators, defeat this nomination. If your heart cringes to hear racist rhetoric of the past from people like Senator Strom Thurmond (who is in the Guiness Book of Records for the longest filibuster in global legislative history, 48 hours railing against the civil rights bill...the People of South Carolina were thenceforce so ashamed that they re elected him six times) then it should cringe equally at the comments of Sonia Sotomayor. Because

racism is racism, no matter from which race it comes and to which race it is directed...Period.

I firmly believe that Gandhi and Dr King would be among those who would cringe at comments like that. But who am I to invoke the name of Gandhi and Dr King? I'm just a dumbass white male. Write me and tell me how racist you think I am now.

Warmest regards,
Colin
maryland@modernwhig.org

Maryland Chapter Growing

2009-05-27T18:59:00.000-04:00

Dear Friends,

It seems I have the first evidence that the Maryland chapter is growing. Mike sent me emails of people who have signed up in Maryland. For those of you who haven't signed up, go to www.modernwhig.org, then email me at maryland@modernwhig.org to let me know you've registered.

We need to get this movement growing!

--Colin

A Digression on Prop 8

2009-05-26T23:14:00.000-04:00

Dear Friends,

It would seem that the Caleefownia Supreme Court ruled today not to repeal Prop 8.

Fortunately, the Whig Party, according to our national chairman, is for the CONSTITUTION, including the "full faith & credit" clause. Unlike the Democratic and Republican parties, we don't claim to support the constitution and then pick and choose which bits of it we like and don't like; we actually support the constitution in its entirety. Including the Full Faith & Credit Clause. The California Supreme Court judgment is pretty much meaningless. Gays will go to another state and get married, and California will have to recognize them, like it or not. And Texas. And Alabama.

I am pretty sure the dam on gay marriage has burst and innundated conservative-town. As a Whig, I support the full faith and credit clause, because I support the Constitution of 1787 and the Bill of Rights in their entirety. The Constitution protects all citizens of the United States, not just the ones who bitch and moan about activist judges. No one whines about an activist judge being activist when that judge is on their side!

As the United States Constitution forbids ex post facto laws, the 18,000+ gays who have already married there do not have their marriages legally annulled. Again, who does California think it's kidding? Their system of government is so whack, you can get anything passed on a ballot measure and bypass the legislature completely. It's the equivalent of the Roman Republic's "ten tribunes" who could veto anybody and anything. [Note to self: the Roman Republic collapsed into dictatorship.] When the legislature meets, it has to fund all these stupid laws the People passed on their own initiative. This is what happens when "direct democracy" goes way too far.

This is the same state which freed OJ if that means anything to you.

Good luck and good nite,

Colin

[Belated] Memorial Day post

2009-05-26T21:23:00.000-04:00

Dear Friends,

The whole post of yesterday got me a little distracted...when I should have been wishing the vets of Iraq and Afghanistan, and those currently deployed, and all veterans everywhere, a great memorial day. Without you guys this party wouldn't be possible.

Nor would any party.

CMB

Great Online Meeting!!!

2009-05-19T22:32:00.000-04:00

The online meeting of the Modern Whig Party earlier this evening was fantastic. Thanks to all of you who showed up. I do not have any exact figures on attendance from Mike yet, but will keep all of you posted. I did speak briefly about gerrymandering in redistricting for about 30 seconds, they gave me the mike and everybody at the meeting could hear, though no one asked me any questions afterward (it was pretty close to the close of meeting then).

We discussed Paul McKain running for Congress in 2010 in the 2nd congressional district of Florida. He introduced himself and spoke briefly, and he sounds like the kind of guy I'd much rather have in Congress than the one currently in my district. He will be the first Whig to run for Congress since before the Civil War. You can see his campaign website at:

www.paulmckain.com

Looking forward to another! For those of you who didn't attend, I encourage you to attend the next one. For those of you in Florida, I encourage you to sign on and help Mr McKain's campaign.

Regards,
Colin

"Who's your Daddy?" Why, King Abdullah!

2009-05-18T02:49:00.000-04:00

As it was said in the tongue-in-cheek film by the Producers of South Park, Team America: World Police, "Gary, there are people out there who want you dead...they're called terrorists, and they hate everything about you." Let's face it, people out there hate us, and there's good reasons (and some stupid reasons, as well) why.

In our mad Cold War dash to win friends and influence people, we often won the wrong friends and influenced the wrong people. People like General Augusto Pinochet of Chile, or the Shah of Iran. I talked to a girl in Egypt and she said that people resent that the United States talks about democratizing countries, meanwhile, we're giving their President, Hosni Mubarak, a boatload of money to line his own pockets. (Egypt is the second highest recipient of American foreign aid.) This schmuck has been ruling Egypt by emergency decree when the emergency that brought him to power (the assassination of President Anwar Sadat in 1981) from vice-presidential obscurity is long gone. The last "election" in Egypt was a PR-minded farce on the part of the in situ regime in which Hosni Mubarak won greater than 80% of the popular vote.

[In fact, an Egyptian college professor of mine told me a joke Egyptians have about Mubarak: when he appeared on TV to be sworn in--aww, isn't that precious?--after the assassination of Sadat, people noticed his bandaged wrist where shrapnel from the Muslim Brother's bullets hit him. The joke is that when the assassin came up to the presidential box to fire off his rounds, Mubarak extended his hand to point at the President as if to say "Him, you idiot, not me!" Probably not true, but it wouldn't surprise most Egyptians.]

We go around telling regimes like Burma (excuse me, Myanmar) and Syria they have to democratize, yet in the same breath support ones like Saudi Arabia. So two out of three for protecting national interest, but minus several million for consistency and good thinking. This fact hasn't escaped the notice of the peoples whose despotic regimes we're supporting and that's yet another reason they don't like us.

But let's be fair, if you're looking for a lack of hypocrisy in international relations, you'll be searching for a great while. My advice is not to hold your breath. But that isn't good enough for the people being oppressed. How can we talk about self-determination yet we prop up the very despots who laugh at it? Because we have to. No seriously, we have very little choice but to prop up the dysfunctional dynasty known as the House of Sa`ud because they control the price of oil. All 30,000 (!!!) princes of them (Ibn Saud had many wives)

But wait, don't we get 2/3 of our oil and gas supplies from North American sources? Ah, true. However, we don't stockpile what we pump: we use it. As Robert Baer explained in Sleeping With the Devil, what is important is not so much the actual oil that America needs (we only get 15% of our oil from the Middle East as a whole) but the surplus that Saudi Arabia controls for itself.

The reason for this is simple. If you have the world's largest oil surplus (and are the most powerful member state of OPEC and can have leverage over its activities) you can control the price of light sweet crude on the global commodities markets by expanding and contracting the surplus. They have so much oil that they don't even use all of it for their Mercedes Benz limousines. They stockpile it and use it to control the price of gasoline in America, and other places. It's all economics: you cannot control the world's demand for oil (which is only increasing anyway) but you can control the supply and, hence, set prices.

And this is why give foreign aid and military hardware to a regime that will only use it against its own people, because if we earn the ire of the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques he can jack up the price of gas to $6 a gallon if he wanted to. That's the whole reason for America's strategic partnership with the Magic Kingdom. The last time we seriously annoyed them (during the Arab-Israeli Yom Kippur War of 1973) the end result was Americans lined up around the block to get a gallon of gasoline.

So how do we escape this? The People of Saudi Arabia [another fun fact, the country is named after its ruling dynasty because theoretically the whole kingdom is the personal property of its rulers...rather like Queen Elizabeth deciding to change the name of the UK to Windsoria] will hate us as long as we prop up the oligarchs who call themselves the Saudi Crown, and if the Saudi Crown collapses or is in danger of falling we will be drawn into a military conflict in the middle east that will make Iraq look like a sideshow, in which either side we back--the Crown or the jihadists--will make us enemies of pretty much the whole world and terrorists in particular. I remind you--for those of you who live in reality and don't believe it was a Jewish Conspiracy--that Osama Bin Laden said his chief grievance with the USA was our presence in the Muslim holy land. If you think they were a little irate wish us for going into Iraq, can you imagine what would happen if so much as a stray bullet or cruise missile hit the Forbidden Mosque of Mecca?

The answer to this vexing question is we must develop our own surplus. Not just drill to use it, but drill such a ginormous quantity of oil that we can start simply storing it in our backyards and have a bigger surplus than the Saudis have. Then it would be Washington, not Riyadh, which controls the price of oil on the world's markets. Not only would we have leverage over our own economy (and the rest of the world's) we would be able to stop the whole reason for terrorism, our perpetual involvement in the middle east.

But our politicians are pretty much, according to Robert Baer, in the House of Sa`ud's pockets. He tells a story about how a Saudi Prince "accidentally" left a briefcase with Nixon's campaign officials containing a million dollars in $100 bills (soft money) and never got the briefcase back. But he did get a commitment from Nixon & Kissinger to support the Saudi Crown. And he's not the only president who's been bought by these desert shieks and their associated Washington law firms. Ever wondered why Prince Bandar, the Saudi Ambassador to the United States, is the only foreign ambassador in Washington to have his own personal Secret Service detail? Because they have us by the balls.

Washington needs to stop being the bought dogs of this corrupt and despotic syndicate known as the House of Sa`ud. We need a new kind of regime in Washington, one who doesn't vacillate between the extremism of annoying everybody (George W. Bush) or worrying about offending people too much (Barack Obama). Someone who listens to common sense rather and protects America, rather than simply protecting a narrow-minded view of what it's "strategic interests" are. Our strategic interests do not involve fighting a Saudi Civil War. Let them pull their own chestnuts out of the fire if the worst happens.

Yours very truly,

Colin Bisasky
maryland@modernwhig.org

National Online Meeting

2009-05-09T02:14:00.000-04:00

Reserve your "seat" now for the national online meeting to be held on May 19th at 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time. Speakers include a couple of the state chairs, plus, others will get a chance to speak (probably myself included as well).

Go to: https://www2.gotomeeting.com/register/842858242

Also; some time within the next 10 days new, more professional-looking websites will be up in lieu of blogs for state chapters. I will give the link to the new Maryland website once it is in place.

The Redistricting Scam

2009-05-03T03:43:00.000-04:00

Dear Friends,

There are many problems in the American body politic these days, but I am confident that at least some of them can be solved. One of the grave problems which faces the system today involves a term you may have heard: gerrymandering.

In most states the party in power can redraw its congressional and legislative district boundaries, and they do so in such a way that the majority in each district will re elect that congressman or legislator indefinitely. Computers have only made it worse, now there exists at any politician's fingertips software which can create sophisticated demographic models of how people are voting and where they live, with three disquieting results: first, mapmakers have more power over the outcome of elections than voters; second, instead of the constituents picking their elected officials the "elected" officials are picking their constituents; and third, members of Congress and the legislators of the several states can stay in office almost indefinitely.

According to some sources, the incumbency rate (probability the incumbent politician will be re elected versus a challenger) in the U.S. House of Representatives is over 90%, meaning there is less than a 10% chance that a challenger will ever unseat one of the usually well-entrenched incumbents. Thus, most of the seats in the House are "safe" seats; very few are what we would call "swing" seats. In one of the safe seats the party that predominates in that district can maintain an almost indefinite stranglehold on it. And so, we get the office of "congressman-for-life". It is no longer a House of Representatives but a House of Lords.

In some countries exist laws that mandate political districts to be geographically logical; but in the U.S., gerrymandering is perfectly legal. One very infamous district in North Carolina was actually drawn to follow an interstate highway, its shape was very reminiscent of a long snake. Now, California and three other states have ordered different systems to be used, notably in that state, retired judges now have the power to redistrict, and not the incumbent politicians. But in the other 46 states, including Maryland, it is perfectly legal to redistrict in such a way as to disadvantage a political minority, or a minority (third) party, or to stay in office indefinitely.

I reject the view that term limits in Congress would solve the problem, for several reasons. First, it would not solve the problem that the same party would have a stranglehold over certain seats. So, Congresswoman Smith might not stay in office forever, but her party would. Second, even if you set a limit of say, five terms in the House (a total of 10 years), then it would most likely be the same person for all five terms, no matter what he or she did (or did not) accomplish in office. Third, there ought to at least be some long-term leadership in both houses of Congress, to be able to check and balance the authority of the two-term presidency. Also, politicians who have repeatedly proven to their constituents that they are not only useful and innovative but adaptable to change ought to stay in office as long as they retain those qualities (but no longer than that!) The current problem, of course, is that this need for long-term leadership has been taken to a wild extreme to where it is no longer an advantage but a blot on our constitution.

If the incumbency rate was say, 50% instead of 90%, you'd have a House of Representatives composed of a few long term leaders, while the whole body itself would prove more adaptable to change. Essentially, there would come about natural term limits rather than legal or constitutional term limits. Also, the constituents' ideas, beliefs and interests would shape the policy of Congress rather than the members of Congress shaping public opinion themselves. The founding fathers' whole point in making a House term two years (instead of say, five or six) was to provide fluidity and make that chamber more responsive to change and public opinion.

I firmly believe that many of America's ills--though perhaps I am an optimist--can be solved by fixing the redistricting/gerrymandering problem. Many of the system's problems can be traced to this disease. Fresh ideas and fresh leadership is often the solution to a changing, fluid situation, since the only constant in the universe is...change itself.

Please write me and let me know what you think of this issue, how important (or unimportant) you may think it is.

Best always,

Colin Bisasky, state chairman
maryland@modernwhig.org

A Message from the New Maryland Chairman

2009-04-26T21:22:00.000-04:00

Dear Friends,

It is my pleasure to accept the position of Maryland Chairman of the Modern Whig Party. I wish to thank Mike Leibowitz for offering me this position.

It is my current desire that the Maryland chapter of the Modern Whig Party should focus on drumming up support for the party through new membership, perhaps speaking on college campuses (like UMBC, where I currently attend). Also, we should look for any state and local politicians in Maryland who, like us, are dismayed at the bipolarity of the current two-party system in the United States as a whole and wish to change American (and Maryland) politics for the better.

I welcome any and all Marylanders to the Modern Whig Party. Remember, change can start with just one person with an idea, and the journey of a thousand miles begins with but one step.

Warmest regards,

Colin M. Bisasky, state chairman