180 million American workers took home 40% of the income generated from 1979 to 2011 while 300,000 families(0.1%) took 20%. This is a travesty of economic justice and a peek inside the aristocracy of modern capital that is the U.S. economic equivalent of the politburo in Stalin's communist Russia.These 300,000 families control our congress,undermine workers rights,inflate commodities,restrict economic freedom,create insecurity,transfer jobs and have taken our democracy with their subversive activities as never before in our history.The corporations that they own have CEO's that make 531 times the salary that their workers take home.Their mouthpieces in politics(both parties) are presently working over public employees who try to organize and resist their dogmatic,greedy,un-American grip on society.Private and public unions(less than 10% of all workers..3.3% are public) are the last holdout from our parent's world.One out of three workers were unionized when our parents went to work in the 1950's(baby boomers).They believed in democracy in the workplace because they just fought a damaging war to be free to unionize and earn a living wage.They understood that economic equality is the backbone of a prosperous nation.That generation worked together to build a country where corporations were in the business of common good not good for a few.
Today, I saw President Obama with his Council of Economic Advisers.Austan Goolsbee is the current chairman who served as Senior Economist to the Progressive Policy Institute who many critics describe as conservative,neoconservative or neoliberal think tank.I also had the pleasure of seeing Jeff Immelt(CEO of General Electric)interviewed on MSNBC who is the leader of a jobs creation committee.William Daley(JP Morgan Chase) was also seated by President Obama as they laid out a plan for job creation.Mr. Immelt(GE and Comcast own MSNBC) told his employee(MSNBC pundit) that lowering corporate taxes and getting rid of most government regulations would create jobs.At that moment,I finally realized I can no longer argue on behalf of President Obama and felt hopeless that in a week where Wisconsin public workers are fighting to maintain a union,he is a conspirator with CEO's about future job creation and refuses to stand up for the battered workers.He has been turned into a corporate flunky and I am sorry I ever voted for him.He has been a big disappointment and an embarrassment to his supporters,especially the black community.He needs to take a new path that doesn't look down the road to the 2012 election.
Friday, February 25, 2011
Thursday, February 24, 2011
In A Dream, I Talked With Chris Christie On The Picket LIne
I had a dream last night that I had a conversation with Governor Christie as I joined a demonstration in Trenton,N.J. for collective bargaining.I wasn't angry in the dream and listened to Christie talk about the burden of taxation and the benefits of public workers,government regulations,public corruption,private schools,restricting abortion,the job killing EPA,freeze on affordable housing,suspending the public advocate and cutting aid to hospitals,higher education and transit systems.
I told him I agreed with his assessment of the tax burden on the families(71%) who fall below the $50,000 level in his state.These angry taxpayers can't pay higher taxes because they can't afford the expense due to their level of income.I put my arm around him and said we agree on this issue.Income levels have been the same for thirty years when one accounts for inflation. I told him I've been losing money for the past ten years on my privileged teacher bargained contract(1.9% raise while inflation was listed at 3.2%).We just don't have the revenue anymore to meet expenses the way our fathers and mothers did(higher tax rates for corporations and high income earners).I said my progressive group and the Tea Party members had a lot in common.Both of us can't continue holding up the revenue end on this train ride to freedom.I said "God bless America..how can we solve this problem" and Christie smiled because he thought he won me over to the pragmatic conservative viewpoint.I smiled back and said"that 71% needs the other 29% to help out and produce more revenue for the children so they can live the American dream and continue the great tradition of our values.He started to look a little confused by this statement.I stated again that we need the money from the folks who got it..the capital gains people who pay less than us in taxes as a percentage.Christie said they earned that money and they should have the right to spent it as they wish.I said that every worker earns their money but we give it back at a greater rate than the capital gains folks who have more and isn't it better for our economy if the lower income citizens have more money to spend(lower income level citizens spend more as a ratio than higher earners) because it stimulates the markets and creates jobs.He said rich people create jobs from lower taxes.I stated that under George Bush(decreased tax rates) job creation was the lowest since the great depression and the rich sit on their money and collect dividends from their investments.
Anyway,I know the Tea party members like social security and medicare just like me.Thank God we have a little security in old age.I feel very luck to have a pension coming and social security.My union in N.Y. have invested my and school district money wisely.I wish more people had protected pensions (strength in numbers)and higher social security payments.The vast majority of us worked very hard throughout our lives and really need assistance to continue a modest lifestyle with our families and grandchildren if we are blessed.I hope Governor Christie will join us(Tea party and Progressives) and try to convince his buddies that it's healthy for our country(I know they are patriots) when everyone shares in the revenue burdens created by our dark times.Let him return to the valleys of downtown Manhattan(issue transaction tax to raise $250 billion/year) and sing a new song for freedom.
I told him I agreed with his assessment of the tax burden on the families(71%) who fall below the $50,000 level in his state.These angry taxpayers can't pay higher taxes because they can't afford the expense due to their level of income.I put my arm around him and said we agree on this issue.Income levels have been the same for thirty years when one accounts for inflation. I told him I've been losing money for the past ten years on my privileged teacher bargained contract(1.9% raise while inflation was listed at 3.2%).We just don't have the revenue anymore to meet expenses the way our fathers and mothers did(higher tax rates for corporations and high income earners).I said my progressive group and the Tea Party members had a lot in common.Both of us can't continue holding up the revenue end on this train ride to freedom.I said "God bless America..how can we solve this problem" and Christie smiled because he thought he won me over to the pragmatic conservative viewpoint.I smiled back and said"that 71% needs the other 29% to help out and produce more revenue for the children so they can live the American dream and continue the great tradition of our values.He started to look a little confused by this statement.I stated again that we need the money from the folks who got it..the capital gains people who pay less than us in taxes as a percentage.Christie said they earned that money and they should have the right to spent it as they wish.I said that every worker earns their money but we give it back at a greater rate than the capital gains folks who have more and isn't it better for our economy if the lower income citizens have more money to spend(lower income level citizens spend more as a ratio than higher earners) because it stimulates the markets and creates jobs.He said rich people create jobs from lower taxes.I stated that under George Bush(decreased tax rates) job creation was the lowest since the great depression and the rich sit on their money and collect dividends from their investments.
Anyway,I know the Tea party members like social security and medicare just like me.Thank God we have a little security in old age.I feel very luck to have a pension coming and social security.My union in N.Y. have invested my and school district money wisely.I wish more people had protected pensions (strength in numbers)and higher social security payments.The vast majority of us worked very hard throughout our lives and really need assistance to continue a modest lifestyle with our families and grandchildren if we are blessed.I hope Governor Christie will join us(Tea party and Progressives) and try to convince his buddies that it's healthy for our country(I know they are patriots) when everyone shares in the revenue burdens created by our dark times.Let him return to the valleys of downtown Manhattan(issue transaction tax to raise $250 billion/year) and sing a new song for freedom.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Who Is Governor Scott Walker Of Wisconsin?
Governor Walker is a college dropout from Marquette University in Milwaukee(attended1986-90).He stated that the purpose of going to college is getting a good job.He dropped out because he was a salesman for IBM from 1988 to 1990(full health benefits) and concluded that his wonderful job was enough to stop his education(should have continued to acquire some understanding of human needs and fulfillment).He stopped working at this marvelous job to work for the Red Cross(more company benefits) as a marketing developer for another four years.He also ran for the state assembly during this time period .So the governor has a great resume working a total of six years as a businessman who is well aware of the history of unionization in America and the struggles workers have had to improve working conditions in an assortment of un-democratic environments.He knows about the work councils in Europe and the worker-management boards that direct businesses there.After his long experience as a productive business leader, he ran as a representative of the people.He used his skills as a public speaker(father was a Baptist minister) to secure a spot in the state assembly in 1993(tried in 1990 at twenty-three for same seat and failed).He won a special election and ran on the great issue of welfare reform and non-expansion of mass transit.So,Mr.Walker wanted to focus in on the very poor...children and mothers who needed assistance.He wanted these frauds to find minimum wage jobs without child care provisions(maybe he wished the fathers locked up in jail could do the babysitting).Oh,I forgot,he wanted to do all this without any new money for a decrepid transportation sysytem that hindered these fraudulent mothers and jailed fathers to get to the wonderful jobs that awaited them in the center of the city or in the surrounding suburbs.But the people bought his slick ignorance and the dropout won because the white district he represented probably had a racist majority that loves to put "those" people in their place.He was against all kinds of spending,especially on the state and local employees that were taking all his money through high taxes and spending it on college educations for their children.Mr.Walker also had an interest in keeping the jail door locked and secured as he supported and passed the truth-in-sentencing bill(1999) that made criminals stay the entire length of their sentencing without time off for good behavio(but what about the babysitting?).
As a county executive(Milwaukee 2002-2008),he cut the number of county employees by 20%.Let's remember we had prosperous times before the great depression of 2008.I wonder how those 20% are doing in this generous,job creating environment today.Did the county pay more for their hospital bills,welfare and unemployment benefits? Did Mr.Dropout save any money for the county during his stay in office?No..spending increased over 35% during his tenue but he did reduce the county debt by 10%.(on the backs of the lower and middle class).As the new governor of Wisconsin,Mr.Walker wants to change public employees contracts(lower pay and benefits,taking any protections from thugs like the governor) while lowering state taxes of small and large businesses,capital gains and top income earners.Walker is a common flunky for the top twenty percent earners,especially the top five percent, for our glorious,competitive economic system as he steps on and over the eighty percent(many who ignorantly elected him) to show his financial supporters that he is a good little boy who genuflects at their instructions to alleviate the tax pain they feel when they read the WSJ in a Caribbean hotel in the middle of February.
As a county executive(Milwaukee 2002-2008),he cut the number of county employees by 20%.Let's remember we had prosperous times before the great depression of 2008.I wonder how those 20% are doing in this generous,job creating environment today.Did the county pay more for their hospital bills,welfare and unemployment benefits? Did Mr.Dropout save any money for the county during his stay in office?No..spending increased over 35% during his tenue but he did reduce the county debt by 10%.(on the backs of the lower and middle class).As the new governor of Wisconsin,Mr.Walker wants to change public employees contracts(lower pay and benefits,taking any protections from thugs like the governor) while lowering state taxes of small and large businesses,capital gains and top income earners.Walker is a common flunky for the top twenty percent earners,especially the top five percent, for our glorious,competitive economic system as he steps on and over the eighty percent(many who ignorantly elected him) to show his financial supporters that he is a good little boy who genuflects at their instructions to alleviate the tax pain they feel when they read the WSJ in a Caribbean hotel in the middle of February.
Monday, February 21, 2011
Jesus,Coleman Hawkins And I:Lets Throw Those Corporate College Boys And Girls In Jail
Jesus appeared to me last night as I was placing a log into my Vermont Castings wood stove while listening to Coleman Hawkins palying "Hanid" with Roy Eldridge,Hank Jones,George Duvier and Mikey Sheen.Jesus is about twenty-one now and has short hair,blue eyes and a nice athletic body of a college basketball player.He doesn't want the Knicks to get Carmelo Anthony because he thinks his name should be Anthony Carmelo(He has always favored Italians).He also stated that he hangs out around college campuses lately to see what the future might look like.Jesus knows that the health of a country falls to the college boys and girls who run our companies,teach our children,protect our lives and disperse the income generated.He talked with me about the many choices college people have when they start their careers in the public or private sectors.He remembered me making the decision to go into teaching instead of marketing because I just didn't want to take orders from anyone or fake an interest in a bunch of products I didn't use or believe in.Jesus remembered I wanted more time off to do the things I enjoyed instead a working hard for someone who might not appreciate my efforts.Also remembering, that I hated the simple act of putting on a suit and losing my identity.The Son of God also stated that I didn't care about money that much or the things money can buy but loved to meet new people and listen to their stories.
So,I became a teacher.I could wear any type of clothing I wanted and joined the union so I had some protection from a manager who was inexperienced,unprofessional or power hungry.I worked with forgotten kids who primarily came from broken homes and low income levels.Teaching was interesting and the final product was intellectual growth in a human along his/her road to happiness.I had time off to be with my family as I got older and spent every summer playing with my two daughters as they grew into wonderful humans with loads of compassion.I never thought about my income much because we got by as a family.I did borrow too much from credit cards in the early years to provide toys at Christmas and parts for my cars(didn't get a lot of money until my twentieth year in teaching...never enough to invest in stocks,bonds,etc.).We never went on vacations(my wife stayed home and only worked part time during the first ten years with the children)but enjoyed the free time together around the house and neighborhood.I made a choice at twenty-one to live that type of lifestyle.A choice that most college students have because they are fortunate enough to have the resources to go to college.I was the lucky 25% in our country to go four years and graduate.Eventually, I went another two years to graduate school(not paid by my district) and studied Educational Psychology and used that degree to help myself and the students that I taught over a thirty-eight year career.
Many college people my age decided to go into business and had successful careers, made a lot of money and invested in the stock market.They had bigger houses,vacationed in Europe and had a lifestyle that one needed a good source of revenue to maintain.It was their choice to do so.They had the freedom to take my road or stay on their path.I don't begrudge their decision and I know they just wanted the best for themselves and their families.I do have a problem with them if they participated in decisions that hurt other workers in an unreasonable way.If they looked the other way when their company avoided paying federal taxes,undermined environmental regulations,moved or closed company factories to save on labor costs,lost worker pensions,deprived health insurance to employees,refused membership in unions,continued dangerous working environments for employees and discriminated against females with lower pay scales.My main problem with these fellow college graduates is that they forgot where most of them came from(union fathers).The ones who turned their backs on the poor and lower class(voting with the conservative republicans) and rationalized their perspective that everyone has an equal chance to succeed like them.The college boys and girls forgot they are the priviledge ones who made it through four years and had the option to go down many roads to fulfillment.The 75% in this country who didn't make it must rely on the 25% who did to make good decisions for the entire 100%.
Jesus wants us to make good decisions for the entire 100%.He said so to me last night but he has always said so.He loved the poor and cared for their welfare before anyone else.He is very unhappy with how this country's money is unevenly distributed.Jesus doesn't want to throw anyone in jail but he is hanging around today's colleges to secretely infultrate the minds and hearts of potential leaders to make the appropriate decisions that would help the majority of the population that wants a good life for their children.Coleman Hawkins was an angel sent by Jesus to bring beauty to our hearts and love in our souls.Compassion,for me,is the primary goal of education.I hope more of our privileged class opens up and lets this light shine in.
Saturday, February 19, 2011
Shouldn't We Be In The Streets Today LIke Egypt(Nader)
Friday, February 18. 2011
Posted by nimda in In the Public Interest
Time to Topple Corporate Dictators
The 18 day non-violent Egyptian protests for freedom raise the question: is America next? Were Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine around, they would likely say “what are we waiting for?” They would be appalled by the concentration of economic and political power in such a few hands. Remember how often these two men warned about concentrated power.
Our Declaration of Independence (1776) listed grievances against King George III. A good number of them could have been made against “King” George W. Bush who not only brushed aside Congressional War-making authority under the Constitution but plunged the nation through lies into extended illegal wars which he conducted in violation of international law. Even conservative legal scholars such as Republicans Bruce Fein and former Judge Andrew Napolitano believe he and Dick Cheney still should be prosecuted for war and other related crimes. The conservative American Bar Association sent George W. Bush three “white papers” in 2005-2006 that documented his distinct violations of the Constitution he had sworn to uphold.
Here at home, the political system is a two-party dictatorship whose gerrymandering results in most electoral districts being one-party fiefdoms. The two Parties block the freedom of third parties and independent candidates to have equal access to the ballots and to the debates. Another barrier to competitive democratic elections is big money, largely commercial in source, which marinates most politicians in cowardliness and sinecurism.
Our legislative and executive branches, at the federal and state levels, can fairly be called corporate regimes. This is corporatism where government is controlled by private economic power. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt called this grip “fascism” in a formal message to Congress in 1938.
Corporatism shuts out the people and opens governmental largesse paid for by taxpayers to insatiable corporations.
Notice how each decade the bailouts, subsidies, hand-outs, giveaways, and tax escapes for big business grow larger. The word “trillions” is increasingly used, as in the magnitude of the rescue by Washington of the Wall Street crooks and speculators who looted the peoples’ pensions and savings.
It is not as if these giant companies demonstrate any gratitude to the people who save them again and again. Instead, U.S. companies are fast quitting the country in which they were chartered and prospered. These corporations, which were built on the backs of American workers, are shipping millions of jobs and whole industries to repressive foreign regimes abroad, such as China.
Over 70 percent of Americans in a September 2000 Business Week poll said corporations had “too much control over their lives.” It’s gotten worse with the last decade’s corporate corruption and crime wave.
Wal-Mart imports over $20 billion a year in products from sweatshops in China. About a million Wal-Mart workers make under $10.50 per hour before deductions—many in the $8 an hour range. While Wal-Mart’s CEO makes about $11,000 a hour plus benefits and perks.
This scenario has metastasized through the economy. One in three workers in the U.S. makes Wal-Mart level wages. Fifty million people have no health insurance and every year about 45,000 die because they cannot afford diagnosis or treatment. Child poverty is climbing as household income falls. Unemployment and underemployment are near 20% levels. The federal minimum wage, adjusted for inflation since 1968, would be $10.00 per hour now. Instead, it is $7.25.
Yet one percent of the richest Americans have financial wealth equivalent to the bottom ninety-five percent of the people. Corporate profits and compensation of corporate bosses are at record levels. While companies, excluding financial firms, are sitting on two trillion dollars in cash.
On February 7, President Obama showed us where the power is by walking across LaFayette Park from the White House to the headquarters of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Before a large audience of CEOs, he pleaded for them to invest more in jobs in America. Imagine, CEOs of pampered, privileged mega-companies often on welfare and in trouble with the law sitting there while the President curtsied.
With Bill Clinton in the Nineties, corporate lobbies tightened their grip on our country by greasing through Congress both NAFTA and the World Trade Organization agreements that subordinated our sovereignty and workers to the global government of corporations.
All this adds to the growing sense of powerlessness by the citizenry. They experience hundreds of thousands of preventable deaths and many more injuries every year in the workplace, the environment, and the marketplace. Massive budgets and technologies do not go to reduce these costly casualties, instead they go to the big business of exaggerated security threats.
While the ObamaBush deficit-financed wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have been destroying those nations, our public works here, such as mass transit, schools and clincs crumble for lack of repairs. Foreclosures keep rising.
The debt servitude of consumers is stripping them of control of their own money as fine print contracts, credit ratings and credit scores tighten the noose on family budgets.
Half of democracy is showing up. Too many Americans, despairingly, are not “showing up” at the polls, at rallies, marches, courtrooms or city council meetings. If “we the people” want to reassert our proper constitutional sovereignty over our country—we can start by amassing ourselves in public squares and around the giant buildings of our rulers.
In a country that has so many problems it doesn’t deserve and so many solutions that it doesn’t apply; all things are possible when people begin looking at themselves for the necessary power to produce a just society.
Our Declaration of Independence (1776) listed grievances against King George III. A good number of them could have been made against “King” George W. Bush who not only brushed aside Congressional War-making authority under the Constitution but plunged the nation through lies into extended illegal wars which he conducted in violation of international law. Even conservative legal scholars such as Republicans Bruce Fein and former Judge Andrew Napolitano believe he and Dick Cheney still should be prosecuted for war and other related crimes. The conservative American Bar Association sent George W. Bush three “white papers” in 2005-2006 that documented his distinct violations of the Constitution he had sworn to uphold.
Here at home, the political system is a two-party dictatorship whose gerrymandering results in most electoral districts being one-party fiefdoms. The two Parties block the freedom of third parties and independent candidates to have equal access to the ballots and to the debates. Another barrier to competitive democratic elections is big money, largely commercial in source, which marinates most politicians in cowardliness and sinecurism.
Our legislative and executive branches, at the federal and state levels, can fairly be called corporate regimes. This is corporatism where government is controlled by private economic power. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt called this grip “fascism” in a formal message to Congress in 1938.
Corporatism shuts out the people and opens governmental largesse paid for by taxpayers to insatiable corporations.
Notice how each decade the bailouts, subsidies, hand-outs, giveaways, and tax escapes for big business grow larger. The word “trillions” is increasingly used, as in the magnitude of the rescue by Washington of the Wall Street crooks and speculators who looted the peoples’ pensions and savings.
It is not as if these giant companies demonstrate any gratitude to the people who save them again and again. Instead, U.S. companies are fast quitting the country in which they were chartered and prospered. These corporations, which were built on the backs of American workers, are shipping millions of jobs and whole industries to repressive foreign regimes abroad, such as China.
Over 70 percent of Americans in a September 2000 Business Week poll said corporations had “too much control over their lives.” It’s gotten worse with the last decade’s corporate corruption and crime wave.
Wal-Mart imports over $20 billion a year in products from sweatshops in China. About a million Wal-Mart workers make under $10.50 per hour before deductions—many in the $8 an hour range. While Wal-Mart’s CEO makes about $11,000 a hour plus benefits and perks.
This scenario has metastasized through the economy. One in three workers in the U.S. makes Wal-Mart level wages. Fifty million people have no health insurance and every year about 45,000 die because they cannot afford diagnosis or treatment. Child poverty is climbing as household income falls. Unemployment and underemployment are near 20% levels. The federal minimum wage, adjusted for inflation since 1968, would be $10.00 per hour now. Instead, it is $7.25.
Yet one percent of the richest Americans have financial wealth equivalent to the bottom ninety-five percent of the people. Corporate profits and compensation of corporate bosses are at record levels. While companies, excluding financial firms, are sitting on two trillion dollars in cash.
On February 7, President Obama showed us where the power is by walking across LaFayette Park from the White House to the headquarters of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Before a large audience of CEOs, he pleaded for them to invest more in jobs in America. Imagine, CEOs of pampered, privileged mega-companies often on welfare and in trouble with the law sitting there while the President curtsied.
With Bill Clinton in the Nineties, corporate lobbies tightened their grip on our country by greasing through Congress both NAFTA and the World Trade Organization agreements that subordinated our sovereignty and workers to the global government of corporations.
All this adds to the growing sense of powerlessness by the citizenry. They experience hundreds of thousands of preventable deaths and many more injuries every year in the workplace, the environment, and the marketplace. Massive budgets and technologies do not go to reduce these costly casualties, instead they go to the big business of exaggerated security threats.
While the ObamaBush deficit-financed wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have been destroying those nations, our public works here, such as mass transit, schools and clincs crumble for lack of repairs. Foreclosures keep rising.
The debt servitude of consumers is stripping them of control of their own money as fine print contracts, credit ratings and credit scores tighten the noose on family budgets.
Half of democracy is showing up. Too many Americans, despairingly, are not “showing up” at the polls, at rallies, marches, courtrooms or city council meetings. If “we the people” want to reassert our proper constitutional sovereignty over our country—we can start by amassing ourselves in public squares and around the giant buildings of our rulers.
In a country that has so many problems it doesn’t deserve and so many solutions that it doesn’t apply; all things are possible when people begin looking at themselves for the necessary power to produce a just society.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Today's World:Better Than Yesterday?
This is my 100th post and I wanted to write about all the things I've learned since August,2010 with information saturated with documented statistics but I've decided to just write my observations.Are we a better world today than in the past? I have an uncomfortable feeling that we aren't in a better place as a nation and maybe my perception is as a result of the acquired information I have gathered over the last six months preparing for this blog.In the past, I read the N.Y Times,The Nation,Atlantic Monthly,Mother Jones,The Economist and an assortment of other magazines but few political books that had a reservoir of depth.I didn't even have a home computer until Jan.2010 to look up valuable information.I was always a progressive but the last six months have been an eye opener for me because I read many political books that really made me wonder if we ever lived in an economic democracy or a Darwinian free for all .Our society has always had income inequality, from our founders who controlled the ports and prime land to the financial masters of the securities world..The vast difference in income levels and wealth is disheartening to me and I wonder why more people don't get very upset about our nation's income disparity(Are we too drugged to care?).Americans are not unique in this disparity because most developed and developing countries have income inequality that is similar to ours.Some countries(those with higher percentages of union members) spread the wealth better than us and try to support its citizens with free tuition,health care,cultural experiences,paid maternity leave, pensions and subsidies of many types to alleviate the income inequality that exists.The U.S. has a great love affair with an economic system that hasn't provided welfare and benefits to all from it's deliverance of independence.The dialogue today rarely dwells on the failure of this system to meet the needs of 70% of our country.This 70% of our citizens barely get by and use credit to sustain a lifestyle that is always in the survival mode.Americans don't get paid enough to support themselves and the towns they live in.Their taxes are too high for their incomes,especially if they own a house.As foreclosures increase,it is obvious that families who make under $50,000 a year(70% of the country) can't afford all the bills a typical household has to pay.Many of us is a pink slip away from disaster.With so many jobs lost to off shoring and the new way of doing global business,Americans are always insecure about the future.Every day is an adventure with rumors about future employment or the high prices of goods and services.Workers are always on the defense, states and communities are on their knees to any business enterprise that is willing to bring jobs to its citizens.Why don't we have discussions about a better economic system to enrich our citizens...one that is more cooperative than competitive.I can't find anyone who is even writing about new solutions to the disaster we have.I know I trust in the citizens(government without lobbyists) more than the fundamental capitalists who are nation less and authoritarian.We must make our own products to sell to ourselves and other countries and change our perception what "freedom" really means.One can be free and still be required to purchase products produced in our own state or country.Freedom to me isn't about purchasing clothes from companies that exploit workers wherever they live.Freedom to me is the chance to live a life without worrying about the welfare of my family.It is a concept that protects every citizen from abuse and hopelessness.Our political leaders are caught in a game protecting the wealthy corporations that want to continue these insecurities because it gives them more control over our lives.The election reforms we seek are squashed because politicians need corporate money to get elected in the future.The financial community with their enormous wealth control legislation through their army of lobbyists that have turned their backs on the 70% a long time ago.Recently,politicians have turned against part of the top 30% who have a little more stability than the bottom 70%.They want to undercut public workers(cut numerous jobs)) who have used collective bargaining to secure better pay and benefits.They are turning citizen against citizen and ignoring the fact that our banking industry with their manufactured securities decreased federal and state revenues by foolishly gambling with American investments and causing the Great Depression of 2008.Again, not much is debated anymore about this disaster of a system that creates deficits for states across the nation(Financial Regulation Act didn't change the core problems).
Over the past ten years,the U.S. has waged war against two nations in the name of national security.It did so at the cost of rebuilding our infrastructure,lowering college tuition,decreasing health costs,improving transportation systems,supporting clean air and water,creating new "green" companies,establishing more usable public parks,investing in renewable energy and a larger,well funded,public broadcasting system like the BBC.The war made new private sector billionaires and increased our federal budget more than any other type of spending.Our current budget is over 50% for total defense spending(current expenditures,interest debt plus continued medical benefits to soldiers injured).The Defense Department is an endless money spout for private companies who supply our services with ever item under the sun(They surround the Pentagon like flies around honey).Our politicians would rather take away subsidised food for poor families,decrease social security benefits,reduce eligibility for health care than cut from this holy sanctum of national security.
So,the world doesn't look better from my perspective these days.We had more freedom last year than we do today.Economic security is the benchmark that must be attained in order for a nation to be free.We are getting closer each day to losing our freedom in the workplace that has become as authoritarian as any dictatorship.Democracy must return to the workplace where management and workers are partners in the welfair of the company.Our system has been devalued from one of promise to one of dispear.New ideas are needed to bring new economic reforms that will provide for all of the citizens not just the ones with a valued financial education(75% have a H.S.education...most lack of money for a four year college).Hope must return or our jail system will increase even to a greater degree(largest system in the world today) and our stable 30% will dwindle as the years go by.
Over the past ten years,the U.S. has waged war against two nations in the name of national security.It did so at the cost of rebuilding our infrastructure,lowering college tuition,decreasing health costs,improving transportation systems,supporting clean air and water,creating new "green" companies,establishing more usable public parks,investing in renewable energy and a larger,well funded,public broadcasting system like the BBC.The war made new private sector billionaires and increased our federal budget more than any other type of spending.Our current budget is over 50% for total defense spending(current expenditures,interest debt plus continued medical benefits to soldiers injured).The Defense Department is an endless money spout for private companies who supply our services with ever item under the sun(They surround the Pentagon like flies around honey).Our politicians would rather take away subsidised food for poor families,decrease social security benefits,reduce eligibility for health care than cut from this holy sanctum of national security.
So,the world doesn't look better from my perspective these days.We had more freedom last year than we do today.Economic security is the benchmark that must be attained in order for a nation to be free.We are getting closer each day to losing our freedom in the workplace that has become as authoritarian as any dictatorship.Democracy must return to the workplace where management and workers are partners in the welfair of the company.Our system has been devalued from one of promise to one of dispear.New ideas are needed to bring new economic reforms that will provide for all of the citizens not just the ones with a valued financial education(75% have a H.S.education...most lack of money for a four year college).Hope must return or our jail system will increase even to a greater degree(largest system in the world today) and our stable 30% will dwindle as the years go by.
Monday, February 14, 2011
Financial Regulation:President Obama Falls Short Again(Alterman)
Financial regulation wasn't a tough sell for the Obama administration because anger at Wall St. ran so high during his first two years and eventually became a favorite theme for Republican candidates in 2010.
More than two hundred candidates around the country ran ads depicting their opponents as captives of an avaricious group of Wall St. bankers.President Obama had an unmistakable public mandate for strong action to prevent a repeat of 2008's emergency bailout.
The financial regulation bill won some important victories for average people,particularly in the realm of credit card bills and other consumer related protections.For all the ferocious rhetoric emanating from Washington about indefensible behavior,pretty much nothing of importance had changed in the way these same bankers went about their business.Credit-rating companies still face the same potential conflicts of interest because they are paid by the very parties churning out the debt that is being rated.Trading accounts for more than half the revenue of Wall St. firms and continues dependence on volatile investment profits. There also have been few changes in markets for derivative securities,such as credit-default swaps. Finally, the rules have not been changed concerning the amount of capital that U.S. banks must hold as a percentage of assets(debt).
The Group of Thirty,an organization of senior business executives and academics(led by Paul Volcker),reported that large systemically important banking institutions should be restricted in undertaking proprietary activities that represent high risks and serious conflicts of interest.Yet the legislation continued to abide by such trades on the bank's accounts in risky hedge funds and private equity funds. Limits were placed on the banks(3% of Tier I capital) but in real terms,banks could now put up a lot more money than the Group of Thirty wanted.Mutual funds,insurers and trusts were exempt from these extremely generous limits.After the bill's passage,Goldman Sacks simply reclassified its proprietary traders as asset managers and it made it impossible to distinguish between a trade made for a client and one made on the company's own behalf.
More from "Kabuki Democracy" by Eric Alterman.
Friday, February 11, 2011
Torturous Egyptian:Suleiman(Lisa Hajjar)
From 1993 until Saturday, Suleiman was chief of Egypt’s General Intelligence Service. He remained largely in the shadows until 2001, when he started taking over powerful dossiers in the foreign ministry; he has since become a public figure, as the WikiLeak document attests. In 2009, he was touted by the London Telegraph and Foreign Policy as the most powerful spook in the region, topping even the head of Mossad.
In the mid-1990s, Suleiman worked closely with the Clinton administration in devising and implementing its rendition program; back then, rendition involved kidnapping suspected terrorists and transferring them to a third country for trial. In The Dark Side, Jane Mayer describes how the rendition program began:
In October 2001, Habib was seized from a bus by Pakistani security forces. While detained in Pakistan, at the behest of American agents, he was suspended from a hook and electrocuted repeatedly. He was then turned over to the CIA, and in the process of transporting him to Egypt he endured the usual treatment: his clothes were cut off, a suppository was stuffed in his anus, he was put into a diaper - and 'wrapped up like a spring roll'
A far more infamous torture case, in which Suleiman also is directly implicated, is that of Ibn al-Sheikh al-Libi. Unlike Habib, who was innocent of any ties to terror or militancy, al-Libi was allegedly a trainer at al-Khaldan camp in Afghanistan. He was captured by the Pakistanis while fleeing across the border in November 2001. He was sent to Bagram, and questioned by the FBI. But the CIA wanted to take over, which they did, and he was transported to a black site on the USS Bataan in the Arabian Sea, then extraordinarily rendered to Egypt. Under torture there, al-Libi "confessed" knowledge about an al-Qaeda–Saddam connection, claiming that two al-Qaeda operatives had received training in Iraq for use in chemical and biological weapons. In early 2003, this was exactly the kind of information that the Bush administration was seeking to justify attacking Iraq and to persuade reluctant allies to go along. Indeed, al-Libi’s "confession" was one the central pieces of "evidence" presented at the United Nations by then-Secretary of State Colin Powell to make the case for war.
Al-Libi was eventually sent off, quietly, to Libya - though he reportedly made a few other stops along the way - where he was imprisoned. The use of al-Libi’s statement in the build-up to the Iraq war made him a huge American liability once it became clear that the purported al-Qaeda–Saddam connection was a tortured lie. His whereabouts were, in fact, a secret for years, until April 2009 when Human Rights Watch researchers investigating the treatment of Libyan prisoners encountered him in the courtyard of a prison. Two weeks later, on May 10, al-Libi was dead, and the Gaddafi regime claimed it was a suicide.
According to Evan Kohlmann, who enjoys favoured status among US officials as an 'al-Qaeda expert', citing a classified source: 'Al-Libi’s death coincided with the first visit by Egypt’s spymaster Omar Suleiman to Tripoli.'
Kohlmann surmises and opines that, after al-Libi recounted his story about about an al-Qaeda–Saddam-WMD connection, "The Egyptians were embarrassed by this admission - and the Bush government found itself in hot water internationally. Then, in May 2009, Omar Suleiman saw an opportunity to get even with al-Libi and travelled to Tripoli. By the time Omar Suleiman’s plane left Tripoli, Ibn al-Sheikh al-Libi had committed 'suicide'."
As people in Egypt and around the world speculate about the fate of the Mubarak regime, one thing should be very clear: Omar Suleiman is not the man to bring democracy to the country. His hands are too dirty, and any 'stability' he might be imagined to bring to the country and the region comes at way too high a price. Hopefully, the Egyptians who are thronging the streets and demanding a new era of freedom will make his removal from power part of their demands, too.
Lisa Hajjar teaches sociology at the University of California - Santa Barbara and is a co-editor of Jadaliyya.
This article first appeared on Jadaliyya.
In the mid-1990s, Suleiman worked closely with the Clinton administration in devising and implementing its rendition program; back then, rendition involved kidnapping suspected terrorists and transferring them to a third country for trial. In The Dark Side, Jane Mayer describes how the rendition program began:
"Each rendition was authorised at the very top levels of both governments [the US and Egypt] ... The long-serving chief of the Egyptian central intelligence agency, Omar Suleiman, negotiated directly with top [CIA] officials. [Former US Ambassador to Egypt Edward] Walker described the Egyptian counterpart, Suleiman, as 'very bright, very realistic', adding that he was cognisant that there was a downside to 'some of the negative things that the Egyptians engaged in, of torture and so on. But he was not squeamish, by the way'. (p. 113).Under the Bush administration, in the context of "the global war on terror", US renditions became "extraordinary", meaning the objective of kidnapping and extra-legal transfer was no longer to bring a suspect to trial - but rather for interrogation to seek actionable intelligence. The extraordinary rendition program landed some people in CIA black sites - and others were turned over for torture-by-proxy to other regimes. Egypt figured large as a torture destination of choice, as did Suleiman as Egypt’s torturer-in-chief. At least one person extraordinarily rendered by the CIA to Egypt — Egyptian-born Australian citizen Mamdouh Habib — was reportedly tortured by Suleiman himself.
"Technically, US law required the CIA to seek 'assurances' from Egypt that rendered suspects wouldn't face torture. But under Suleiman's reign at the EGIS, such assurances were considered close to worthless. As Michael Scheuer, a former CIA officer [head of the al-Qaeda desk], who helped set up the practise of rendition, later testified, even if such 'assurances' were written in indelible ink, 'they weren't worth a bucket of warm spit'."
In October 2001, Habib was seized from a bus by Pakistani security forces. While detained in Pakistan, at the behest of American agents, he was suspended from a hook and electrocuted repeatedly. He was then turned over to the CIA, and in the process of transporting him to Egypt he endured the usual treatment: his clothes were cut off, a suppository was stuffed in his anus, he was put into a diaper - and 'wrapped up like a spring roll'
A far more infamous torture case, in which Suleiman also is directly implicated, is that of Ibn al-Sheikh al-Libi. Unlike Habib, who was innocent of any ties to terror or militancy, al-Libi was allegedly a trainer at al-Khaldan camp in Afghanistan. He was captured by the Pakistanis while fleeing across the border in November 2001. He was sent to Bagram, and questioned by the FBI. But the CIA wanted to take over, which they did, and he was transported to a black site on the USS Bataan in the Arabian Sea, then extraordinarily rendered to Egypt. Under torture there, al-Libi "confessed" knowledge about an al-Qaeda–Saddam connection, claiming that two al-Qaeda operatives had received training in Iraq for use in chemical and biological weapons. In early 2003, this was exactly the kind of information that the Bush administration was seeking to justify attacking Iraq and to persuade reluctant allies to go along. Indeed, al-Libi’s "confession" was one the central pieces of "evidence" presented at the United Nations by then-Secretary of State Colin Powell to make the case for war.
Al-Libi was eventually sent off, quietly, to Libya - though he reportedly made a few other stops along the way - where he was imprisoned. The use of al-Libi’s statement in the build-up to the Iraq war made him a huge American liability once it became clear that the purported al-Qaeda–Saddam connection was a tortured lie. His whereabouts were, in fact, a secret for years, until April 2009 when Human Rights Watch researchers investigating the treatment of Libyan prisoners encountered him in the courtyard of a prison. Two weeks later, on May 10, al-Libi was dead, and the Gaddafi regime claimed it was a suicide.
According to Evan Kohlmann, who enjoys favoured status among US officials as an 'al-Qaeda expert', citing a classified source: 'Al-Libi’s death coincided with the first visit by Egypt’s spymaster Omar Suleiman to Tripoli.'
Kohlmann surmises and opines that, after al-Libi recounted his story about about an al-Qaeda–Saddam-WMD connection, "The Egyptians were embarrassed by this admission - and the Bush government found itself in hot water internationally. Then, in May 2009, Omar Suleiman saw an opportunity to get even with al-Libi and travelled to Tripoli. By the time Omar Suleiman’s plane left Tripoli, Ibn al-Sheikh al-Libi had committed 'suicide'."
As people in Egypt and around the world speculate about the fate of the Mubarak regime, one thing should be very clear: Omar Suleiman is not the man to bring democracy to the country. His hands are too dirty, and any 'stability' he might be imagined to bring to the country and the region comes at way too high a price. Hopefully, the Egyptians who are thronging the streets and demanding a new era of freedom will make his removal from power part of their demands, too.
Lisa Hajjar teaches sociology at the University of California - Santa Barbara and is a co-editor of Jadaliyya.
This article first appeared on Jadaliyya.
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Center For Responsive Politics:$3.47 Billion Spent Lobbying The Federal Government
According to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics,$3.47 billion was spent(2009) lobbying the federal government with the pharmaceutical and health products industries ($266.8 million) leading the way and spreading the wealth.At one point during that year,PhRMA,the industry wide association, employed forty-eight lobbying firms with a total of 165 people,according to Sunlight Foundation's Paul Blumenthal.Sunlight also claims that as of late may 2010,members of the financial committees of both houses had already enjoyed 845 separate fund-raising events.Fourteen freshmen serving on the House Financial Services Committee raised 56% more by mid-2010 in campaign contributions than other freshmen.Members of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee enjoyed an average of $52,000 in contributions from oil and gas industry in the 2008-2010 election cycle,compared with $24,000 for others in the Senate,according to the Center for Responsive Politics.(Alterman)
Politicians do not have to switch votes to meet the demands of this money. They can bury bills by rewriting the language of the bills,miss key votes(persuade others to do the same),confuse debate or bankroll primary opposition.The real outcome of most lobbying is the achievement of nothing.The corporations want to maintain to status quo, continue gridlock and stalemating of proposals.
Consider health care for a moment and see how lobbying worked its way to deflate the single-payer program,the negotiating of drug prices for seniors,antitrust regulations for the health insurance industry and lowering the cost of deliverable care.President Obama won by the skin of his teeth but lost all these battles along the way because the powerful lobbyist stopped him almost before he started.
According to the Center for Public Integrity, the number of lobbyists devoted to climate change had risen by more than 400% since 2003 to a total of 2,810.This is contrasted to the estimate 138 working on behalf of alternative forms of energy.Targets for improving renewable energy resources were roughly halved as Congress gutted the EPA's authority to regulate carbon emissions.Rather than auction off pollution permits,as candidate Obama had proposed,the legislation offered 83 percent of them to polluters for free.Polluters earned themselves $134 billion in taxpayer funded gifts as they reduced the overall goal of a reduction in carbon emissions from 20% to 17%.
More from"Kabuki Democracy" by Eric Alterman in the near future.
Politicians do not have to switch votes to meet the demands of this money. They can bury bills by rewriting the language of the bills,miss key votes(persuade others to do the same),confuse debate or bankroll primary opposition.The real outcome of most lobbying is the achievement of nothing.The corporations want to maintain to status quo, continue gridlock and stalemating of proposals.
Consider health care for a moment and see how lobbying worked its way to deflate the single-payer program,the negotiating of drug prices for seniors,antitrust regulations for the health insurance industry and lowering the cost of deliverable care.President Obama won by the skin of his teeth but lost all these battles along the way because the powerful lobbyist stopped him almost before he started.
According to the Center for Public Integrity, the number of lobbyists devoted to climate change had risen by more than 400% since 2003 to a total of 2,810.This is contrasted to the estimate 138 working on behalf of alternative forms of energy.Targets for improving renewable energy resources were roughly halved as Congress gutted the EPA's authority to regulate carbon emissions.Rather than auction off pollution permits,as candidate Obama had proposed,the legislation offered 83 percent of them to polluters for free.Polluters earned themselves $134 billion in taxpayer funded gifts as they reduced the overall goal of a reduction in carbon emissions from 20% to 17%.
More from"Kabuki Democracy" by Eric Alterman in the near future.
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Obstruction: Republicans Middle Name
When the U.S.Senate was created,the most populous state had twelve times the amount of the smallest state.Today that number is seventy times as Wyoming Senators represent 272,000(less than a NYC councilperson) while California's represents 18,481,000.It just so happens that the best represented states(smaller in population) are the most conservative.In late September 2010,forty Republican senators elected to block debate on a measure,recommended by President Obama,Robert Gates, and Mike Mullen(Joint Chiefs of staff),to end the military seventeen-year "Don't Ask,Don't Tell" policy.These senators represented only 33 percent of the U.S. population.Under current Senate rules,it is possible for senators representing just 11 percent of the population to prevent the passage of legislation supported by senators representing the other 89 percent or fifty-nine senators from the thirty most populous states.(Alterman)
This is just the beginning of the problems facing Americans with disproportionate representation. The average age of a U.S. senator is sixty-nine while the median age of Americans is just over thirty-five.Women are the majority of the U.S. population but only 17 percent of the Senate is female.African American,Hispanic and Native Americans represent 33 percent of the population but only have four senators from these ethnic groups(4%).Most senators are millionaires while 71% of the American families make under $50,000 a year.As a result, elderly white male millionaires do quite well when it comes to legislation but underrepresented groups suffer.(Alterman)
Today,the most common tool of obstruction is a treat to filibuster to prevent votes on popular legislation.Democrats used to block civil rights legislation in the 1940's and 50's by speaking on any topic for long periods of time.Three-fifths of the Senate is needed to block a filibuster(60 senators).The treat of a filibuster is enough today to shelve legislation.The average senator only spends about 1 percent of their time on the Senate floor..it's an inconvenience today.The threat of filibuster has grown from 10% in the 1970's to about 70% today.Since the Democratic takeover of both houses in 2006,Republicans have more than doubled the 130"cloture" motions Democrats had managed to force during the Bush years.
Another fossilized rule is that any senator can freeze any bill merely by placing a personal hold on it.The party leadership merely has to agree with the procedure.As of September 2010,only half of President Obama's federal nominees for jobs have been confirmed and 102 out of 854 judgeship's remain vacant(go to hightowerlowdown.org for more on this issue).Of the 81 judicial nominations President Obama sent to the Senate,only 30% were approved,largely due to single senator holds placed on individual nominees.This was only half the number Bush got approved in the previous administration.On April 20,2010,Senator Claire McCaskillD-MO)took to the floor to try to lift the holds on 56 separate federal nominees.Jon Kyl(R-AZ) objected to every last one of them.
More from "Kabuki Democracy" by Eric Alterman.
This is just the beginning of the problems facing Americans with disproportionate representation. The average age of a U.S. senator is sixty-nine while the median age of Americans is just over thirty-five.Women are the majority of the U.S. population but only 17 percent of the Senate is female.African American,Hispanic and Native Americans represent 33 percent of the population but only have four senators from these ethnic groups(4%).Most senators are millionaires while 71% of the American families make under $50,000 a year.As a result, elderly white male millionaires do quite well when it comes to legislation but underrepresented groups suffer.(Alterman)
Today,the most common tool of obstruction is a treat to filibuster to prevent votes on popular legislation.Democrats used to block civil rights legislation in the 1940's and 50's by speaking on any topic for long periods of time.Three-fifths of the Senate is needed to block a filibuster(60 senators).The treat of a filibuster is enough today to shelve legislation.The average senator only spends about 1 percent of their time on the Senate floor..it's an inconvenience today.The threat of filibuster has grown from 10% in the 1970's to about 70% today.Since the Democratic takeover of both houses in 2006,Republicans have more than doubled the 130"cloture" motions Democrats had managed to force during the Bush years.
Another fossilized rule is that any senator can freeze any bill merely by placing a personal hold on it.The party leadership merely has to agree with the procedure.As of September 2010,only half of President Obama's federal nominees for jobs have been confirmed and 102 out of 854 judgeship's remain vacant(go to hightowerlowdown.org for more on this issue).Of the 81 judicial nominations President Obama sent to the Senate,only 30% were approved,largely due to single senator holds placed on individual nominees.This was only half the number Bush got approved in the previous administration.On April 20,2010,Senator Claire McCaskillD-MO)took to the floor to try to lift the holds on 56 separate federal nominees.Jon Kyl(R-AZ) objected to every last one of them.
More from "Kabuki Democracy" by Eric Alterman.
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Republican Party:Extreme Ideology And Unprincipled Tactics(Alterman)
Republicans can't help themselves.They are suspicious of government on principle and opposed to successful programs in practice and are happy to see government programs fail and eventually disappear.Moderates are being run out of town while conservatives rule not only the party but the airwaves.The Congressional Republicans exercise party discipline,support extreme ideology and are far more willing to twist and abuse procedure than Congressional Democrats.As N.Y congressman Anthony Weiner observed,too often Democrats arrive at"knight fights carrying library books".
Republicans never even bothered to come up with an alternative health care plan.They used words like socialism,government takeover and death panels to undermine the plan.As you know,U.S. and South Africa(as of 2009) are the only two developed countries that does not provide health care for all of its citizens.We also spend far more than any developed country as a percentage of GDP.Nationally,30% of American children were without health insurance.U.S. is eighty-ninth for polio immunizations and eighty-four for measles.Let's remember what Sarah Palin stated"Hell no"to helping children receive proper care.
The "Pledge to America"(deficit reduction,fiscal responsibility) proposed the full extension of the Bush tax cuts(Obama is also responsible)) and a full repeal of the health-care law.The first increases the deficit by more than $4 trillion over the next ten years and the repeal would cost an additional $100 billion over the same time period.Nothing in the document comes close to paying for the two proposals.The "Pledge" also wants to fully fund a missile defense system that never worked in any meaningful way since the Reagan presidency.Billions have been spent since its inception a generation ago.Republicans are able to keep their members united in party-line votes because conservatives enjoy a genuine political movement that is eager to challenge incumbents in primary contests should they stray from the fold.
In August,2010,40% of Republicans could not,for certain, identify the country in which Barack Obama had been born and 46% said they were pretty sure their president was a Muslim.More than 50% surveyed believed that Obama sympathizes with the goals of fundamentalists who want to impose Islamic law around the world.What can one say about these statistics.How do you overcome this misinformation that has been streaming from FOX news?
The Republicans have no interest in bipartisan legislation.American Enterprise Institutes's Norm Ornstein noted"A week into his presidency,House Republicans voted unanimously against Obama's move to save the country as it teetered at the edge of deflation and depression-and their leaders danced a victory jig".
More from"Kabuki Democracy" by Eric Alterman soon.
Republicans never even bothered to come up with an alternative health care plan.They used words like socialism,government takeover and death panels to undermine the plan.As you know,U.S. and South Africa(as of 2009) are the only two developed countries that does not provide health care for all of its citizens.We also spend far more than any developed country as a percentage of GDP.Nationally,30% of American children were without health insurance.U.S. is eighty-ninth for polio immunizations and eighty-four for measles.Let's remember what Sarah Palin stated"Hell no"to helping children receive proper care.
The "Pledge to America"(deficit reduction,fiscal responsibility) proposed the full extension of the Bush tax cuts(Obama is also responsible)) and a full repeal of the health-care law.The first increases the deficit by more than $4 trillion over the next ten years and the repeal would cost an additional $100 billion over the same time period.Nothing in the document comes close to paying for the two proposals.The "Pledge" also wants to fully fund a missile defense system that never worked in any meaningful way since the Reagan presidency.Billions have been spent since its inception a generation ago.Republicans are able to keep their members united in party-line votes because conservatives enjoy a genuine political movement that is eager to challenge incumbents in primary contests should they stray from the fold.
In August,2010,40% of Republicans could not,for certain, identify the country in which Barack Obama had been born and 46% said they were pretty sure their president was a Muslim.More than 50% surveyed believed that Obama sympathizes with the goals of fundamentalists who want to impose Islamic law around the world.What can one say about these statistics.How do you overcome this misinformation that has been streaming from FOX news?
The Republicans have no interest in bipartisan legislation.American Enterprise Institutes's Norm Ornstein noted"A week into his presidency,House Republicans voted unanimously against Obama's move to save the country as it teetered at the edge of deflation and depression-and their leaders danced a victory jig".
More from"Kabuki Democracy" by Eric Alterman soon.
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
U.S.Must Back The Protesters In Egypt And Help Get Rid Of A Dictator
It isn't hard to believe that the Obama administration is waiting to endorse the revolution in Egypt because America has a long history of supporting dictators if they protect the interests of capitalists and lobbyists.Here is a list of dictators the U.S.A has supported since 1930.
I understand a cold war between the U.S. and Russia/China existed during many of these years but not every political movement on the left in these countries were destine to have a ruling class and secret police.Many of the countries listed just wanted income equality and representation on economic and political issues.They also wanted control of their own natural resources like all Americans want .By supporting dictators who ruled the majority through fear and oppression,the U.S. lost numerous opportunities to expand democracy and support a world economy that eliminated the exploitation of workers.Our companies,with their bought representatives,showed no respect for the welfare of these countries where their natural resources were taken cheaply and safeguarded by the violent police in each dictatorial nation.
Country | Dictator | Dates | Statistics |
Chile | Gen. Augusto Pinochet | 1973-1990 | 3000 murdered. 400,000 tortured. |
Argentina | Gen. Jorge Rafael Videla | 1976-1981 | 30,000 murdered. more |
Indonesia | Suharto | 1965 coup against left-leaning Sukarno, 1975 support of East Timor genocide | 500,000 dead after 1965 coup; 100,000-230,000 dead in East Timor; more, more, more. |
Guatemala | Armas, Fuentes, Montt | 1954- | |
Iran | The Shah of Iran | ||
Ayatollah Khomeini was on the CIA payroll in the 1970s in Paris | |||
Egypt | Sadat, Mubarak | 1978-today | |
Iraq | Saddam Hussein | ||
Nicaragua | Anastasio Somoza & sons | 1937-1979 | |
Paraguay | Stroessner. US supported throughout (state.gov says US has supported Paraguayan development since 1942) ($142M between 1962 and 1975) | 1954-1989 | |
Bolivia | Col. Hugo Banzer overthrew elected leftist president Juan Jose Torres | 1970- | |
Angola | Jonas Savimbi/UNITA (didn't actually win his revolution, but killed or displaced millions) | 1975-1989 | |
Zaire | Mobutu | ||
Saudi Arabia | Saud family | ||
Kuwait | a monarchy | ||
Morocco | |||
Tunisia | |||
Algeria | |||
Jordan | |||
Panama | Noriega was US-supported for years | ||
Haiti | Papa Doc, Baby Doc | ||
Dominican Republic | Trujillo, a military dictator for 32 years with US support for most of that time; Belaguer, Trujillo's protege, installed after US Marines intervened to put down an attempt to restore the democratically elected government of Juan Bosch | 1930-61, 1965-78 | |
Honduras | |||
El Salvador | 1980s | ||
Nepal | monarchy | since 1948 | |
Cuba | Fulgencio Batista | pre-Castro | |
Brazil | Gen. Branco overthrew elected president Goulart with US support | 1965-67 | |
Uzbekistan | Kamirov "The Boiler", $150M from the Bush administration for an air base.(Veatch) | 1965-67 |
I understand a cold war between the U.S. and Russia/China existed during many of these years but not every political movement on the left in these countries were destine to have a ruling class and secret police.Many of the countries listed just wanted income equality and representation on economic and political issues.They also wanted control of their own natural resources like all Americans want .By supporting dictators who ruled the majority through fear and oppression,the U.S. lost numerous opportunities to expand democracy and support a world economy that eliminated the exploitation of workers.Our companies,with their bought representatives,showed no respect for the welfare of these countries where their natural resources were taken cheaply and safeguarded by the violent police in each dictatorial nation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
More From Ralph Nader in the future.