SEPTEMBER 30, 2005
THE DUTCH DO LEVEES RIGHT
This article shows a history of Bush administration tax cuts for the rich and the collapse of infrastructure in New Orleans that led to the massive flooding after Hurricane Katrina. House Speaker Dennis Hastert inanely stated that maybe New Orleans should be bulldozed rather than rebuilt because much of New Orleans is below sea level. But the Dutch live below sea level too and the Dutch, unlike the Bush administration, have invested in the necessary infrastructure to prevent flooding in the Netherlands. This article by David Sirota is at www.inthesetimes.com:
Some may try to argue that because of New Orleans’ sub-sea-level geography, there was no amount of funding or infrastructure improvements that could have protected the city. House Speaker Dennis Hastert foreshadowed this inane assertion when he callously questioned whether New Orleans should even be rebuilt. But that argument asks us to simply forget places like the Netherlands—one of the oldest industrialized countries in the world that has thrived right on the banks of the tempestuous North Sea, even though half of the country sits below sea level. After a powerful storm breached dikes there in 1953, the Dutch launched a massive project to upgrade its infrastructure. The Associated Press reported that the most critical piece of the project cost today’s equivalent of $3.1 billion—one half of one percent of the tax cuts the Bush administration delivered to the richest 1 percent of America.
The difference between the Netherlands’ prudent investments and our government’s tax-cuts-before-everything policies can be seen in the most basic comparisons. USA Today reported that “few levees anywhere in the [United States] are built to more than a 100-year standard—capable of withstanding a flood so bad that its probability of occurring is once in a 100 years.” Better-funded Dutch levees, by contrast, are built to a 1,250-year standard. And while the Netherlands’ infrastructure is built to withstand some of the strongest storms, the New York Times reported in September 2005 that “Congress authorized a flood control system to handle only a Category 3 storm”—most likely to save on cost. Additionally, “as a result of federal budget constraints” (that came as the Bush administration was handing out ever-increasing numbers of tax breaks) the flood walls that broke during Katrina “were never tested” and never built to the strength experts made clear was necessary.
BUSH ADMINISTRATION VIOLATED LAW BY BUYING P.R.
What? Republicans committing crimes? Who would ever have thought that? Auditors from the General Accounting Office found that the Bush administration broke the law by paying a public relations firm to analyze perceptions of the Republican party. This is our tax money being used to propagandize us. This article by Robert Pear is at www.nytimes.com:
Federal auditors said today that the Bush administration had violated the law by purchasing favorable news coverage of President Bush's education policies, by making payments to the conservative commentator Armstrong Williams and by hiring a public relations company to analyze media perceptions of the Republican Party.
In a blistering report, the investigators, from the Government Accountability Office, said the administration had disseminated "covert propaganda" inside the United States, in violation of a longstanding, explicit statutory ban.
The contract with Mr. Williams and the general contours of the administration's public relations campaign had been known for months. The report today provided the first definitive ruling on the legality of the activities.
Thursday, September 29, 2005
SEPTEMBER 29, 2005
SCREW US NOW AND SCREW US LATER
When Adolf Hitler wrote Mein Kampf he outlined his plans for world conquest. At the time no one wanted to take Hitler seriously. Grover Norquist, a major force in the Republican party, has said he wants to shrink government to the size where it can be drowned in a bathtub. We're seeing that plan in operation. The Bush administration has run up massive deficits, mostly to give tax cuts to the rich. To offset some of those deficits they want to gut programs that benefit the middle class and the poor. What the cuts won't accomplish they will pass on to future generations. It's the rotten government that just keeps on taking. This article by John Atcheson is at www.informationclearinghouse.info:
But if the imperative for the K Street consortium is to simultaneously shrink government and provide corporate Pork, how do the Republicans propose paying for it?
Easy. First, cut programs that benefit people, to help fund the pork. As Jonathon Weisman reported in the Washington Post, over the next several months, Republicans will try to cut Medicaid growth by $10 billion, trim $7 billion from the Student Loan program, sell out ANWR for $2.4 billion in oil revenue; cut the food stamp program by $600 million, among other cuts.
Of course, no matter how much you screw the people, you can’t afford to give rich people massive tax cuts while you give trillions to industry. So, the second part of their strategy is to simply pass on the inevitable bill to our children. If the K Street Consortium implements their policy agenda, in ten years, every child born in the US will "inherit" $36,000 of additional debt.
BUSH CARES ONLY ABOUT THE RICH
No matter how he may try to disguise it, George W. Bush and his administration have nothing but contempt for those of us not in the capitalist class. He has demonstrated it his whole life. When he was at Harvard he sneered that people were poor because they were lazy. He got his daddy to pull strings to get him into the Texas Air National Guard so he could avoid going to Vietnam. Others, not well-connected, went to Vietnam and died or came back maimed. Mr. Bush could snort cocaine and be an alcoholic, but as Governor of Texas was only too happy to send drug offenders to lengthy prison terms He and his cohorts orchestrated the theft of a presidential election in 2000. He has recently tried to snooker us with a plan to privatize Social Security. He is willing to slash programs that benefit the poor and middle class so that he continue doling out big bucks to people who are already obscenely rich. In this column Joan Vennochi looks at this facade of a man who stole the presidency. The column is at www.boston.com:
Where in the president's call for sacrifice is any sense that he now understands the disconnect between his policies and better government, responsive to all, not just the wealthy few? Where in his call for sacrifice is any sense that he is in this post-Katrina-Rita mess with the rest of us?
Bush and his father may get gussied up like cowpokes every so often so the press corps will think they are self-made men. But more Americans understand a Bush administration operates the federal government as a wholly owned subsidiary of America's capitalist class. Bush has nothing but disdain for those clinging desperately to society's bottom rungs. And Bush's weak call for our sacrifice shows disdain for those clinging to the middle rungs, too.
The simple truth: Making an actual sacrifice is less painful than listening to Bush talk about it.
ALTERNATIVE TO OIL
In this commentary David Sirota talks about a process where coal can be converted into fuel. The process was more expensive than oil before oil reached $35 a barrel. Now that oil has surpassed that mark this process might be worth a look. The column is at www.huffingtonpost.com:
Case in point is the Bush administration's unwillingness to show some leadership on coal-to-oil technology. Right now, America has billions of tons of coal that could be quickly and cleanly converted into fuel - fuel that burns far more cleanly than any used today. The process used to convert the coal, called Fischer-Tropsch, has been around since the 1920s, and has been used by countries who (for various political/economic reasons) can't import oil.
The reason why Fischer-Tropsch hasn't been used more widely over the years is because it is only profitable when crude oil prices go above about $35 a barrel. But now, with oil above $60, few think it will ever go back down below the Fischer-Tropsch profit point. That means America has a golden (but as-yet-untapped) opportunity to use its own resources to both improve the environment with a cleaner fuel, and get us off foreign oil. Additionally, the process produces hydrogen that can be stored as fuel for a future hydrogen economy when that technology develops, and it creates electricity as a byproduct.
SCREW US NOW AND SCREW US LATER
When Adolf Hitler wrote Mein Kampf he outlined his plans for world conquest. At the time no one wanted to take Hitler seriously. Grover Norquist, a major force in the Republican party, has said he wants to shrink government to the size where it can be drowned in a bathtub. We're seeing that plan in operation. The Bush administration has run up massive deficits, mostly to give tax cuts to the rich. To offset some of those deficits they want to gut programs that benefit the middle class and the poor. What the cuts won't accomplish they will pass on to future generations. It's the rotten government that just keeps on taking. This article by John Atcheson is at www.informationclearinghouse.info:
But if the imperative for the K Street consortium is to simultaneously shrink government and provide corporate Pork, how do the Republicans propose paying for it?
Easy. First, cut programs that benefit people, to help fund the pork. As Jonathon Weisman reported in the Washington Post, over the next several months, Republicans will try to cut Medicaid growth by $10 billion, trim $7 billion from the Student Loan program, sell out ANWR for $2.4 billion in oil revenue; cut the food stamp program by $600 million, among other cuts.
Of course, no matter how much you screw the people, you can’t afford to give rich people massive tax cuts while you give trillions to industry. So, the second part of their strategy is to simply pass on the inevitable bill to our children. If the K Street Consortium implements their policy agenda, in ten years, every child born in the US will "inherit" $36,000 of additional debt.
BUSH CARES ONLY ABOUT THE RICH
No matter how he may try to disguise it, George W. Bush and his administration have nothing but contempt for those of us not in the capitalist class. He has demonstrated it his whole life. When he was at Harvard he sneered that people were poor because they were lazy. He got his daddy to pull strings to get him into the Texas Air National Guard so he could avoid going to Vietnam. Others, not well-connected, went to Vietnam and died or came back maimed. Mr. Bush could snort cocaine and be an alcoholic, but as Governor of Texas was only too happy to send drug offenders to lengthy prison terms He and his cohorts orchestrated the theft of a presidential election in 2000. He has recently tried to snooker us with a plan to privatize Social Security. He is willing to slash programs that benefit the poor and middle class so that he continue doling out big bucks to people who are already obscenely rich. In this column Joan Vennochi looks at this facade of a man who stole the presidency. The column is at www.boston.com:
Where in the president's call for sacrifice is any sense that he now understands the disconnect between his policies and better government, responsive to all, not just the wealthy few? Where in his call for sacrifice is any sense that he is in this post-Katrina-Rita mess with the rest of us?
Bush and his father may get gussied up like cowpokes every so often so the press corps will think they are self-made men. But more Americans understand a Bush administration operates the federal government as a wholly owned subsidiary of America's capitalist class. Bush has nothing but disdain for those clinging desperately to society's bottom rungs. And Bush's weak call for our sacrifice shows disdain for those clinging to the middle rungs, too.
The simple truth: Making an actual sacrifice is less painful than listening to Bush talk about it.
ALTERNATIVE TO OIL
In this commentary David Sirota talks about a process where coal can be converted into fuel. The process was more expensive than oil before oil reached $35 a barrel. Now that oil has surpassed that mark this process might be worth a look. The column is at www.huffingtonpost.com:
Case in point is the Bush administration's unwillingness to show some leadership on coal-to-oil technology. Right now, America has billions of tons of coal that could be quickly and cleanly converted into fuel - fuel that burns far more cleanly than any used today. The process used to convert the coal, called Fischer-Tropsch, has been around since the 1920s, and has been used by countries who (for various political/economic reasons) can't import oil.
The reason why Fischer-Tropsch hasn't been used more widely over the years is because it is only profitable when crude oil prices go above about $35 a barrel. But now, with oil above $60, few think it will ever go back down below the Fischer-Tropsch profit point. That means America has a golden (but as-yet-untapped) opportunity to use its own resources to both improve the environment with a cleaner fuel, and get us off foreign oil. Additionally, the process produces hydrogen that can be stored as fuel for a future hydrogen economy when that technology develops, and it creates electricity as a byproduct.
Wednesday, September 28, 2005
SEPTEMBER 28, 2005
CORRUPTION AND ITS CONSEQUENCES
On the day that a Texas grand jury indicted House Majority Leader Tom Leader it's worth remembering all the endemic corruption in the Republican party. This is the party that deliberately stole a presidential election in 2000 and probably repeated the theft in the 2004 election. This is the party that sees opportunity and big bucks in lying us into a war so big corporations can rake in big bucks as war profiteers. This is the party that is exploiting a tragedy in the Gulf Coast so big corporations can make big bucks again and so that Republicans can ram through crackpot ideas like school vouchers. This is a party with a history of corruption. Think of the administrations of Ulysses S. Grant, Warren G. Harding, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan-George Bush, and now the worst of them all, George W. Bush. Molly Ivins talks about the horrific consequences of corruption that we see after Hurricane Katrina. The commentary is at www.workingforchange.com:
Look, this is rank, nasty business -- corruption, cronyism and competence (the lack thereof) are the issues here. And as we have so recently and so painfully been reminded, when government is run by corrupt, incompetent cronies, real people pay a real price. There is nothing abstract about swollen bodies floating in flooded streets or dozens of old people dead in nursing homes.
Frankly, it's just a mercy most of Houston didn't drown in a giant traffic jam last week. Already, the corporate vultures are moving in -- contracts are arranged through people like Joe Allbaugh, the former FEMA director who brought in his old buddy Michael ("Heckuva job, Brownie") Brown to run the agency.
CONSERVATION SHOULD START WITH BUSH
I remember all too well how right-wingers mocked Jimmy Carter for proposing that we conserve energy and get away from the use of fossil fuels. President Carter even put solar collectors on the roof of the White House, which Ronald Reagan promptly removed. Now, after saying we should consume, consume, consume fossil fuels George W. Bush is advocating conservation. Unfortunately, he still wheels around in the fuel hog Air Force One as he goes from photo-op to photo-op. He still rides around in a big limousine that is hardly fuel efficient. So maybe Mr. Bush should try some conservation of his own. Maureen Dowd writes about the clueless White House in this column linked at groups.google.com:
I can't wait to see what's next.
Dick Cheney carpooling downtown with Brownie? Rummy Rollerblading down
the bike path to the Pentagon? Condi huddling by a Watergate fireplace
in a gray cardigan?
Maybe now that our hydrocarbon president is the conservation president,
he'll downgrade from Air Force One to a solar-powered Piper Cub as he
continues to stalk the Gulf Coast towns and oil rigs like Banquo's
ghost.
The once disciplined and swaggering Bush administration has descended
into slapstick, more comical even than having Clarence Thomas et al.
sit in judgment as Anna Nicole Smith attempts to get more of the moolah
of her late oil tycoon husband.
A WHOLE NEW CONNOTATION FOR "BROWNIE"
It used to be when you heard the word "Brownie" you thought of a chocolate snack or maybe a girl scout troupe. Now, thanks to former FEMA Director Michael Brown, we will associate "Brownie" with gross incompetence and corruption. In this column Paul Krugman examines all the links to corruption in the Bush administration from the General Services Administration to ties with super lobbyist Jack Abramhoff. The column is linked at call2action.blogspot.com:
A tipster urged me to look for Brownies among regional administrators for the General Services Administration, which oversees federal property and leases. There are several potential ways a position at G.S.A. could be abused. For example, an official might give a particular businessman an inside track in the purchase of government property - the charge against David Safavian, who was recently arrested - or give a particular landlord an inside track in renting space to federal agencies.
Some of the regional administrators at G.S.A. are longtime professionals. But the regional administrator for the Northeast and Caribbean region, which includes New York, has no obvious qualifications other than being the daughter of the chairman of the Conservative Party of New York State. The regional administrator for the Southwest, appointed in 2002 after a failed bid for his father's Congressional seat, is Scott Armey, the son of Dick Armey, the former House majority leader.
CORRUPTION AND ITS CONSEQUENCES
On the day that a Texas grand jury indicted House Majority Leader Tom Leader it's worth remembering all the endemic corruption in the Republican party. This is the party that deliberately stole a presidential election in 2000 and probably repeated the theft in the 2004 election. This is the party that sees opportunity and big bucks in lying us into a war so big corporations can rake in big bucks as war profiteers. This is the party that is exploiting a tragedy in the Gulf Coast so big corporations can make big bucks again and so that Republicans can ram through crackpot ideas like school vouchers. This is a party with a history of corruption. Think of the administrations of Ulysses S. Grant, Warren G. Harding, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan-George Bush, and now the worst of them all, George W. Bush. Molly Ivins talks about the horrific consequences of corruption that we see after Hurricane Katrina. The commentary is at www.workingforchange.com:
Look, this is rank, nasty business -- corruption, cronyism and competence (the lack thereof) are the issues here. And as we have so recently and so painfully been reminded, when government is run by corrupt, incompetent cronies, real people pay a real price. There is nothing abstract about swollen bodies floating in flooded streets or dozens of old people dead in nursing homes.
Frankly, it's just a mercy most of Houston didn't drown in a giant traffic jam last week. Already, the corporate vultures are moving in -- contracts are arranged through people like Joe Allbaugh, the former FEMA director who brought in his old buddy Michael ("Heckuva job, Brownie") Brown to run the agency.
CONSERVATION SHOULD START WITH BUSH
I remember all too well how right-wingers mocked Jimmy Carter for proposing that we conserve energy and get away from the use of fossil fuels. President Carter even put solar collectors on the roof of the White House, which Ronald Reagan promptly removed. Now, after saying we should consume, consume, consume fossil fuels George W. Bush is advocating conservation. Unfortunately, he still wheels around in the fuel hog Air Force One as he goes from photo-op to photo-op. He still rides around in a big limousine that is hardly fuel efficient. So maybe Mr. Bush should try some conservation of his own. Maureen Dowd writes about the clueless White House in this column linked at groups.google.com:
I can't wait to see what's next.
Dick Cheney carpooling downtown with Brownie? Rummy Rollerblading down
the bike path to the Pentagon? Condi huddling by a Watergate fireplace
in a gray cardigan?
Maybe now that our hydrocarbon president is the conservation president,
he'll downgrade from Air Force One to a solar-powered Piper Cub as he
continues to stalk the Gulf Coast towns and oil rigs like Banquo's
ghost.
The once disciplined and swaggering Bush administration has descended
into slapstick, more comical even than having Clarence Thomas et al.
sit in judgment as Anna Nicole Smith attempts to get more of the moolah
of her late oil tycoon husband.
A WHOLE NEW CONNOTATION FOR "BROWNIE"
It used to be when you heard the word "Brownie" you thought of a chocolate snack or maybe a girl scout troupe. Now, thanks to former FEMA Director Michael Brown, we will associate "Brownie" with gross incompetence and corruption. In this column Paul Krugman examines all the links to corruption in the Bush administration from the General Services Administration to ties with super lobbyist Jack Abramhoff. The column is linked at call2action.blogspot.com:
A tipster urged me to look for Brownies among regional administrators for the General Services Administration, which oversees federal property and leases. There are several potential ways a position at G.S.A. could be abused. For example, an official might give a particular businessman an inside track in the purchase of government property - the charge against David Safavian, who was recently arrested - or give a particular landlord an inside track in renting space to federal agencies.
Some of the regional administrators at G.S.A. are longtime professionals. But the regional administrator for the Northeast and Caribbean region, which includes New York, has no obvious qualifications other than being the daughter of the chairman of the Conservative Party of New York State. The regional administrator for the Southwest, appointed in 2002 after a failed bid for his father's Congressional seat, is Scott Armey, the son of Dick Armey, the former House majority leader.
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
SEPTEMBER 27, 2005
THE FEAR OUT THERE
For most of the time since he stole the presidency George W. Bush has used fear as a tactical weapon. He has kept Americans ramped up with fear about a terrorist attack like the one we suffered on September 11. He ratcheted up fear about non-existent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, while letting Osama bin Laden, mastermind of 9/11, escape. He has allowed North Korea to become a nuclear threat to us, and his policies encourage nuclear proliferation. Now fear is boomeranging on the Bush administration. People saw the callousness and inept response to Hurricane Katrina. They see an economy that is shot full of holes. It benefits the very rich and is leaving most of us gasping in the dust. So, like his father before him, Mr. Bush sees a record drop in consumer confidence. This story by the Associated Press is at msnbc.msn.com:
Consumer confidence plummeted almost 19 points in September, its biggest drop in 15 years, as Americans worried about the economic fallout of Hurricane Katrina and rising gasoline prices.
The Conference Board said its Consumer Confidence Index, compiled from a survey of U.S. households, dropped 18.9 points to 86.6, from a revised reading of 105.5.
BUSH'S CHAIN OF DISASTER
George W. Bush didn't heed the warnings that a major terrorist attack was being planned against the United States, including a Presidential Daily Briefing that flatly stated, "Bin Laden determined to strike in the United States." Then Bush attacked Afghanistan, supposedly to capture or kill the people responsible for September 11, and allowed them to escape. Rather than continuing the pursuit of Osama bin Laden, Bush launched a war against Iraq, even though Iraq was no threat to the United States. He didn't commit enough troops to Iraq or equip them properly. He pushed through massive tax cuts for his rich friends even in the midst of two wars. Then he didn't fund repair of the levees in New Orleans, even though there were warnings the levees wouldn't survive a major hurricane. Because the war in Iraq wasn't the cakewalk Bush and company predicted, National Guardsmen have been sent to Iraq, meaning they aren't here at home to deal with natural disasters. Equipment that could have been used to help the victims of Hurricane Katrina is in Iraq. It just goes on and on. This story by Stacy Bannerman is at seattlepi.nwsource.com:
Hurricane Katrina blew apart President Bush's rickety arguments about how invading Iraq would make us safe.
We don't know Hurricane Katrina's death toll, or how many Americans might have lived had the thousands of National Guard troops trained to help in the wake of hurricanes and floods not been protecting oil in the desert.
But we know 35 percent of Louisiana's and 40 percent of Mississippi's National Guard troops were in Iraq while their towns were leveled. National Guard officers repeatedly had warned officials about the catastrophic impact of having so many Guardsmen deployed in the event of a major natural disaster.
LEADING THE INDUSTRIALIZED WORLD IN POVERTY
In Republican land there are no real poor people in the United States. I've heard arguments that people who own VCR's or drive rickety old cars aren't really poor. Or Republicans will take another approach and claim that anyone poor in the United States is there because of being lazy, on drugs, or suffering from some other moral failing. George W. Bush, while at Harvard, once remarked that poor people are lazy. There's something especially galling about a rich punk who inherited his wealth making judgments about other people. In this article Katrina vanden Huevel looks at the issue of poverty in the United States. The article is linked at www.commondreams.org:
America's claim to shame is that it has the highest level of poverty in the industrialized world. Bush's four and a half years of trickle-down theories have failed miserably. The poor have become even poorer. The nation's poverty rate has climbed from a 27 year low of 11.3 percent to 12.7 percent last year. Thirty seven million Americans are living below the poverty line, a group so large, Newsweek's Jonathan Alter pointed out in a post-Katrina cover article, that it amounts to "a nation of poor people the size of Canada or Morocco living inside the United States."
Bush may talk about addressing poverty in this rich nation, but his coldhearted agenda has made the problems much more pronounced. His administration gave a massive tax break to corporations and the wealthiest individuals in his first term; since then, despite evidence of rising income inequalities, a growing sea of red ink, and $200 billion needed to fight the war in Iraq and another $200 billion we will spend to rebuild the Gulf region, Bush has ruled out repealing any of his tax cuts for the rich.(And this while household incomes failed to rise for five consecutive years--for the first time on record.)
THE FEAR OUT THERE
For most of the time since he stole the presidency George W. Bush has used fear as a tactical weapon. He has kept Americans ramped up with fear about a terrorist attack like the one we suffered on September 11. He ratcheted up fear about non-existent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, while letting Osama bin Laden, mastermind of 9/11, escape. He has allowed North Korea to become a nuclear threat to us, and his policies encourage nuclear proliferation. Now fear is boomeranging on the Bush administration. People saw the callousness and inept response to Hurricane Katrina. They see an economy that is shot full of holes. It benefits the very rich and is leaving most of us gasping in the dust. So, like his father before him, Mr. Bush sees a record drop in consumer confidence. This story by the Associated Press is at msnbc.msn.com:
Consumer confidence plummeted almost 19 points in September, its biggest drop in 15 years, as Americans worried about the economic fallout of Hurricane Katrina and rising gasoline prices.
The Conference Board said its Consumer Confidence Index, compiled from a survey of U.S. households, dropped 18.9 points to 86.6, from a revised reading of 105.5.
BUSH'S CHAIN OF DISASTER
George W. Bush didn't heed the warnings that a major terrorist attack was being planned against the United States, including a Presidential Daily Briefing that flatly stated, "Bin Laden determined to strike in the United States." Then Bush attacked Afghanistan, supposedly to capture or kill the people responsible for September 11, and allowed them to escape. Rather than continuing the pursuit of Osama bin Laden, Bush launched a war against Iraq, even though Iraq was no threat to the United States. He didn't commit enough troops to Iraq or equip them properly. He pushed through massive tax cuts for his rich friends even in the midst of two wars. Then he didn't fund repair of the levees in New Orleans, even though there were warnings the levees wouldn't survive a major hurricane. Because the war in Iraq wasn't the cakewalk Bush and company predicted, National Guardsmen have been sent to Iraq, meaning they aren't here at home to deal with natural disasters. Equipment that could have been used to help the victims of Hurricane Katrina is in Iraq. It just goes on and on. This story by Stacy Bannerman is at seattlepi.nwsource.com:
Hurricane Katrina blew apart President Bush's rickety arguments about how invading Iraq would make us safe.
We don't know Hurricane Katrina's death toll, or how many Americans might have lived had the thousands of National Guard troops trained to help in the wake of hurricanes and floods not been protecting oil in the desert.
But we know 35 percent of Louisiana's and 40 percent of Mississippi's National Guard troops were in Iraq while their towns were leveled. National Guard officers repeatedly had warned officials about the catastrophic impact of having so many Guardsmen deployed in the event of a major natural disaster.
LEADING THE INDUSTRIALIZED WORLD IN POVERTY
In Republican land there are no real poor people in the United States. I've heard arguments that people who own VCR's or drive rickety old cars aren't really poor. Or Republicans will take another approach and claim that anyone poor in the United States is there because of being lazy, on drugs, or suffering from some other moral failing. George W. Bush, while at Harvard, once remarked that poor people are lazy. There's something especially galling about a rich punk who inherited his wealth making judgments about other people. In this article Katrina vanden Huevel looks at the issue of poverty in the United States. The article is linked at www.commondreams.org:
America's claim to shame is that it has the highest level of poverty in the industrialized world. Bush's four and a half years of trickle-down theories have failed miserably. The poor have become even poorer. The nation's poverty rate has climbed from a 27 year low of 11.3 percent to 12.7 percent last year. Thirty seven million Americans are living below the poverty line, a group so large, Newsweek's Jonathan Alter pointed out in a post-Katrina cover article, that it amounts to "a nation of poor people the size of Canada or Morocco living inside the United States."
Bush may talk about addressing poverty in this rich nation, but his coldhearted agenda has made the problems much more pronounced. His administration gave a massive tax break to corporations and the wealthiest individuals in his first term; since then, despite evidence of rising income inequalities, a growing sea of red ink, and $200 billion needed to fight the war in Iraq and another $200 billion we will spend to rebuild the Gulf region, Bush has ruled out repealing any of his tax cuts for the rich.(And this while household incomes failed to rise for five consecutive years--for the first time on record.)
Monday, September 26, 2005
SEPTEMBER 26, 2005
BUSH GIVES BUSINESS A BAD NAME
If you judged business strictly from observing George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and other CEO types in this administration you would conclude that businessmen care only about short-term profits at the expense of the environment, the social fabric, and the future of the country. There are undoubtedly businessmen who are honest, visionary, and care about their community, both locally and globally, and they should step up and denounce this administration. This article by David Olive is at www.thestar.com:
The legacy of the Bush administration may well be that government can no longer be entrusted to business people.
That would be a shame, given that business savants as varied as Kennedy treasury secretary Douglas Dillon and Silicon Valley legend Dave Packard served ably in Washington.
Many of the most prominent CEOs in the current administration aren't real business people at all, but faux CEOs who after a lifetime in politics cashed in on brief stints as trophy CEOs at Fortune 500 firms before returning to public life in George W. Bush's White House.
RELIGIOUS BLOODLUST
All the major religions have their passages calling for mercy, forgiveness, and love. But they contain far too many passages dealing with violence, death, punishment, and damnation. Religious fundamentalists tend to seize on the punitive parts of religion and ignore all the parts about compassion. And that makes them very dangerous. In this commentary Bill Moyers talks about the dangers of politics and religion. The article is at www.informationclearinghouse.info:
The radical religious right has succeeded in taking over one of America’s great political parties-the country is not yet a theocracy but the Republican Party is-and they are driving American politics, using God as a battering ram on almost every issue: crime and punishment, foreign policy, health care, taxation, energy, regulation, social services and so on.
They have brought intensity, organization, and anger to the public square. They use the language of faith to demonize political opponents, mislead and misinform voters, censor writers and artists, ostracize dissenters, and marginalize the poor. These are the foot soldiers in a political holy war financed by wealthy economic interests and guided by savvy partisan operatives who know that couching political ambition in religious rhetoric can ignite the passion of followers.
MAYBE THE RED CROSS ISN'T BENEVOLENT
If the mention of any organization's name would make you feel warm and fuzzy it would probably be the American Red Cross. The Red Cross is there providing aid and comfort at scenes of devastation such as Hurricane Katrina. But this article turns a different light on the Red Cross, an organization that rakes in big bucks and also gets money from the government, an organization that solicits blood donations and then sells the donated blood. The article by Richard M. Walden is at www.commondreams.org:
The Red Cross brand is platinum. Its fundraising vastly outruns its programs because it does very little or nothing to rescue survivors, provide direct medical care or rebuild houses. After 9/11, the Red Cross collected more than $1 billion, a record in philanthropic fundraising after a disaster. But the Red Cross could do little more than trace missing people, help a handful of people in shelters and provide food to firefighters, police, paramedics and evacuation crews during that catastrophe.
When New York Atty. Gen. Eliot Spitzer asked for documentation of 9/11 expenditures, the Red Cross' response was that it is federally chartered and not answerable to state government regulators. The clamor rose, however, when the media began dissecting Red Cross activities in the 9/11 aftermath. This resulted in the resignation of the organization's president and chief executive, Dr. Bernadine Healy, and the appointment of ex-Sen. George Mitchell (D-Maine) to oversee its 9/11 fund and help clean up its image. Funds were then pushed out the door — including millions to New York limo drivers who said they lost income after 9/11, and to upscale residents of lower Manhattan to help pay their utility bills.
BUSH GIVES BUSINESS A BAD NAME
If you judged business strictly from observing George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and other CEO types in this administration you would conclude that businessmen care only about short-term profits at the expense of the environment, the social fabric, and the future of the country. There are undoubtedly businessmen who are honest, visionary, and care about their community, both locally and globally, and they should step up and denounce this administration. This article by David Olive is at www.thestar.com:
The legacy of the Bush administration may well be that government can no longer be entrusted to business people.
That would be a shame, given that business savants as varied as Kennedy treasury secretary Douglas Dillon and Silicon Valley legend Dave Packard served ably in Washington.
Many of the most prominent CEOs in the current administration aren't real business people at all, but faux CEOs who after a lifetime in politics cashed in on brief stints as trophy CEOs at Fortune 500 firms before returning to public life in George W. Bush's White House.
RELIGIOUS BLOODLUST
All the major religions have their passages calling for mercy, forgiveness, and love. But they contain far too many passages dealing with violence, death, punishment, and damnation. Religious fundamentalists tend to seize on the punitive parts of religion and ignore all the parts about compassion. And that makes them very dangerous. In this commentary Bill Moyers talks about the dangers of politics and religion. The article is at www.informationclearinghouse.info:
The radical religious right has succeeded in taking over one of America’s great political parties-the country is not yet a theocracy but the Republican Party is-and they are driving American politics, using God as a battering ram on almost every issue: crime and punishment, foreign policy, health care, taxation, energy, regulation, social services and so on.
They have brought intensity, organization, and anger to the public square. They use the language of faith to demonize political opponents, mislead and misinform voters, censor writers and artists, ostracize dissenters, and marginalize the poor. These are the foot soldiers in a political holy war financed by wealthy economic interests and guided by savvy partisan operatives who know that couching political ambition in religious rhetoric can ignite the passion of followers.
MAYBE THE RED CROSS ISN'T BENEVOLENT
If the mention of any organization's name would make you feel warm and fuzzy it would probably be the American Red Cross. The Red Cross is there providing aid and comfort at scenes of devastation such as Hurricane Katrina. But this article turns a different light on the Red Cross, an organization that rakes in big bucks and also gets money from the government, an organization that solicits blood donations and then sells the donated blood. The article by Richard M. Walden is at www.commondreams.org:
The Red Cross brand is platinum. Its fundraising vastly outruns its programs because it does very little or nothing to rescue survivors, provide direct medical care or rebuild houses. After 9/11, the Red Cross collected more than $1 billion, a record in philanthropic fundraising after a disaster. But the Red Cross could do little more than trace missing people, help a handful of people in shelters and provide food to firefighters, police, paramedics and evacuation crews during that catastrophe.
When New York Atty. Gen. Eliot Spitzer asked for documentation of 9/11 expenditures, the Red Cross' response was that it is federally chartered and not answerable to state government regulators. The clamor rose, however, when the media began dissecting Red Cross activities in the 9/11 aftermath. This resulted in the resignation of the organization's president and chief executive, Dr. Bernadine Healy, and the appointment of ex-Sen. George Mitchell (D-Maine) to oversee its 9/11 fund and help clean up its image. Funds were then pushed out the door — including millions to New York limo drivers who said they lost income after 9/11, and to upscale residents of lower Manhattan to help pay their utility bills.
Sunday, September 25, 2005
SEPTEMBER 25, 2005
MORE ON WESTCO EQUITIES
Fresno has a property management company called WestCo Equities. Like many of these companies, they "manage" properties for absentee landlords. My experiences with WestCo have included annual rent increases (one time it was $70 in just six months), a constant list of rules that make living in the complex more like being a prisoner than a renter, and now harassment.
Lest someone say, "Why don't you just move?" my response is that it's not so simple sometimes. You have to possess money for deposits and first month rents and a number of other issues. The free market isn't as free as some would suggest.
WestCo constantly wants access to your apartment for "inspections," whether to check the smoke detector or the A/C filters or whatever. I think the "inspections" are more for snooping purposes than for any legitimate inspection. For example, their filter "inspection" consists of leaving a filter that you have to install yourself. Their onsite manager has office hours of 9 a.m.-4 p.m. Monday through Friday. During that time the office is closed one hour for lunch. It makes it virtually impossible for you to see the manager if you work a typical schedule, and then the office is closed on weekends. So, as I've said before, I wouldn't recommend renting any apartment managed by this Big Brother company.
BUSH'S SHAM GOVERNMENT
The Hurricane Katrina disaster brought into sharp focus that you need qualified professionals in government, especially in agencies like FEMA where competence is a matter of life and death. But competence has not been important to George W. Bush. He has stocked the government with lackies who get the jobs mostly because they are loyal to Bush, not because they bring any sense of duty or competence to the job. Bush likes hard-nosed political operatives like Karl Rove, who can stage manage a presidency and divert attention from the American public while our civil liberties get stripped away and corporations get enriched. In this editorial The New York Times talks about the Bush administration's dedication to low expectations for most of us. The editorial is at www.nytimes.com:
Throughout his campaigns in 2000 and 2004, George W. Bush talked about "the soft bigotry of low expectations": the mind-set that tolerates poor school performance and dead-end careers for minority students on the presumption that they are incapable of doing better. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said recently that this phrase attracted her to Mr. Bush more than anything else.
It was, indeed, a brilliant encapsulation of so much of what is wrong with American education. But while Mr. Bush has been worrying about low expectations in schools, he's been ratcheting the bar downward himself on almost everything else.
The president's recent schedule of nonstop disaster-scene photo-ops is reminiscent of the principal of a failing school who believes he's doing a great job because he makes it a point to drop in on every class play and teacher retirement party. And if there ever was an exhibit of the misguided conviction that for some people very little is good enough, it's the current administration spin that the proposed Iraqi constitution is fine because the founding fathers didn't give women equal rights either.
BUSH IS BREAKING SOCIAL CONTRACT
George W. Bush and members of his administration believe they are entitled to their positions of power and that they are entitled to do whatever they want, regardless of the will of the people. For example, a majority of Americans want us out of the loathsome war in Iraq, but Bush insists he will continue the bloodbath. Most
Americans want to protect the pristine environment in ANWR, but Bush and his oil company cronies want to drill there. Most Americans favor addresssing issues about global climate change, but Bush and company dismiss evidence for global warming and drag their feet. The relationship between the American people and the government is that government derives its power from consent of the governed, and Bush has shattered that contract. In this article MICHAEL IGNATIEFF writes about the broken contract. The article is at www.nytimes.com:
A contract of citizenship defines the duties of care that public officials owe to the people of a democratic society. The Constitution defines some parts of this contract, and statutes define other parts, but much of it is a tacit understanding that citizens have about what to expect from their government. Its basic term is protection: helping citizens to protect their families and possessions from forces beyond their control. Let's not suppose this contract is uncontroversial. American politics is a furious argument about what should be in the contract and what shouldn't be. But there is enough agreement, most of the time, about what the contract contains for America to hold together as a political community. When disasters strike, they test whether the contract is respected in a citizen's hour of need. When the levees broke, the contract of American citizenship failed.
MORE ON WESTCO EQUITIES
Fresno has a property management company called WestCo Equities. Like many of these companies, they "manage" properties for absentee landlords. My experiences with WestCo have included annual rent increases (one time it was $70 in just six months), a constant list of rules that make living in the complex more like being a prisoner than a renter, and now harassment.
Lest someone say, "Why don't you just move?" my response is that it's not so simple sometimes. You have to possess money for deposits and first month rents and a number of other issues. The free market isn't as free as some would suggest.
WestCo constantly wants access to your apartment for "inspections," whether to check the smoke detector or the A/C filters or whatever. I think the "inspections" are more for snooping purposes than for any legitimate inspection. For example, their filter "inspection" consists of leaving a filter that you have to install yourself. Their onsite manager has office hours of 9 a.m.-4 p.m. Monday through Friday. During that time the office is closed one hour for lunch. It makes it virtually impossible for you to see the manager if you work a typical schedule, and then the office is closed on weekends. So, as I've said before, I wouldn't recommend renting any apartment managed by this Big Brother company.
BUSH'S SHAM GOVERNMENT
The Hurricane Katrina disaster brought into sharp focus that you need qualified professionals in government, especially in agencies like FEMA where competence is a matter of life and death. But competence has not been important to George W. Bush. He has stocked the government with lackies who get the jobs mostly because they are loyal to Bush, not because they bring any sense of duty or competence to the job. Bush likes hard-nosed political operatives like Karl Rove, who can stage manage a presidency and divert attention from the American public while our civil liberties get stripped away and corporations get enriched. In this editorial The New York Times talks about the Bush administration's dedication to low expectations for most of us. The editorial is at www.nytimes.com:
Throughout his campaigns in 2000 and 2004, George W. Bush talked about "the soft bigotry of low expectations": the mind-set that tolerates poor school performance and dead-end careers for minority students on the presumption that they are incapable of doing better. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said recently that this phrase attracted her to Mr. Bush more than anything else.
It was, indeed, a brilliant encapsulation of so much of what is wrong with American education. But while Mr. Bush has been worrying about low expectations in schools, he's been ratcheting the bar downward himself on almost everything else.
The president's recent schedule of nonstop disaster-scene photo-ops is reminiscent of the principal of a failing school who believes he's doing a great job because he makes it a point to drop in on every class play and teacher retirement party. And if there ever was an exhibit of the misguided conviction that for some people very little is good enough, it's the current administration spin that the proposed Iraqi constitution is fine because the founding fathers didn't give women equal rights either.
BUSH IS BREAKING SOCIAL CONTRACT
George W. Bush and members of his administration believe they are entitled to their positions of power and that they are entitled to do whatever they want, regardless of the will of the people. For example, a majority of Americans want us out of the loathsome war in Iraq, but Bush insists he will continue the bloodbath. Most
Americans want to protect the pristine environment in ANWR, but Bush and his oil company cronies want to drill there. Most Americans favor addresssing issues about global climate change, but Bush and company dismiss evidence for global warming and drag their feet. The relationship between the American people and the government is that government derives its power from consent of the governed, and Bush has shattered that contract. In this article MICHAEL IGNATIEFF writes about the broken contract. The article is at www.nytimes.com:
A contract of citizenship defines the duties of care that public officials owe to the people of a democratic society. The Constitution defines some parts of this contract, and statutes define other parts, but much of it is a tacit understanding that citizens have about what to expect from their government. Its basic term is protection: helping citizens to protect their families and possessions from forces beyond their control. Let's not suppose this contract is uncontroversial. American politics is a furious argument about what should be in the contract and what shouldn't be. But there is enough agreement, most of the time, about what the contract contains for America to hold together as a political community. When disasters strike, they test whether the contract is respected in a citizen's hour of need. When the levees broke, the contract of American citizenship failed.
Saturday, September 24, 2005
SEPTEMBER 24, 2005
BUSH TAX CUTS ACTUALLY RAISE TAXES ON MIDDLE CLASS
"Tax cut" is one of the mantras repeated by right-wingers and the Bush administration. It's the panacea for whatever ails you. What the Bush tax cutters didn't tell us was that their "cuts" would cause the alternative minimum tax to kick in for millions of middle class taxpayers and actually increase their tax burden. This article by David Cay Johnston is at www.nytimes.com:
Over the next 10 years, Americans will not receive nearly $750 billion in tax cuts sponsored by President Bush because the cuts will be offset by the alternative minimum tax, a new report by Congressional tax specialists shows.
The report, prepared by the staff of the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, said that from 2006 to 2015, Americans would pay as much as $1.1 trillion more under the alternative minimum tax, partly as a result of the Bush tax cuts.
The Bush tax cuts reduced the bill for millions of taxpayers to a level that will subject them to the alternative minimum tax instead of the standard tax rate. As a result, the report said, their tax savings would be reduced by a total of $739.2 billion over the 10 years.
CORPORATE CALLOUSNESS MENTALITY
Back in 1973 there was a problem with the Chevy Malibu. If the car was hit in a particular way, the fuel tank would explode and fire would engulf the occupants. So General Motors did a cost-benefit analysis and concluded it would be less expensive to pay out judgments in lawsuits than to correct the problem. There's something really wrong when profits take precedence over saving lives. The same logic applies to the policies of the Bush administration. Patricia Goldsmith writes about it in this article linked at www.smirkingchimp.com:
In a 1973 court case involving General Motors, documents showed that a GM engineer had created a cost-benefit analysis to decide whether or not to correct a serious defect in the company's Malibu model. The analyst calculated that GM would pay $200,000 in legal costs for each of the projected 500 lives lost each year due to the defect. Fixing the defect, the study showed, would be more expensive than paying the costs of litigation. [1] So they didn't fix it.
GM had repositioned the fuel tank to cut costs. In most accidents, it didn't matter. But when the car was hit in a certain way, fuel-fed fires resulted. The defendants in the case in question suffered "horrible and disfiguring second- and third-degree burns. . . . Three of the children were burned over 60 percent of their bodies, and one of them had to have her hand amputated."
COMPETENCE MATTERS
It's hard to believe a lot of people voted for George W. Bush because he seemed like a guy they'd want to have a beer with. First, that was never going to happen, and standards for the President of the United States should be much higher. When you choose a lawyer or financial adviser or doctor you want someone who is skilled and professional. Why do we relax that standard for the man who holds the fate of millions in his hands? Bob Herbert talks about it in this column linked at www.truthout.org:
There is a general sense now that things are falling apart. The economy was already faltering before Katrina hit. Gasoline prices are starting to undermine the standard of living of some Americans, and a full-blown home-heating-oil crisis could erupt this winter. The administration's awful response to the agony of the Gulf Coast has left most Americans believing that we are not prepared to cope with a large terrorist attack. And Osama bin Laden is still at large.
This is what happens when voters choose a president because he seems like a nice guy, like someone who'd be fun at a barbecue or a ballgame. You'd never use that criterion when choosing a surgeon, or a pilot to fly your family across the country.
Mr. Bush will be at the helm of the ship of state for three more years, so we have no choice but to hang on. But the next time around, voters need to keep in mind that beyond the incessant yammering about left and right, big government and small, Democrats and Republicans, is a more immediate issue, and that's competence.
BUSH TAX CUTS ACTUALLY RAISE TAXES ON MIDDLE CLASS
"Tax cut" is one of the mantras repeated by right-wingers and the Bush administration. It's the panacea for whatever ails you. What the Bush tax cutters didn't tell us was that their "cuts" would cause the alternative minimum tax to kick in for millions of middle class taxpayers and actually increase their tax burden. This article by David Cay Johnston is at www.nytimes.com:
Over the next 10 years, Americans will not receive nearly $750 billion in tax cuts sponsored by President Bush because the cuts will be offset by the alternative minimum tax, a new report by Congressional tax specialists shows.
The report, prepared by the staff of the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, said that from 2006 to 2015, Americans would pay as much as $1.1 trillion more under the alternative minimum tax, partly as a result of the Bush tax cuts.
The Bush tax cuts reduced the bill for millions of taxpayers to a level that will subject them to the alternative minimum tax instead of the standard tax rate. As a result, the report said, their tax savings would be reduced by a total of $739.2 billion over the 10 years.
CORPORATE CALLOUSNESS MENTALITY
Back in 1973 there was a problem with the Chevy Malibu. If the car was hit in a particular way, the fuel tank would explode and fire would engulf the occupants. So General Motors did a cost-benefit analysis and concluded it would be less expensive to pay out judgments in lawsuits than to correct the problem. There's something really wrong when profits take precedence over saving lives. The same logic applies to the policies of the Bush administration. Patricia Goldsmith writes about it in this article linked at www.smirkingchimp.com:
In a 1973 court case involving General Motors, documents showed that a GM engineer had created a cost-benefit analysis to decide whether or not to correct a serious defect in the company's Malibu model. The analyst calculated that GM would pay $200,000 in legal costs for each of the projected 500 lives lost each year due to the defect. Fixing the defect, the study showed, would be more expensive than paying the costs of litigation. [1] So they didn't fix it.
GM had repositioned the fuel tank to cut costs. In most accidents, it didn't matter. But when the car was hit in a certain way, fuel-fed fires resulted. The defendants in the case in question suffered "horrible and disfiguring second- and third-degree burns. . . . Three of the children were burned over 60 percent of their bodies, and one of them had to have her hand amputated."
COMPETENCE MATTERS
It's hard to believe a lot of people voted for George W. Bush because he seemed like a guy they'd want to have a beer with. First, that was never going to happen, and standards for the President of the United States should be much higher. When you choose a lawyer or financial adviser or doctor you want someone who is skilled and professional. Why do we relax that standard for the man who holds the fate of millions in his hands? Bob Herbert talks about it in this column linked at www.truthout.org:
There is a general sense now that things are falling apart. The economy was already faltering before Katrina hit. Gasoline prices are starting to undermine the standard of living of some Americans, and a full-blown home-heating-oil crisis could erupt this winter. The administration's awful response to the agony of the Gulf Coast has left most Americans believing that we are not prepared to cope with a large terrorist attack. And Osama bin Laden is still at large.
This is what happens when voters choose a president because he seems like a nice guy, like someone who'd be fun at a barbecue or a ballgame. You'd never use that criterion when choosing a surgeon, or a pilot to fly your family across the country.
Mr. Bush will be at the helm of the ship of state for three more years, so we have no choice but to hang on. But the next time around, voters need to keep in mind that beyond the incessant yammering about left and right, big government and small, Democrats and Republicans, is a more immediate issue, and that's competence.
Friday, September 23, 2005
SEPTEMBER 23, 2005
BUSH EVEN BLAMES REAGAN FOR 9/11
George W. Bush finds a way to always pass the buck. Now he's laying the blame for 9/11 on Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, and, of course, Bill Clinton. According to Bush, those presidents' restraint in using massive military force sent a message to terrorists that we were "weak." I wonder, then, why the attack on 9/11, when the tough macho Bush administration was in power, took place. If those previous presidents sent such a wrong message, why didn't the attack happen on their watches? This article by Warren Vieth is at www.latimes.com:
President Bush said Thursday that mistakes made by three of his predecessors, including the Reagan administration's restraint after the 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon, had emboldened terrorists and helped set the stage for the Sept. 11 attacks.
Bush said he was determined not to repeat the pattern by pulling U.S. troops out of Iraq before the insurgency there is contained and Iraqi forces are able to provide adequate security.
BEING POOR IN REPUBLICAN AMERICA
In Republican land you're only poor if you're lazy or shiftless or on drugs. It can't be because there are little things like racial and gender discrimination. It can't be because wages are miserly while CEOs live like emperors. It can't be because all the basic costs of living go up and up while wages remain stagnant. This article by Kevin Drum is at www.washingtonmonthly.com:
THE REPUBLICAN WAR ON THE POOR....As it turns out, the Republican Study Committee's list of proposed spending cuts is — aside from some humorous arithmetic errors — mostly just a standard conservative wish list, and not a very serious one at that. What's more, as Joel Achenbach points out, a huge part of it is nothing more than the usual attacks on the poor, including a total (by my count) of $477 billion in Medicare/Medicaid cuts.
Achenbach also points out another conservative hobbyhorse that I noticed as well: "Verify Income of Earned Income Tax Credit Participants." Talk about a blast from the past! The EITC is a way of boosting the incomes of the working poor, one that actually works pretty well, so naturally it's been a conservative target for years. In the mid 90s, just after Newt Gingrich came to power and shortly before the famous IRS show trials orchestrated by Senator William Roth (short version: IRS agents = jackbooted thugs), Bill Clinton caved in to pressure from Republicans who were supposedly concerned about EITC "abuse" and approved a $100 million program to audit EITC recipients.
NOW FRIST MIRED IN SCANDAL
Scandals, scandals everywhere in Republican land. You almost get scandal fatigue We know that House Majority Leader Tom DeLay should probably be indicted, convicted, and sent to prison for various shady deals. George W. Bush should probably be prosecuted for insider trading when he was on the board of Harken Energy, not to mention various other things. Dick Cheney is up to his eyeballs with Halliburton and the massive ripoffs Halliburton has pulled on American taxpayers. Now we learn that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist--gasp!--might be involved in insider trading. This article by Cenk Uygur is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
Senator Bill Frist (R-TN) held on to his shares of Hospital Corporation of America (HCA) through thick and thin. When people said it might be a conflict of interest for him to have millions of dollars invested in the largest for-profit hospital chain in America while he presided over legislation affecting the medical industry, he stood firm. He would not sell under any circumstance - that is, of course, unless he got wind of a negative earnings report that was about to come out.
Two weeks before HCA announced their disappointing earnings on July 13, 2005, Senator Frist finally decided to sell all of his shares in the company. What a coincidence, because as luck would have it the earnings news led to the stock of the company dropping 15%.
BUSH EVEN BLAMES REAGAN FOR 9/11
George W. Bush finds a way to always pass the buck. Now he's laying the blame for 9/11 on Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, and, of course, Bill Clinton. According to Bush, those presidents' restraint in using massive military force sent a message to terrorists that we were "weak." I wonder, then, why the attack on 9/11, when the tough macho Bush administration was in power, took place. If those previous presidents sent such a wrong message, why didn't the attack happen on their watches? This article by Warren Vieth is at www.latimes.com:
President Bush said Thursday that mistakes made by three of his predecessors, including the Reagan administration's restraint after the 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon, had emboldened terrorists and helped set the stage for the Sept. 11 attacks.
Bush said he was determined not to repeat the pattern by pulling U.S. troops out of Iraq before the insurgency there is contained and Iraqi forces are able to provide adequate security.
BEING POOR IN REPUBLICAN AMERICA
In Republican land you're only poor if you're lazy or shiftless or on drugs. It can't be because there are little things like racial and gender discrimination. It can't be because wages are miserly while CEOs live like emperors. It can't be because all the basic costs of living go up and up while wages remain stagnant. This article by Kevin Drum is at www.washingtonmonthly.com:
THE REPUBLICAN WAR ON THE POOR....As it turns out, the Republican Study Committee's list of proposed spending cuts is — aside from some humorous arithmetic errors — mostly just a standard conservative wish list, and not a very serious one at that. What's more, as Joel Achenbach points out, a huge part of it is nothing more than the usual attacks on the poor, including a total (by my count) of $477 billion in Medicare/Medicaid cuts.
Achenbach also points out another conservative hobbyhorse that I noticed as well: "Verify Income of Earned Income Tax Credit Participants." Talk about a blast from the past! The EITC is a way of boosting the incomes of the working poor, one that actually works pretty well, so naturally it's been a conservative target for years. In the mid 90s, just after Newt Gingrich came to power and shortly before the famous IRS show trials orchestrated by Senator William Roth (short version: IRS agents = jackbooted thugs), Bill Clinton caved in to pressure from Republicans who were supposedly concerned about EITC "abuse" and approved a $100 million program to audit EITC recipients.
NOW FRIST MIRED IN SCANDAL
Scandals, scandals everywhere in Republican land. You almost get scandal fatigue We know that House Majority Leader Tom DeLay should probably be indicted, convicted, and sent to prison for various shady deals. George W. Bush should probably be prosecuted for insider trading when he was on the board of Harken Energy, not to mention various other things. Dick Cheney is up to his eyeballs with Halliburton and the massive ripoffs Halliburton has pulled on American taxpayers. Now we learn that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist--gasp!--might be involved in insider trading. This article by Cenk Uygur is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
Senator Bill Frist (R-TN) held on to his shares of Hospital Corporation of America (HCA) through thick and thin. When people said it might be a conflict of interest for him to have millions of dollars invested in the largest for-profit hospital chain in America while he presided over legislation affecting the medical industry, he stood firm. He would not sell under any circumstance - that is, of course, unless he got wind of a negative earnings report that was about to come out.
Two weeks before HCA announced their disappointing earnings on July 13, 2005, Senator Frist finally decided to sell all of his shares in the company. What a coincidence, because as luck would have it the earnings news led to the stock of the company dropping 15%.
Thursday, September 22, 2005
SEPTEMBER 22, 2005
RIGHT WING LABORATORY IN THE GULF
Iraq has been used as a laboratory for right-wing ideas and now they want to do the same thing in the Gulf Coast. Frankenstein had nothing on these monsters. This article by Julian Borger is at www.commondreams.org:
The White House has argued that the deregulation measures are designed to disentangle the relief effort from federal red tape. But Democrats are furious at the proposals. They view them as an attempt to slip through unpopular policies under cover of the wave of sympathy for Katrina's victims. "The plan they're designing for the Gulf coast turns the region into a vast laboratory for rightwing ideological experiments," said John Kerry, the party's defeated 2004 presidential candidate.
Conservative commentators see the measures as an opportunity to reverse federal entitlement programmes dating back to Franklin Roosevelt's that they argue ingrain poverty by encouraging dependency on the government. "The objection to these Bush proposals isn't fiscal, but philosophical," Rich Lowry, an editor on the National Review magazine, wrote. "They serve to undermine the principle of government dependency that underpins the contemporary welfare state, and to which liberals are utterly devoted."
LOW WAGES, ALWAYS
Even though we have had little inflation until now, the Federal Reserve has been relentlessly raising interest rates. Every time the Fed raises rates it hits people who have variable loans, either home loans or credit cards, and it drives up the cost of credit everywhere. It dampens hiring and growth, which seems to be the way Alan Greenspan and company like it. This article by Randolph T. Holhut is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
No, in Greenspan's mind, inflation is the threat. So this week, for the 11th time since June 2004, the Federal Reserve raised its short-term interest rates.
This is turn drives up the cost of credit for consumers - higher credit card interest rates, higher home equity loans, higher mortgages. A nation already overextended in debt gets another kick in the wallet.
But that doesn't matter to Greenspan and the Fed. As long as economic growth is sufficiently restrained to keep wages low and price growth minimal, who cares who gets hurt? Just keep the financial markets safe.
A rise in the Gross Domestic Product doesn't mean much if your expenses - particularly your energy costs - are rising faster than your salary.
KATRINA NOT ONLY DEFICIT PROBLEM
Hurricane Katrina has brought several issues into stark focus: racism, poverty, and federal deficits, among them. Many in the political establishment have asked how we can pay the costs of rebuilding from Hurricane Katrina, but the issue of federal deficits should be of concern even without Katrina. It's like the mammoth rock that chased Indiana Jones through the cave. It's gaining on us and threatening to crush us. This article by Gene Sperling is at www.motherjones.com:
Consider the following: prior to Katrina, Goldman Sachs estimated that the next 10 years – which had been projected to be surplus years when Bush took office – will now see a cumulative deficit of $4.75 trillion. Projections from Economy.com came in lower, but still over $4 trillion, while the bipartisan Concord Coalition had projected an even higher $5.7 trillion deficit. It is this dramatic swing from projected 10-year surpluses of over $5 trillion to near $5 trillion deficits – and not the one-time costs of Katrina – which poses the most serious threat to global economic stability, our long-term national savings rates, and our ability to address Medicare and Social Security, while still investing in our children. Simply finding one-time savings to pay for the one-time costs of Katrina just means that Goldman Sachs’ estimate will stay at $4.75 trillion and not $5 trillion. Not a staggering accomplishment.
RIGHT WING LABORATORY IN THE GULF
Iraq has been used as a laboratory for right-wing ideas and now they want to do the same thing in the Gulf Coast. Frankenstein had nothing on these monsters. This article by Julian Borger is at www.commondreams.org:
The White House has argued that the deregulation measures are designed to disentangle the relief effort from federal red tape. But Democrats are furious at the proposals. They view them as an attempt to slip through unpopular policies under cover of the wave of sympathy for Katrina's victims. "The plan they're designing for the Gulf coast turns the region into a vast laboratory for rightwing ideological experiments," said John Kerry, the party's defeated 2004 presidential candidate.
Conservative commentators see the measures as an opportunity to reverse federal entitlement programmes dating back to Franklin Roosevelt's that they argue ingrain poverty by encouraging dependency on the government. "The objection to these Bush proposals isn't fiscal, but philosophical," Rich Lowry, an editor on the National Review magazine, wrote. "They serve to undermine the principle of government dependency that underpins the contemporary welfare state, and to which liberals are utterly devoted."
LOW WAGES, ALWAYS
Even though we have had little inflation until now, the Federal Reserve has been relentlessly raising interest rates. Every time the Fed raises rates it hits people who have variable loans, either home loans or credit cards, and it drives up the cost of credit everywhere. It dampens hiring and growth, which seems to be the way Alan Greenspan and company like it. This article by Randolph T. Holhut is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
No, in Greenspan's mind, inflation is the threat. So this week, for the 11th time since June 2004, the Federal Reserve raised its short-term interest rates.
This is turn drives up the cost of credit for consumers - higher credit card interest rates, higher home equity loans, higher mortgages. A nation already overextended in debt gets another kick in the wallet.
But that doesn't matter to Greenspan and the Fed. As long as economic growth is sufficiently restrained to keep wages low and price growth minimal, who cares who gets hurt? Just keep the financial markets safe.
A rise in the Gross Domestic Product doesn't mean much if your expenses - particularly your energy costs - are rising faster than your salary.
KATRINA NOT ONLY DEFICIT PROBLEM
Hurricane Katrina has brought several issues into stark focus: racism, poverty, and federal deficits, among them. Many in the political establishment have asked how we can pay the costs of rebuilding from Hurricane Katrina, but the issue of federal deficits should be of concern even without Katrina. It's like the mammoth rock that chased Indiana Jones through the cave. It's gaining on us and threatening to crush us. This article by Gene Sperling is at www.motherjones.com:
Consider the following: prior to Katrina, Goldman Sachs estimated that the next 10 years – which had been projected to be surplus years when Bush took office – will now see a cumulative deficit of $4.75 trillion. Projections from Economy.com came in lower, but still over $4 trillion, while the bipartisan Concord Coalition had projected an even higher $5.7 trillion deficit. It is this dramatic swing from projected 10-year surpluses of over $5 trillion to near $5 trillion deficits – and not the one-time costs of Katrina – which poses the most serious threat to global economic stability, our long-term national savings rates, and our ability to address Medicare and Social Security, while still investing in our children. Simply finding one-time savings to pay for the one-time costs of Katrina just means that Goldman Sachs’ estimate will stay at $4.75 trillion and not $5 trillion. Not a staggering accomplishment.
Wednesday, September 21, 2005
SEPTEMBER 21, 2005
CHRISTIAN COALITION FADING FAST
Wonder if they offended God somehow? The once influential Christian Coalition is mired in debt and fading rapidly, according to this article. Now let's hope the same thing happens to some other right-wing groups. This article by Lee Bandy is at www.thestate.com:
Rocked by financial debt, lawsuits and the loss of experienced political leaders, the Christian Coalition has become a pale imitation of its once-powerful self.
Some say the group — now based in Charleston and headed by a South Carolinian — is on life support, having been eclipsed by higher-profile, better-funded groups such as Focus on the Family.
“The coalition as we knew it doesn’t exist,” says Lois Eargle, former chairwoman of the Horry County Christian Coalition.
DOES KATRINA PORTEND THE FUTURE?
Hurricane Katrina just happened and now another monster hurricane is ravaging the Gulf Coast. I wonder how many right-wingers will continue to mock environmentalists and claim that global climate change is a myth. In this article Richard Steiner talks about what we can learn--or not learn--from Hurricane Katrina that may impact the future of the human race. This article is linked at www.commondreams.org:
Herein may lie our potential evolutionary downfall -- our modern inability to act decisively and cooperatively to avert certain disaster.
In this way, Katrina may provide -- in fast-forward microcosm -- a vision of the very future of Homo sapiens itself. The transcendent lesson of this perfect storm may be that the natural environment is ignored only at our own peril. As Katrina swept away lives and life-support systems on the Gulf Coast, the tragedy may give focus to the deteriorating condition of the essential environmental services the planet provides for the health and welfare of all 6.5 billion of us -- air, freshwater, food, shelter, energy, medicines, nutrient recycling, waste processing, enjoyment, etc.
History is littered with fallen civilizations that ignored their deteriorating environmental condition -- the Anasazi, Maya, Greenland Norse, Easter Islanders, etc. And like Exxon Valdez, Chernobyl and Bhopal, Katrina will now take its place in history as one of the seminal, time-compressed disasters that provide an overnight glimpse of the long-term degradation of the life-support systems of our home planet.
THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT BUSH SAYS
You should not take anything George W. Bush or members of his administration say at face value. In fact, you should assume just the opposite is true. In his photo-op from New Orleans Bush made all kinds of happy sounds about fighting poverty and racism. In the meantime, he and his administration are going in the opposite direction. This commentary by Matthew Rothschild is at www.progressive.org:
Forget about Bush’s words. Watch his actions.
For all of Bush’s pious pronouncements last week about his concern for racism and poverty on the Gulf Coast, he’s already taken steps that belie that concern.
If he’s so worried about poverty, why did he lift the requirement that government contractors pay the prevailing wage on construction jobs?
If he’s so worried about racism, why did he lift the requirement that government contractors have an affirmative action plan in place?
The answer is obvious. He isn’t worried about poverty or racism. He’s worried about helping out his friends in the business community.
That the disaster vultures like Halliburton are already feasting on Katrina is shameless enough.
CHRISTIAN COALITION FADING FAST
Wonder if they offended God somehow? The once influential Christian Coalition is mired in debt and fading rapidly, according to this article. Now let's hope the same thing happens to some other right-wing groups. This article by Lee Bandy is at www.thestate.com:
Rocked by financial debt, lawsuits and the loss of experienced political leaders, the Christian Coalition has become a pale imitation of its once-powerful self.
Some say the group — now based in Charleston and headed by a South Carolinian — is on life support, having been eclipsed by higher-profile, better-funded groups such as Focus on the Family.
“The coalition as we knew it doesn’t exist,” says Lois Eargle, former chairwoman of the Horry County Christian Coalition.
DOES KATRINA PORTEND THE FUTURE?
Hurricane Katrina just happened and now another monster hurricane is ravaging the Gulf Coast. I wonder how many right-wingers will continue to mock environmentalists and claim that global climate change is a myth. In this article Richard Steiner talks about what we can learn--or not learn--from Hurricane Katrina that may impact the future of the human race. This article is linked at www.commondreams.org:
Herein may lie our potential evolutionary downfall -- our modern inability to act decisively and cooperatively to avert certain disaster.
In this way, Katrina may provide -- in fast-forward microcosm -- a vision of the very future of Homo sapiens itself. The transcendent lesson of this perfect storm may be that the natural environment is ignored only at our own peril. As Katrina swept away lives and life-support systems on the Gulf Coast, the tragedy may give focus to the deteriorating condition of the essential environmental services the planet provides for the health and welfare of all 6.5 billion of us -- air, freshwater, food, shelter, energy, medicines, nutrient recycling, waste processing, enjoyment, etc.
History is littered with fallen civilizations that ignored their deteriorating environmental condition -- the Anasazi, Maya, Greenland Norse, Easter Islanders, etc. And like Exxon Valdez, Chernobyl and Bhopal, Katrina will now take its place in history as one of the seminal, time-compressed disasters that provide an overnight glimpse of the long-term degradation of the life-support systems of our home planet.
THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT BUSH SAYS
You should not take anything George W. Bush or members of his administration say at face value. In fact, you should assume just the opposite is true. In his photo-op from New Orleans Bush made all kinds of happy sounds about fighting poverty and racism. In the meantime, he and his administration are going in the opposite direction. This commentary by Matthew Rothschild is at www.progressive.org:
Forget about Bush’s words. Watch his actions.
For all of Bush’s pious pronouncements last week about his concern for racism and poverty on the Gulf Coast, he’s already taken steps that belie that concern.
If he’s so worried about poverty, why did he lift the requirement that government contractors pay the prevailing wage on construction jobs?
If he’s so worried about racism, why did he lift the requirement that government contractors have an affirmative action plan in place?
The answer is obvious. He isn’t worried about poverty or racism. He’s worried about helping out his friends in the business community.
That the disaster vultures like Halliburton are already feasting on Katrina is shameless enough.
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
SEPTEMBER 20, 2005
DON'T GET FOOLED AGAIN
In one of the malapropisms he's famous for George W. Bush once said, "Don't get fooled again." That should be the motto of every American listening to all the promises Mr. Bush makes. There were the lies about Iraq, for instance, and the promises that Iraq would be rebuilt and turned into a model of democracy. Hasn't happened. Now we hear all kinds of promises for rebuilding New Orleans and the Gulf Coast. Don't believe it. Bob Herbert writes about Bush in his column linked at www.startribune.com:
The country has put its faith in Bush many times before, and come up empty. It may be cynical, but my guess is that if we believe him again this time, we're going to end up on our collective keisters, just like Charlie Brown, who could never stop himself from kicking mightily at empty space, which was all that was left each time Lucy snatched the ball away.
In March 2003, in another nationally televised address, the president told us we had no choice but to go to war with Iraq because Saddam Hussein was sitting on "some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."
ANOTHER BEE JAW DROPPER
Sometimes when you see letters to the Fresno Bee from the rabid right you have to wonder if it's tongue in cheek. Today is a good example. The correspondent makes the astounding claim that what Bush does in the Gulf Coast will be a "blow to liberalism." George W. Bush has been the greatest case for liberalism since Herbert Hoover. He is proof positive that conservatism is about crony capitalism, greed, and exploitation. We have seen surpluses turned into massive deficits under Bush. We have seen civil liberties being ripped away from us. We have seen poverty on the increase. Most people in the middle class are losing ground and lurking dangerously near being poor. Over forty million U.S. citizens have no health insurance. We have seen government ineptitude at an unprecedented level. Yeah, a real "blow to liberalism."
BUSH'S STAGED PRESIDENCY
It wouldn't be accurate to say that George W. Bush's presidency is all show and no substance. It's just that the substance, like the toxic waters in New Orleans, is corrosive. But Bush's handlers have been masterful at photo-ops. They have shown Bush against the backdrop of Mt. Rushmore and the Statue of Liberty. They just finished the photo-op in New Orleans showing Bush against the backdrop of a cathedral, while carefully screening out the devastated parts of New Orleans It's past time for Americans to stop being diverted by the photo-ops and look around at the reality. This article by Pierre Tristam is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
The evening of Oct. 7, 2001, Bush announced the war on Afghanistan in an address to the nation from the White House Treaty Room, with a painting of President McKinley presiding over ceremonies ending the Spanish-American War. McKinley, of course, launched America's 20th century empire. For the first anniversary of the 2001 attacks, the White House planted Bush on Ellis Island, with the Statue of Liberty looming over his shoulder, and rented three barges-full of stadium lights to illuminate the statue during the evening address to the nation. The statue was off-limits at the time, and would remain so until 2004. For a speech from Mt. Rushmore the following summer, the president's podium was set in such a way as to align Bush's profile along that of Washington, Jefferson, Teddy Roosevelt and Lincoln. Only God was missing (hold on to your kerchiefs).
DON'T GET FOOLED AGAIN
In one of the malapropisms he's famous for George W. Bush once said, "Don't get fooled again." That should be the motto of every American listening to all the promises Mr. Bush makes. There were the lies about Iraq, for instance, and the promises that Iraq would be rebuilt and turned into a model of democracy. Hasn't happened. Now we hear all kinds of promises for rebuilding New Orleans and the Gulf Coast. Don't believe it. Bob Herbert writes about Bush in his column linked at www.startribune.com:
The country has put its faith in Bush many times before, and come up empty. It may be cynical, but my guess is that if we believe him again this time, we're going to end up on our collective keisters, just like Charlie Brown, who could never stop himself from kicking mightily at empty space, which was all that was left each time Lucy snatched the ball away.
In March 2003, in another nationally televised address, the president told us we had no choice but to go to war with Iraq because Saddam Hussein was sitting on "some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."
ANOTHER BEE JAW DROPPER
Sometimes when you see letters to the Fresno Bee from the rabid right you have to wonder if it's tongue in cheek. Today is a good example. The correspondent makes the astounding claim that what Bush does in the Gulf Coast will be a "blow to liberalism." George W. Bush has been the greatest case for liberalism since Herbert Hoover. He is proof positive that conservatism is about crony capitalism, greed, and exploitation. We have seen surpluses turned into massive deficits under Bush. We have seen civil liberties being ripped away from us. We have seen poverty on the increase. Most people in the middle class are losing ground and lurking dangerously near being poor. Over forty million U.S. citizens have no health insurance. We have seen government ineptitude at an unprecedented level. Yeah, a real "blow to liberalism."
BUSH'S STAGED PRESIDENCY
It wouldn't be accurate to say that George W. Bush's presidency is all show and no substance. It's just that the substance, like the toxic waters in New Orleans, is corrosive. But Bush's handlers have been masterful at photo-ops. They have shown Bush against the backdrop of Mt. Rushmore and the Statue of Liberty. They just finished the photo-op in New Orleans showing Bush against the backdrop of a cathedral, while carefully screening out the devastated parts of New Orleans It's past time for Americans to stop being diverted by the photo-ops and look around at the reality. This article by Pierre Tristam is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
The evening of Oct. 7, 2001, Bush announced the war on Afghanistan in an address to the nation from the White House Treaty Room, with a painting of President McKinley presiding over ceremonies ending the Spanish-American War. McKinley, of course, launched America's 20th century empire. For the first anniversary of the 2001 attacks, the White House planted Bush on Ellis Island, with the Statue of Liberty looming over his shoulder, and rented three barges-full of stadium lights to illuminate the statue during the evening address to the nation. The statue was off-limits at the time, and would remain so until 2004. For a speech from Mt. Rushmore the following summer, the president's podium was set in such a way as to align Bush's profile along that of Washington, Jefferson, Teddy Roosevelt and Lincoln. Only God was missing (hold on to your kerchiefs).
Monday, September 19, 2005
SEPTEMBER 19, 2005
NOW THEY WANT THOSE IMMIGRANTS
It has been fashionable in California to bash illegal immigrants. Former Governor Pete Wilson shamelessly and cynically exploited prejudice against illegal immigrants to further his own political career with Proposition 187. Republicans such as Pat Buchanan have been almost openly racist against Latino immigrants. Now, though, the Central Valley agricultural industry finds itself in a crunch because there aren't enough farm workers as the raisin crop is due for harvest. This article by George Rains is at www.sfgate.com:
It's the middle of harvest season for California raisin grapes, and only half of the farmworkers needed are in the fields.
What holds for raisin grapes is happening widely in California agriculture. In the Central Valley alone, there is a shortage of from 70,000 to 80,000 workers to bring fresh fruits, nuts and vegetables to market, according to an estimate by the trade association Western Growers.
ONE BILLION DOLLARS MISSING IN IRAQ
Whenever the Bush administration is involved money has a way of disappearing. We know that projected surpluses left by the Clinton administration have long since gone with the wind. We know that Halliburton, Dick Cheney's old company, has profited handsomely from being in Iraq. Now we learn that a billion dollars is missing from the Iraq Defense Ministry, leaving the country virtually incapable of defending itself against the so-called insurgency. This is either theft on a grand scale, or incompetence on a grand scale, take your pick. This article by Patrick Cockburn is at www.commondreams.org:
One billion dollars has been plundered from Iraq's defence ministry in one of the largest thefts in history, The Independent can reveal, leaving the country's army to fight a savage insurgency with museum-piece weapons.
The money, intended to train and equip an Iraqi army capable of bringing security to a country shattered by the US-led invasion and prolonged rebellion, was instead siphoned abroad in cash and has disappeared.
"It is possibly one of the largest thefts in history," Ali Allawi, Iraq's Finance Minister, told The Independent.
"Huge amounts of money have disappeared. In return we got nothing but scraps of metal."
The carefully planned theft has so weakened the army that it cannot hold Baghdad against insurgent attack without American military support, Iraqi officials say, making it difficult for the US to withdraw its 135,000- strong army from Iraq, as Washington says it wishes to do.
THE U.S. AS FANTASY LAND
There's nothing wrong with dreaming, as long as the dreams are based in some sort of reality. Some of the great ideas and inventions have come from people who dared to dream and sometimes almost obsessively pursued those dreams. But you fear that too many Americans live in a dream world that is becoming dangerous to our survival. The belief that a free market will make them rich, or the fantasy that global warming isn't happening, or that "intelligent design" should be taught on an equal par with evolutionary theory are dangerous impediments to our progress. In this commentary Katha Pollit looks at the way the religious right has thrown reality out the window. The commentary is at www.thenation.com:
For decades the right has worked day and night to delegitimize concepts without which no society can thrive, or maybe even survive--the common good, social solidarity, knowledge and expertise, public service. God, abstinence and the market were supposed to solve all our problems. Bad news--climate change, rising poverty, racial and gender disparities, educational failure, the mess in Iraq--was just flimflam from liberals who hate freedom. Is there another world power that lives in such a fantasy world? Now, in old people left to drown in their nursing home beds, in police who reportedly demanded that young women stranded on rooftops bare their breasts in return for rescue, in the contempt for public safety shown by Bush's transformation of FEMA into a pasture for hapless cronies--we can all see what those fantasies obscured. A government that doesn't believe in government was a disaster waiting to happen.
NOW THEY WANT THOSE IMMIGRANTS
It has been fashionable in California to bash illegal immigrants. Former Governor Pete Wilson shamelessly and cynically exploited prejudice against illegal immigrants to further his own political career with Proposition 187. Republicans such as Pat Buchanan have been almost openly racist against Latino immigrants. Now, though, the Central Valley agricultural industry finds itself in a crunch because there aren't enough farm workers as the raisin crop is due for harvest. This article by George Rains is at www.sfgate.com:
It's the middle of harvest season for California raisin grapes, and only half of the farmworkers needed are in the fields.
What holds for raisin grapes is happening widely in California agriculture. In the Central Valley alone, there is a shortage of from 70,000 to 80,000 workers to bring fresh fruits, nuts and vegetables to market, according to an estimate by the trade association Western Growers.
ONE BILLION DOLLARS MISSING IN IRAQ
Whenever the Bush administration is involved money has a way of disappearing. We know that projected surpluses left by the Clinton administration have long since gone with the wind. We know that Halliburton, Dick Cheney's old company, has profited handsomely from being in Iraq. Now we learn that a billion dollars is missing from the Iraq Defense Ministry, leaving the country virtually incapable of defending itself against the so-called insurgency. This is either theft on a grand scale, or incompetence on a grand scale, take your pick. This article by Patrick Cockburn is at www.commondreams.org:
One billion dollars has been plundered from Iraq's defence ministry in one of the largest thefts in history, The Independent can reveal, leaving the country's army to fight a savage insurgency with museum-piece weapons.
The money, intended to train and equip an Iraqi army capable of bringing security to a country shattered by the US-led invasion and prolonged rebellion, was instead siphoned abroad in cash and has disappeared.
"It is possibly one of the largest thefts in history," Ali Allawi, Iraq's Finance Minister, told The Independent.
"Huge amounts of money have disappeared. In return we got nothing but scraps of metal."
The carefully planned theft has so weakened the army that it cannot hold Baghdad against insurgent attack without American military support, Iraqi officials say, making it difficult for the US to withdraw its 135,000- strong army from Iraq, as Washington says it wishes to do.
THE U.S. AS FANTASY LAND
There's nothing wrong with dreaming, as long as the dreams are based in some sort of reality. Some of the great ideas and inventions have come from people who dared to dream and sometimes almost obsessively pursued those dreams. But you fear that too many Americans live in a dream world that is becoming dangerous to our survival. The belief that a free market will make them rich, or the fantasy that global warming isn't happening, or that "intelligent design" should be taught on an equal par with evolutionary theory are dangerous impediments to our progress. In this commentary Katha Pollit looks at the way the religious right has thrown reality out the window. The commentary is at www.thenation.com:
For decades the right has worked day and night to delegitimize concepts without which no society can thrive, or maybe even survive--the common good, social solidarity, knowledge and expertise, public service. God, abstinence and the market were supposed to solve all our problems. Bad news--climate change, rising poverty, racial and gender disparities, educational failure, the mess in Iraq--was just flimflam from liberals who hate freedom. Is there another world power that lives in such a fantasy world? Now, in old people left to drown in their nursing home beds, in police who reportedly demanded that young women stranded on rooftops bare their breasts in return for rescue, in the contempt for public safety shown by Bush's transformation of FEMA into a pasture for hapless cronies--we can all see what those fantasies obscured. A government that doesn't believe in government was a disaster waiting to happen.
Sunday, September 18, 2005
SEPTEMBER 18, 2005
PARADOXES IN NATURE AND RELIGION
There is a new documentary film about penguins that the Christian Right actually likes. The film is reportedly very good, but what the fundamentalists like is that penguins seem to exemplify the "family values" they claim to represent. The problem is that penguins do not represent all of nature. There is a great deal of cruelty in nature. This little article shows some other facts about nature that wouldn't be as appealing to the fundamentalists. The article by Leader is at film.guardian.co.uk:
But surely the penguin is only one of God's works. Earth also has Bonobo chimps, whose jaw-dropping sexual athleticism would make Hugh Hefner blush; well-fed cats that cruelly toy with their prey; and praying mantises that eat their spouses. How do we know that these creatures do not point The Way? We don't, therefore we should remember the words of the film company executive responsible for March of the Penguins: 'You know what? They're just birds.'
SENSENBRENNER: MODEL OF REPUBLICANS
There's a truly vile Congressman named James Sensenbrenner who voted against aid for the victims of Hurricane Katrina and won't even hold hearings about giving relief to those victims from the despicable new bankruptcy law. The new law requires all kinds of documentation that the hurricane victims may not have because it was lost in flooding along the Gulf Coast. I really hope there is such a thing as karma for people like Sensenbrenner. This article by Martin H. Bosworth is at www.consumeraffairs.com:
Survivors of Hurricane Katrina who were hoping to avoid the weight of the new bankruptcy law may be out of luck. Representative F. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, has indicated he will not hold a hearing on waiving the law for purposes of disaster relief.
COMPETENCE AND INTEGRITY WOULD BE A NICE CHANGE
In 2000 the American people and the Supreme Court allowed the barbarians inside the gate. The Bush administration has been pillaging ever since. Unlike the Huns and Visigoths of old, the Bushies have the power of television and the blustering propaganda of AM radio to further their destruction. In the 2000 GOP convention the Bushies made sure to have black faces prominently on stage and showing up on TV. In the Hurricane Katrina disaster Mr. Bush has done photo-ops with black folk in an attempt to show he really does care about African-Americans. Frank Rich writes about Bush and the phony facade we've seen in this column at www.nytimes.com:
Like his father before him, Mr. Bush has squandered the huge store of political capital he won in a war. His Thursday-night invocation of "armies of compassion" will prove as worthless as the "thousand points of light" that the first President Bush bestowed upon the poor from on high in New Orleans (at the Superdome, during the 1988 G.O.P. convention). It will be up to other Republicans in Washington to cut through the empty words and image-mongering to demand effective action from Mr. Bush on the Gulf Coast and in Iraq, if only because their own political lives are at stake. It's up to Democrats, though they show scant signs of realizing it, to step into the vacuum and propose an alternative to a fiscally disastrous conservatism that prizes pork over compassion. If the era of Great Society big government is over, the era of big government for special interests is proving a fiasco. Especially when it's presided over by a self-styled C.E.O. with a consistent three-decade record of running private and public enterprises alike into a ditch.
What comes next? Having turned the page on Mr. Bush, the country hungers for a vision that is something other than either liberal boilerplate or Rovian stagecraft. At this point, merely plain old competence, integrity and heart might do.
BUSH'S RHETORIC AT THE U.N.
When he wasn't busily asking Condoleezza Rice's permission to go to the restroom George W. Bush was giving a speech to the United Nations that was filled with hypocrisy. From his speech, you would think Mr. Bush really was a compassionate and visionary leader. But, as usual, the rhetoric and the reality are quite different. In this article by Yifat Susskind there an examination of Bush's real record. The article is linked at www.commondreams.org:
On September 14, George W. Bush addressed a gathering of over 170 world leaders at the UN World Summit. His speech came in the wake of international outrage against the US for its attempts to derail the Summit's original purpose, which was to make progress on reducing global poverty. Given the disconnect between the President's words and deeds, we offer the following MADRE reality check on some of Bush's more egregious comments at the World Summit.
"Either hope will spread, or violence will spread-and we must take the side of hope."
As the world's biggest arms exporter, the US has clearly taken the side of violence. On Bush's watch, US arms sales have outpaced the second-largest arms dealer (Russia) two-to-one. More than half of these weapons went to governments known for human rights abuses against civilians, such as Pakistan, Uzbekistan, and Colombia.[1]
PARADOXES IN NATURE AND RELIGION
There is a new documentary film about penguins that the Christian Right actually likes. The film is reportedly very good, but what the fundamentalists like is that penguins seem to exemplify the "family values" they claim to represent. The problem is that penguins do not represent all of nature. There is a great deal of cruelty in nature. This little article shows some other facts about nature that wouldn't be as appealing to the fundamentalists. The article by Leader is at film.guardian.co.uk:
But surely the penguin is only one of God's works. Earth also has Bonobo chimps, whose jaw-dropping sexual athleticism would make Hugh Hefner blush; well-fed cats that cruelly toy with their prey; and praying mantises that eat their spouses. How do we know that these creatures do not point The Way? We don't, therefore we should remember the words of the film company executive responsible for March of the Penguins: 'You know what? They're just birds.'
SENSENBRENNER: MODEL OF REPUBLICANS
There's a truly vile Congressman named James Sensenbrenner who voted against aid for the victims of Hurricane Katrina and won't even hold hearings about giving relief to those victims from the despicable new bankruptcy law. The new law requires all kinds of documentation that the hurricane victims may not have because it was lost in flooding along the Gulf Coast. I really hope there is such a thing as karma for people like Sensenbrenner. This article by Martin H. Bosworth is at www.consumeraffairs.com:
Survivors of Hurricane Katrina who were hoping to avoid the weight of the new bankruptcy law may be out of luck. Representative F. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, has indicated he will not hold a hearing on waiving the law for purposes of disaster relief.
COMPETENCE AND INTEGRITY WOULD BE A NICE CHANGE
In 2000 the American people and the Supreme Court allowed the barbarians inside the gate. The Bush administration has been pillaging ever since. Unlike the Huns and Visigoths of old, the Bushies have the power of television and the blustering propaganda of AM radio to further their destruction. In the 2000 GOP convention the Bushies made sure to have black faces prominently on stage and showing up on TV. In the Hurricane Katrina disaster Mr. Bush has done photo-ops with black folk in an attempt to show he really does care about African-Americans. Frank Rich writes about Bush and the phony facade we've seen in this column at www.nytimes.com:
Like his father before him, Mr. Bush has squandered the huge store of political capital he won in a war. His Thursday-night invocation of "armies of compassion" will prove as worthless as the "thousand points of light" that the first President Bush bestowed upon the poor from on high in New Orleans (at the Superdome, during the 1988 G.O.P. convention). It will be up to other Republicans in Washington to cut through the empty words and image-mongering to demand effective action from Mr. Bush on the Gulf Coast and in Iraq, if only because their own political lives are at stake. It's up to Democrats, though they show scant signs of realizing it, to step into the vacuum and propose an alternative to a fiscally disastrous conservatism that prizes pork over compassion. If the era of Great Society big government is over, the era of big government for special interests is proving a fiasco. Especially when it's presided over by a self-styled C.E.O. with a consistent three-decade record of running private and public enterprises alike into a ditch.
What comes next? Having turned the page on Mr. Bush, the country hungers for a vision that is something other than either liberal boilerplate or Rovian stagecraft. At this point, merely plain old competence, integrity and heart might do.
BUSH'S RHETORIC AT THE U.N.
When he wasn't busily asking Condoleezza Rice's permission to go to the restroom George W. Bush was giving a speech to the United Nations that was filled with hypocrisy. From his speech, you would think Mr. Bush really was a compassionate and visionary leader. But, as usual, the rhetoric and the reality are quite different. In this article by Yifat Susskind there an examination of Bush's real record. The article is linked at www.commondreams.org:
On September 14, George W. Bush addressed a gathering of over 170 world leaders at the UN World Summit. His speech came in the wake of international outrage against the US for its attempts to derail the Summit's original purpose, which was to make progress on reducing global poverty. Given the disconnect between the President's words and deeds, we offer the following MADRE reality check on some of Bush's more egregious comments at the World Summit.
"Either hope will spread, or violence will spread-and we must take the side of hope."
As the world's biggest arms exporter, the US has clearly taken the side of violence. On Bush's watch, US arms sales have outpaced the second-largest arms dealer (Russia) two-to-one. More than half of these weapons went to governments known for human rights abuses against civilians, such as Pakistan, Uzbekistan, and Colombia.[1]
Saturday, September 17, 2005
SEPTEMBER 17, 2005
CONSUMER CONFIDENCE AT THIRTEEN YEAR LOW
Analysts are trying to partially dismiss a dramatic plummet in consumer confidence because of the "shock" of Hurricane Katrina. But maybe it's just reality setting in after five years of the rotten economic policies of the Bush administration. Wages are stagnant or falling, health care costs are on the rise, energy prices have moved sharply upward, and federal deficits are wildly out of control. Even in the face of Hurricane Katrina, Bush doesn't want to stop the deficit freight train. He still wants to give tax cuts to his rich friends and take the rest of the country right over the cliff. This article from Reuters is at www.nytimes.com:
U.S. consumer confidence plummeted to a 13-year low in early September, battered by record high gasoline prices and the full force of Hurricane Katrina, a report showed on Friday.
Separate data showed the U.S. current account deficit, the broadest measure of U.S. trade with the rest of the world, narrowed in the second quarter but remained at levels seen as unsustainable over the long term.
The University of Michigan's closely-watched consumer sentiment index fell to 76.9 in September from 89.1 in August, far below Wall Street forecasts and the 81.8 hit after the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington.
The current conditions dropped to the lowest level since December 2003 while the expectations index plummeted to the lowest since February 1992.
GLOBAL WARMING IS MAKING FIERCER HURRICANES
There is yet another study showing a strong correlation between warmer ocean waters caused by global warming and the ferocity of hurricanes such as Hurricane Katrina. And yet right-wingers will continue to deny that global warming is a grim reality. Doing so means big corporations have to change and it affects their bottom lines. It also means moving away from a transportation system based on fossil fuels. This article by Juliet Eilperin is at www.washingtonpost.com:
A new study concludes that rising sea temperatures have been accompanied by a significant global increase in the most destructive hurricanes, adding fuel to an international debate over whether global warming contributed to the devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina.
The study, published today in the journal Science, is the second in six weeks to draw this conclusion, but other climatologists dispute the findings and argue that a recent spate of severe storms reflects nothing more than normal weather variability.
Katrina's destructiveness has given a sharp new edge to the ongoing debate over whether the United States should do more to curb greenhouse gas emissions linked to global warming. Domestic and European critics have pointed to Katrina as a reason to take action, while skeptics say climate activists are capitalizing on a national disaster to further their own agenda.
AMERICA AS CORPORATION
George W. Bush has liked to tout himself as the first president with an MBA. He was going to run the country like a corporation. What we've seen Bush do is turn the country over to corporations. Bush and company want to privatize everything, take off almost any restrictions from doing business, and let everyone fend for himself or herself in the predatory free market. In this article Michael Tomasky looks at the effects of conservative ideology. The article is at www.prospect.org:
Of the several central precepts of modern movement conservatism, three played crucial roles here: first, its sanctification of the individual and concomitant rejection of the community as the foundational unit of social organization (except for religious communities, which are to substitute for political action and social investment); second, its glorification of the corporation -- indeed its attempt to model the government on the corporation (although on a very inefficient, corrupted idea of the corporation); and third, its utter anti-empiricism -- its ability to deny any fact that is not either presented in a “study” paid for by the oil industry or insisted upon by those greatest of all deniers of fact, the Christian right.
CONSUMER CONFIDENCE AT THIRTEEN YEAR LOW
Analysts are trying to partially dismiss a dramatic plummet in consumer confidence because of the "shock" of Hurricane Katrina. But maybe it's just reality setting in after five years of the rotten economic policies of the Bush administration. Wages are stagnant or falling, health care costs are on the rise, energy prices have moved sharply upward, and federal deficits are wildly out of control. Even in the face of Hurricane Katrina, Bush doesn't want to stop the deficit freight train. He still wants to give tax cuts to his rich friends and take the rest of the country right over the cliff. This article from Reuters is at www.nytimes.com:
U.S. consumer confidence plummeted to a 13-year low in early September, battered by record high gasoline prices and the full force of Hurricane Katrina, a report showed on Friday.
Separate data showed the U.S. current account deficit, the broadest measure of U.S. trade with the rest of the world, narrowed in the second quarter but remained at levels seen as unsustainable over the long term.
The University of Michigan's closely-watched consumer sentiment index fell to 76.9 in September from 89.1 in August, far below Wall Street forecasts and the 81.8 hit after the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington.
The current conditions dropped to the lowest level since December 2003 while the expectations index plummeted to the lowest since February 1992.
GLOBAL WARMING IS MAKING FIERCER HURRICANES
There is yet another study showing a strong correlation between warmer ocean waters caused by global warming and the ferocity of hurricanes such as Hurricane Katrina. And yet right-wingers will continue to deny that global warming is a grim reality. Doing so means big corporations have to change and it affects their bottom lines. It also means moving away from a transportation system based on fossil fuels. This article by Juliet Eilperin is at www.washingtonpost.com:
A new study concludes that rising sea temperatures have been accompanied by a significant global increase in the most destructive hurricanes, adding fuel to an international debate over whether global warming contributed to the devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina.
The study, published today in the journal Science, is the second in six weeks to draw this conclusion, but other climatologists dispute the findings and argue that a recent spate of severe storms reflects nothing more than normal weather variability.
Katrina's destructiveness has given a sharp new edge to the ongoing debate over whether the United States should do more to curb greenhouse gas emissions linked to global warming. Domestic and European critics have pointed to Katrina as a reason to take action, while skeptics say climate activists are capitalizing on a national disaster to further their own agenda.
AMERICA AS CORPORATION
George W. Bush has liked to tout himself as the first president with an MBA. He was going to run the country like a corporation. What we've seen Bush do is turn the country over to corporations. Bush and company want to privatize everything, take off almost any restrictions from doing business, and let everyone fend for himself or herself in the predatory free market. In this article Michael Tomasky looks at the effects of conservative ideology. The article is at www.prospect.org:
Of the several central precepts of modern movement conservatism, three played crucial roles here: first, its sanctification of the individual and concomitant rejection of the community as the foundational unit of social organization (except for religious communities, which are to substitute for political action and social investment); second, its glorification of the corporation -- indeed its attempt to model the government on the corporation (although on a very inefficient, corrupted idea of the corporation); and third, its utter anti-empiricism -- its ability to deny any fact that is not either presented in a “study” paid for by the oil industry or insisted upon by those greatest of all deniers of fact, the Christian right.
Friday, September 16, 2005
SEPTEMBER 16, 2005
IS BUSH TRYING TO PASS THE BUCK AGAIN?
An internal government e-mail suggests the Bush administration is trying to blame environmental groups for the broken levees that resulted in flooding New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina. Never mind that the administration cut funding to renovate the levees. This administration's incredible greed and incompetence know no bounds, nor does their willingness to smear opponents. This article by Jerry Mitchell is at www.clarionledger.com:
Federal officials appear to be seeking proof to blame the flood of New Orleans on environmental groups, documents show.
The Clarion-Ledger has obtained a copy of an internal e-mail the U.S. Department of Justice sent out this week to various U.S. attorneys' offices: "Has your district defended any cases on behalf of the (U.S.) Army Corps of Engineers against claims brought by environmental groups seeking to block or otherwise impede the Corps work on the levees protecting New Orleans? If so, please describe the case and the outcome of the litigation."
Cynthia Magnuson, a spokeswoman for the Justice Department, said Thursday she couldn't comment "because it's an internal e-mail."
WILL NEW ORLEANS BE AN IRAQ ENCORE?
We've heard that the Bush administration was going to rebuild Iraq better than ever before (except for all those dead and wounded, of course). But Iraq still lacks even basic services, although cronies of the Bush administration, such as Halliburton, have raked in big profits at taxpayer expense. It appears we might expect much the same in New Orleans and the Gulf Coast. Right-wingers want to try out their ridiculous theories there too, privatizing everything that moves. Paul Krugman writes about it in his column at www.nytimes.com:
It's a given that the Bush administration, which tried to turn Iraq into a laboratory for conservative economic policies, will try the same thing on the Gulf Coast. The Heritage Foundation, which has surely been helping Karl Rove develop the administration's recovery plan, has already published a manifesto on post-Katrina policy. It calls for waivers on environmental rules, the elimination of capital gains taxes and the private ownership of public school buildings in the disaster areas. And if any of the people killed by Katrina, most of them poor, had a net worth of more than $1.5 million, Heritage wants to exempt their heirs from the estate tax.
BUSH WANTS EVEN MORE POWER?
The one thing George W. Bush and company seem to be good at is exploiting a tragedy to their own ends. They have beat 9/11 to death over the past four years while they've gutted civil liberties and decimated the budget. Now Mr. Bush claims that he needs even more power to act in emergencies such as Hurricane Katrina. How, pray tell, was he limited in acting to help the people along the Gulf Coast, except by his own incompetence? Josh Marshall looks at Bush's latest power grab at www.talkingpointsmemo.com:
As I've been saying, repressive governments mix administrative clumsiness and inefficiency with authoritarian tendencies. That's almost always the pattern. The direction the president wants to go in is one in which, in emergencies, the federal government will have trouble moving water into or enabling transportation out of the disaster zone but will be well-equipped to declare martial law on a moment's notice.
Another pack of lies. Right in front of everyone.
TIME FOR ANOTHER NEW DEAL
I don't know where he or she will come from, but I hope there's another leader like FDR in our time. FDR came along at a time when the private market, greedy Republicans and their business cohorts had taken the country into the Great Depression. The free market types had no answers for getting things back on track because they are essentially soulless. Money is their reason for existence and compassion is an impediment to making money. William Greider talks about the interest in using the New Deal as a model in this latest example of Republican greed and corruption. The article is at www.commondreams.org:
Senator Edward Kennedy calls for a "Gulf Coast Regional Redevelopment Authority," modeled after FDR's Tennessee Valley Authority, to lead the rebuilding. Former Senator John Edwards proposes a vast new jobs program, patterned after the New Deal's Works Progress Administration (WPA) and Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), in which the displaced and the poor are hired at living wages to clean up and rebuild their devastated communities. In the week after Katrina, Representatives Dennis Kucinich and Stephanie Tubbs Jones swiftly rounded up eighty-eight House co-sponsors, including some from Mississippi and Louisiana, for a similar initiative.
As the dimensions of this challenge become clearer, reformers will discover other New Deal models they can emulate and adapt to present circumstances. For instance, in the 1930s Roosevelt's Reconstruction Finance Corporation was a central player in rebuilding the industrial economy, because it acted like a public-spirited investment banker empowered to channel startup capital to collapsed companies, provide temporary protection from creditors and impose equitable terms on how the private firms relate to social priorities. This time cities and schools need similar help.
The government, meanwhile, must quickly become the employer of last resort across the region.
IS BUSH TRYING TO PASS THE BUCK AGAIN?
An internal government e-mail suggests the Bush administration is trying to blame environmental groups for the broken levees that resulted in flooding New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina. Never mind that the administration cut funding to renovate the levees. This administration's incredible greed and incompetence know no bounds, nor does their willingness to smear opponents. This article by Jerry Mitchell is at www.clarionledger.com:
Federal officials appear to be seeking proof to blame the flood of New Orleans on environmental groups, documents show.
The Clarion-Ledger has obtained a copy of an internal e-mail the U.S. Department of Justice sent out this week to various U.S. attorneys' offices: "Has your district defended any cases on behalf of the (U.S.) Army Corps of Engineers against claims brought by environmental groups seeking to block or otherwise impede the Corps work on the levees protecting New Orleans? If so, please describe the case and the outcome of the litigation."
Cynthia Magnuson, a spokeswoman for the Justice Department, said Thursday she couldn't comment "because it's an internal e-mail."
WILL NEW ORLEANS BE AN IRAQ ENCORE?
We've heard that the Bush administration was going to rebuild Iraq better than ever before (except for all those dead and wounded, of course). But Iraq still lacks even basic services, although cronies of the Bush administration, such as Halliburton, have raked in big profits at taxpayer expense. It appears we might expect much the same in New Orleans and the Gulf Coast. Right-wingers want to try out their ridiculous theories there too, privatizing everything that moves. Paul Krugman writes about it in his column at www.nytimes.com:
It's a given that the Bush administration, which tried to turn Iraq into a laboratory for conservative economic policies, will try the same thing on the Gulf Coast. The Heritage Foundation, which has surely been helping Karl Rove develop the administration's recovery plan, has already published a manifesto on post-Katrina policy. It calls for waivers on environmental rules, the elimination of capital gains taxes and the private ownership of public school buildings in the disaster areas. And if any of the people killed by Katrina, most of them poor, had a net worth of more than $1.5 million, Heritage wants to exempt their heirs from the estate tax.
BUSH WANTS EVEN MORE POWER?
The one thing George W. Bush and company seem to be good at is exploiting a tragedy to their own ends. They have beat 9/11 to death over the past four years while they've gutted civil liberties and decimated the budget. Now Mr. Bush claims that he needs even more power to act in emergencies such as Hurricane Katrina. How, pray tell, was he limited in acting to help the people along the Gulf Coast, except by his own incompetence? Josh Marshall looks at Bush's latest power grab at www.talkingpointsmemo.com:
As I've been saying, repressive governments mix administrative clumsiness and inefficiency with authoritarian tendencies. That's almost always the pattern. The direction the president wants to go in is one in which, in emergencies, the federal government will have trouble moving water into or enabling transportation out of the disaster zone but will be well-equipped to declare martial law on a moment's notice.
Another pack of lies. Right in front of everyone.
TIME FOR ANOTHER NEW DEAL
I don't know where he or she will come from, but I hope there's another leader like FDR in our time. FDR came along at a time when the private market, greedy Republicans and their business cohorts had taken the country into the Great Depression. The free market types had no answers for getting things back on track because they are essentially soulless. Money is their reason for existence and compassion is an impediment to making money. William Greider talks about the interest in using the New Deal as a model in this latest example of Republican greed and corruption. The article is at www.commondreams.org:
Senator Edward Kennedy calls for a "Gulf Coast Regional Redevelopment Authority," modeled after FDR's Tennessee Valley Authority, to lead the rebuilding. Former Senator John Edwards proposes a vast new jobs program, patterned after the New Deal's Works Progress Administration (WPA) and Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), in which the displaced and the poor are hired at living wages to clean up and rebuild their devastated communities. In the week after Katrina, Representatives Dennis Kucinich and Stephanie Tubbs Jones swiftly rounded up eighty-eight House co-sponsors, including some from Mississippi and Louisiana, for a similar initiative.
As the dimensions of this challenge become clearer, reformers will discover other New Deal models they can emulate and adapt to present circumstances. For instance, in the 1930s Roosevelt's Reconstruction Finance Corporation was a central player in rebuilding the industrial economy, because it acted like a public-spirited investment banker empowered to channel startup capital to collapsed companies, provide temporary protection from creditors and impose equitable terms on how the private firms relate to social priorities. This time cities and schools need similar help.
The government, meanwhile, must quickly become the employer of last resort across the region.
Thursday, September 15, 2005
SEPTEMBER 15, 2005
"UNDER GOD" IN PLEDGE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
A new court decision that the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional has right-wingers in another tizzy. I've heard the argument about, "What does it hurt?" because kids who don't want to participate don't have to participate. It's not as simple as that. I don't know if some of these right-wingers have ever been in the distinct minority. The pressure to conform is enormous.
Show me in the Constitution where it says we're one nation under God. To the contrary, the Constitution says power comes from the people of the United States. The First Amendment makes it clear that the government is prohibited from establishing a state religion. What about the part about the "free exercise thereof" you ask? If I understand the Bible correctly, people can pray any time they want, even silently, and God will hear those prayers. So why is it necessary to recite a pledge by rote that most kids begin to take for granted?
The words "under God" were inserted into the Pledge back in the 1950s during the McCarthy witch hunt years. That alone, that association with Joseph McCarthy, should make people think twice. And just think if you changed the words "under God" to something else. What if you changed it to "under Satan"? People who didn't want to participate wouldn't have to participate, so what would be the harm? That's if you buy into the right wing argument. This discussion is from an article by Kelly St. John at www.commondreams.org:
A federal judge in Sacramento ruled Wednesday that requiring children to recite a Pledge of Allegiance that contains the phrase "under God" in public schools is unconstitutional, a move that sets the stage for another Supreme Court showdown over the daily classroom ritual.
Reaction to the ruling by U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton was swift and widespread. Religious conservatives condemned the decision, while senators at the confirmation hearings of chief justice nominee John Roberts referred to the ruling in an attempt to gauge Roberts' views on the constitutional separation of church and state.
Karlton granted legal standing in the case to two families represented by Sacramento attorney Michael Newdow -- an atheist who lost a previous pledge case before the Supreme Court last year -- and ruled that the pledge's reference to one nation "under God" violates schoolchildren's right to be "free from a coercive requirement to affirm God."
LIKE WHITE-WASHED GRAVES
Since we're talking religion, I'm reminded of a passage where Jesus condemned the religious leaders of his day as hypocrites. He compared them to white-washed graves, nice and neat on the outside, but rotten to the core on the inside. That's what so-called conservatism is. They talk a good game about God, country, and family, but their real agenda is taking as much for the very wealthy as they can grab and stuff into their pockets. It doesn't matter how many lives are lost or destroyed, or how many tragedies we endure. It's all about the bottom line profit. Joe Conason writes about the white-washed graves in this article from www.workingforchange.com:
Politically as well as physically, the destructive force of nature can rip away surfaces and expose layers of decay. With the floodwaters of Katrina receding, we can see beneath the veneer of modern conservatism and gaze upon its rotten center.
For in the nation's capital, at least, that traditional philosophy of society and statecraft appears to have degenerated into a public-relations scam.
The obvious fact is that Republicans are the party of big spending, big deficits and big government, no matter how indignantly their leaders profess to despise all those terrible things. Yet the history of the Bush administration and the G.O.P. Congress makes it equally obvious that they're also incompetent at governing. So the question that Americans now confront is why these fakers should be allowed to waste hundreds of billions of dollars, adding to the hundreds of billions they have already squandered, when the results of their exertions are so unsatisfactory -- and so self-serving.
THE SHAMBLES LEFT BY CONSERVATIVES
Right-wingers really didn't like the 1960s. You know, there were those long-haired war protesters running around, advocating radical ideas like loving each other and not making war any more. The right didn't like programs that actually helped poor people. The Johnson administration, in the wake of JFK's assassination, got meaningful civil rights legislation passed and Medicare passed, and Lord have mercy the country was going to hell in a hand basket. After over two decades of mostly conservative rule, we can see what a mess we have. We have fewer civil liberties thanks to the PATRIOT act. Conservatives have been far more incompetent at protecting us if you judge from the attacks on 9/11 and the Hurricane Katrina disaster. Our air quality is worse, more people live in poverty, wages for the middle class are stagnant, millions of us don't have health insurance, and we're stuck in a conservative quagmire war in Iraq. In this article by Bruce Maples is at www.makethemaccountable.com:
There is a growing sense of discontent with the direction of the country, and not just from the left. Citizens across the political spectrum are beginning to feel that our government, and our country, are not working. We are supposedly the greatest nation on the planet, and yet we lag behind most other developed nations in education, health care, infrastructure and basic services. We have become the largest debtor nation on the planet, and the federal deficits have hamstrung our ability to think big and act decisively.
The right has chanted their mantra of "less government, lower taxes" for years, and once in power, they have been true to their word. Since 1980, with a brief respite during the Clinton years, we have seen unending cuts in government revenue and government expectations.
Today, citizens are looking around, and they don't like what they see. They don't like the two-class nation we have become. They don't like a government that functions poorly or not at all. And they don't like a system that abandons the poor, the powerless and the weak.
It is time to stop talking about "big" or "small" government and focus on "effective government."
"UNDER GOD" IN PLEDGE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
A new court decision that the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional has right-wingers in another tizzy. I've heard the argument about, "What does it hurt?" because kids who don't want to participate don't have to participate. It's not as simple as that. I don't know if some of these right-wingers have ever been in the distinct minority. The pressure to conform is enormous.
Show me in the Constitution where it says we're one nation under God. To the contrary, the Constitution says power comes from the people of the United States. The First Amendment makes it clear that the government is prohibited from establishing a state religion. What about the part about the "free exercise thereof" you ask? If I understand the Bible correctly, people can pray any time they want, even silently, and God will hear those prayers. So why is it necessary to recite a pledge by rote that most kids begin to take for granted?
The words "under God" were inserted into the Pledge back in the 1950s during the McCarthy witch hunt years. That alone, that association with Joseph McCarthy, should make people think twice. And just think if you changed the words "under God" to something else. What if you changed it to "under Satan"? People who didn't want to participate wouldn't have to participate, so what would be the harm? That's if you buy into the right wing argument. This discussion is from an article by Kelly St. John at www.commondreams.org:
A federal judge in Sacramento ruled Wednesday that requiring children to recite a Pledge of Allegiance that contains the phrase "under God" in public schools is unconstitutional, a move that sets the stage for another Supreme Court showdown over the daily classroom ritual.
Reaction to the ruling by U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton was swift and widespread. Religious conservatives condemned the decision, while senators at the confirmation hearings of chief justice nominee John Roberts referred to the ruling in an attempt to gauge Roberts' views on the constitutional separation of church and state.
Karlton granted legal standing in the case to two families represented by Sacramento attorney Michael Newdow -- an atheist who lost a previous pledge case before the Supreme Court last year -- and ruled that the pledge's reference to one nation "under God" violates schoolchildren's right to be "free from a coercive requirement to affirm God."
LIKE WHITE-WASHED GRAVES
Since we're talking religion, I'm reminded of a passage where Jesus condemned the religious leaders of his day as hypocrites. He compared them to white-washed graves, nice and neat on the outside, but rotten to the core on the inside. That's what so-called conservatism is. They talk a good game about God, country, and family, but their real agenda is taking as much for the very wealthy as they can grab and stuff into their pockets. It doesn't matter how many lives are lost or destroyed, or how many tragedies we endure. It's all about the bottom line profit. Joe Conason writes about the white-washed graves in this article from www.workingforchange.com:
Politically as well as physically, the destructive force of nature can rip away surfaces and expose layers of decay. With the floodwaters of Katrina receding, we can see beneath the veneer of modern conservatism and gaze upon its rotten center.
For in the nation's capital, at least, that traditional philosophy of society and statecraft appears to have degenerated into a public-relations scam.
The obvious fact is that Republicans are the party of big spending, big deficits and big government, no matter how indignantly their leaders profess to despise all those terrible things. Yet the history of the Bush administration and the G.O.P. Congress makes it equally obvious that they're also incompetent at governing. So the question that Americans now confront is why these fakers should be allowed to waste hundreds of billions of dollars, adding to the hundreds of billions they have already squandered, when the results of their exertions are so unsatisfactory -- and so self-serving.
THE SHAMBLES LEFT BY CONSERVATIVES
Right-wingers really didn't like the 1960s. You know, there were those long-haired war protesters running around, advocating radical ideas like loving each other and not making war any more. The right didn't like programs that actually helped poor people. The Johnson administration, in the wake of JFK's assassination, got meaningful civil rights legislation passed and Medicare passed, and Lord have mercy the country was going to hell in a hand basket. After over two decades of mostly conservative rule, we can see what a mess we have. We have fewer civil liberties thanks to the PATRIOT act. Conservatives have been far more incompetent at protecting us if you judge from the attacks on 9/11 and the Hurricane Katrina disaster. Our air quality is worse, more people live in poverty, wages for the middle class are stagnant, millions of us don't have health insurance, and we're stuck in a conservative quagmire war in Iraq. In this article by Bruce Maples is at www.makethemaccountable.com:
There is a growing sense of discontent with the direction of the country, and not just from the left. Citizens across the political spectrum are beginning to feel that our government, and our country, are not working. We are supposedly the greatest nation on the planet, and yet we lag behind most other developed nations in education, health care, infrastructure and basic services. We have become the largest debtor nation on the planet, and the federal deficits have hamstrung our ability to think big and act decisively.
The right has chanted their mantra of "less government, lower taxes" for years, and once in power, they have been true to their word. Since 1980, with a brief respite during the Clinton years, we have seen unending cuts in government revenue and government expectations.
Today, citizens are looking around, and they don't like what they see. They don't like the two-class nation we have become. They don't like a government that functions poorly or not at all. And they don't like a system that abandons the poor, the powerless and the weak.
It is time to stop talking about "big" or "small" government and focus on "effective government."
Wednesday, September 14, 2005
SEPTEMBER 14, 2005
VOODOO STRIKES BUSH
George W. Bush seems so devoid of conscience that I sometimes wonder if he ever sees the spirits of the dead in his sleep. He's responsible now for thousands upon thousands of deaths. As Governor of Texas he was notorious for okaying executions after getting a condensed version of the case from his aides. He was an active participant in stealing the presidential election of 2000 and has since sicced his minions on people like Senator Max Cleland to steal seats for the Republican party. He shoved through massive tax cuts for the very affluent, while the middle class and the poor are sinking deeper into despair. He didn't pay attention and Osama bin Laden was able to launch a successful terrorist attack against the United States. He launched an immoral war against Iraq. He was too lazy and unfeeling to take action to save lives along the Gulf coast as Hurricane Katrina ravaged the area. So I wonder if Bush is seeing the spirits of the dead. Maureen Dowd writes about Bush, the tinplated dictator and incompetent, in this column at www.nytimes.com:
President Bush continued to try to spin his own inaction yesterday, but he may finally have reached a patch of reality beyond spin. Now he's the one drowning, unable to rescue himself by patting small black children on the head during photo-ops and making scripted attempts to appear engaged. He can keep going back down there, as he will again on Thursday when he gives a televised speech to the nation, but he can never compensate for his tragic inattention during days when so many lives could have been saved.
He made the ultimate sacrifice and admitted his administration had messed up, something he'd refused to do through all of the other screw-ups, from phantom W.M.D. and the torture at Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo to the miscalculations on the Iraq occupation and the insurgency, which will soon claim 2,000 young Americans.
How many places will be in shambles by the time the Bush crew leaves office?
E. J. DIONNE: BUSH ERA IS OVER
In his column in The Washington Post E. J. Dionne writes that the Bush era is over. Let's hope so. Unfortunately, the rotting corpse of this administration still hasn't been removed, although it stinks to high heaven. Mr. Dionne's column is at www.washingtonpost.com:
But the first intimations of the end of the Bush Era came months ago. The president's post-election fixation on privatizing part of Social Security showed how out of touch he was. The more Bush discussed this boutique idea cooked up in conservative think tanks and Wall Street imaginations, the less the public liked it. The situation in Iraq deteriorated. The glorious economy Bush kept touting turned out not to be glorious for many Americans. The Census Bureau's annual economic report, released in the midst of the Gulf disaster, found that an additional 4.1 million Americans.
RESCIND THE NEW BANKRUPTCY LAW AND MORE
The catastrophe in the Gulf coast has claimed lives, made countless people homeless and without jobs, and leaves any number of people facing a Draconian and despicable bankruptcy law scheduled to go into effect on October 17. As this blogger notes, the law is harsh for everyone, including the victims of Hurricane Katrina. I would add that the totally unfair laws that allow credit card companies to hike rates at the drop of a hat, to jack up minimum payments, to hit people with punitive late charges, and all the rest should be rescinded. I hope there is a backlash against the credit card industry because they're being recognized as the greedy vultures they are. This item is from americablog.blogspot.com:
This raises the question: if the new bankruptcy laws are so Draconian or unfair for victims of Katrina, why aren't they unfair when punishing the victim of the next hurricane? Why aren't they unfair when punishing the victim of a catastrophic illness? Why aren't they unfair when punishing someone who lost their job at Enron because the white collar criminals in charge drove their company into the ground? Everyone wants to fight fraud (the pretense for passing these cruel new rules), but if the new bankruptcy law is wrong when applied to victims of Katrina then it's wrong when applied to anyone, regardless of the catastrophe that has blindsided them.
If the Democrats had any backbone, they would push to overturn that law, using Katrina as a classic example of why it's bad. If the Republicans offer the compromise of delay, they should refuse on principle, insisting on full reversal. Let the Republicans explain why these people should suffer.
STUFF HAPPENS
If you're rich and powerful, it's all right to be predatory, particularly if you're a corporation. You need those tax cuts, baby, like an addict needs a fix. Let those teeming masses fend for themselves, even those teeming masses are largely responsible for your wealth. The wealthy in the United States have become some of the greatest parasites in the history of our planet. Harold Meyerson writes about the gap between the haves and the have-nots and other matters in this column at www.commondreams.org:
By which measures, precisely, do we lead the world? Caring for our countrymen? You jest. A first-class physical infrastructure? Tell that to New Orleans. Throwing so much money at the rich that we've got nothing left over to promote the general welfare? Now you're talking.
The problem goes beyond the fact that we can't count on our government to be there for us in catastrophes. It's that a can't-do spirit, a shouldn't-do spirit, guides the men who run the nation. Consider the congressional testimony of Joe Allbaugh, George W. Bush's 2000 campaign manager, who assumed the top position at the Federal Emergency Management Agency in 2001. He characterized the organization as "an oversized entitlement program," and counseled states and cities to rely instead on "faith-based organizations... such as the Salvation Army and the Mennonite Disaster Service."
VOODOO STRIKES BUSH
George W. Bush seems so devoid of conscience that I sometimes wonder if he ever sees the spirits of the dead in his sleep. He's responsible now for thousands upon thousands of deaths. As Governor of Texas he was notorious for okaying executions after getting a condensed version of the case from his aides. He was an active participant in stealing the presidential election of 2000 and has since sicced his minions on people like Senator Max Cleland to steal seats for the Republican party. He shoved through massive tax cuts for the very affluent, while the middle class and the poor are sinking deeper into despair. He didn't pay attention and Osama bin Laden was able to launch a successful terrorist attack against the United States. He launched an immoral war against Iraq. He was too lazy and unfeeling to take action to save lives along the Gulf coast as Hurricane Katrina ravaged the area. So I wonder if Bush is seeing the spirits of the dead. Maureen Dowd writes about Bush, the tinplated dictator and incompetent, in this column at www.nytimes.com:
President Bush continued to try to spin his own inaction yesterday, but he may finally have reached a patch of reality beyond spin. Now he's the one drowning, unable to rescue himself by patting small black children on the head during photo-ops and making scripted attempts to appear engaged. He can keep going back down there, as he will again on Thursday when he gives a televised speech to the nation, but he can never compensate for his tragic inattention during days when so many lives could have been saved.
He made the ultimate sacrifice and admitted his administration had messed up, something he'd refused to do through all of the other screw-ups, from phantom W.M.D. and the torture at Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo to the miscalculations on the Iraq occupation and the insurgency, which will soon claim 2,000 young Americans.
How many places will be in shambles by the time the Bush crew leaves office?
E. J. DIONNE: BUSH ERA IS OVER
In his column in The Washington Post E. J. Dionne writes that the Bush era is over. Let's hope so. Unfortunately, the rotting corpse of this administration still hasn't been removed, although it stinks to high heaven. Mr. Dionne's column is at www.washingtonpost.com:
But the first intimations of the end of the Bush Era came months ago. The president's post-election fixation on privatizing part of Social Security showed how out of touch he was. The more Bush discussed this boutique idea cooked up in conservative think tanks and Wall Street imaginations, the less the public liked it. The situation in Iraq deteriorated. The glorious economy Bush kept touting turned out not to be glorious for many Americans. The Census Bureau's annual economic report, released in the midst of the Gulf disaster, found that an additional 4.1 million Americans.
RESCIND THE NEW BANKRUPTCY LAW AND MORE
The catastrophe in the Gulf coast has claimed lives, made countless people homeless and without jobs, and leaves any number of people facing a Draconian and despicable bankruptcy law scheduled to go into effect on October 17. As this blogger notes, the law is harsh for everyone, including the victims of Hurricane Katrina. I would add that the totally unfair laws that allow credit card companies to hike rates at the drop of a hat, to jack up minimum payments, to hit people with punitive late charges, and all the rest should be rescinded. I hope there is a backlash against the credit card industry because they're being recognized as the greedy vultures they are. This item is from americablog.blogspot.com:
This raises the question: if the new bankruptcy laws are so Draconian or unfair for victims of Katrina, why aren't they unfair when punishing the victim of the next hurricane? Why aren't they unfair when punishing the victim of a catastrophic illness? Why aren't they unfair when punishing someone who lost their job at Enron because the white collar criminals in charge drove their company into the ground? Everyone wants to fight fraud (the pretense for passing these cruel new rules), but if the new bankruptcy law is wrong when applied to victims of Katrina then it's wrong when applied to anyone, regardless of the catastrophe that has blindsided them.
If the Democrats had any backbone, they would push to overturn that law, using Katrina as a classic example of why it's bad. If the Republicans offer the compromise of delay, they should refuse on principle, insisting on full reversal. Let the Republicans explain why these people should suffer.
STUFF HAPPENS
If you're rich and powerful, it's all right to be predatory, particularly if you're a corporation. You need those tax cuts, baby, like an addict needs a fix. Let those teeming masses fend for themselves, even those teeming masses are largely responsible for your wealth. The wealthy in the United States have become some of the greatest parasites in the history of our planet. Harold Meyerson writes about the gap between the haves and the have-nots and other matters in this column at www.commondreams.org:
By which measures, precisely, do we lead the world? Caring for our countrymen? You jest. A first-class physical infrastructure? Tell that to New Orleans. Throwing so much money at the rich that we've got nothing left over to promote the general welfare? Now you're talking.
The problem goes beyond the fact that we can't count on our government to be there for us in catastrophes. It's that a can't-do spirit, a shouldn't-do spirit, guides the men who run the nation. Consider the congressional testimony of Joe Allbaugh, George W. Bush's 2000 campaign manager, who assumed the top position at the Federal Emergency Management Agency in 2001. He characterized the organization as "an oversized entitlement program," and counseled states and cities to rely instead on "faith-based organizations... such as the Salvation Army and the Mennonite Disaster Service."
Tuesday, September 13, 2005
SEPTEMBER 13, 2005
WHAT RIGHT-WINGERS HAVE IS GALL
There was once a guy I call Bad Talk Show Host on the air in Fresno. BTSH claimed he was an attorney, and that he had written a novel (no doubt self-published). At first, I thought BTSH was fairer and more open-minded that your typical right wing talk show host, but it didn't take long for me to be disabused of that notion. BTSH went on a rant one day and said, "Get the damned government off my back!" He considered things like seat belts as oppressive, I guess, and unemployment insurance a disincentive to work. In a moment of poetic justice BTSH got fired when his station changed format. I wonder if BTSH would consider Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo or the PATRIOT Act oppressive. Probably not.
But BTSH is illustrative of the major difference between talk and reality Right-wingers have always harped about big government, giving you visions of a utopia if you just do away with government. Under right-wing control, though, we have more intrusions into our lives than ever before. There is a gulf between the promises of right-wingers and the harsh reality they leave behind. In this item American Progress Action looks at right-wing promises. The item is at www.americanprogressaction.org:
Taking care of the wealthy first does nothing to ensure shared sacrifice and mutual responsibility for America’s needs and security. For the first time in history, a wartime president and his allies in Congress have sacrificed the nation's well-being to their ideology by asking nothing from those who have prospered so much from the collective work of all Americans. After cutting taxes for the wealthy after 9/11 and before the war in Iraq, conservatives now have the audacity to claim that Katrina should actually speed up the move to repeal the estate tax for millionaires. The culmination of thirty years of conservative dreams and proposals has produced little more than a destabilized economy racked by corruption and misplaced priorities that favor the needs of the few over the national interest.
THE SPOILS SYSTEM IS BACK IN THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION
One reason the civil service system was started was to alleviate the abuses of the spoils system. Before the civil service system existed the winning political party would fill all available jobs with loyal cronies. Competence was not the issue. In the Bush administration we see the spoils system revisited. People get placed into jobs for which they're totally unqualified. Their sole reason for getting a job is loyalty to Bush. We see the tragic consequences of the appointment of Michael Brown as head of FEMA. Paul Krugman writes about the twenty-first century version of the spoils system in his column at www.nytimes.com:
But what we really should be asking is whether FEMA's decline and fall is unique, or part of a larger pattern. What other government functions have been crippled by politicization, cronyism and/or the departure of experienced professionals? How many FEMA's are there?
Unfortunately, it's easy to find other agencies suffering from some version of the FEMA syndrome.
The first example won't surprise you: the Environmental Protection Agency, which has a key role to play in Hurricane Katrina's aftermath, but which has seen a major exodus of experienced officials over the past few years. In particular, senior officials have left in protest over what they say is the Bush administration's unwillingness to enforce environmental law.
BUSH WAS AWOL AGAIN
Throughout his life George W. Bush has had someone else there to pick up the pieces for him. Become a coke-sniffing cheerleader in college and you don't worry because daddy will bail you out. Go into business, break insider trading laws, but don't get charged because daddy or daddy's friends will bail you out. Support the Vietnam war, but don't go yourself. In fact, you even abscond from National Guard duty because your daddy will bail you out. Get into politics with the help of daddy's rich friends and even steal a presidential election because daddy's appointees are on the Supreme Court. Now George W. Bush is in a position where it's not so easy for daddy or daddy's friends to bail him out and lots of people are suffering. This editorial comes from Newsday and is linked at www.commondreams.org:
And Americans could see on their televisions that their government was AWOL. Terry Ebbert, the director of homeland security for New Orleans, said Thursday, "This is a national emergency. This is a national disgrace. FEMA has been here three days yet there is no command and control. We can send massive amounts of aid to tsunami victims but we can't bail out the City of New Orleans."
At about the same time, Brown, the clueless FEMA head, told CNN that he had only just learned that there were evacuees in the Convention Center. This was Thursday afternoon, by which time every television watcher in America knew there were thousands of people at the Convention Center and that they had no food or water and that people were dying for lack of medical care.
It wasn't until Friday that the vaunted American can-do spirit put an end to three days of governmental failure. Enough troops were mobilized, enough food was delivered to end the anarchy. Since then, we've begun to see the kind of behavior we expect from government: rescuing survivors, reuniting families, supplying needs, giving desperate people reason to hope again.
BUSH IS SNAPPISH, COLD, INCOMPETENT
The press has treated George W. Bush with kid gloves from the time of the 2000 presidential campaign, and especially after the terrorist attacks on 9/11. The picture the press presented to the world was of a likable guy who gave out cut nicknames. He was "decisive" we were told. Now, after the debacle of Hurricane Katrina, the press is telling us about the real Bush, a guy who snaps at people who tell him what he doesn't want to hear, a guy who doesn't even comprehend some of the speeches he gives. This item by Dan Froomkin is at www.washingtonpost.com:
Judging from the blistering analyses in Time, Newsweek, and elsewhere these past few days, it turns out that Bush is in fact fidgety, cold and snappish in private. He yells at those who dare give him bad news and is therefore not surprisingly surrounded by an echo chamber of terrified sycophants. He is slow to comprehend concepts that don't emerge from his gut. He is uncomprehending of the speeches that he is given to read. And oh yes, one of his most significant legacies -- the immense post-Sept. 11 reorganization of the federal government which created the Homeland Security Department -- has failed a big test.
MINIMUM CREDIT CARD PAYMENT INCREASE
I have seen rumors about credit card companies increasing their minimum payments, in some cases more than doubling the monthly payments people have been making. The industry says they are required to raise payments in accordance with a directive issued by the Comptroller of the Currency.
I checked out what the Comptroller had to say. They put a shiny happy face on a directive that is going to clobber many of us. Their excuse is that they don't like "predatory" lending. They cite cases where people would never pay off their credit card debt, or would take 15 or 20 years. They say that making larger payments reduces the balance faster and saves thousands of dollars in interest. This assumes, of course, that people have the means to make larger payments. I would suggest that most people who have large balances would dearly love to pay them off sooner, but just lack the money to do so. So now the Comptroller wants to squeeze blood out of a turnip.
I also believe that most people who carry credit card debt are doing so temporarily. They have no intention of carrying large balances for 15 or 20 years. And what of people who have to make large payments each month, turn around and borrow to make ends meet, and make the same large payment the next month? It's just as much a revolving door, if not worse, than the current system.
The Comptroller also didn't express much concern about true predatory lending practices such as huge late payments for being a single day late, or "universal default" provisions that allow credit card companies to jack up rates if a person is late with a payment anywhere. How is a person supposed to get from under with rates exceeding 20%?
This is just an egregious case of a bureaucrat addressing a perceived problem in the cruelest way possible. Maybe they should take a look at the Hippocratic Oath which says, "First, do no harm."
WHAT RIGHT-WINGERS HAVE IS GALL
There was once a guy I call Bad Talk Show Host on the air in Fresno. BTSH claimed he was an attorney, and that he had written a novel (no doubt self-published). At first, I thought BTSH was fairer and more open-minded that your typical right wing talk show host, but it didn't take long for me to be disabused of that notion. BTSH went on a rant one day and said, "Get the damned government off my back!" He considered things like seat belts as oppressive, I guess, and unemployment insurance a disincentive to work. In a moment of poetic justice BTSH got fired when his station changed format. I wonder if BTSH would consider Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo or the PATRIOT Act oppressive. Probably not.
But BTSH is illustrative of the major difference between talk and reality Right-wingers have always harped about big government, giving you visions of a utopia if you just do away with government. Under right-wing control, though, we have more intrusions into our lives than ever before. There is a gulf between the promises of right-wingers and the harsh reality they leave behind. In this item American Progress Action looks at right-wing promises. The item is at www.americanprogressaction.org:
Taking care of the wealthy first does nothing to ensure shared sacrifice and mutual responsibility for America’s needs and security. For the first time in history, a wartime president and his allies in Congress have sacrificed the nation's well-being to their ideology by asking nothing from those who have prospered so much from the collective work of all Americans. After cutting taxes for the wealthy after 9/11 and before the war in Iraq, conservatives now have the audacity to claim that Katrina should actually speed up the move to repeal the estate tax for millionaires. The culmination of thirty years of conservative dreams and proposals has produced little more than a destabilized economy racked by corruption and misplaced priorities that favor the needs of the few over the national interest.
THE SPOILS SYSTEM IS BACK IN THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION
One reason the civil service system was started was to alleviate the abuses of the spoils system. Before the civil service system existed the winning political party would fill all available jobs with loyal cronies. Competence was not the issue. In the Bush administration we see the spoils system revisited. People get placed into jobs for which they're totally unqualified. Their sole reason for getting a job is loyalty to Bush. We see the tragic consequences of the appointment of Michael Brown as head of FEMA. Paul Krugman writes about the twenty-first century version of the spoils system in his column at www.nytimes.com:
But what we really should be asking is whether FEMA's decline and fall is unique, or part of a larger pattern. What other government functions have been crippled by politicization, cronyism and/or the departure of experienced professionals? How many FEMA's are there?
Unfortunately, it's easy to find other agencies suffering from some version of the FEMA syndrome.
The first example won't surprise you: the Environmental Protection Agency, which has a key role to play in Hurricane Katrina's aftermath, but which has seen a major exodus of experienced officials over the past few years. In particular, senior officials have left in protest over what they say is the Bush administration's unwillingness to enforce environmental law.
BUSH WAS AWOL AGAIN
Throughout his life George W. Bush has had someone else there to pick up the pieces for him. Become a coke-sniffing cheerleader in college and you don't worry because daddy will bail you out. Go into business, break insider trading laws, but don't get charged because daddy or daddy's friends will bail you out. Support the Vietnam war, but don't go yourself. In fact, you even abscond from National Guard duty because your daddy will bail you out. Get into politics with the help of daddy's rich friends and even steal a presidential election because daddy's appointees are on the Supreme Court. Now George W. Bush is in a position where it's not so easy for daddy or daddy's friends to bail him out and lots of people are suffering. This editorial comes from Newsday and is linked at www.commondreams.org:
And Americans could see on their televisions that their government was AWOL. Terry Ebbert, the director of homeland security for New Orleans, said Thursday, "This is a national emergency. This is a national disgrace. FEMA has been here three days yet there is no command and control. We can send massive amounts of aid to tsunami victims but we can't bail out the City of New Orleans."
At about the same time, Brown, the clueless FEMA head, told CNN that he had only just learned that there were evacuees in the Convention Center. This was Thursday afternoon, by which time every television watcher in America knew there were thousands of people at the Convention Center and that they had no food or water and that people were dying for lack of medical care.
It wasn't until Friday that the vaunted American can-do spirit put an end to three days of governmental failure. Enough troops were mobilized, enough food was delivered to end the anarchy. Since then, we've begun to see the kind of behavior we expect from government: rescuing survivors, reuniting families, supplying needs, giving desperate people reason to hope again.
BUSH IS SNAPPISH, COLD, INCOMPETENT
The press has treated George W. Bush with kid gloves from the time of the 2000 presidential campaign, and especially after the terrorist attacks on 9/11. The picture the press presented to the world was of a likable guy who gave out cut nicknames. He was "decisive" we were told. Now, after the debacle of Hurricane Katrina, the press is telling us about the real Bush, a guy who snaps at people who tell him what he doesn't want to hear, a guy who doesn't even comprehend some of the speeches he gives. This item by Dan Froomkin is at www.washingtonpost.com:
Judging from the blistering analyses in Time, Newsweek, and elsewhere these past few days, it turns out that Bush is in fact fidgety, cold and snappish in private. He yells at those who dare give him bad news and is therefore not surprisingly surrounded by an echo chamber of terrified sycophants. He is slow to comprehend concepts that don't emerge from his gut. He is uncomprehending of the speeches that he is given to read. And oh yes, one of his most significant legacies -- the immense post-Sept. 11 reorganization of the federal government which created the Homeland Security Department -- has failed a big test.
MINIMUM CREDIT CARD PAYMENT INCREASE
I have seen rumors about credit card companies increasing their minimum payments, in some cases more than doubling the monthly payments people have been making. The industry says they are required to raise payments in accordance with a directive issued by the Comptroller of the Currency.
I checked out what the Comptroller had to say. They put a shiny happy face on a directive that is going to clobber many of us. Their excuse is that they don't like "predatory" lending. They cite cases where people would never pay off their credit card debt, or would take 15 or 20 years. They say that making larger payments reduces the balance faster and saves thousands of dollars in interest. This assumes, of course, that people have the means to make larger payments. I would suggest that most people who have large balances would dearly love to pay them off sooner, but just lack the money to do so. So now the Comptroller wants to squeeze blood out of a turnip.
I also believe that most people who carry credit card debt are doing so temporarily. They have no intention of carrying large balances for 15 or 20 years. And what of people who have to make large payments each month, turn around and borrow to make ends meet, and make the same large payment the next month? It's just as much a revolving door, if not worse, than the current system.
The Comptroller also didn't express much concern about true predatory lending practices such as huge late payments for being a single day late, or "universal default" provisions that allow credit card companies to jack up rates if a person is late with a payment anywhere. How is a person supposed to get from under with rates exceeding 20%?
This is just an egregious case of a bureaucrat addressing a perceived problem in the cruelest way possible. Maybe they should take a look at the Hippocratic Oath which says, "First, do no harm."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)