September 30, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH'S BIG TOBACCO CONNECTION
George W. Bush is suddenly in high dudgeon about spending when it involves funding children's health care. The funding for the program would come from an increase in tobacco taxes. Bush's administration has criminally wasted taxpayer money on the immoral war in Iraq and on a variety of expenditures to his fat cat buddies. This commentary is at www.welcome-to-pottersville.com:
Congress "failed" because Democrats wanted to add $23 billion for domestic spending that Bush considers wasteful. So, because Bush threatened to veto the bill, the Democrats enlisted the aid of one Graeme Frost, age 12, who begged Bush to sign the bill so four million of the nation's nine million uninsured children can benefit from the Schip expansion (which would be paid for by an increase in tobacco taxes).
This seems to be the real reason for his opposition to the whole bill. Bush is foaming at the mouth over this modest increase in spending on domestic programs and even though the Schip expansion will still provide health coverage for less than half of the nation's uninsured children, Bush's own sleazy connection with Big Tobacco seems to be at the black little heart of his righteous indignation. Said Robert Dreyfus in The Nation in October of 1999 (emphasis mine),
Bush's record on tobacco certainly doesn't displease the industry: opposition to the federal lawsuit against Big Tobacco and to increased taxes on cigarettes, plus vigorous support for tort reform that limits consumers' rights to sue makers of dangerous products--like tobacco. In Texas, Bush refused to support a lawsuit against Big Tobacco that eventually won $17 billion for the state's treasury. Taken together, Bush's friendships and his stance on tobacco-related issues are causing cigarette makers to salivate over the possibility of a Bush victory next year. "The prospect of Bill Clinton gone and a George Bush presidency makes the industry almost giddy," said Martin Feldman, a tobacco industry analyst at Salomon Smith Barney, in September.
AYN RAND -- SOCIAL DARWINISM IN NEW CLOTHES
Alan Greenspan, former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, is a disciple of Objectivist philosopher Ayn Rand. Her philosophy can be summed up as "greed is good." Supposedly, the pursuit of personal self interest ultimately benefits society as a whole. It's really just social Darwinism dressed up as something else. It comes down to survival of the fittest. As a country and as a species we could do better with the rich having somewhat less and the poor having enough for a decent life. This article by Naomi Klein is at www.opednews.com:
Rand's ideas about the "utopia of greed" allowed Greenspan to keep doing what he was doing but infused his corporate service with a powerful new sense of mission: making money wasn't just good for him, it was good for society as a whole. Of course, the flip side of this is the cruel disregard for those left behind. "Undeviating purpose and rationality achieve joy and fulfilment," Greenspan wrote as a zealous new convert. "Parasites who persistently avoid either purpose or reason perish as they should." Was it this mindset that served him well as he supported shock therapy in Russia (72 million impoverished) and east Asia after the 1997 economic crisis (24 million pushed into unemployment)?
Rand has played this role of greed-enabler for countless disciples. According to the New York Times, Atlas Shrugged - Rand's novel that ends with the hero tracing a dollar sign in the air like a benediction - stands as "one of the most influential business books ever written". Since Rand is simply pulped-up Adam Smith, her influence on men such as Greenspan suggests an interesting possibility. Perhaps the true purpose of the entire literature of trickle-down theory is to liberate entrepreneurs to pursue their narrowest advantage while claiming global altruistic motives - not so much an economic philosophy as an elaborate, retroactive rationale.
What Greenspan teaches us is that trickle-down isn't really an ideology after all. It's more like the friend we call after some embarrassing excess who will tell us, "Don't beat yourself up: You deserve it."
Friday, September 28, 2007
September 28, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE BUSH ENABLERS
It's ironic, really, that some of the people who yell the most about freedom and piously wrap themselves in the flag are the first in line when it comes to the destruction of civil liberties. I remember a letter to the editor in The Fresno Bee where the writer suggested that the Constitution was outdated for our times. Those nasty amendments in the Bill of Rights keep George W. Bush from "protecting" us from terrorists. Even if you gave Bush all the power in the world, which he seems to crave, he would never protect us from everything. In the meantime we would have no freedom. Is that what life is supposed to be, living like a herd animal in a cage, "protected" until our number comes up? This article by Walter Uhler is at www.walter-c-uhler.com:
Certain Americans chose a president no smarter than themselves, an illiterate who, in the seventh year of his presidency, still mangles the English language with such sentences as "Childrens do learn." Far worse, however, certain Americans chose a president who then lied to them about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and ties to al Qaeda, in order to send their sons and daughters (along with our sons and daughters) to kill Iraqis and, perhaps, die in an illegal, immoral invasion - now considered the worst strategic disaster in US history.
Even so, certain Americans either shrugged their shoulders or rationalized away the evil behavior of their president when, for example, on the eve of announcing the invasion of Iraq, he "pumped his fist as though instead of initiating a war he had kicked a winning field goal or hit a home run. 'Feels good,' he said." [Paul Waldman, Fraud, p. 8]
Certain Americans cheered him when he proclaimed "Mission Accomplished," more than four years and thousands of lives ago. Certain Americans basked in his phony bravado, when, from the safety of his White House, their coward-in-chief said "Bring 'em on" to the Iraqis just beginning to develop their deadly insurgency. And certain Americans raised few questions when, in 2007, their president falsely told Australia's deputy prime minister that "We're kicking ass" in Iraq.
THE STORY OF NINE BILLION MISSING DOLLARS
This is the story of shipments of large "bricks" of cash to Iraq, some $12 billion, of which $9 billion went missing. When it comes to the Bush administration there is no accountability for anything. Enron-style accounting is used in Iraq and in disguising the budget deficit here at home. Imagine how much good $12 billion could do to build housing, provide health care, clean up the environment, or improve education. The level of corruption in this administration is simply astonishing. This article by Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele is at www.corpwatch.org:
There is no true method of calculating the human cost of the war in Iraq. The monetary cost, grossly inflated by theft and corruption, is another matter. One simple piece of data puts this into perspective: to date, America has spent twice as much in inflation-adjusted dollars to rebuild Iraq as it did to rebuild Japan--an industrialized country three times Iraq's size, two of whose cities had been incinerated by atomic bombs. Understanding how and why this happened will take many years--if understanding comes at all. There has been no rush to explain even this one small part of the story, that of the missing Iraqi billions. No one in the U.S. government wants to talk about NorthStar Consultants, much less about the money that disappeared. Bradford R. Higgins was the C.P.A.'s chief financial officer, on loan from the State Department, where he is assistant secretary for resource management and chief financial officer. Higgins says it was "a Department of Defense-managed operation"; he says that "I don't know anyone at NorthStar" and that he did not oversee its operations. The C.P.A.'s comptroller and D.F.I. fund manager during the NorthStar days in 2003 was air-force colonel Don Davis. Through the air-force public-affairs office in the Pentagon, Davis declined to comment. L. Paul Bremer III, who wrote a 400-page book on his experiences as the C.P.A.'s administrator, stated in an interview that he had no input in the decision to hire NorthStar. He explained that "all of the contracting was done, by order of the secretary of defense, by the department of the army. They were our contracting arm ... I don't think I ever heard of NorthStar until some questions came up after I left." Nor did he have any dealings with NorthStar's Howell, he said. "If I met him, I have no memory of it." Queries sent repeatedly to the army's public-affairs desk in Baghdad and the Pentagon have gone unanswered, as have those to the office of the secretary of defense.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE BUSH ENABLERS
It's ironic, really, that some of the people who yell the most about freedom and piously wrap themselves in the flag are the first in line when it comes to the destruction of civil liberties. I remember a letter to the editor in The Fresno Bee where the writer suggested that the Constitution was outdated for our times. Those nasty amendments in the Bill of Rights keep George W. Bush from "protecting" us from terrorists. Even if you gave Bush all the power in the world, which he seems to crave, he would never protect us from everything. In the meantime we would have no freedom. Is that what life is supposed to be, living like a herd animal in a cage, "protected" until our number comes up? This article by Walter Uhler is at www.walter-c-uhler.com:
Certain Americans chose a president no smarter than themselves, an illiterate who, in the seventh year of his presidency, still mangles the English language with such sentences as "Childrens do learn." Far worse, however, certain Americans chose a president who then lied to them about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and ties to al Qaeda, in order to send their sons and daughters (along with our sons and daughters) to kill Iraqis and, perhaps, die in an illegal, immoral invasion - now considered the worst strategic disaster in US history.
Even so, certain Americans either shrugged their shoulders or rationalized away the evil behavior of their president when, for example, on the eve of announcing the invasion of Iraq, he "pumped his fist as though instead of initiating a war he had kicked a winning field goal or hit a home run. 'Feels good,' he said." [Paul Waldman, Fraud, p. 8]
Certain Americans cheered him when he proclaimed "Mission Accomplished," more than four years and thousands of lives ago. Certain Americans basked in his phony bravado, when, from the safety of his White House, their coward-in-chief said "Bring 'em on" to the Iraqis just beginning to develop their deadly insurgency. And certain Americans raised few questions when, in 2007, their president falsely told Australia's deputy prime minister that "We're kicking ass" in Iraq.
THE STORY OF NINE BILLION MISSING DOLLARS
This is the story of shipments of large "bricks" of cash to Iraq, some $12 billion, of which $9 billion went missing. When it comes to the Bush administration there is no accountability for anything. Enron-style accounting is used in Iraq and in disguising the budget deficit here at home. Imagine how much good $12 billion could do to build housing, provide health care, clean up the environment, or improve education. The level of corruption in this administration is simply astonishing. This article by Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele is at www.corpwatch.org:
There is no true method of calculating the human cost of the war in Iraq. The monetary cost, grossly inflated by theft and corruption, is another matter. One simple piece of data puts this into perspective: to date, America has spent twice as much in inflation-adjusted dollars to rebuild Iraq as it did to rebuild Japan--an industrialized country three times Iraq's size, two of whose cities had been incinerated by atomic bombs. Understanding how and why this happened will take many years--if understanding comes at all. There has been no rush to explain even this one small part of the story, that of the missing Iraqi billions. No one in the U.S. government wants to talk about NorthStar Consultants, much less about the money that disappeared. Bradford R. Higgins was the C.P.A.'s chief financial officer, on loan from the State Department, where he is assistant secretary for resource management and chief financial officer. Higgins says it was "a Department of Defense-managed operation"; he says that "I don't know anyone at NorthStar" and that he did not oversee its operations. The C.P.A.'s comptroller and D.F.I. fund manager during the NorthStar days in 2003 was air-force colonel Don Davis. Through the air-force public-affairs office in the Pentagon, Davis declined to comment. L. Paul Bremer III, who wrote a 400-page book on his experiences as the C.P.A.'s administrator, stated in an interview that he had no input in the decision to hire NorthStar. He explained that "all of the contracting was done, by order of the secretary of defense, by the department of the army. They were our contracting arm ... I don't think I ever heard of NorthStar until some questions came up after I left." Nor did he have any dealings with NorthStar's Howell, he said. "If I met him, I have no memory of it." Queries sent repeatedly to the army's public-affairs desk in Baghdad and the Pentagon have gone unanswered, as have those to the office of the secretary of defense.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
September 27, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
SAYING ONE THING, DOING ANOTHER
George W. Bush addressed the United Nations and talked about human rights. Bush, one of the most egregious violators of human rights in the world today, had the temerity to criticize other regimes like Cuba and Iran for their abuses. As this article points out, he failed to mention regimes that abuse human rights, but are allies of the United States. The article by William Douglas is at www.mcclatchydc.com:
Speaking before the United Nations General Assembly, the president called for renewed efforts to enforce the U.N.'s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a striking point of emphasis for a leader who's widely accused of violating human rights in waging war against terrorism.
Bush didn't mention the U.S. prisons in Afghanistan or at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, the U.S. practice of holding detainees for years without legal charges or access to lawyers, or the CIA's "rendition" kidnappings of suspects abroad, all issues of concern to human rights activists around the world.
LIMBAUGH NOT SUPPORTING THE TROOPS
You can't have any conscience or sense of shame to say some of the things Rush Limbaugh says on the air. The guy is a world class liar and hypocrite. A well-placed cyst kept Rush out of Vietnam, and like so many other right-wing chickenhawks, Rush is pro-war when somebody else does the fighting and dying. He had the effrontery to say soldiers returning from Iraq who don't support the war are "phony soldiers." This, once again, is an example of right-wingers attacking members of the military who have actually been in combat when those soldiers aren't good little lockstep right-wingers. This commentary by Jon Soltz is at www.huffingtonpost.com:
Where to begin?
First, in what universe is a guy who never served even close to being qualified to judge those who have worn the uniform? Rush Limbaugh has never worn a uniform in his life -- not even one at Mickey D's -- and somehow he's got the moral standing to pass judgment on the men and women who risked their lives for this nation, and his right to blather smears on the airwaves?
Second, maybe Rush doesn't much care, but the majority of troops on the ground in Iraq, and those who have returned, do not back the President's failed policy. If you go to our "Did You Get the Memo" page at VoteVets.org, there's a good collection of stories, polls, and surveys, which all show American's troops believe we are on the wrong track, not the right one, in Iraq.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
SAYING ONE THING, DOING ANOTHER
George W. Bush addressed the United Nations and talked about human rights. Bush, one of the most egregious violators of human rights in the world today, had the temerity to criticize other regimes like Cuba and Iran for their abuses. As this article points out, he failed to mention regimes that abuse human rights, but are allies of the United States. The article by William Douglas is at www.mcclatchydc.com:
Speaking before the United Nations General Assembly, the president called for renewed efforts to enforce the U.N.'s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a striking point of emphasis for a leader who's widely accused of violating human rights in waging war against terrorism.
Bush didn't mention the U.S. prisons in Afghanistan or at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, the U.S. practice of holding detainees for years without legal charges or access to lawyers, or the CIA's "rendition" kidnappings of suspects abroad, all issues of concern to human rights activists around the world.
LIMBAUGH NOT SUPPORTING THE TROOPS
You can't have any conscience or sense of shame to say some of the things Rush Limbaugh says on the air. The guy is a world class liar and hypocrite. A well-placed cyst kept Rush out of Vietnam, and like so many other right-wing chickenhawks, Rush is pro-war when somebody else does the fighting and dying. He had the effrontery to say soldiers returning from Iraq who don't support the war are "phony soldiers." This, once again, is an example of right-wingers attacking members of the military who have actually been in combat when those soldiers aren't good little lockstep right-wingers. This commentary by Jon Soltz is at www.huffingtonpost.com:
Where to begin?
First, in what universe is a guy who never served even close to being qualified to judge those who have worn the uniform? Rush Limbaugh has never worn a uniform in his life -- not even one at Mickey D's -- and somehow he's got the moral standing to pass judgment on the men and women who risked their lives for this nation, and his right to blather smears on the airwaves?
Second, maybe Rush doesn't much care, but the majority of troops on the ground in Iraq, and those who have returned, do not back the President's failed policy. If you go to our "Did You Get the Memo" page at VoteVets.org, there's a good collection of stories, polls, and surveys, which all show American's troops believe we are on the wrong track, not the right one, in Iraq.
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
September 26, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
ETHICALLY CHALLENGED STOSSEL
Broadcaster John Stossel likes to advertise himself as a "journalist," but he's really just a right-wing shill. Stossel is a devout believer in the "free market." You could summarize like Tarzan: free market good, government bad. Stossel was attacking the idea of government-provided universal health care and used one-sided interviews and straw men to support his argument. If people like Stossel attack something, it's probably something we should support. This commentary is at www.fair.org:
ABC's 20/20 host John Stossel got an hour of prime time on September 14 to launch a one-sided attack on single-payer healthcare, and advocate for the so-called "free market" solutions that Stossel and his favorite sources prefer.
"Tonight, we ask some provocative questions about your healthcare. We get some surprising answers," explained Stossel at the beginning of the "Sick in America" special. But "surprising" is not the first thing that comes to mind for anyone familiar with Stossel's journalism; as usual, Stossel relied largely on interviews with people who endorse the ABC host's platitudes about the virtues of the marketplace ("Private sector does everything better because they compete," for example). Except for an appearance by filmmaker Michael Moore, which serves to set up some of Stossel's complaints, the experts interviewed all share Stossel's vision: right-wing think tank spokespeople, a Harvard business school professor, a CEO who offers employees "health savings accounts" instead of insurance, a senior fellow at Manhattan Institute identified only as a "Canadian doctor" who criticizes his country's health system, and so forth.
Stossel tries to make the familiar argument that public healthcare programs in countries like Canada and Great Britain don't live up to the hype. "Many people say that healthcare in countries like France, Germany, Britain and Canada is great because it's free. Government pays for everything. No one has to worry. And free is good, right? Well, not so fast." In an effort to debunk the idea that "free" is always good, Stossel presents footage of giveaways for gasoline and ice cream causing chaos.
DOING THE CRUSADES AGAIN
The right-wing wackos who have been driving the aggressive war-mongering foreign policy we've seen the past few years probably would have loved the Crusades. Good Christians marched against those evil Moslems. Nowadays the most extreme wackos would have you believe that the terrorist attacks on 9/11 were just a prelude to a new war between the western "civilized" world and those pagan Moslems. Now we get "Terrorism Awareness Week" featuring the likes of Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, and Rick Santorum. This article by Frank J. Ranelli is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
Now consider these alternatives to so-called “islamo-fascists.” Hitler killed all total 12 million Jews, dissenters and infirmed people, amassed a state-sponsored, mechanical-backed army of millions that reeked havoc on numerous continents for 12 years. Stalin held the world’s collective stage hostage under a repressive regime replete with thousands of nuclear missiles that came within minutes of incendiary obliteration of the Earth, as we know it.
When in view of the heinous atrocities of Hitler and Stalin, the demagoguery and utter mendacity of the Terrorism Awareness Project should immediately be dismissed. Yet, over two million misinformed and deluded people have visited their site just this year alone. Adding to the sensational theatrics this fringe group is trying to propagate across college campuses are wild assertions such as “the academic left has mobilized to create sympathy for the enemy” and “the nation will be rocked by the biggest conservative campus protest ever - Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week, a wake-up call for Americans on 200 university and college campuses.”
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
ETHICALLY CHALLENGED STOSSEL
Broadcaster John Stossel likes to advertise himself as a "journalist," but he's really just a right-wing shill. Stossel is a devout believer in the "free market." You could summarize like Tarzan: free market good, government bad. Stossel was attacking the idea of government-provided universal health care and used one-sided interviews and straw men to support his argument. If people like Stossel attack something, it's probably something we should support. This commentary is at www.fair.org:
ABC's 20/20 host John Stossel got an hour of prime time on September 14 to launch a one-sided attack on single-payer healthcare, and advocate for the so-called "free market" solutions that Stossel and his favorite sources prefer.
"Tonight, we ask some provocative questions about your healthcare. We get some surprising answers," explained Stossel at the beginning of the "Sick in America" special. But "surprising" is not the first thing that comes to mind for anyone familiar with Stossel's journalism; as usual, Stossel relied largely on interviews with people who endorse the ABC host's platitudes about the virtues of the marketplace ("Private sector does everything better because they compete," for example). Except for an appearance by filmmaker Michael Moore, which serves to set up some of Stossel's complaints, the experts interviewed all share Stossel's vision: right-wing think tank spokespeople, a Harvard business school professor, a CEO who offers employees "health savings accounts" instead of insurance, a senior fellow at Manhattan Institute identified only as a "Canadian doctor" who criticizes his country's health system, and so forth.
Stossel tries to make the familiar argument that public healthcare programs in countries like Canada and Great Britain don't live up to the hype. "Many people say that healthcare in countries like France, Germany, Britain and Canada is great because it's free. Government pays for everything. No one has to worry. And free is good, right? Well, not so fast." In an effort to debunk the idea that "free" is always good, Stossel presents footage of giveaways for gasoline and ice cream causing chaos.
DOING THE CRUSADES AGAIN
The right-wing wackos who have been driving the aggressive war-mongering foreign policy we've seen the past few years probably would have loved the Crusades. Good Christians marched against those evil Moslems. Nowadays the most extreme wackos would have you believe that the terrorist attacks on 9/11 were just a prelude to a new war between the western "civilized" world and those pagan Moslems. Now we get "Terrorism Awareness Week" featuring the likes of Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, and Rick Santorum. This article by Frank J. Ranelli is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
Now consider these alternatives to so-called “islamo-fascists.” Hitler killed all total 12 million Jews, dissenters and infirmed people, amassed a state-sponsored, mechanical-backed army of millions that reeked havoc on numerous continents for 12 years. Stalin held the world’s collective stage hostage under a repressive regime replete with thousands of nuclear missiles that came within minutes of incendiary obliteration of the Earth, as we know it.
When in view of the heinous atrocities of Hitler and Stalin, the demagoguery and utter mendacity of the Terrorism Awareness Project should immediately be dismissed. Yet, over two million misinformed and deluded people have visited their site just this year alone. Adding to the sensational theatrics this fringe group is trying to propagate across college campuses are wild assertions such as “the academic left has mobilized to create sympathy for the enemy” and “the nation will be rocked by the biggest conservative campus protest ever - Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week, a wake-up call for Americans on 200 university and college campuses.”
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
September 25, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE GOP RUNS ON RACISM
The Republican party has found ways to tap into the basest and most primitive emotions people have. They find a way to ramp up the hate against gays, against feminists, against environmentalists, against the poor, against immigrants, and notably against African-Americans. Richard Nixon crafted much of his strategy in the "southern strategy" that was designed to bring out the bigotry in white southerners upset about the gains made by blacks in civil rights. Ronald Reagan made a career of talking about "welfare Cadillacs," which is just code for blacks on public assistance. In denying the District of Columbia, comprised of a mostly black population, the right to real Congressional representation last week was just another example of Republican bigotry in action. And let's not forget how heavily black New Orleans has been left ravaged since Hurricane Katrina. This column by Bob Herbert is at www.nytimes.com:
The G.O.P. has spent the last 40 years insulting, disenfranchising and otherwise stomping on the interests of black Americans. Last week, the residents of Washington, D.C., with its majority black population, came remarkably close to realizing a goal they have sought for decades — a voting member of Congress to represent them.
A majority in Congress favored the move, and the House had already approved it. But the Republican minority in the Senate — with the enthusiastic support of President Bush — rose up on Tuesday and said: “No way, baby.”
At least 57 senators favored the bill, a solid majority. But the Republicans prevented a key motion on the measure from receiving the 60 votes necessary to move it forward in the Senate. The bill died.
COUNTRY MUSIC'S SHIFT
I've been a country music fan most of my life. I love Merle Haggard, Buck Owens, Emmylou Harris, Waylon Jennings, Johnny Cash, Mary Chapin-Carpenter, and several other artists. I got turned off on contemporary country music for a number of reasons. For one thing, it just sounds fake. Everyone sounds the same. And then prominent country music stars like Toby Keith and Darryl Worley jumped on the Bush war bandwagon. Now it seems that Toby claims he never supported the war. As I recall, Toby was one of the major critics of the Dixie Chicks for merely suggesting they were ashamed George W. Bush was from Texas. Now one of the best songs on the country charts is Tim McGraw's "If You're Reading This" about a soldier killed in Iraq. This article by Tim Shipman is at www.commondreams.org:
But as the US death toll rises in Iraq and public patience with the conflict - and with George W. Bush - diminishes, many anti-war songs are emerging from Nashville, Tennessee, home of the genre.
No one has moved further than Toby Keith and Darryl Worley, two of the biggest names in country music.
In 2002, Keith had a huge hit with Courtesy of the Red, White and Blue, which includes the lyric: “You’ll be sorry that you messed with the US of A, ’cause we’ll put a boot in your ass - it’s the American Way.”
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE GOP RUNS ON RACISM
The Republican party has found ways to tap into the basest and most primitive emotions people have. They find a way to ramp up the hate against gays, against feminists, against environmentalists, against the poor, against immigrants, and notably against African-Americans. Richard Nixon crafted much of his strategy in the "southern strategy" that was designed to bring out the bigotry in white southerners upset about the gains made by blacks in civil rights. Ronald Reagan made a career of talking about "welfare Cadillacs," which is just code for blacks on public assistance. In denying the District of Columbia, comprised of a mostly black population, the right to real Congressional representation last week was just another example of Republican bigotry in action. And let's not forget how heavily black New Orleans has been left ravaged since Hurricane Katrina. This column by Bob Herbert is at www.nytimes.com:
The G.O.P. has spent the last 40 years insulting, disenfranchising and otherwise stomping on the interests of black Americans. Last week, the residents of Washington, D.C., with its majority black population, came remarkably close to realizing a goal they have sought for decades — a voting member of Congress to represent them.
A majority in Congress favored the move, and the House had already approved it. But the Republican minority in the Senate — with the enthusiastic support of President Bush — rose up on Tuesday and said: “No way, baby.”
At least 57 senators favored the bill, a solid majority. But the Republicans prevented a key motion on the measure from receiving the 60 votes necessary to move it forward in the Senate. The bill died.
COUNTRY MUSIC'S SHIFT
I've been a country music fan most of my life. I love Merle Haggard, Buck Owens, Emmylou Harris, Waylon Jennings, Johnny Cash, Mary Chapin-Carpenter, and several other artists. I got turned off on contemporary country music for a number of reasons. For one thing, it just sounds fake. Everyone sounds the same. And then prominent country music stars like Toby Keith and Darryl Worley jumped on the Bush war bandwagon. Now it seems that Toby claims he never supported the war. As I recall, Toby was one of the major critics of the Dixie Chicks for merely suggesting they were ashamed George W. Bush was from Texas. Now one of the best songs on the country charts is Tim McGraw's "If You're Reading This" about a soldier killed in Iraq. This article by Tim Shipman is at www.commondreams.org:
But as the US death toll rises in Iraq and public patience with the conflict - and with George W. Bush - diminishes, many anti-war songs are emerging from Nashville, Tennessee, home of the genre.
No one has moved further than Toby Keith and Darryl Worley, two of the biggest names in country music.
In 2002, Keith had a huge hit with Courtesy of the Red, White and Blue, which includes the lyric: “You’ll be sorry that you messed with the US of A, ’cause we’ll put a boot in your ass - it’s the American Way.”
Monday, September 24, 2007
September 24, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
ANOTHER DEREGULATION MESS
You can almost hear Oliver Hardy turning to Stan Laurel and saying with disgust, "This is another fine mess you've gotten us into." The free-market disciples of deregulation tell us that the road of deregulation leads to paradise. History says otherwise. The Crash of 1929 came about largely because there was no regulation and speculators ran wild. In California we were getting privatized electricity and we got Enron and a huge mess. Now we've had subprime mortgages with speculators running wild again, and it puts the whole economy at risk. Robert Reich writes about it in this column at www.commondreams.org:
The sub-prime mess, the huge risks taken by hedge funds, and the conflicts of interest that led to Enron and kindred scandals, are all the consequences of serial bouts of financial deregulation. Since the 1970s, in the name of free-market efficiency, Congress and presidents of both parties repealed key protections put in place by the New Deal. But the main effect has been to engineer windfall profits for financial insiders, replace real productive innovation with financial engineering, shift wealth from families to corporations, and put the entire American economy at ever greater risk.
As a result, the economy has increasingly come to depend on asset bubbles — overvalued stocks, overpriced real estate, and dubious financial instruments like derivatives. The bubbles have been pumped up by speculative borrowing. The borrowing feeds on itself, as it did in the 1920s, since an inflated asset is handy collateral for still more borrowing. Alarmingly, these bubbles turn out to be interconnected — hedge-fund profits reliant on high-yield sub-prime mortgages, and a soaring stock market bid up by risky private equity deals — so if the air goes out of one bubble, it goes out of others. That’s why the crisis is so hard to manage, even by a very aggressive Federal Reserve.
Supposedly, we can’t have depressions anymore, for three reasons. First, the Fed has gotten far more sophisticated about containing financial panics. In recent weeks, the Fed’s and the world’s other central banks have poured hundreds of billions of dollars into credit markets so that risk-averse banks keep lending against shaky collateral. This in turn keeps the price of that collateral — bonds, stocks, real estate — from sinking still farther in a 1929-style meltdown. However, once a bubble bursts, low interest rates can’t necessarily revive it; the Fed can cheapen money, but it can’t make anxious creditors put it at risk.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
ANOTHER DEREGULATION MESS
You can almost hear Oliver Hardy turning to Stan Laurel and saying with disgust, "This is another fine mess you've gotten us into." The free-market disciples of deregulation tell us that the road of deregulation leads to paradise. History says otherwise. The Crash of 1929 came about largely because there was no regulation and speculators ran wild. In California we were getting privatized electricity and we got Enron and a huge mess. Now we've had subprime mortgages with speculators running wild again, and it puts the whole economy at risk. Robert Reich writes about it in this column at www.commondreams.org:
The sub-prime mess, the huge risks taken by hedge funds, and the conflicts of interest that led to Enron and kindred scandals, are all the consequences of serial bouts of financial deregulation. Since the 1970s, in the name of free-market efficiency, Congress and presidents of both parties repealed key protections put in place by the New Deal. But the main effect has been to engineer windfall profits for financial insiders, replace real productive innovation with financial engineering, shift wealth from families to corporations, and put the entire American economy at ever greater risk.
As a result, the economy has increasingly come to depend on asset bubbles — overvalued stocks, overpriced real estate, and dubious financial instruments like derivatives. The bubbles have been pumped up by speculative borrowing. The borrowing feeds on itself, as it did in the 1920s, since an inflated asset is handy collateral for still more borrowing. Alarmingly, these bubbles turn out to be interconnected — hedge-fund profits reliant on high-yield sub-prime mortgages, and a soaring stock market bid up by risky private equity deals — so if the air goes out of one bubble, it goes out of others. That’s why the crisis is so hard to manage, even by a very aggressive Federal Reserve.
Supposedly, we can’t have depressions anymore, for three reasons. First, the Fed has gotten far more sophisticated about containing financial panics. In recent weeks, the Fed’s and the world’s other central banks have poured hundreds of billions of dollars into credit markets so that risk-averse banks keep lending against shaky collateral. This in turn keeps the price of that collateral — bonds, stocks, real estate — from sinking still farther in a 1929-style meltdown. However, once a bubble bursts, low interest rates can’t necessarily revive it; the Fed can cheapen money, but it can’t make anxious creditors put it at risk.
Sunday, September 23, 2007
September 23, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
DISAPPOINTING FEINSTEIN
California Senator Dianne Feinstein is representative of the disappointment so many of us feel about the Democrats in Congress. Back when Bush first stole the presidency it was only the Congressional Black Caucus that made any serious objection to the election being certified for Bush. Democrats consistently confirmed vile Bush nominees for Cabinet posts. Democrats have voted to fund this bloodbath in Iraq and they voted for the bankruptcy bill that was a gift to credit card companies. They have voted for far-right nominees to the Supreme Court. Just what is it that people like Dianne Feinstein stand for? This commentary by Glenn Greenwald is at www.salon.com:
The standard excuse offered by many apologists for Bush-enabling Democrats -- that they support the Bush agenda and capitulate to the right-wing noise machine due to political fear of being depicted as too liberal or "soft on terror" -- is clearly inapplicable to many, if not most, of the enablers. California's Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein provides a perfect case study for understanding why the Congress has done virtually nothing to oppose the most extreme Bush policies, while doing much actively to support it.
Feinstein represents a deep blue state and was just easily re-elected to her third term last year. She won't run for re-election, if she ever does, until 2012, when she will be 80 years old. Her state easily re-elected a Senator, Barbara Boxer, with a much more liberal voting record than Feinstein's. Political fear cannot possibly explain her loyal support for the Bush agenda on the most critical issues decided by the Senate.
GOP HYPOCRISY ON MOVEON AD
Moveon.org printed an ad referring to "General Betray-us" and the right-wing is in a major froth. According to George W. Bush, criticizing General Petreaus is tantamount to criticizing the entire military. First, I would say the military should not be immune to criticism. The military shouldn't get an automatic pass just because it is the military. But, beyond that, how about the GOP's outright smears against members or past members of the military? How about the attacks on John McCain, John Kerry, and Max Cleland? The GOP does a few things well: racism, homophobia, transferring wealth to the rich, destroying the environment, and massive hyprocisy. This article by Paul Begala is at www.huffingtonpost.com:
Before Democrats fall all over themselves to agree with a president whose trust and honesty rating from the American people is even lower than his IQ, let's look at the real record of Bush's cowardice when it comes to speaking out against attacks on military heroes:
* In the 2000 South Carolina primary, George W. Bush stood next to a man described as a "fringe" figure - a man who had attacked Bush's own father - at a Bush rally. With Bush applauding him, the man said John McCain "abandoned" veterans. McCain, who was tortured in a North Vietnamese POW camp, was incensed. Five U.S. Senators who fought in Vietnam, including Democrats John Kerry, Max Cleland and Bob Kerrey, condemned the attack and called on Bush to repudiate it. When pressed on it at a debate hosted by CNN's Larry King, Bush meekly muttered that he shouldn't be held responsible for what others say. Even when he's standing next to them at a Bush rally.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
DISAPPOINTING FEINSTEIN
California Senator Dianne Feinstein is representative of the disappointment so many of us feel about the Democrats in Congress. Back when Bush first stole the presidency it was only the Congressional Black Caucus that made any serious objection to the election being certified for Bush. Democrats consistently confirmed vile Bush nominees for Cabinet posts. Democrats have voted to fund this bloodbath in Iraq and they voted for the bankruptcy bill that was a gift to credit card companies. They have voted for far-right nominees to the Supreme Court. Just what is it that people like Dianne Feinstein stand for? This commentary by Glenn Greenwald is at www.salon.com:
The standard excuse offered by many apologists for Bush-enabling Democrats -- that they support the Bush agenda and capitulate to the right-wing noise machine due to political fear of being depicted as too liberal or "soft on terror" -- is clearly inapplicable to many, if not most, of the enablers. California's Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein provides a perfect case study for understanding why the Congress has done virtually nothing to oppose the most extreme Bush policies, while doing much actively to support it.
Feinstein represents a deep blue state and was just easily re-elected to her third term last year. She won't run for re-election, if she ever does, until 2012, when she will be 80 years old. Her state easily re-elected a Senator, Barbara Boxer, with a much more liberal voting record than Feinstein's. Political fear cannot possibly explain her loyal support for the Bush agenda on the most critical issues decided by the Senate.
GOP HYPOCRISY ON MOVEON AD
Moveon.org printed an ad referring to "General Betray-us" and the right-wing is in a major froth. According to George W. Bush, criticizing General Petreaus is tantamount to criticizing the entire military. First, I would say the military should not be immune to criticism. The military shouldn't get an automatic pass just because it is the military. But, beyond that, how about the GOP's outright smears against members or past members of the military? How about the attacks on John McCain, John Kerry, and Max Cleland? The GOP does a few things well: racism, homophobia, transferring wealth to the rich, destroying the environment, and massive hyprocisy. This article by Paul Begala is at www.huffingtonpost.com:
Before Democrats fall all over themselves to agree with a president whose trust and honesty rating from the American people is even lower than his IQ, let's look at the real record of Bush's cowardice when it comes to speaking out against attacks on military heroes:
* In the 2000 South Carolina primary, George W. Bush stood next to a man described as a "fringe" figure - a man who had attacked Bush's own father - at a Bush rally. With Bush applauding him, the man said John McCain "abandoned" veterans. McCain, who was tortured in a North Vietnamese POW camp, was incensed. Five U.S. Senators who fought in Vietnam, including Democrats John Kerry, Max Cleland and Bob Kerrey, condemned the attack and called on Bush to repudiate it. When pressed on it at a debate hosted by CNN's Larry King, Bush meekly muttered that he shouldn't be held responsible for what others say. Even when he's standing next to them at a Bush rally.
Saturday, September 22, 2007
September 22, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THUG NATION
Under the Bush administration, detaining or killing people is easier than diplomacy. We know that Bush avoids protests by using so-called "Free Speech Zones." In several instances during this administration people have been forced to leave Bush events because they dared to wear a message on a T-shirt opposing the administration. Things in Iraq are dramatically worse. The rules of engagement basically give carte blanche to American forces to execute anyone who is deemed a threat, even if that person is unarmed. This article by Robert Parry is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
Besides the periodic controversies over U.S. military killings of unarmed Iraqis and Afghanis, the Bush administration also is facing a challenge from the Iraqi government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki over the U.S. Embassy’s reliance on Blackwater security contractors despite their reputation as crude and murderous bullies.
On Sept. 16, Blackwater gunmen accompanying a U.S. diplomatic convoy apparently sensed an ambush and opened fire, spraying a busy Baghdad square with bullets. Eyewitness accounts, including from an Iraqi police officer, indicated that the Blackwater team apparently overreacted to a car moving into the square and killed at least 11 people.
“Blackwater has no respect for the Iraqi people,” an Iraqi Interior Ministry official told the Washington Post. “They consider Iraqis like animals, although actually I think they may have more respect for animals. We have seen what they do in the streets. When they’re not shooting, they’re throwing water bottles at people and calling them names. If you are terrifying a child or an elderly woman, or you are killing an innocent civilian who is riding in his car, isn’t that terrorism?” [Washington Post, Sept. 20, 2007]
THE DISASTER OF FREE MARKET CAPITALISM
This article is a discussion of Naomi Klein's new book The Shock Doctrine and what is called "disaster capitalism." There is strong evidence that the wave of predatory capitalism we see now is guaranteed to produce a series of disasters, including war, inequality, and environmental degradation. This article by John Gray is at www.alternet.org:
As Klein sees it, the social breakdowns that have accompanied neo-liberal economic policies are not the result of incompetence or mismanagement. They are integral to the free-market project, which can only advance against a background of disasters. At times, writing in a populist vein that echoes her first book No Logo, published seven years ago, Klein seems to suggest that these disasters are manufactured as part of a deliberate policy framed by corporations with hidden influence in government. Her more considered view, which is also more plausible, is that disaster is part of the normal functioning of the type of capitalism we have today: "An economic system that requires constant growth, while bucking almost all serious attempts at environmental regulation, generates a steady stream of disasters all on its own, whether military, ecological or financial. The appetite for easy, short-term profits offered by purely speculative investment has turned the stock, currency and real estate markets into crisis-creation machines, as the Asian financial crisis, the Mexican peso crisis and the dotcom collapse all demonstrate."
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THUG NATION
Under the Bush administration, detaining or killing people is easier than diplomacy. We know that Bush avoids protests by using so-called "Free Speech Zones." In several instances during this administration people have been forced to leave Bush events because they dared to wear a message on a T-shirt opposing the administration. Things in Iraq are dramatically worse. The rules of engagement basically give carte blanche to American forces to execute anyone who is deemed a threat, even if that person is unarmed. This article by Robert Parry is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
Besides the periodic controversies over U.S. military killings of unarmed Iraqis and Afghanis, the Bush administration also is facing a challenge from the Iraqi government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki over the U.S. Embassy’s reliance on Blackwater security contractors despite their reputation as crude and murderous bullies.
On Sept. 16, Blackwater gunmen accompanying a U.S. diplomatic convoy apparently sensed an ambush and opened fire, spraying a busy Baghdad square with bullets. Eyewitness accounts, including from an Iraqi police officer, indicated that the Blackwater team apparently overreacted to a car moving into the square and killed at least 11 people.
“Blackwater has no respect for the Iraqi people,” an Iraqi Interior Ministry official told the Washington Post. “They consider Iraqis like animals, although actually I think they may have more respect for animals. We have seen what they do in the streets. When they’re not shooting, they’re throwing water bottles at people and calling them names. If you are terrifying a child or an elderly woman, or you are killing an innocent civilian who is riding in his car, isn’t that terrorism?” [Washington Post, Sept. 20, 2007]
THE DISASTER OF FREE MARKET CAPITALISM
This article is a discussion of Naomi Klein's new book The Shock Doctrine and what is called "disaster capitalism." There is strong evidence that the wave of predatory capitalism we see now is guaranteed to produce a series of disasters, including war, inequality, and environmental degradation. This article by John Gray is at www.alternet.org:
As Klein sees it, the social breakdowns that have accompanied neo-liberal economic policies are not the result of incompetence or mismanagement. They are integral to the free-market project, which can only advance against a background of disasters. At times, writing in a populist vein that echoes her first book No Logo, published seven years ago, Klein seems to suggest that these disasters are manufactured as part of a deliberate policy framed by corporations with hidden influence in government. Her more considered view, which is also more plausible, is that disaster is part of the normal functioning of the type of capitalism we have today: "An economic system that requires constant growth, while bucking almost all serious attempts at environmental regulation, generates a steady stream of disasters all on its own, whether military, ecological or financial. The appetite for easy, short-term profits offered by purely speculative investment has turned the stock, currency and real estate markets into crisis-creation machines, as the Asian financial crisis, the Mexican peso crisis and the dotcom collapse all demonstrate."
Thursday, September 20, 2007
September 20, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH THE PETULANT
Since George W. Bush has conducted himself as though he's a king, maybe it's appropriate we give him a moniker. Even more appropriate, since the Bush organization behaves like a Mafia family it's appropriate to give him a name like a Mafia hood. Bush the Petulant. Bush really thinks he's better than everyone else, so when he doesn't get his way he stamps his foot or uses sarcasm to demean those around him. This article by Sidney Blumenthal is at www.salon.com:
Bush is a classic insecure authoritarian who imposes humiliating tests of obedience on others in order to prove his superiority and their inferiority. In 1999, according to Draper, at a meeting of economic experts at the Texas governor's mansion, Bush interrupted Rove when he joined in the discussion, saying, "Karl, hang up my jacket." In front of other aides, Bush joked repeatedly that he would fire Rove. (Laura Bush's attitude toward Rove was pointedly disdainful. She nicknamed him "Pigpen," for wallowing in dirty politics. He was staff, not family -- certainly not people like them.)
Bush's deployed his fetish for punctuality as a punitive weapon. When Colin Powell was several minutes late to a Cabinet meeting, Bush ordered that the door to the Cabinet Room be locked. Aides have been fearful of raising problems with him. In his 2004 debates with Sen. John Kerry, no one felt comfortable or confident enough to discuss with Bush the importance of his personal demeanor. Doing poorly in his first debate, he turned his anger on his communications director, Dan Bartlett, for showing him a tape afterward. When his trusted old public relations handler, Karen Hughes, tried gently to tell him, "You looked mad," he shot back, "I wasn't mad! Tell them that!"
At a political strategy meeting in May 2004, when Matthew Dowd and Rove explained to him that he was not likely to win in a Reagan-like landslide, as Bush had imagined, he lashed out at Rove: "KARL!" Rove, according to Draper, was Bush's "favorite punching bag," and the president often threw futile and meaningless questions at him, and shouted, "You don't know what the hell you're talking about."
THE FOOLISH CLIMATE CHANGE DENIERS
I get the feeling that people who deny the reality of global warming really believe in fairy tales. They're the same people who think the "free market" solves everything or that prayer can cure cancer. Accepting the reality of climate change is inconvenient. It means lifestyles have to change. This article by Joe Brewer is at www.truthout.org:
A typical technique used by climate contrarians is to frame projections of likely future events as predictions and call climate scientists foolish for predicting the future. Tierney goes the other way and frames future events as reflections of the past. Check out this quote:
"Since record-keeping began in the 19th century, the sea level in New York has been rising a foot per century, which happens to be about the same increase estimated to occur over the next century by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change."
(emphasis added)
He does more than claim numerical equivalence. That alone would merely be inaccurate (the average of all scenarios for sea level rise over the next century is closer to 1.5 feet, but could be as high as 3 feet). Instead, he goes further to imply that the rise in sea level over the last century didn't cause any harm. Therefore, another increase of the same amount will have the same consequence. Clever sleight-of-hand, isn't it? He does the same thing with temperature:
"The temperature has also risen as New York has been covered with asphalt and concrete … that's estimated to have raised nighttime temperatures by 7 degrees Fahrenheit. The warming that has already occurred locally is on the same scale as what's expected globally in the next century."
(emphasis added)
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH THE PETULANT
Since George W. Bush has conducted himself as though he's a king, maybe it's appropriate we give him a moniker. Even more appropriate, since the Bush organization behaves like a Mafia family it's appropriate to give him a name like a Mafia hood. Bush the Petulant. Bush really thinks he's better than everyone else, so when he doesn't get his way he stamps his foot or uses sarcasm to demean those around him. This article by Sidney Blumenthal is at www.salon.com:
Bush is a classic insecure authoritarian who imposes humiliating tests of obedience on others in order to prove his superiority and their inferiority. In 1999, according to Draper, at a meeting of economic experts at the Texas governor's mansion, Bush interrupted Rove when he joined in the discussion, saying, "Karl, hang up my jacket." In front of other aides, Bush joked repeatedly that he would fire Rove. (Laura Bush's attitude toward Rove was pointedly disdainful. She nicknamed him "Pigpen," for wallowing in dirty politics. He was staff, not family -- certainly not people like them.)
Bush's deployed his fetish for punctuality as a punitive weapon. When Colin Powell was several minutes late to a Cabinet meeting, Bush ordered that the door to the Cabinet Room be locked. Aides have been fearful of raising problems with him. In his 2004 debates with Sen. John Kerry, no one felt comfortable or confident enough to discuss with Bush the importance of his personal demeanor. Doing poorly in his first debate, he turned his anger on his communications director, Dan Bartlett, for showing him a tape afterward. When his trusted old public relations handler, Karen Hughes, tried gently to tell him, "You looked mad," he shot back, "I wasn't mad! Tell them that!"
At a political strategy meeting in May 2004, when Matthew Dowd and Rove explained to him that he was not likely to win in a Reagan-like landslide, as Bush had imagined, he lashed out at Rove: "KARL!" Rove, according to Draper, was Bush's "favorite punching bag," and the president often threw futile and meaningless questions at him, and shouted, "You don't know what the hell you're talking about."
THE FOOLISH CLIMATE CHANGE DENIERS
I get the feeling that people who deny the reality of global warming really believe in fairy tales. They're the same people who think the "free market" solves everything or that prayer can cure cancer. Accepting the reality of climate change is inconvenient. It means lifestyles have to change. This article by Joe Brewer is at www.truthout.org:
A typical technique used by climate contrarians is to frame projections of likely future events as predictions and call climate scientists foolish for predicting the future. Tierney goes the other way and frames future events as reflections of the past. Check out this quote:
"Since record-keeping began in the 19th century, the sea level in New York has been rising a foot per century, which happens to be about the same increase estimated to occur over the next century by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change."
(emphasis added)
He does more than claim numerical equivalence. That alone would merely be inaccurate (the average of all scenarios for sea level rise over the next century is closer to 1.5 feet, but could be as high as 3 feet). Instead, he goes further to imply that the rise in sea level over the last century didn't cause any harm. Therefore, another increase of the same amount will have the same consequence. Clever sleight-of-hand, isn't it? He does the same thing with temperature:
"The temperature has also risen as New York has been covered with asphalt and concrete … that's estimated to have raised nighttime temperatures by 7 degrees Fahrenheit. The warming that has already occurred locally is on the same scale as what's expected globally in the next century."
(emphasis added)
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
September 18, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
SOUR NOTES ON THE MAESTRO
Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan is a Libertarian, a devotee of Ayn Rand, and a champion of the "free market." So Mr. Greenspan was on board with the economics of the Bush administration. Now that we're seeing the poison fruit from Bush's policies Greenspan is trying to disavow himself of any responsibility. What we've gotten the past six years under Bush is a dire lesson in right-wing Economics 101, which is about giving everything to the rich and leaving the rest of us to struggle. This article by William Greider is at www.commondreams.org:
The economic consequences of his rule are accumulating, and even the dullest financial reporters are stumbling on crumbs of truth about Greenspan’s legendary reign. It sowed profound and dangerous imbalances in the U.S. economy. That’s what happens when government power tips the balance in favor of capital over labor, favoring super-rich over middle class and poor, then holds it there for nearly a generation.
Things get out of whack and now the country is paying enormously. A pity reporters and politicians didn’t have the nerve to ask these questions when Greenspan was in power.
He retired only a year ago, but is already trying to revise the history - to explain away blunders that are now a financial crisis facing his successor; to rearrange the facts in exculpatory ways; to deny his right-wing ideological bias and his raw partisanship in behalf of the Bush Republicans.
SURE, THE FREE MARKET CAN POLICE ITSELF
One of the most ludicrous ideas conservatives bandy about is that the free market can police itself. You know, the market will correct itself when bad things happen. The "invisible hand" will be mending things. When he was Governor of Texas George W. Bush allowed polluters to police themselves and Texas got some of the worst air pollution in the country. Now we're witnessing more tests of free market evangelism. You wonder if the food you eat is safe. It just might have e. coli or some other deadly additive because food companies don't want to go to the expense of making it safe. The toys you buy might have lead paint or the tires on your car might separate and cause you to lose control and die. But then the free market will step in and correct things. But you'll be dead. Never mind. This article by Roy Ulrich is at www.tompaine.com:
The headlines read, "Lead Paint Found in Imported Toys." It's been easy to bash the Chinese and the toy industry for their failings. But missing in most accounts is the sorry state of the Consumer Products Safety Commission, the federal agency charged with the mission of warning consumers about potentially defective products.
The budget for the agency is a paltry $62 million this year though the industry it supposedly regulates sells $1.4 trillion annually. In the 1970's the agency had almost 1,000 employees. Now there are 420, 81 of whom are field inspectors. At the port in Long Beach, Calif., sits a single inspector whose impossible job it is to spot check incoming overseas shipments. The agency employs a single full-time toy tester at its cramped, poorly lit laboratory in Gaithersburg, Md., for the whole country. Astonishingly, by law, it can mandate safety standards only after voluntary measures have failed.
Six years ago, 100 people died in the wake of accidents caused by faulty Ford Explorer tires manufactured by Firestone/Bridgestone. Since 1980, the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration —the federal agency responsible for overseeing traffic safety—has seen its budget decline by 36 percent in real terms to $392 million. During the same time frame, the NHTSA rule-making staff has shrunk from 103 people to 62.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
SOUR NOTES ON THE MAESTRO
Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan is a Libertarian, a devotee of Ayn Rand, and a champion of the "free market." So Mr. Greenspan was on board with the economics of the Bush administration. Now that we're seeing the poison fruit from Bush's policies Greenspan is trying to disavow himself of any responsibility. What we've gotten the past six years under Bush is a dire lesson in right-wing Economics 101, which is about giving everything to the rich and leaving the rest of us to struggle. This article by William Greider is at www.commondreams.org:
The economic consequences of his rule are accumulating, and even the dullest financial reporters are stumbling on crumbs of truth about Greenspan’s legendary reign. It sowed profound and dangerous imbalances in the U.S. economy. That’s what happens when government power tips the balance in favor of capital over labor, favoring super-rich over middle class and poor, then holds it there for nearly a generation.
Things get out of whack and now the country is paying enormously. A pity reporters and politicians didn’t have the nerve to ask these questions when Greenspan was in power.
He retired only a year ago, but is already trying to revise the history - to explain away blunders that are now a financial crisis facing his successor; to rearrange the facts in exculpatory ways; to deny his right-wing ideological bias and his raw partisanship in behalf of the Bush Republicans.
SURE, THE FREE MARKET CAN POLICE ITSELF
One of the most ludicrous ideas conservatives bandy about is that the free market can police itself. You know, the market will correct itself when bad things happen. The "invisible hand" will be mending things. When he was Governor of Texas George W. Bush allowed polluters to police themselves and Texas got some of the worst air pollution in the country. Now we're witnessing more tests of free market evangelism. You wonder if the food you eat is safe. It just might have e. coli or some other deadly additive because food companies don't want to go to the expense of making it safe. The toys you buy might have lead paint or the tires on your car might separate and cause you to lose control and die. But then the free market will step in and correct things. But you'll be dead. Never mind. This article by Roy Ulrich is at www.tompaine.com:
The headlines read, "Lead Paint Found in Imported Toys." It's been easy to bash the Chinese and the toy industry for their failings. But missing in most accounts is the sorry state of the Consumer Products Safety Commission, the federal agency charged with the mission of warning consumers about potentially defective products.
The budget for the agency is a paltry $62 million this year though the industry it supposedly regulates sells $1.4 trillion annually. In the 1970's the agency had almost 1,000 employees. Now there are 420, 81 of whom are field inspectors. At the port in Long Beach, Calif., sits a single inspector whose impossible job it is to spot check incoming overseas shipments. The agency employs a single full-time toy tester at its cramped, poorly lit laboratory in Gaithersburg, Md., for the whole country. Astonishingly, by law, it can mandate safety standards only after voluntary measures have failed.
Six years ago, 100 people died in the wake of accidents caused by faulty Ford Explorer tires manufactured by Firestone/Bridgestone. Since 1980, the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration —the federal agency responsible for overseeing traffic safety—has seen its budget decline by 36 percent in real terms to $392 million. During the same time frame, the NHTSA rule-making staff has shrunk from 103 people to 62.
Monday, September 17, 2007
September 17, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
CHANGEABLE GREENSPAN
Back when George W. Bush first stole the presidency and big tax cuts were being floated Alan Greenspan wasn't criticizing Bush's irresponsibility. It was obvious even then that this was Trickle Down Economics II. Bush was copying Ronald Reagan and going even further. Now Mr. Greenspan is critical of the fiscal madness we've seen the past six years. Paul Krugman takes a look in this column at www.welcome-to-pottersville.com:
When President Bush first took office, it seemed unlikely that he would succeed in getting his proposed tax cuts enacted. The questionable nature of his installation in the White House seemed to leave him in a weak political position, while the Senate was evenly balanced between the parties. It was hard to see how a huge, controversial tax cut, which delivered most of its benefits to a wealthy elite, could get through Congress.
Then Alan Greenspan, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, testified before the Senate Budget Committee.
Until then Mr. Greenspan had presented himself as the voice of fiscal responsibility, warning the Clinton administration not to endanger its hard-won budget surpluses. But now Republicans held the White House, and the Greenspan who appeared before the Budget Committee was a very different man.
Suddenly, his greatest concern — the “emerging key fiscal policy need,” he told Congress — was to avert the threat that the federal government might actually pay off all its debt. To avoid this awful outcome, he advocated tax cuts. And the floodgates were opened.
THE GREAT ECONOMIC DIVIDE
More Americans now see an economic divide between the "haves" and "have-nots." What's surprises me is that so many Americans, as recently as 1988, saw themselves among the "haves." Our system, for a very long time, has been tilted toward the very rich. A great book on the subject is Ferdinand Lundberg's The Rich and the Super-Rich. The insights Lundberg provides are probably even more relevant now than when he wrote the book. There's nothing wrong, in my view, with a system that creates rich people. There is something very wrong, however, in a system that increasingly rewards the wealthy and leaves everyone else behind. This article by Jodie T. Allen is at pewresearch.org:
The share of Americans who see the country as divided along economic lines has also continued to tick upward, though at a somewhat slower rate in recent years (Have/have-not perceptions rose by 18 points over the 13 years between 1988 and 2001 compared with a rise of four points over the last six years).
The increased prevalence of both views -- that the country is increasingly divided along economic lines and that a given individual is on the wrong side of that divide -- finds support in national economic data. As numerous studies have demonstrated in recent years, income gains over the last few decades have been heavily concentrated at the very top of the income distribution. For example, in an update of their earlier study of long-term U.S. income trends,1 economists Piketty and Saez compute that the share of income going to families in the top 1% of the income scale has doubled from 8% in 1980 to 16% in 2004 even excluding capital gains.2 (For a review of other recent studies see an earlier Pew commentary, "Pinched Pocketbooks: Do Average Americans Spot Something That Most Economists Miss?"3)
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
CHANGEABLE GREENSPAN
Back when George W. Bush first stole the presidency and big tax cuts were being floated Alan Greenspan wasn't criticizing Bush's irresponsibility. It was obvious even then that this was Trickle Down Economics II. Bush was copying Ronald Reagan and going even further. Now Mr. Greenspan is critical of the fiscal madness we've seen the past six years. Paul Krugman takes a look in this column at www.welcome-to-pottersville.com:
When President Bush first took office, it seemed unlikely that he would succeed in getting his proposed tax cuts enacted. The questionable nature of his installation in the White House seemed to leave him in a weak political position, while the Senate was evenly balanced between the parties. It was hard to see how a huge, controversial tax cut, which delivered most of its benefits to a wealthy elite, could get through Congress.
Then Alan Greenspan, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, testified before the Senate Budget Committee.
Until then Mr. Greenspan had presented himself as the voice of fiscal responsibility, warning the Clinton administration not to endanger its hard-won budget surpluses. But now Republicans held the White House, and the Greenspan who appeared before the Budget Committee was a very different man.
Suddenly, his greatest concern — the “emerging key fiscal policy need,” he told Congress — was to avert the threat that the federal government might actually pay off all its debt. To avoid this awful outcome, he advocated tax cuts. And the floodgates were opened.
THE GREAT ECONOMIC DIVIDE
More Americans now see an economic divide between the "haves" and "have-nots." What's surprises me is that so many Americans, as recently as 1988, saw themselves among the "haves." Our system, for a very long time, has been tilted toward the very rich. A great book on the subject is Ferdinand Lundberg's The Rich and the Super-Rich. The insights Lundberg provides are probably even more relevant now than when he wrote the book. There's nothing wrong, in my view, with a system that creates rich people. There is something very wrong, however, in a system that increasingly rewards the wealthy and leaves everyone else behind. This article by Jodie T. Allen is at pewresearch.org:
The share of Americans who see the country as divided along economic lines has also continued to tick upward, though at a somewhat slower rate in recent years (Have/have-not perceptions rose by 18 points over the 13 years between 1988 and 2001 compared with a rise of four points over the last six years).
The increased prevalence of both views -- that the country is increasingly divided along economic lines and that a given individual is on the wrong side of that divide -- finds support in national economic data. As numerous studies have demonstrated in recent years, income gains over the last few decades have been heavily concentrated at the very top of the income distribution. For example, in an update of their earlier study of long-term U.S. income trends,1 economists Piketty and Saez compute that the share of income going to families in the top 1% of the income scale has doubled from 8% in 1980 to 16% in 2004 even excluding capital gains.2 (For a review of other recent studies see an earlier Pew commentary, "Pinched Pocketbooks: Do Average Americans Spot Something That Most Economists Miss?"3)
Sunday, September 16, 2007
September 16, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE CULT OF RIGHT WING ECONOMICS
The core belief of right-wingers is that the rich count and the rest of do not. The rich are there, we're told, because they're just better than the rest of us. They're smarter, work harder, are more innovative, are "risk takers," or possibly even favored by God. So to tax the rich to make society better for everyone else is just "stealing," you see. It ignores the fact that the rich wouldn't have much of a life without the labor of the rest of us and that the rich ultimately prosper most when there is a sane and stable society. What we've been given since the age of Reagan is insanity disguised as some form of "intellectualism." This article by Jonathan Chait looks at the cult of right-wing economic belief. The article is at www.tnr.com:
American politics has been hijacked by a tiny coterie of right-wing economic extremists, some of them ideological zealots, others merely greedy, a few of them possibly insane. The scope of their triumph is breathtaking. Over the course of the last three decades, they have moved from the right-wing fringe to the commanding heights of the national agenda. Notions that would have been laughed at a generation ago--that cutting taxes for the very rich is the best response to any and every economic circumstance or that it is perfectly appropriate to turn the most rapacious and self-interested elements of the business lobby into essentially an arm of the federal government--are now so pervasive, they barely attract any notice.
The result has been a slow- motion disaster. Income inequality has approached levels normally associated with Third World oligarchies, not healthy Western democracies. The federal government has grown so encrusted with business lobbyists that it can no longer meet the great public challenges of our time. Not even many conservative voters or intellectuals find the result congenial. Government is no smaller--it is simply more debt-ridden and more beholden to wealthy elites.
EVEN GREENSPAN ATTACKS BUSH
Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, once called "Maestro" by celebrity reporter Bob Woodward, has criticized George W. Bush in a new memoir. Greenspan is critical of Bush's fiscal irresponsibility. It's not a major insight to say that Bush has thoroughly messed up the budget and the economy, of course. But it does buttress the case against right-wing economic theory. This article from the Forbes website is at www.forbes.com:
Former U.S. Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan has criticized President George W. Bush for paying too little attention to financial discipline.
In a forthcoming book, Greenspan, 81, says Bush ignored his advice to veto "out-of-control" bills that sent the U.S. deeper into deficit. "Little value was placed on rigorous economic policy debate or the weighing of long-term consequences," he writes of the Bush administration.
The Republicans deserved to lose control of Congress in last year's elections, Greenspan writes in The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World, to be published on Sept, 17. He charges that Republicans in Congress "swapped principle for power" and "ended up with neither".
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE CULT OF RIGHT WING ECONOMICS
The core belief of right-wingers is that the rich count and the rest of do not. The rich are there, we're told, because they're just better than the rest of us. They're smarter, work harder, are more innovative, are "risk takers," or possibly even favored by God. So to tax the rich to make society better for everyone else is just "stealing," you see. It ignores the fact that the rich wouldn't have much of a life without the labor of the rest of us and that the rich ultimately prosper most when there is a sane and stable society. What we've been given since the age of Reagan is insanity disguised as some form of "intellectualism." This article by Jonathan Chait looks at the cult of right-wing economic belief. The article is at www.tnr.com:
American politics has been hijacked by a tiny coterie of right-wing economic extremists, some of them ideological zealots, others merely greedy, a few of them possibly insane. The scope of their triumph is breathtaking. Over the course of the last three decades, they have moved from the right-wing fringe to the commanding heights of the national agenda. Notions that would have been laughed at a generation ago--that cutting taxes for the very rich is the best response to any and every economic circumstance or that it is perfectly appropriate to turn the most rapacious and self-interested elements of the business lobby into essentially an arm of the federal government--are now so pervasive, they barely attract any notice.
The result has been a slow- motion disaster. Income inequality has approached levels normally associated with Third World oligarchies, not healthy Western democracies. The federal government has grown so encrusted with business lobbyists that it can no longer meet the great public challenges of our time. Not even many conservative voters or intellectuals find the result congenial. Government is no smaller--it is simply more debt-ridden and more beholden to wealthy elites.
EVEN GREENSPAN ATTACKS BUSH
Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, once called "Maestro" by celebrity reporter Bob Woodward, has criticized George W. Bush in a new memoir. Greenspan is critical of Bush's fiscal irresponsibility. It's not a major insight to say that Bush has thoroughly messed up the budget and the economy, of course. But it does buttress the case against right-wing economic theory. This article from the Forbes website is at www.forbes.com:
Former U.S. Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan has criticized President George W. Bush for paying too little attention to financial discipline.
In a forthcoming book, Greenspan, 81, says Bush ignored his advice to veto "out-of-control" bills that sent the U.S. deeper into deficit. "Little value was placed on rigorous economic policy debate or the weighing of long-term consequences," he writes of the Bush administration.
The Republicans deserved to lose control of Congress in last year's elections, Greenspan writes in The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World, to be published on Sept, 17. He charges that Republicans in Congress "swapped principle for power" and "ended up with neither".
Saturday, September 15, 2007
September 15, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
"FLAMING HORROR" IN IRAQ
No matter what estimate you believe, the death toll in Iraq from Bush's unnecessary war is horrific. What gets overlooked sometimes is the ongoing humanitarian crisis that has caused millions of Iraqis to flee the country and others to live homeless in terrible conditions. I don't understand egocentric politicians like Bush and Cheney who have little regard for human life. And I don't understand the people who support them. This commentary by Bob Herbert is at www.welcome-to-pottersville.com:
When the U.S. launched its “shock and awe” invasion in March 2003, the population of Iraq was about 26 million. The flaming horror unleashed by the invasion has since forced 2.2 million of those Iraqis, nearly a tenth of the population, to flee the country. Many of those who left were professionals marked for death — doctors, lawyers, academics, the very people with the skills necessary to build a viable society.
The Iraq Ministry of Health reported that 102 doctors and 164 nurses were killed from April 2003 to May 2006. It is believed that nearly half of Iraq’s doctors have fled. The exodus of health care professionals in a country hemorrhaging from the worst kinds of violence pretty much qualifies as nightmarish.
While more than two million Iraqis have fled to other countries, another two million have been displaced internally. According to the Global Policy Forum, a group that monitors international developments:
BUSH IS A LIAR
I didn't watch George W. Bush's speech touting the "progress" in Iraq. I'm not into masochism. But from reports of the speech Bush engaged in his usual pathological lying about Iraq. What is different now is that mainstream media are starting to do their jobs and fact checking Bush. This article by Glenn Kessler is at www.washingtonpost.com:
In his speech last night, President Bush made a case for progress in Iraq by citing facts and statistics that at times contradicted recent government reports or his own words.
For instance, Bush asserted that "Iraq's national leaders are getting some things done," such as "sharing oil revenues with the provinces" and allowing "former Baathists to rejoin Iraq's military or receive government pensions."
Yet his statement ignored the fact that U.S. officials have been frustrated that none of those actions have been enshrined into law -- and that reports from Baghdad this week indicated that a potential deal on sharing oil revenue is collapsing.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
"FLAMING HORROR" IN IRAQ
No matter what estimate you believe, the death toll in Iraq from Bush's unnecessary war is horrific. What gets overlooked sometimes is the ongoing humanitarian crisis that has caused millions of Iraqis to flee the country and others to live homeless in terrible conditions. I don't understand egocentric politicians like Bush and Cheney who have little regard for human life. And I don't understand the people who support them. This commentary by Bob Herbert is at www.welcome-to-pottersville.com:
When the U.S. launched its “shock and awe” invasion in March 2003, the population of Iraq was about 26 million. The flaming horror unleashed by the invasion has since forced 2.2 million of those Iraqis, nearly a tenth of the population, to flee the country. Many of those who left were professionals marked for death — doctors, lawyers, academics, the very people with the skills necessary to build a viable society.
The Iraq Ministry of Health reported that 102 doctors and 164 nurses were killed from April 2003 to May 2006. It is believed that nearly half of Iraq’s doctors have fled. The exodus of health care professionals in a country hemorrhaging from the worst kinds of violence pretty much qualifies as nightmarish.
While more than two million Iraqis have fled to other countries, another two million have been displaced internally. According to the Global Policy Forum, a group that monitors international developments:
BUSH IS A LIAR
I didn't watch George W. Bush's speech touting the "progress" in Iraq. I'm not into masochism. But from reports of the speech Bush engaged in his usual pathological lying about Iraq. What is different now is that mainstream media are starting to do their jobs and fact checking Bush. This article by Glenn Kessler is at www.washingtonpost.com:
In his speech last night, President Bush made a case for progress in Iraq by citing facts and statistics that at times contradicted recent government reports or his own words.
For instance, Bush asserted that "Iraq's national leaders are getting some things done," such as "sharing oil revenues with the provinces" and allowing "former Baathists to rejoin Iraq's military or receive government pensions."
Yet his statement ignored the fact that U.S. officials have been frustrated that none of those actions have been enshrined into law -- and that reports from Baghdad this week indicated that a potential deal on sharing oil revenue is collapsing.
Friday, September 14, 2007
September 14, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
KATRINA AND INSURANCE COMPANIES
Insurance companies are like casinos. Just as casinos can calculate the odds and come out ahead, so do insurance companies. Then something inconvenient like Hurricane Katrina comes along and changes the odds. So the insurance companies turn to their big law firms and look for a technicality so they don't have to pay an avalanche of claims due to the hurricane. The business press, like the media in general, take the side of big corporations. This article by Dean Starkman is at www.cjr.org:
The disgraceful state of the Gulf’s recovery can be traced in large measure to insurers’ wholesale-and I mean, by the tens of thousands-violations of their legal obligations to policyholders. While many blame the government, and I’m sure with good reason, it is worth noting that the recovery of Mississippi, which has an efficient state government under a Republican governor with close ties to Washington and two smart, active and influential Republican senators, has been only marginally more successful than Louisiana’s, where basically none of that is true, except Louisiana has one prominent Republican official, Sen. Very Serious Sin.
The common thread in these two states is insurance.
I was largely correct about the business press, too, I’m afraid. Somehow, national outlets devoted to business news, The Wall Street Journal, Forbes, Fortune, Business Week, and the Financial Times barely notice that 2005-year of the worst-ever insured loss in the history of the world-was also the most profitable insurance year ever, by a long shot. No one asked how that could be so.
CONSUMER CONFIDENCE DROPS
I think I'm the economy in microcosm. I haven't had a raise in over two years. In the meantime, rent has gone up, gas prices have gone up, and food prices have gone up. The catalogs arrive in the mail, but I don't have the extra money to buy stuff from catalogs. If there are lots of people like me, then the people at the catalog companies are hurting. They will reduce their spending and the ripple effect will spread through the whole economy. What we're seeing now is that people can't keep borrowing forever. There comes a point you have to stop spending, especially when there is no good news on the economic front. When we see how much this administration has lied about everything and how the war in Iraq has been so dismally mismanaged, why we would be confident in the government's ability to steward the economy? This article by Froma Harrop is at seattletimes.nwsource.com:
The new numbers on consumer confidence are out. They show American consumers very confident that the economy is going down the tubes.
Over in Asia and Europe, stocks plunged on fears that Americans may no longer be able to find the second jobs and recklessly borrow the money needed to buy imported stuff. Economists now freely use the "recession" word following the report that American payrolls fell in August, the first monthly decline in four years.
American consumers, in other words, are all dried up. And the discussion has begun on what kind of baloney economy kept them lubricated for so long.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
KATRINA AND INSURANCE COMPANIES
Insurance companies are like casinos. Just as casinos can calculate the odds and come out ahead, so do insurance companies. Then something inconvenient like Hurricane Katrina comes along and changes the odds. So the insurance companies turn to their big law firms and look for a technicality so they don't have to pay an avalanche of claims due to the hurricane. The business press, like the media in general, take the side of big corporations. This article by Dean Starkman is at www.cjr.org:
The disgraceful state of the Gulf’s recovery can be traced in large measure to insurers’ wholesale-and I mean, by the tens of thousands-violations of their legal obligations to policyholders. While many blame the government, and I’m sure with good reason, it is worth noting that the recovery of Mississippi, which has an efficient state government under a Republican governor with close ties to Washington and two smart, active and influential Republican senators, has been only marginally more successful than Louisiana’s, where basically none of that is true, except Louisiana has one prominent Republican official, Sen. Very Serious Sin.
The common thread in these two states is insurance.
I was largely correct about the business press, too, I’m afraid. Somehow, national outlets devoted to business news, The Wall Street Journal, Forbes, Fortune, Business Week, and the Financial Times barely notice that 2005-year of the worst-ever insured loss in the history of the world-was also the most profitable insurance year ever, by a long shot. No one asked how that could be so.
CONSUMER CONFIDENCE DROPS
I think I'm the economy in microcosm. I haven't had a raise in over two years. In the meantime, rent has gone up, gas prices have gone up, and food prices have gone up. The catalogs arrive in the mail, but I don't have the extra money to buy stuff from catalogs. If there are lots of people like me, then the people at the catalog companies are hurting. They will reduce their spending and the ripple effect will spread through the whole economy. What we're seeing now is that people can't keep borrowing forever. There comes a point you have to stop spending, especially when there is no good news on the economic front. When we see how much this administration has lied about everything and how the war in Iraq has been so dismally mismanaged, why we would be confident in the government's ability to steward the economy? This article by Froma Harrop is at seattletimes.nwsource.com:
The new numbers on consumer confidence are out. They show American consumers very confident that the economy is going down the tubes.
Over in Asia and Europe, stocks plunged on fears that Americans may no longer be able to find the second jobs and recklessly borrow the money needed to buy imported stuff. Economists now freely use the "recession" word following the report that American payrolls fell in August, the first monthly decline in four years.
American consumers, in other words, are all dried up. And the discussion has begun on what kind of baloney economy kept them lubricated for so long.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
September 12, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
REALITY VS. BUSH
I think George W. Bush is a product of the right-wing ideology that has always lain like a coiled serpent and ready to strike. The serpent was held at bay for the most part during the 20th century. It had a resurgence during the McCarthy era. Then it came out from under the rock during the Reagan administration and hasn't really gone away since. Right-wing ideology says the best solution to any quarrel is a military solution. You "bomb them back to the Stone Age" or some other equivalent. You give the government and the economy over to big business and trust big business will do what's right. You ignore all the historical examples that the mixing of religion and politics is a disaster. Bush, as a servant to his ideology, would rather continue the failure in Iraq than admit failure and pull out. This article by Andrew Greeley is at www.commondreams.org:
Here’s the question that senators ought to have asked General Petraeus (the current Colin Powell):Could you give us a rough estimate, general, of how many more American men and women will die in Iraq? Not a precise figure, just an approximation?
That is an important question. Chicago political guru Don Rose has pointed out that Bush’s war in Iraq has caused the deaths of more Americans than died in the Sept. 11 attacks and probably more Iraqis than Saddam Hussein killed. What is the point of all this slaughter?
This is a strange week in America. As we pass the sixth anniversary of 9/11, Bush is still telling us that the Iraq war can be won, that we can achieve victory, that we can create a democratic Iraq. The neocons who created the war are telling us that the “surge” in Iraq has “worked,” that the tide has turned, that we see light at the end of the tunnel (well, they don’t say that, but it’s the same idea). The work of the Iraq Study Group could be cast aside, the grim news in the recent National Intelligence Report can be dismissed, the reports of the Government Accountability Office on the “guidelines” for the Iraqi government were “pessimistic;” Marine Gen. James Jones’ reports on the state of the Iraqi police and army did not include August.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
REALITY VS. BUSH
I think George W. Bush is a product of the right-wing ideology that has always lain like a coiled serpent and ready to strike. The serpent was held at bay for the most part during the 20th century. It had a resurgence during the McCarthy era. Then it came out from under the rock during the Reagan administration and hasn't really gone away since. Right-wing ideology says the best solution to any quarrel is a military solution. You "bomb them back to the Stone Age" or some other equivalent. You give the government and the economy over to big business and trust big business will do what's right. You ignore all the historical examples that the mixing of religion and politics is a disaster. Bush, as a servant to his ideology, would rather continue the failure in Iraq than admit failure and pull out. This article by Andrew Greeley is at www.commondreams.org:
Here’s the question that senators ought to have asked General Petraeus (the current Colin Powell):Could you give us a rough estimate, general, of how many more American men and women will die in Iraq? Not a precise figure, just an approximation?
That is an important question. Chicago political guru Don Rose has pointed out that Bush’s war in Iraq has caused the deaths of more Americans than died in the Sept. 11 attacks and probably more Iraqis than Saddam Hussein killed. What is the point of all this slaughter?
This is a strange week in America. As we pass the sixth anniversary of 9/11, Bush is still telling us that the Iraq war can be won, that we can achieve victory, that we can create a democratic Iraq. The neocons who created the war are telling us that the “surge” in Iraq has “worked,” that the tide has turned, that we see light at the end of the tunnel (well, they don’t say that, but it’s the same idea). The work of the Iraq Study Group could be cast aside, the grim news in the recent National Intelligence Report can be dismissed, the reports of the Government Accountability Office on the “guidelines” for the Iraqi government were “pessimistic;” Marine Gen. James Jones’ reports on the state of the Iraqi police and army did not include August.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
September 11, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
A CASE FOR LEISURE
On a somber day like the sixth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks maybe it's good to chill out a little. This is an article about the benefits of leisure. We have it drilled into us in this country that you always have to be "productive." You have to "multitask." I have a manager who would have fit in on the Roman galleys. Stroke to the beat of the drum--stroke, stroke! He tries to track our every second of our days, afraid he might lose a few cents here and there. It's ironic that we're here in the 21st century with all this technological advancement and we work more than people in hunter-gatherer societies. This article by Eric Weiner is at www.latimes.com:
A recent survey found that the typical American worker wastes slightly more than two hours a day, not including lunch and scheduled breaks. The insurance industry is particularly rife with time wasters (can you blame them?) and Missouri, for reasons not entirely clear, is the state with the highest percentage of slackers.
The No. 1 time-wasting activity is surfing the Internet and sending personal e-mails (a finding perhaps skewed by the fact that the survey, conducted by AOL and salary.com, was Web-based), followed by socializing with co-workers, conducting personal business and just plain "spacing out." All of this loafing is supposedly costing employers $759 billion a year in lost productivity.
The findings were greeted, predictably, with much hand-wringing about the declining American work ethic. I find the survey disturbing too, but for a different reason. American workers, it turns out, are wasting less time than they did just a couple of years ago -- 19% less. We must stop this dangerous trend.
The elevation of hard work to the status of noble pursuit is, in the sweep of human history, relatively recent. The ancient Greeks and Romans viewed hard work as a curse.
BUSH IGNORED TERRORIST ATTACK THREAT
In the years since the attacks on 9/11, with all the posturing about the "war on terror," it's easy to forget how ho-hum the Bush administration regarded the terrorist threat back in 2001. Back then Bush was more interested in appeasing his right-wing base by stopping serious efforts at stem cell research. This article by Robert Parry is at www.consortiumnews.com:
Another big part of the problem was the lack of urgency at the top. Counterterrorism coordinator Clarke said the 9/11 attacks might have been averted if Bush had shown some initiative in “shaking the trees” by having high-level officials from the FBI, CIA, Customs and other federal agencies go back to their bureaucracies and demand any information about the terrorist threat.
If they had, they might well have found the memos from the FBI agents in Arizona and Minnesota.
Clarke contrasted President Clinton’s urgency over the intelligence warnings that preceded the Millennium events with the lackadaisical approach of Bush and his national security team.
“In December 1999, we received intelligence reports that there were going to be major al-Qaeda attacks,” Clarke said in an interview. “President Clinton asked his national security adviser Sandy Berger to hold daily meetings with the attorney general, the FBI director, the CIA director and stop the attacks.
“Every day they went back from the White House to the FBI, to the Justice Department, to the CIA and they shook the trees to find out if there was any information. You know, when you know the United States is going to be attacked, the top people in the United States government ought to be working hands-on to prevent it and working together.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
A CASE FOR LEISURE
On a somber day like the sixth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks maybe it's good to chill out a little. This is an article about the benefits of leisure. We have it drilled into us in this country that you always have to be "productive." You have to "multitask." I have a manager who would have fit in on the Roman galleys. Stroke to the beat of the drum--stroke, stroke! He tries to track our every second of our days, afraid he might lose a few cents here and there. It's ironic that we're here in the 21st century with all this technological advancement and we work more than people in hunter-gatherer societies. This article by Eric Weiner is at www.latimes.com:
A recent survey found that the typical American worker wastes slightly more than two hours a day, not including lunch and scheduled breaks. The insurance industry is particularly rife with time wasters (can you blame them?) and Missouri, for reasons not entirely clear, is the state with the highest percentage of slackers.
The No. 1 time-wasting activity is surfing the Internet and sending personal e-mails (a finding perhaps skewed by the fact that the survey, conducted by AOL and salary.com, was Web-based), followed by socializing with co-workers, conducting personal business and just plain "spacing out." All of this loafing is supposedly costing employers $759 billion a year in lost productivity.
The findings were greeted, predictably, with much hand-wringing about the declining American work ethic. I find the survey disturbing too, but for a different reason. American workers, it turns out, are wasting less time than they did just a couple of years ago -- 19% less. We must stop this dangerous trend.
The elevation of hard work to the status of noble pursuit is, in the sweep of human history, relatively recent. The ancient Greeks and Romans viewed hard work as a curse.
BUSH IGNORED TERRORIST ATTACK THREAT
In the years since the attacks on 9/11, with all the posturing about the "war on terror," it's easy to forget how ho-hum the Bush administration regarded the terrorist threat back in 2001. Back then Bush was more interested in appeasing his right-wing base by stopping serious efforts at stem cell research. This article by Robert Parry is at www.consortiumnews.com:
Another big part of the problem was the lack of urgency at the top. Counterterrorism coordinator Clarke said the 9/11 attacks might have been averted if Bush had shown some initiative in “shaking the trees” by having high-level officials from the FBI, CIA, Customs and other federal agencies go back to their bureaucracies and demand any information about the terrorist threat.
If they had, they might well have found the memos from the FBI agents in Arizona and Minnesota.
Clarke contrasted President Clinton’s urgency over the intelligence warnings that preceded the Millennium events with the lackadaisical approach of Bush and his national security team.
“In December 1999, we received intelligence reports that there were going to be major al-Qaeda attacks,” Clarke said in an interview. “President Clinton asked his national security adviser Sandy Berger to hold daily meetings with the attorney general, the FBI director, the CIA director and stop the attacks.
“Every day they went back from the White House to the FBI, to the Justice Department, to the CIA and they shook the trees to find out if there was any information. You know, when you know the United States is going to be attacked, the top people in the United States government ought to be working hands-on to prevent it and working together.
Monday, September 10, 2007
September 10, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE RIGHT WING ECONOMICS FRAUD
To hear right-wingers tell it, The Market is everything. The Market leaps tall buildings in a single bound, flies faster than a speeding bullet, and encompasses truth, justice, and the American way. Part of that devotion to The Market is what we call trickle down economics. It's the idea that you cut taxes on the very rich, and those august beings, gods almost, will take that extra money and invest it wisely and there will be jobs aplenty and prosperity for all. We've had the major episodes of trickle down economics in both the Reagan and Bush administrations and what we've gotten both times is whopping deficits, massive inequality, and lousy wages and benefits for the majority of us. Paul Krugman talks about it in this column linked at www.welcome-to-pottersville.com:
It’s true, as the Bushies never tire of reminding us, that the U.S. economy has added eight million jobs since that 2003 tax cut. That sounds impressive, unless you happen to know that a good part of that gain was simply a recovery from large job losses earlier in the administration’s tenure — and that the United States added no fewer than 21 million jobs after Bill Clinton raised taxes on the rich, a move that had conservative pundits predicting economic disaster.
What’s really remarkable, however, is that four years of economic growth have produced essentially no gains for ordinary American workers.
Wages, adjusted for inflation, have stagnated: the real hourly earnings of nonsupervisory workers, the most widely used measure of how typical workers are faring, were no higher in July 2007 than they were in July 2003.
Meanwhile, benefits have deteriorated: the percentage of Americans receiving health insurance through employers, which plunged along with employment during the early years of the Bush administration, continued to decline even as the economy finally began creating some jobs.
9/11: MISSTEPS ALL THE WAY
When the Clinton administration was leaving office the incoming Bush administration was warned that terrorism should be a high national security priority. But they ignored those warnings, just as Bush himself ignored a Presidential Daily Briefing stating that Osama bin Laden was determined to strike in the United States. After the tragic events of six years ago, the Bush administration declared a "war on terror" instead of treating the attacks as the criminal attacks they were. In Afghanistan Osama bin Laden was allowed to slip away and despite Bush's cowboy rhetoric of getting bin Laden "dead or alive" bin Laden remains at large. Then the Bush administration attacked Iraq, a country not involved in terrorism or the attacks on 9/11. Now Iraq has become a major recruitment incentive for Osama bin Laden and has bogged down our military. This commentary by Gary Hart is at www.huffingtonpost.com:
The Bush administration was warned months before 9/11 that terrorists were going to attack America. They did nothing. They have yet to be held accountable for the preventable loss of American lives. Yet the administration blames its critics for not understanding the terrorist threat.
The perpetrator of those American deaths is still at large and the war to eliminate those who harbored him threatens to drag on inconclusively for many years. Instead, administration operatives, with the approval of their masters, find it convenient to use him to create fear, and therefore justify their positions of power.
The United States has suffered more than 30,000 casualties in another war that had nothing to do with those attacks. This folly is producing more haters of America than it can ever possibly eliminate.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE RIGHT WING ECONOMICS FRAUD
To hear right-wingers tell it, The Market is everything. The Market leaps tall buildings in a single bound, flies faster than a speeding bullet, and encompasses truth, justice, and the American way. Part of that devotion to The Market is what we call trickle down economics. It's the idea that you cut taxes on the very rich, and those august beings, gods almost, will take that extra money and invest it wisely and there will be jobs aplenty and prosperity for all. We've had the major episodes of trickle down economics in both the Reagan and Bush administrations and what we've gotten both times is whopping deficits, massive inequality, and lousy wages and benefits for the majority of us. Paul Krugman talks about it in this column linked at www.welcome-to-pottersville.com:
It’s true, as the Bushies never tire of reminding us, that the U.S. economy has added eight million jobs since that 2003 tax cut. That sounds impressive, unless you happen to know that a good part of that gain was simply a recovery from large job losses earlier in the administration’s tenure — and that the United States added no fewer than 21 million jobs after Bill Clinton raised taxes on the rich, a move that had conservative pundits predicting economic disaster.
What’s really remarkable, however, is that four years of economic growth have produced essentially no gains for ordinary American workers.
Wages, adjusted for inflation, have stagnated: the real hourly earnings of nonsupervisory workers, the most widely used measure of how typical workers are faring, were no higher in July 2007 than they were in July 2003.
Meanwhile, benefits have deteriorated: the percentage of Americans receiving health insurance through employers, which plunged along with employment during the early years of the Bush administration, continued to decline even as the economy finally began creating some jobs.
9/11: MISSTEPS ALL THE WAY
When the Clinton administration was leaving office the incoming Bush administration was warned that terrorism should be a high national security priority. But they ignored those warnings, just as Bush himself ignored a Presidential Daily Briefing stating that Osama bin Laden was determined to strike in the United States. After the tragic events of six years ago, the Bush administration declared a "war on terror" instead of treating the attacks as the criminal attacks they were. In Afghanistan Osama bin Laden was allowed to slip away and despite Bush's cowboy rhetoric of getting bin Laden "dead or alive" bin Laden remains at large. Then the Bush administration attacked Iraq, a country not involved in terrorism or the attacks on 9/11. Now Iraq has become a major recruitment incentive for Osama bin Laden and has bogged down our military. This commentary by Gary Hart is at www.huffingtonpost.com:
The Bush administration was warned months before 9/11 that terrorists were going to attack America. They did nothing. They have yet to be held accountable for the preventable loss of American lives. Yet the administration blames its critics for not understanding the terrorist threat.
The perpetrator of those American deaths is still at large and the war to eliminate those who harbored him threatens to drag on inconclusively for many years. Instead, administration operatives, with the approval of their masters, find it convenient to use him to create fear, and therefore justify their positions of power.
The United States has suffered more than 30,000 casualties in another war that had nothing to do with those attacks. This folly is producing more haters of America than it can ever possibly eliminate.
Saturday, September 08, 2007
September 08, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
PHONY STATISTICS FOR THE "SURGE"
The general in charge in Iraq, General David Petraeus, is going to release a report showing what progress has been made since George Bush's troop surge. The statistics the general and the administration are offering are very selective. If you look at all the deaths occurring in Iraq, it's obvious that the "surge" has been a miserable failure. Bush had the cover of the Iraq Study Group's recommendation to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq, but instead went the macho route and sent more troops. This commentary by Paul Krugman is at www.welcome-to-pottersville.com:
There are five things I hope Democrats in Congress will remember.
First, no independent assessment has concluded that violence in Iraq is down. On the contrary, estimates based on morgue, hospital and police records suggest that the daily number of civilian deaths is almost twice its average pace from last year. And a recent assessment by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office found no decline in the average number of daily attacks.
So how can the military be claiming otherwise? Apparently, the Pentagon has a double super secret formula that it uses to distinguish sectarian killings (bad) from other deaths (not important); according to press reports, all deaths from car bombs are excluded, and one intelligence analyst told The Washington Post that “if a bullet went through the back of the head, it’s sectarian. If it went through the front, it’s criminal.” So the number of dead is down, as long as you only count certain kinds of dead people.
THE CHEMICALS AMONG US
This item about trains carrying hazardous chemicals strikes home because Fresno is crisscrossed by railroad tracks. It's difficult to drive in almost any part of Fresno without encountering railroad tracks and trains. It's sobering when you realize how many hazardous chemicals are transported by trains and how a derailment, either due to human error or an attack, could result in chemicals being released. This is yet another area, among a multitude of issues, that has not been addressed by the Bush administration, state, or local governments in their fixation on military solutions to terrorism. The item by James Ridgeway is at www.motherjones.com:
Yet passenger trains are in fact the least dangerous potential target on our rails. Often running along the same rail corridors are freight tracks carrying chemicals and other hazardous materials. "In my thinking," says P.J. Crowley, the director of homeland security at the Center for American Progress, "freight rail, for all intents and purposes, is an element of chemical security. You can’t separate the two."
Long lines of freight cars filled with hazardous materials often sit on sidings for days in populated areas, making choice targets. Environmentalists have sought to require that deadly chemicals not be transported through urban areas, and the 9/11 Improving America's Security Act passed in July requires the Department of Transportation to consider rerouting "security sensitive materials." The chemical industry fought the legislation, as did the Bush administration. The District of Columbia is currently engaged in a court battle against the industry to win legal approval for rerouting chemical cars around the nation's capital.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
PHONY STATISTICS FOR THE "SURGE"
The general in charge in Iraq, General David Petraeus, is going to release a report showing what progress has been made since George Bush's troop surge. The statistics the general and the administration are offering are very selective. If you look at all the deaths occurring in Iraq, it's obvious that the "surge" has been a miserable failure. Bush had the cover of the Iraq Study Group's recommendation to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq, but instead went the macho route and sent more troops. This commentary by Paul Krugman is at www.welcome-to-pottersville.com:
There are five things I hope Democrats in Congress will remember.
First, no independent assessment has concluded that violence in Iraq is down. On the contrary, estimates based on morgue, hospital and police records suggest that the daily number of civilian deaths is almost twice its average pace from last year. And a recent assessment by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office found no decline in the average number of daily attacks.
So how can the military be claiming otherwise? Apparently, the Pentagon has a double super secret formula that it uses to distinguish sectarian killings (bad) from other deaths (not important); according to press reports, all deaths from car bombs are excluded, and one intelligence analyst told The Washington Post that “if a bullet went through the back of the head, it’s sectarian. If it went through the front, it’s criminal.” So the number of dead is down, as long as you only count certain kinds of dead people.
THE CHEMICALS AMONG US
This item about trains carrying hazardous chemicals strikes home because Fresno is crisscrossed by railroad tracks. It's difficult to drive in almost any part of Fresno without encountering railroad tracks and trains. It's sobering when you realize how many hazardous chemicals are transported by trains and how a derailment, either due to human error or an attack, could result in chemicals being released. This is yet another area, among a multitude of issues, that has not been addressed by the Bush administration, state, or local governments in their fixation on military solutions to terrorism. The item by James Ridgeway is at www.motherjones.com:
Yet passenger trains are in fact the least dangerous potential target on our rails. Often running along the same rail corridors are freight tracks carrying chemicals and other hazardous materials. "In my thinking," says P.J. Crowley, the director of homeland security at the Center for American Progress, "freight rail, for all intents and purposes, is an element of chemical security. You can’t separate the two."
Long lines of freight cars filled with hazardous materials often sit on sidings for days in populated areas, making choice targets. Environmentalists have sought to require that deadly chemicals not be transported through urban areas, and the 9/11 Improving America's Security Act passed in July requires the Department of Transportation to consider rerouting "security sensitive materials." The chemical industry fought the legislation, as did the Bush administration. The District of Columbia is currently engaged in a court battle against the industry to win legal approval for rerouting chemical cars around the nation's capital.
Friday, September 07, 2007
September 06, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
RIGHT WING FANTASY LAND
If right-wingers had a theme park along the lines of Disneyland, I wonder what it would look like. It would probably have elements of the Creationist Museum we've heard about that has dinosaurs and humans coexisting, even though dinosaurs preceded humans by millions of years. It would have everyone segregated by race. Those dark-skinned people, cursed by God you know, have to be kept separate from the morally upright white people. Women of age would be barefoot, pregnant, and illiterate. Educated women tend to get "uppity," you know. Gays wouldn't be allowed at all, of course, unless they were being flogged or stoned to death.
Another version of right-wing fantasy land touts the "accomplishments" of people like Ronald Reagan and, heaven help us, George W. Bush. Today's Fresno Bee has a letter so over the top I thought maybe it was parody. Our scribe claimed that Bush inherited the Clinton/Gore "recession" and his tax cuts just did marvelous things in turning around the economy. We're told that Bush reduced the deficit (what!?) and that it's only "partisan hatred" that blinds people to his "accomplishments."
Here in the real world we know that Bush lied us into a war. He's got the blood of hundreds of thousands on his hands. He has sanctioned torture. He has weakened our civil liberties or ignored them altogether. The gap between the rich and poor is a chasm and getting wider. He has ignored the threat of global climate change, which may destroy all human life on this planet. If there are future historians, I don't think Bush will get good reviews unless the historians are from the Ministry of Truth in George Orwell's 1984.
THE RIGHT WING HOBBESIAN VIEW OF PEOPLE
Thomas Hobbes was a political philosopher who said, in essence, that people are no good. There are a few good people, those people who are rich and powerful and at the top, and then there are the rest of us. Thomas Hobbes would have fit in perfectly with today's Republican Party that plays to the worst and most primitive instincts in people. Conservatism isn't about hope; it's about cynicism and fear and hatred of the "other." It's about finding a scapegoat, anything to distract attention from the people running the show. This article by Richard Belzer is at www.huffingtonpost.com:
Conservatism is in its last throes if you will, twisting in the wind, dying like communism did because neither philosophy works by definition -- they both operate from the fraudulent premise built around contempt for and control of the people.
In the coming months and years history will not absolve them. These multimillionaire radio and television personalities who stoke and taunt "Joe Sixpack" with cleverly and sometimes not-so hate speech, railing about the danger of gays taking over and turning everything and everyone gay; Hollywood liberals seem to be among the most evil people since Sodom and Gomorrah, African-Americans are attacked in veiled terms that are usually not as veiled as they think, playing on people's fear of losing their job, demonizing foreigners seemingly from everywhere, scoffing at the notion that there is no class system in this country. All the while looking down on rubes and suckers who vote against things that are in their self interest and very survival to help further a cynical, mean-spirited political movement that has become a dangerous parody of the most astoundingly inept, impotent bully wannabes who can count among them physical and intellectual cowards who knowingly and smugly perpetrate lies that have literally cost untold lives.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
RIGHT WING FANTASY LAND
If right-wingers had a theme park along the lines of Disneyland, I wonder what it would look like. It would probably have elements of the Creationist Museum we've heard about that has dinosaurs and humans coexisting, even though dinosaurs preceded humans by millions of years. It would have everyone segregated by race. Those dark-skinned people, cursed by God you know, have to be kept separate from the morally upright white people. Women of age would be barefoot, pregnant, and illiterate. Educated women tend to get "uppity," you know. Gays wouldn't be allowed at all, of course, unless they were being flogged or stoned to death.
Another version of right-wing fantasy land touts the "accomplishments" of people like Ronald Reagan and, heaven help us, George W. Bush. Today's Fresno Bee has a letter so over the top I thought maybe it was parody. Our scribe claimed that Bush inherited the Clinton/Gore "recession" and his tax cuts just did marvelous things in turning around the economy. We're told that Bush reduced the deficit (what!?) and that it's only "partisan hatred" that blinds people to his "accomplishments."
Here in the real world we know that Bush lied us into a war. He's got the blood of hundreds of thousands on his hands. He has sanctioned torture. He has weakened our civil liberties or ignored them altogether. The gap between the rich and poor is a chasm and getting wider. He has ignored the threat of global climate change, which may destroy all human life on this planet. If there are future historians, I don't think Bush will get good reviews unless the historians are from the Ministry of Truth in George Orwell's 1984.
THE RIGHT WING HOBBESIAN VIEW OF PEOPLE
Thomas Hobbes was a political philosopher who said, in essence, that people are no good. There are a few good people, those people who are rich and powerful and at the top, and then there are the rest of us. Thomas Hobbes would have fit in perfectly with today's Republican Party that plays to the worst and most primitive instincts in people. Conservatism isn't about hope; it's about cynicism and fear and hatred of the "other." It's about finding a scapegoat, anything to distract attention from the people running the show. This article by Richard Belzer is at www.huffingtonpost.com:
Conservatism is in its last throes if you will, twisting in the wind, dying like communism did because neither philosophy works by definition -- they both operate from the fraudulent premise built around contempt for and control of the people.
In the coming months and years history will not absolve them. These multimillionaire radio and television personalities who stoke and taunt "Joe Sixpack" with cleverly and sometimes not-so hate speech, railing about the danger of gays taking over and turning everything and everyone gay; Hollywood liberals seem to be among the most evil people since Sodom and Gomorrah, African-Americans are attacked in veiled terms that are usually not as veiled as they think, playing on people's fear of losing their job, demonizing foreigners seemingly from everywhere, scoffing at the notion that there is no class system in this country. All the while looking down on rubes and suckers who vote against things that are in their self interest and very survival to help further a cynical, mean-spirited political movement that has become a dangerous parody of the most astoundingly inept, impotent bully wannabes who can count among them physical and intellectual cowards who knowingly and smugly perpetrate lies that have literally cost untold lives.
Thursday, September 06, 2007
September 06, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
SUCCESS? REPORT SAYS IRAQI GOVERNMENT NEAR COLLAPSE
I got an email survey from the Republican Congressman in this district. Rubber Stamp Radanovich sent a totally slanted survey. This one said something to the effect of, "Do you believe the progress in the region is due to President Bush's surge?" It assumes there is progress. I don't happen to believe there is. The Bush administration made a big thing of "democracy" in Iraq, purple fingers and all, and now the Iraqi government is near collapse, according to a new report provided to Congress. This story by James Gordon Meek is at www.nydailynews.com:
Lawmakers returning here this week got hit with more bad news about Iraq in a confidential report that says the fragile democracy is "collapsing," the Daily News has learned.
The boycott of the government by certain Shiite and Kurdish political blocs has left Iraq's leadership hanging by a thread, according to a report by the Congressional Research Service.
The report by CRS, Congress' research and analysis arm, was completed Aug. 15 for the House and Senate.
"My assessment is that because of the number and breadth of parties boycotting the cabinet, the Iraqi government is in essential collapse," Kenneth Katzman, the author of the report, said. "That argues against any real prospects for political reconciliation."
Without a political infrastructure in Iraq, any military progress would be short-lived, he added.
MEDIA BE NOT PROUD
As important as a presidential election is to the country and the world, you would think professional journalists would view it seriously. Instead, many reporters like to portray the campaign as a beauty contest. It becomes a matter of who can court the press more effectively than a candidate's experience, his positions, or where he might take the country. In the 2000 election cycle we saw the media go out of its way to denigrate Al Gore, to make him appear pompous and elitist and untruthful. Frat Boy George Bush was just more fun to be with back in those days and the press failed miserably in its obligation to report the issues and what was really at stake in that election. We see the horrific results now after years of George W. Bush. This article by Evgenia Peretz is at www.vanityfair.com:
As he was running for president, Al Gore said he'd invented the Internet; announced that he had personally discovered Love Canal, the most infamous toxic-waste site in the country; and bragged that he and Tipper had been the sole inspiration for the golden couple in Erich Segal's best-selling novel Love Story (made into a hit movie with Ali MacGraw and Ryan O'Neal). He also invented the dog, joked David Letterman, and gave mankind fire.
Could such an obviously intelligent man have been so megalomaniacal and self-deluded to have actually said such things? Well, that's what the news media told us, anyway. And on top of his supposed pomposity and elitism, he was a calculating dork: unable to get dressed in the morning without the advice of a prominent feminist (Naomi Wolf).
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
SUCCESS? REPORT SAYS IRAQI GOVERNMENT NEAR COLLAPSE
I got an email survey from the Republican Congressman in this district. Rubber Stamp Radanovich sent a totally slanted survey. This one said something to the effect of, "Do you believe the progress in the region is due to President Bush's surge?" It assumes there is progress. I don't happen to believe there is. The Bush administration made a big thing of "democracy" in Iraq, purple fingers and all, and now the Iraqi government is near collapse, according to a new report provided to Congress. This story by James Gordon Meek is at www.nydailynews.com:
Lawmakers returning here this week got hit with more bad news about Iraq in a confidential report that says the fragile democracy is "collapsing," the Daily News has learned.
The boycott of the government by certain Shiite and Kurdish political blocs has left Iraq's leadership hanging by a thread, according to a report by the Congressional Research Service.
The report by CRS, Congress' research and analysis arm, was completed Aug. 15 for the House and Senate.
"My assessment is that because of the number and breadth of parties boycotting the cabinet, the Iraqi government is in essential collapse," Kenneth Katzman, the author of the report, said. "That argues against any real prospects for political reconciliation."
Without a political infrastructure in Iraq, any military progress would be short-lived, he added.
MEDIA BE NOT PROUD
As important as a presidential election is to the country and the world, you would think professional journalists would view it seriously. Instead, many reporters like to portray the campaign as a beauty contest. It becomes a matter of who can court the press more effectively than a candidate's experience, his positions, or where he might take the country. In the 2000 election cycle we saw the media go out of its way to denigrate Al Gore, to make him appear pompous and elitist and untruthful. Frat Boy George Bush was just more fun to be with back in those days and the press failed miserably in its obligation to report the issues and what was really at stake in that election. We see the horrific results now after years of George W. Bush. This article by Evgenia Peretz is at www.vanityfair.com:
As he was running for president, Al Gore said he'd invented the Internet; announced that he had personally discovered Love Canal, the most infamous toxic-waste site in the country; and bragged that he and Tipper had been the sole inspiration for the golden couple in Erich Segal's best-selling novel Love Story (made into a hit movie with Ali MacGraw and Ryan O'Neal). He also invented the dog, joked David Letterman, and gave mankind fire.
Could such an obviously intelligent man have been so megalomaniacal and self-deluded to have actually said such things? Well, that's what the news media told us, anyway. And on top of his supposed pomposity and elitism, he was a calculating dork: unable to get dressed in the morning without the advice of a prominent feminist (Naomi Wolf).
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
September 05, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
SHOW ME YOUR PAPERS
In old movies depicting Nazi Germany you'll frequently see some guy in a uniform stopping someone in a car or on the street and in German-accented English demanding, "Show me your papers." I've noticed a disturbing trend in this country of having to constantly identify yourself. Last year I was laid off and applied for unemployment. A week or so later I got a letter from the Employment Development Department requesting a mass of paperwork to prove my identity.
I had to send them a copy of my driver's license, a copy of a check stub, a copy of a utility bill, a copy of the annual statement from the Social Security Administration, and I forget what else. I've never been asked to jump through such major hoops before just to get a few unemployment checks.
Private industry has gotten into the act. At my bank I was asked to show a photo ID when I was making a deposit! The teller said it was because I was taking out some money. I was taking a whole $10.00. It was for "security," he said. They already have video cameras trained on you, they have your checking account number and all the other information that goes with getting a checking account, and that's not enough.
We know that the Bush administration wants to force a national ID card down our throats. There are a multitude of privacy and other issues associated with a national ID card. I want my personal autonomy back and I don't want government and corporations compiling information on me and demanding that I show my papers every time I turn around.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
SHOW ME YOUR PAPERS
In old movies depicting Nazi Germany you'll frequently see some guy in a uniform stopping someone in a car or on the street and in German-accented English demanding, "Show me your papers." I've noticed a disturbing trend in this country of having to constantly identify yourself. Last year I was laid off and applied for unemployment. A week or so later I got a letter from the Employment Development Department requesting a mass of paperwork to prove my identity.
I had to send them a copy of my driver's license, a copy of a check stub, a copy of a utility bill, a copy of the annual statement from the Social Security Administration, and I forget what else. I've never been asked to jump through such major hoops before just to get a few unemployment checks.
Private industry has gotten into the act. At my bank I was asked to show a photo ID when I was making a deposit! The teller said it was because I was taking out some money. I was taking a whole $10.00. It was for "security," he said. They already have video cameras trained on you, they have your checking account number and all the other information that goes with getting a checking account, and that's not enough.
We know that the Bush administration wants to force a national ID card down our throats. There are a multitude of privacy and other issues associated with a national ID card. I want my personal autonomy back and I don't want government and corporations compiling information on me and demanding that I show my papers every time I turn around.
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
September 04, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE BUDGET DEFICIT IN THE SHADOWS
A few days ago a friend expressed concern that the Social Security trust fund would go bust by 2013. I told her that in fact the Social Security trust fund is sound if politicians would quit stealing from the fund to disguise the size of the mammoth federal deficit that has been created by the Reagan-Bush and two Bush administrations. Bush economics has been nothing but a massive cash grab for the very wealthy, no matter the cost to the financial security of the country. This article by Allan Sloan is at www.washingtonpost.com:
Don't believe the hype: The deficit is much bigger than you think.
There will be lots of celebrating in Washington next month when the Treasury announces that the federal budget deficit for fiscal 2007, which ends Sept. 30, will have dropped to a mere $158 billion, give or take a few bucks. That will be $90 billion below the reported 2006 deficit, and will be toasted by the White House and Treasury as a great accomplishment.
But I have a nasty little secret for you, folks: If you use realistic numbers rather than what I call WAAP -- Washington accepted accounting principles -- the real federal deficit for this fiscal year is more than 2 1/2 times the stated deficit.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE BUDGET DEFICIT IN THE SHADOWS
A few days ago a friend expressed concern that the Social Security trust fund would go bust by 2013. I told her that in fact the Social Security trust fund is sound if politicians would quit stealing from the fund to disguise the size of the mammoth federal deficit that has been created by the Reagan-Bush and two Bush administrations. Bush economics has been nothing but a massive cash grab for the very wealthy, no matter the cost to the financial security of the country. This article by Allan Sloan is at www.washingtonpost.com:
Don't believe the hype: The deficit is much bigger than you think.
There will be lots of celebrating in Washington next month when the Treasury announces that the federal budget deficit for fiscal 2007, which ends Sept. 30, will have dropped to a mere $158 billion, give or take a few bucks. That will be $90 billion below the reported 2006 deficit, and will be toasted by the White House and Treasury as a great accomplishment.
But I have a nasty little secret for you, folks: If you use realistic numbers rather than what I call WAAP -- Washington accepted accounting principles -- the real federal deficit for this fiscal year is more than 2 1/2 times the stated deficit.
Monday, September 03, 2007
September 03, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
HAPPY LABOR DAY
BUSH RUNS AWAY ON LABOR DAY
The morning news is that George W. Bush took another secret excursion to Iraq. It's no wonder that Bush would want to leave the country on Labor Day because his administration has been such a disaster for working people. Iraq has also been a disaster, but Bush will participate in happy photo ops and avoid scenes of death and carnage for which he is responsible. This article by Gary Younge is at www.commondreams.org:
There are moments when things really are the way they seem and facts really do speak for themselves. Bad as the facts may appear, attempting to rationalise them only makes matters worse. Trying to convince people otherwise only insults their intelligence.
So it would have seemed last Tuesday when the US census bureau revealed its latest findings on income, poverty and health. The report showed that since George Bush came to power the poverty rate had risen by 9%, the number of people without health insurance had risen by 12%, and real median household income had remained stagnant. On the second anniversary of Hurricane Katrina we learned the racial disparity in income and the gap between rich and poor show no sign of abating.
Bush declared himself “pleased” with the results, even if the uninsured presented “a challenge”. He pointed out that over the past year poverty had declined (albeit by a fraction, and from the previous high he had presided over) and median household income had increased (albeit by a fraction and primarily because more people were working longer hours). Maybe he thought Americans would not realise that five years into a “recovery” their wages were stagnant, their homes were being repossessed at a rate not seen since the Depression, and their pension funds were on a roller coaster.
BUSH'S WAR ON WORKING PEOPLE
While waging military wars on Iraq and Afghanistan, and now threatening Iran, George W. Bush and his neocons have waged an economic war on working Americans. Bush's policies have enriched the already wealthy and are steadily reducing the rest of us to peonage. The rich wouldn't be rich except for the efforts of working people. The rich are not rich because they are especially favored by God, or because they're better. People lucky enough to be rich should be happy to recognize and reward the efforts of people less fortunate. Otherwise, there is no reason for the rest of us to continue to support such an unequal and grossly unfair economic system. This article by Gerald McEntree is at www.huffingtonpost.com:
Yet, as we celebrate the holiday, we must also acknowledge the unsettled state of our nation. It is not a good time for workers, and American families are struggling more than ever just to get by.
From the time George Bush was appointed by the Supreme Court in 2000, college tuition has shot up 56 percent. The cost of gasoline has gone up 107 percent. Forty-seven million Americans -- nearly 16 percent of our nation -- don't have health insurance. Almost 37 million Americans live below the poverty line. Corporate profits have gone up, while income for working Americans has gone down. Home foreclosures are increasing at a record rate. Pensions are at risk as employers break their promises to employees. Bush's tax cuts have not benefited those most in need of them -- working families -- but the billionaires who are his loyal supporters.
The fact is that the people whose labor has fueled our nation's economy have suffered greatly under George Bush.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
HAPPY LABOR DAY
BUSH RUNS AWAY ON LABOR DAY
The morning news is that George W. Bush took another secret excursion to Iraq. It's no wonder that Bush would want to leave the country on Labor Day because his administration has been such a disaster for working people. Iraq has also been a disaster, but Bush will participate in happy photo ops and avoid scenes of death and carnage for which he is responsible. This article by Gary Younge is at www.commondreams.org:
There are moments when things really are the way they seem and facts really do speak for themselves. Bad as the facts may appear, attempting to rationalise them only makes matters worse. Trying to convince people otherwise only insults their intelligence.
So it would have seemed last Tuesday when the US census bureau revealed its latest findings on income, poverty and health. The report showed that since George Bush came to power the poverty rate had risen by 9%, the number of people without health insurance had risen by 12%, and real median household income had remained stagnant. On the second anniversary of Hurricane Katrina we learned the racial disparity in income and the gap between rich and poor show no sign of abating.
Bush declared himself “pleased” with the results, even if the uninsured presented “a challenge”. He pointed out that over the past year poverty had declined (albeit by a fraction, and from the previous high he had presided over) and median household income had increased (albeit by a fraction and primarily because more people were working longer hours). Maybe he thought Americans would not realise that five years into a “recovery” their wages were stagnant, their homes were being repossessed at a rate not seen since the Depression, and their pension funds were on a roller coaster.
BUSH'S WAR ON WORKING PEOPLE
While waging military wars on Iraq and Afghanistan, and now threatening Iran, George W. Bush and his neocons have waged an economic war on working Americans. Bush's policies have enriched the already wealthy and are steadily reducing the rest of us to peonage. The rich wouldn't be rich except for the efforts of working people. The rich are not rich because they are especially favored by God, or because they're better. People lucky enough to be rich should be happy to recognize and reward the efforts of people less fortunate. Otherwise, there is no reason for the rest of us to continue to support such an unequal and grossly unfair economic system. This article by Gerald McEntree is at www.huffingtonpost.com:
Yet, as we celebrate the holiday, we must also acknowledge the unsettled state of our nation. It is not a good time for workers, and American families are struggling more than ever just to get by.
From the time George Bush was appointed by the Supreme Court in 2000, college tuition has shot up 56 percent. The cost of gasoline has gone up 107 percent. Forty-seven million Americans -- nearly 16 percent of our nation -- don't have health insurance. Almost 37 million Americans live below the poverty line. Corporate profits have gone up, while income for working Americans has gone down. Home foreclosures are increasing at a record rate. Pensions are at risk as employers break their promises to employees. Bush's tax cuts have not benefited those most in need of them -- working families -- but the billionaires who are his loyal supporters.
The fact is that the people whose labor has fueled our nation's economy have suffered greatly under George Bush.
Sunday, September 02, 2007
September 02, 2007
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH CALLED A "MASS MURDERER"
Paul Craig Roberts, a former Reagan aide, has rightly called George W. Bush a mass murderer. Bush was already a serial killer before he stole the White House. He almost gleefully presided over a record number of executions while he was governor of Texas. An estimated 655,000 Iraqis have perished in Bush's unnecessary war. Now he wants to attack Iran. This article by Liliana Segura is at www.alternet.org:
One person sees the black humor--but he's not laughing. Paul Craig Roberts, the former Reagan aide who has earned a reputation for being a saber-toothed critic of the Bush administration recently posted an article on Antiwar.com, where he sounds the alarm on Bush's attack plans against Iran, arguing that a military strike would result in so many additional deaths it would place Bush even higher on the list of "mass murderers of all time"--a distinction, Roberts says, the president already holds.
"Bush is too self-righteous to see the dark humor in his denunciations of Iran for threatening 'the security of nations everywhere' and of the Iraqi resistance for 'a vision that rejects tolerance, crushes all dissent, and justifies the murder of innocent men, women, and children in the pursuit of political power," he writes. "Those are precisely the words that most of the world applies to Bush and his Brownshirt administration."
RED CROSS COMPILING WAR CRIMES EVIDENCE
Even with the careful control of the news, we know already that the Bush administration has sanctioned and participated in war crimes. The Red Cross has quietly been compiling evidence that could conceivably be used to try George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and other ranking members of this administration for crimes against humanity. I believe such a trial such take place even if in absentia. The atrocities of Bush and his cronies should be recorded for all human history. This article by Nat Hentoff is at www.villagevoice.com:
While the Democratic Congress has yet to begin a serious investigation into what many European legislators already know about American war crimes, a particularly telling report by the International Committee of the Red Cross has been leaked that would surely figure prominently in such a potential Nuremberg trial. The Red Cross itself is bound to public silence concerning the results of its human-rights probes of prisons around the world—or else governments wouldn't let them in.
But The New Yorker's Jane Mayer has sources who have seen accounts of the Red Cross interviews with inmates formerly held in CIA secret prisons. In "The Black Sites" (August 13, The New Yorker), Mayer also reveals the effect on our torturers of what they do—on the orders of the president—to "protect American values."
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH CALLED A "MASS MURDERER"
Paul Craig Roberts, a former Reagan aide, has rightly called George W. Bush a mass murderer. Bush was already a serial killer before he stole the White House. He almost gleefully presided over a record number of executions while he was governor of Texas. An estimated 655,000 Iraqis have perished in Bush's unnecessary war. Now he wants to attack Iran. This article by Liliana Segura is at www.alternet.org:
One person sees the black humor--but he's not laughing. Paul Craig Roberts, the former Reagan aide who has earned a reputation for being a saber-toothed critic of the Bush administration recently posted an article on Antiwar.com, where he sounds the alarm on Bush's attack plans against Iran, arguing that a military strike would result in so many additional deaths it would place Bush even higher on the list of "mass murderers of all time"--a distinction, Roberts says, the president already holds.
"Bush is too self-righteous to see the dark humor in his denunciations of Iran for threatening 'the security of nations everywhere' and of the Iraqi resistance for 'a vision that rejects tolerance, crushes all dissent, and justifies the murder of innocent men, women, and children in the pursuit of political power," he writes. "Those are precisely the words that most of the world applies to Bush and his Brownshirt administration."
RED CROSS COMPILING WAR CRIMES EVIDENCE
Even with the careful control of the news, we know already that the Bush administration has sanctioned and participated in war crimes. The Red Cross has quietly been compiling evidence that could conceivably be used to try George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and other ranking members of this administration for crimes against humanity. I believe such a trial such take place even if in absentia. The atrocities of Bush and his cronies should be recorded for all human history. This article by Nat Hentoff is at www.villagevoice.com:
While the Democratic Congress has yet to begin a serious investigation into what many European legislators already know about American war crimes, a particularly telling report by the International Committee of the Red Cross has been leaked that would surely figure prominently in such a potential Nuremberg trial. The Red Cross itself is bound to public silence concerning the results of its human-rights probes of prisons around the world—or else governments wouldn't let them in.
But The New Yorker's Jane Mayer has sources who have seen accounts of the Red Cross interviews with inmates formerly held in CIA secret prisons. In "The Black Sites" (August 13, The New Yorker), Mayer also reveals the effect on our torturers of what they do—on the orders of the president—to "protect American values."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)