March 26, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE FREE MARKET IS FOR SUCKERS
Guys who ran medicine shows would promise wondrous results from their elixirs. Unfortunately, the elixirs were a sham, and when the buyers discovered they'd been had the medicine shows had moved on. It's that way with the free market. We're told it's this wonderful process that can make us rich. But only a few people get rich, often at the expense of others. The people who advocate the market the most look down on the poor and the working class. We're just not smart or thrifty enough. But when they need a bailout, guess who foots the bill? This column by Ellen Goodman is at www.chron.com:
I grant you that moral hazard is not a myth. But most of the sermons railing against the harm of helping others are directed at the poorer pews.
We don't seem to worry about the moral hazard of, say, protecting a CEO from his failings. Need I remind you that Robert Nardelli got $210 million in severance after he hammered Home Depot? Or that he now resides at the top of Chrysler? What lesson did other chief executives learn from the Citigroup CEO who had $64 billion in market value evaporate on his watch and nevertheless exited with a $68 million package and a $1.7 million pension?
This leads us right into the den of Bear Stearns. Last weekend, while its chief executive was off playing bridge, one of the most aggressive, cowboy firms in the mortgage securities business collapsed. The government brokered a deal with J.P. Morgan Chase to buy the firm and guarantee its loans with your tax dollars.
Bailout is too strong a word for what happened. Teaspooned-out would be better. The Bear Stearns worker bees looking at their life savings and pensions disappear are not flitting off to the beach, although I was charmed to note that the company will have grief counselors at hand. But it is true that the government went to the rescue.
WHAT DO WE BECOME NOW?
It may take decades to undo the damage from the Bush administration. Some of the damage will never be undone. We can't raise the dead. We can't take back the torture. We can't restore the lost limbs or undo the horrible visions of an unnecessary war. Bush has taken us to a dark side, but where do we go when we find ourselves back in the light? If we learn anything, maybe it's that the time of empires and superpowers is past. As JFK said, we all breathe the same air. We all inhabit this small blue marble of a planet. This article by Mark Morford is at www.sfgate.com:
Some say this pain, this fiscal crisis, this enormous instability will last a few years. Some say no way, it will be at least a generation or two before we can right this ship of state again, so deep are the wounds and so insane is our national debt and so violent the damage to our reputation, our identity, our enfeebled infrastructure.
But I'm more with those who say, no, the truth is we will never truly recover, that America's former ranking as Gilded and Irreproachable Empire No. 1 is dead and gone. India and China are dramatically changing the game, peak oil is nigh, fresh water is the new gold, the planet itself is in paroxysm, Mother Nature is quickly revealing her hand — or rather, maybe just that one big, stormy middle finger.
But maybe this is the best news of all. Because the sort of gluttonous empire Bush so disgustingly represented was doomed to failure. The center could not hold. Dubya may not have hastened the apocalypse like the evangelicals desperately prayed he would, but he certainly is hastening the end of the bloviated American ego.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
March 25, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
GOVERNMENT A TOOL OF THE RICH
Right-wingers call the very rich the "achievers." We're told you can't "punish the achievers" by making them pay taxes based on their wealth. We're told that the rich already pay most of the income taxes (maybe because they have most of the income). We're told that the business of America is business and all that nasty regulation is an impediment to business. Even though we hear about democracy in this country, we have morphed into a kleptocracy. Most of us, in one form or another, are servants of the very rich. Forget about all those glorious words like "all men are created equal." This article by Charles Sullivan is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
Neoconservatives derive much of their political strength from the portrayal of big government as the enemy of the people: a belief that plays only too well in America. Big government is indeed the enemy of the people when it does not serve the people’s interests, or when it betrays them.
Where the neoconservatives and the chicken hawks have been spectacularly successful is in the field of perception management. The super rich—or the ruling clique—constitutes no more than 0.1 percent of the US population. Yet they control the mainstream media, every branch government, the electoral process and the country’s major financial institutions.
Thus, 99.9 percent of the people are being manipulated and cannibalized by a tiny but powerful minority. It is the interests of this powerful minority that are served by government and it is their interests that are defined as the national interest or as national security; and it is hardly benign. Robbing the poor to pay the rich causes irreparable harm to the victim.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
March 23, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH: ONLY THE RICH GET GOVERNMENT HELP
As the subprime mortgage crisis washes over the economy, the Bush administration was very prompt to bail out investment firm Bear Stearns. The excuse is that the government can't allow a major bank like Bear Stearns to fail. But if you're the average person whose mortgage costs have gotten out of hand, tough luck, pal. This whole fiasco is a direct result of the anti-regulation ideology of reactionary conservatives, who believe in the "free market." Of course, the "free market" doesn't apply when it's the very rich. This article by By Jeffrey H. Birnbaum and Lori Montgomery is at www.washingtonpost.com:
Now that the Federal Reserve has pledged billions of dollars to rescue Wall Street bankers from possible default, lawmakers and regulators are turning their attention to helping average citizens -- from homeowners in danger of foreclosure to people who want to buy a home.
But unlike the Fed's rapid moves last week to stabilize financial markets, the consumer benefits are likely to progress slowly as they face resistance from the Bush administration on some broad issues and from special interests on some narrow ones.
Bush officials are working with lawmakers on proposals that would help new home buyers and small investors by strengthening rules that govern mortgage lending.
THE LIFE EXPECTANCY GAP
It turns out that the United States not only has a gulf between the rich and poor in income, but also in life expectancy. Being poor increases the chances for a shorter life. Right-wingers will undoubtedly spin this that poor people "choose" to live unhealthier lives. But lack of money dictates so many things. It dictates your diet because you buy the food you can afford. It dictates the health care you get or don't get. It dictates the kind of neighborhood where you live. Poor neighborhoods tend to have more crime than more affluent areas, for example. Poor people also tend to live nearer things like toxic waste dumps. This article by Robert Pear is at www.nytimes.com:
WASHINGTON — New government research has found "large and growing" disparities in life expectancy for richer and poorer Americans, paralleling the growth of income inequality in the last two decades.
Life expectancy for the nation as a whole has increased, the researchers said, but affluent people have experienced greater gains, and this, in turn, has caused a widening gap.
One of the researchers, Gopal K. Singh, a demographer at the Department of Health and Human Services , said "the growing inequalities in life expectancy" mirrored trends in infant mortality and in death from heart disease and certain cancers.
The gaps have been increasing despite efforts by the federal government to reduce them. One of the top goals of "Healthy People 2010," an official statement of national health objectives issued in 2000, is to "eliminate health disparities among different segments of the population," including higher- and lower-income groups and people of different racial and ethnic background.
Dr. Singh said last week that federal officials had found "widening socioeconomic inequalities in life expectancy" at birth and at every age level.
He and another researcher, Mohammad Siahpush, a professor at the University of Nebraska Medical Center in Omaha, developed an index to measure social and economic conditions in every county, using census data on education, income, poverty, housing and other factors. Counties were then classified into 10 groups of equal population size.
In 1980-82, Dr. Singh said, people in the most affluent group could expect to live 2.8 years longer than people in the most deprived group (75.8 versus 73 years). By 1998-2000, the difference in life expectancy had increased to 4.5 years (79.2 versus 74.7 years), and it continues to grow, he said.
After 20 years, the lowest socioeconomic group lagged further behind the most affluent, Dr. Singh said, noting that "life expectancy was higher for the most affluent in 1980 than for the most deprived group in 2000."
"If you look at the extremes in 2000," Dr. Singh said, "men in the most deprived counties had 10 years’ shorter life expectancy than women in the most affluent counties (71.5 years versus 81.3 years)." The difference between poor black men and affluent white women was more than 14 years (66.9 years vs. 81.1 years).
The Democratic candidates for president, Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois, have championed legislation to reduce such disparities, as have some Republicans, like Senator Thad Cochran of Mississippi.
Peter R. Orszag, director of the Congressional Budget Office , said: "We have heard a lot about growing income inequality. There has been much less attention paid to growing inequality in life expectancy, which is really quite dramatic."
Life expectancy is the average number of years of life remaining for people who have attained a given age.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH: ONLY THE RICH GET GOVERNMENT HELP
As the subprime mortgage crisis washes over the economy, the Bush administration was very prompt to bail out investment firm Bear Stearns. The excuse is that the government can't allow a major bank like Bear Stearns to fail. But if you're the average person whose mortgage costs have gotten out of hand, tough luck, pal. This whole fiasco is a direct result of the anti-regulation ideology of reactionary conservatives, who believe in the "free market." Of course, the "free market" doesn't apply when it's the very rich. This article by By Jeffrey H. Birnbaum and Lori Montgomery is at www.washingtonpost.com:
Now that the Federal Reserve has pledged billions of dollars to rescue Wall Street bankers from possible default, lawmakers and regulators are turning their attention to helping average citizens -- from homeowners in danger of foreclosure to people who want to buy a home.
But unlike the Fed's rapid moves last week to stabilize financial markets, the consumer benefits are likely to progress slowly as they face resistance from the Bush administration on some broad issues and from special interests on some narrow ones.
Bush officials are working with lawmakers on proposals that would help new home buyers and small investors by strengthening rules that govern mortgage lending.
THE LIFE EXPECTANCY GAP
It turns out that the United States not only has a gulf between the rich and poor in income, but also in life expectancy. Being poor increases the chances for a shorter life. Right-wingers will undoubtedly spin this that poor people "choose" to live unhealthier lives. But lack of money dictates so many things. It dictates your diet because you buy the food you can afford. It dictates the health care you get or don't get. It dictates the kind of neighborhood where you live. Poor neighborhoods tend to have more crime than more affluent areas, for example. Poor people also tend to live nearer things like toxic waste dumps. This article by Robert Pear is at www.nytimes.com:
WASHINGTON — New government research has found "large and growing" disparities in life expectancy for richer and poorer Americans, paralleling the growth of income inequality in the last two decades.
Life expectancy for the nation as a whole has increased, the researchers said, but affluent people have experienced greater gains, and this, in turn, has caused a widening gap.
One of the researchers, Gopal K. Singh, a demographer at the Department of Health and Human Services , said "the growing inequalities in life expectancy" mirrored trends in infant mortality and in death from heart disease and certain cancers.
The gaps have been increasing despite efforts by the federal government to reduce them. One of the top goals of "Healthy People 2010," an official statement of national health objectives issued in 2000, is to "eliminate health disparities among different segments of the population," including higher- and lower-income groups and people of different racial and ethnic background.
Dr. Singh said last week that federal officials had found "widening socioeconomic inequalities in life expectancy" at birth and at every age level.
He and another researcher, Mohammad Siahpush, a professor at the University of Nebraska Medical Center in Omaha, developed an index to measure social and economic conditions in every county, using census data on education, income, poverty, housing and other factors. Counties were then classified into 10 groups of equal population size.
In 1980-82, Dr. Singh said, people in the most affluent group could expect to live 2.8 years longer than people in the most deprived group (75.8 versus 73 years). By 1998-2000, the difference in life expectancy had increased to 4.5 years (79.2 versus 74.7 years), and it continues to grow, he said.
After 20 years, the lowest socioeconomic group lagged further behind the most affluent, Dr. Singh said, noting that "life expectancy was higher for the most affluent in 1980 than for the most deprived group in 2000."
"If you look at the extremes in 2000," Dr. Singh said, "men in the most deprived counties had 10 years’ shorter life expectancy than women in the most affluent counties (71.5 years versus 81.3 years)." The difference between poor black men and affluent white women was more than 14 years (66.9 years vs. 81.1 years).
The Democratic candidates for president, Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois, have championed legislation to reduce such disparities, as have some Republicans, like Senator Thad Cochran of Mississippi.
Peter R. Orszag, director of the Congressional Budget Office , said: "We have heard a lot about growing income inequality. There has been much less attention paid to growing inequality in life expectancy, which is really quite dramatic."
Life expectancy is the average number of years of life remaining for people who have attained a given age.
Thursday, March 20, 2008
March 20, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
CONSERVATISM IS A ROTTEN PHILOSOPHY
No matter how they try to dress it up, conservatives really believe in one thing: greed. Supposedly, if we all look out for number one society will thrive. It's a little like saying when the ship is sinking you should jump in the lifeboat and kick everyone else out. It's survival of the fittest, as long as the fittest is you. This column by Alicia Morgan is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
That's the essence of the conservative worldview: as long as I've got mine, I don't care if you have yours. The idea of everyone pursuing his or her own self-interest, then by the invisible hand, the self-interest of all will be maximized, or in the parlance of the Eighties, "Greed is good!" - is the one-size-fits-all answer to poverty, to injustice, to inequality. But what it boils down to in real life is "I've got mine." The idea that every person that works full-time is due enough compensation to support themselves, let alone a family, doesn't even enter into the calculation. It's okay for other people to be underpaid, overworked, taken advantage of. All that matters is - it's not me.
This is why conservatism just plain doesn't work - at least for the kind of society we say we want as Americans. There has to be some kind of consideration for more than just 'me and mine'. The place we're at right now - teetering on the brink of an economic collapse that could easily become a depression, embroiled in a grotesque, bloody occupation with no end in sight, pretending to be 'liberators' with no concern as to whether the country we're occupying wants us there or not, with a Vice-President who doesn't care how many Americans object to the war
A BRIEF HISTORY OF CONSERVATISM'S DISASTERS
The consequences of conservatism are manifold and disastrous except for the very few at the top of the economic pyramid. After years of propaganda about "big government" and taxes, conservatives had the chance to try out their ideas on a national and international stage. We see the sorry results. This article by Eric Lotke is at www.truthout.org:
Modern conservatism is dying. There's still an election to be held, but conservatism as we've known it since Ronald Reagan is failing - ground down in the desert of Iraq, drowned in the floods of Hurricane Katrina, foreclosed by the housing crisis and poisoned by toys imported from China.
The American people are figuring this out. While conservatives repeat their time-worn slogans - "small government, low taxes, high security" - the American people are living the consequences.
We've seen eight years of a conservative presidency, six years overlapping with a conservative Congress, and 30 years of broadly conservative ideology. Now reality is showing how the values embodied in those slogans have been betrayed.
Conservatives say "shrink government." We get inadequate levees, exploding steam pipes and schools without textbooks. Conservatives say "deregulate," and now Thomas the Tank Engine is painted with toxic lead. Conservatives say "low taxes," but it primarily applies to millionaires, billionaires and crony corporations.
And eventually, my conservative friends, even you may find yourself holding the short end of the stick. You may end up being the one treading water while someone else roars away to safety in the speedboat, oblivious to your cries for help. The policy of "I got mine" only leads to fewer and fewer people who have "got theirs" and more and more people who get next to nothing. Sooner or later, you'll be one of the latter. It's just a matter of time.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
March 19, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH'S LEGACY
George W. Bush will undoubtedly go down as the worst president in our history. From the very start, this administration has smacked of cronyism, incompetence, lying, and outright corruption. "Highlights" of the Bush years would include the attack on 9/11, which might had been prevented with someone competent at the helm. It will include a nest of lies about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction and a war that was unnecessary. It will include consistent assaults on civil liberties. It will include end runs around the Constitution with the use of "signing statements." It will include torture. It will include an outright assault on science that didn't fit Bush's ideology. And it will include total mismanagement of the economy. This article by Robert Scheer is at www.commondreams.org:
That idiotic "what me worry?" look just never leaves the man’s visage. Once again there was our president, presiding over disasters in part of his making and totally on his watch, grinning with an aplomb that suggested a serious disconnect between his worldview and existing reality. Be it in his announcement that Iraq was being secured on a day when bombs ripped through that sad land or posed between his treasury secretary and the Federal Reserve chairman to applaud the government’s bailout of a failed bank, George Bush was the only one inexplicably smiling.
Failure suits him. It is a stance he learned well while presiding over one failed Texas business deal after another, and it served him splendidly as he claimed the title of president of the United States after losing the popular, and maybe even the electoral, vote. It carried him through the most ignominious chapter of U.S. foreign policy, from the lies about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction to an unprecedented presidential defense of torture.
The totally unwarranted assurance was there this week as the once proud dollar fell into the toilet and the debacle of Iraq and Bush’s other failed Mideast policies pushed oil prices to record highs. The Europeans, who didn’t support the U.S. imperial intervention, are doing much better, not having to pay for guarding besieged oil pipelines while U.S. taxpayers are saddled with trillions in future debt, not to mention 4,000 U.S. military deaths and 30,000 U.S. injuries in a war the administration had promised would be paid for with Iraqi oil revenues. Even in Baghdad last week there wasn’t enough oil to keep the lights on for more than a few hours.
THE ABSURDITY OF LAISSEZ-FAIRE
Right-wingers and libertarians love the "free market." The free market is where men are men, or something like that. It's the domain of the "achievers." I have thought that, under their definition, Al Capone was an achiever. Al provided what consumers wanted in bootleg whiskey, gambling, and prostitution. The Great Depression should have provided a warning. It was no accident that the laissez-faire capitalism of the 1920's led to the Depression. It's no accident that the reactionary policies of the Bush administration have put us in economic peril. This article by Alicia Morgan is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
Conservatives are all about faith. The same people who pooh-pooh evolution as 'only a theory' and believe global warming is a hoax have an almost religious belief in laissez-faire capitalism. It is an article of faith with them that if the shackles of regulation and taxation were thrown off, a perfect economic miracle would occur. Everyone would be well-off – some more well-off than others, of course. The Market would ensure that competition was fair, and that therefore there would be no need of regulation! The Consumer would decide whether to buy a company’s products, and so the company would be forced to be ethical or else be punished by the Consumer. But the twin devils of Taxation and Regulation keep this miracle from happening.
This economic theory does not need any empirical evidence to be believed in fervently. The theory is more important than the results. If the results don't pan out, it only means that the theory has not been applied properly. More tax cuts! More deregulation!
You serfs who are losing your homes - it's all your own fault! If you can't afford the usurious interest rates, then you have no business buying houses. You mean you believed what your mortgage broker told you? Hey, not our fault. Caveat emptor, baby. Don't expect the government to come to your rescue, you freeloaders!
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH'S LEGACY
George W. Bush will undoubtedly go down as the worst president in our history. From the very start, this administration has smacked of cronyism, incompetence, lying, and outright corruption. "Highlights" of the Bush years would include the attack on 9/11, which might had been prevented with someone competent at the helm. It will include a nest of lies about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction and a war that was unnecessary. It will include consistent assaults on civil liberties. It will include end runs around the Constitution with the use of "signing statements." It will include torture. It will include an outright assault on science that didn't fit Bush's ideology. And it will include total mismanagement of the economy. This article by Robert Scheer is at www.commondreams.org:
That idiotic "what me worry?" look just never leaves the man’s visage. Once again there was our president, presiding over disasters in part of his making and totally on his watch, grinning with an aplomb that suggested a serious disconnect between his worldview and existing reality. Be it in his announcement that Iraq was being secured on a day when bombs ripped through that sad land or posed between his treasury secretary and the Federal Reserve chairman to applaud the government’s bailout of a failed bank, George Bush was the only one inexplicably smiling.
Failure suits him. It is a stance he learned well while presiding over one failed Texas business deal after another, and it served him splendidly as he claimed the title of president of the United States after losing the popular, and maybe even the electoral, vote. It carried him through the most ignominious chapter of U.S. foreign policy, from the lies about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction to an unprecedented presidential defense of torture.
The totally unwarranted assurance was there this week as the once proud dollar fell into the toilet and the debacle of Iraq and Bush’s other failed Mideast policies pushed oil prices to record highs. The Europeans, who didn’t support the U.S. imperial intervention, are doing much better, not having to pay for guarding besieged oil pipelines while U.S. taxpayers are saddled with trillions in future debt, not to mention 4,000 U.S. military deaths and 30,000 U.S. injuries in a war the administration had promised would be paid for with Iraqi oil revenues. Even in Baghdad last week there wasn’t enough oil to keep the lights on for more than a few hours.
THE ABSURDITY OF LAISSEZ-FAIRE
Right-wingers and libertarians love the "free market." The free market is where men are men, or something like that. It's the domain of the "achievers." I have thought that, under their definition, Al Capone was an achiever. Al provided what consumers wanted in bootleg whiskey, gambling, and prostitution. The Great Depression should have provided a warning. It was no accident that the laissez-faire capitalism of the 1920's led to the Depression. It's no accident that the reactionary policies of the Bush administration have put us in economic peril. This article by Alicia Morgan is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
Conservatives are all about faith. The same people who pooh-pooh evolution as 'only a theory' and believe global warming is a hoax have an almost religious belief in laissez-faire capitalism. It is an article of faith with them that if the shackles of regulation and taxation were thrown off, a perfect economic miracle would occur. Everyone would be well-off – some more well-off than others, of course. The Market would ensure that competition was fair, and that therefore there would be no need of regulation! The Consumer would decide whether to buy a company’s products, and so the company would be forced to be ethical or else be punished by the Consumer. But the twin devils of Taxation and Regulation keep this miracle from happening.
This economic theory does not need any empirical evidence to be believed in fervently. The theory is more important than the results. If the results don't pan out, it only means that the theory has not been applied properly. More tax cuts! More deregulation!
You serfs who are losing your homes - it's all your own fault! If you can't afford the usurious interest rates, then you have no business buying houses. You mean you believed what your mortgage broker told you? Hey, not our fault. Caveat emptor, baby. Don't expect the government to come to your rescue, you freeloaders!
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
March 18, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH INCOMPETENCE ON DISPLAY
Bush fans have cited some things they like about the guy. He's the first president with an MBA, for example. He's one of the "grownups in charge." He's "decisive," even to the point of the absurd. I think more accurate descriptions of Bush are: incompetent, lazy, arrogant, and corrupt. Bush made a half-hearted attempt at a speech to reassure the financial sector and Americans in general that things are really hunky-dory in our economy. This column by Gail Collins is at www.nytimes.com:
The president squinched his face and bit his lip and seemed too antsy to stand still. As he searched for the name of King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia (“the king, uh, the king of Saudi”) and made guy-fun of one of the questioners (“Who picked Gigot?”), you had to wonder what the international financial community makes of a country whose president could show up to talk economics in the middle of a liquidity crisis and kind of flop around the stage as if he was emcee at the Iowa Republican Pig Roast.
We’re really past expecting anything much, but in times of crisis you would like to at least believe your leader has the capacity to pretend he’s in control. Suddenly, I recalled a day long ago when my husband worked for a struggling paper full of worried employees and the publisher walked into the newsroom wearing a gorilla suit.
THE FINANCIAL COSTS OF IRAQ
The Bush administration lied to the American people about Iraq on several fronts. We were told that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, which he did not. We were told there was an alliance between Iraq and al-Qaeda, which there was not. We were told the war would be paid for by Iraq's oil revenues, which have not begun to pay for the costs of this war. Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has said this war will cost three trillion dollars. We have the actual costs of maintaining troops and supplying them in Iraq and we will have the interest to pay on money borrowed to finance the war. We will also have massive amounts of veterans benefits to pay. This war is already the second most expensive in our history. This doesn't even take into account the human costs of the war in deaths, wounds, and psychological damage. This article by Zachary Coile is at www.sfgate.com:
It was supposed to be a quick war and a cheap one. Five years later, 160,000 U.S. troops are still in Iraq. And the costs keep piling up - $12 billion every month - putting a strain on an already faltering economy.
The United States has poured more than $500 billion into Iraq, mostly for military operations. But that figure is just a small piece of the much larger bill that taxpayers will pay in the future.
Because the money for the war is being borrowed, interest payments could add another $615 billion. A heavily depleted military will have to be rebuilt at a cost of $280 billion. Disability benefits and health care for Iraq war veterans, many of them severely injured, could add another half-trillion dollars over their lifetime.
Nobel laureate economist Joseph Stiglitz and Harvard University public finance Professor Laura Bilmes, both of whom served in the Clinton administration, have included those calculations in a new study of the war's long-term costs. Their estimate of the war's price tag: $3 trillion.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH INCOMPETENCE ON DISPLAY
Bush fans have cited some things they like about the guy. He's the first president with an MBA, for example. He's one of the "grownups in charge." He's "decisive," even to the point of the absurd. I think more accurate descriptions of Bush are: incompetent, lazy, arrogant, and corrupt. Bush made a half-hearted attempt at a speech to reassure the financial sector and Americans in general that things are really hunky-dory in our economy. This column by Gail Collins is at www.nytimes.com:
The president squinched his face and bit his lip and seemed too antsy to stand still. As he searched for the name of King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia (“the king, uh, the king of Saudi”) and made guy-fun of one of the questioners (“Who picked Gigot?”), you had to wonder what the international financial community makes of a country whose president could show up to talk economics in the middle of a liquidity crisis and kind of flop around the stage as if he was emcee at the Iowa Republican Pig Roast.
We’re really past expecting anything much, but in times of crisis you would like to at least believe your leader has the capacity to pretend he’s in control. Suddenly, I recalled a day long ago when my husband worked for a struggling paper full of worried employees and the publisher walked into the newsroom wearing a gorilla suit.
THE FINANCIAL COSTS OF IRAQ
The Bush administration lied to the American people about Iraq on several fronts. We were told that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, which he did not. We were told there was an alliance between Iraq and al-Qaeda, which there was not. We were told the war would be paid for by Iraq's oil revenues, which have not begun to pay for the costs of this war. Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has said this war will cost three trillion dollars. We have the actual costs of maintaining troops and supplying them in Iraq and we will have the interest to pay on money borrowed to finance the war. We will also have massive amounts of veterans benefits to pay. This war is already the second most expensive in our history. This doesn't even take into account the human costs of the war in deaths, wounds, and psychological damage. This article by Zachary Coile is at www.sfgate.com:
It was supposed to be a quick war and a cheap one. Five years later, 160,000 U.S. troops are still in Iraq. And the costs keep piling up - $12 billion every month - putting a strain on an already faltering economy.
The United States has poured more than $500 billion into Iraq, mostly for military operations. But that figure is just a small piece of the much larger bill that taxpayers will pay in the future.
Because the money for the war is being borrowed, interest payments could add another $615 billion. A heavily depleted military will have to be rebuilt at a cost of $280 billion. Disability benefits and health care for Iraq war veterans, many of them severely injured, could add another half-trillion dollars over their lifetime.
Nobel laureate economist Joseph Stiglitz and Harvard University public finance Professor Laura Bilmes, both of whom served in the Clinton administration, have included those calculations in a new study of the war's long-term costs. Their estimate of the war's price tag: $3 trillion.
Sunday, March 16, 2008
March 16, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE GREAT TAX DELUSION
It's strange that for a time the Republican party was called by some the "party of ideas." There's really nothing new in Republican land. You get variations on the same old nonsense. One of the core and enduring policies in Republican policies is tax cuts. Tax cuts are their economic plan, especially tax cuts for their fat cat friends. Never mind if you get whopping deficits or massive inequality. Tax cuts, we're told, will lead us to the land of milk and honey. Even in the recent "stimulus package" there were tax cuts. Analysts say the best stimulus would be to increase unemployment benefits and food stamp benefits, but Republicans hate anything that helps the working class or the poor. This article by Walter Williams and Bryan D. Jones is at seattlepi.nwsource.com:
Rather than see the stimulus package as a political and economic success, we see it as a mark of the continued failure of the political system to face problems and design policies directed at ameliorating them.
First, the experience with the economic stimulus package shows clearly that the federal government now lacks the capacity to cope with the massive economic problems that are pushing the nation toward second-class economic status.
Second, the source of this inability is the unshakeable ideological belief of President Bush and the Republican Party that income tax cuts are the cure-all for the nation's economic problems. This core belief led to a flawed stimulus package, a repeat of the bad logic leading to the administration's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.
Third, the 2008 legislation has many of the same flaws as the earlier tax cuts that put the U.S. on the path toward fiscal insolvency, left the middle class in the worst financial straits in the post-World War II era, and brought the widest income inequality since the 1920s-effects we document clearly in our new book, "The Politics of Bad Ideas: The Great Tax Cut Delusion and the Decline of Good Government in America."
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE GREAT TAX DELUSION
It's strange that for a time the Republican party was called by some the "party of ideas." There's really nothing new in Republican land. You get variations on the same old nonsense. One of the core and enduring policies in Republican policies is tax cuts. Tax cuts are their economic plan, especially tax cuts for their fat cat friends. Never mind if you get whopping deficits or massive inequality. Tax cuts, we're told, will lead us to the land of milk and honey. Even in the recent "stimulus package" there were tax cuts. Analysts say the best stimulus would be to increase unemployment benefits and food stamp benefits, but Republicans hate anything that helps the working class or the poor. This article by Walter Williams and Bryan D. Jones is at seattlepi.nwsource.com:
Rather than see the stimulus package as a political and economic success, we see it as a mark of the continued failure of the political system to face problems and design policies directed at ameliorating them.
First, the experience with the economic stimulus package shows clearly that the federal government now lacks the capacity to cope with the massive economic problems that are pushing the nation toward second-class economic status.
Second, the source of this inability is the unshakeable ideological belief of President Bush and the Republican Party that income tax cuts are the cure-all for the nation's economic problems. This core belief led to a flawed stimulus package, a repeat of the bad logic leading to the administration's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.
Third, the 2008 legislation has many of the same flaws as the earlier tax cuts that put the U.S. on the path toward fiscal insolvency, left the middle class in the worst financial straits in the post-World War II era, and brought the widest income inequality since the 1920s-effects we document clearly in our new book, "The Politics of Bad Ideas: The Great Tax Cut Delusion and the Decline of Good Government in America."
Saturday, March 15, 2008
March 15, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
REAPING THE POISON FRUIT
Right-wing "philosophy" essentially consists of an aggressive foreign policy, a big military and huge military expenditures, a laissez-faire attitude toward business that says the less regulation the better, and minimal taxes for the most affluent people in the country. There is a mix of religion thrown in, with the usual claims that the United States is a Christian country, and that a restoration of school prayer and abolition of abortion would make God like us again. We are seeing the fruition of right-wing ideas with the grossly immoral war in Iraq, the destruction of our middle class at home, and the demise of American power around the world. This commentary by Paul Craig Roberts is at www.counterpunch.org:
The bottom line: US power is enfeebled. US power depends on the willingness of foreigners to finance our wars and on the willingness of foreigners to continue to accumulate depreciating dollar assets. The US cannot close its trade deficit. Oil prices are rising, and offshore production of goods and services for US markets results in a dollar-for-dollar increase in imports, while reducing the supply of domestic goods available for export.
The US cannot close its budget deficit while it is squandering vast sums on wars that serve no US purpose, handing out $150 billion in red ink rebates, and falling into recession.
US living standards, which have been stagnant for years, will plummet once dollar decline forces China off the dollar peg. So far prices of the Chinese-made goods on Wal-Mart shelves have not risen, because the Chinese currency, pegged to the dollar, falls in value with the dollar. In a word, tottering US living standards are being supported by China’s willingness to subsidize US consumption by keeping its currency grossly undervalued.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
REAPING THE POISON FRUIT
Right-wing "philosophy" essentially consists of an aggressive foreign policy, a big military and huge military expenditures, a laissez-faire attitude toward business that says the less regulation the better, and minimal taxes for the most affluent people in the country. There is a mix of religion thrown in, with the usual claims that the United States is a Christian country, and that a restoration of school prayer and abolition of abortion would make God like us again. We are seeing the fruition of right-wing ideas with the grossly immoral war in Iraq, the destruction of our middle class at home, and the demise of American power around the world. This commentary by Paul Craig Roberts is at www.counterpunch.org:
The bottom line: US power is enfeebled. US power depends on the willingness of foreigners to finance our wars and on the willingness of foreigners to continue to accumulate depreciating dollar assets. The US cannot close its trade deficit. Oil prices are rising, and offshore production of goods and services for US markets results in a dollar-for-dollar increase in imports, while reducing the supply of domestic goods available for export.
The US cannot close its budget deficit while it is squandering vast sums on wars that serve no US purpose, handing out $150 billion in red ink rebates, and falling into recession.
US living standards, which have been stagnant for years, will plummet once dollar decline forces China off the dollar peg. So far prices of the Chinese-made goods on Wal-Mart shelves have not risen, because the Chinese currency, pegged to the dollar, falls in value with the dollar. In a word, tottering US living standards are being supported by China’s willingness to subsidize US consumption by keeping its currency grossly undervalued.
Friday, March 14, 2008
March 14, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
CAPITALISM'S TURNING POINT
Despite all the propaganda, capitalism has always been a bad economic system. Prior to the New Deal, most people were poor their entire lives with no economic security. If you couldn't find work, too bad. If you got too old to work, too bad. If you worked in conditions where you could get injured or killed, too bad. The New Deal saved capitalism from itself. But the greedy people who benefit from capitalism weren't happy with the New Deal reforms. We've seen a consistent assault on the reforms of the New Deal since the Reagan administration. Now the Bush administration has driven us to the cliff. It's obvious that "free market" capitalism will not get us out of this mess. This commentary by Peter Michaelson
is at www.buzzflash.com:
Capitalism is a hanger-on from a time of global colonialism, when slavery was thriving and women couldn't vote. Its followers haven't been able to tear themselves away from cold-blooded, bottom-line self-aggrandizement. It has pandered to our worst instincts. It finances the pollution of our free air and free water. Its relentless expansionism is too toxic, its promises of "heaven on earth" too corrosive to our moral fiber. Something new and greener is coming.
Solzhenitsyn said that, if the world has not approached its end, "it has reached a major watershed in history, equal in importance to the turn from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance." It's an exciting time to be alive, perhaps the beginning of the good times.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
March 13, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
KEEPING SPITZER IN PERSPECTIVE
The corporate media may be disappointed that New York Governor Eliot Spitzer announced his resignation today. He will leave office on March 17 and the media won't have the "sex scandal" to flog 24/7 the way they did the Monica story during the Clinton administration. Sex is so much more marketable than crony capitalism or torture or immoral wars. This commentary by Robert Scheer is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
The sad truth is that reporting on major corruption, say, the rationalizations of a president who has authorized torture, doesn't cut it as a marketing bonanza. Just days before this grand expose, the president vetoed a bill banning torture, and instead of being greeted with horrified disgust, the president's deep denigration of this nation's presumed ideals was met with a vast public yawn. Torture, unlike paid sex, doesn't have legs as a news story.
Sex sells, and frankly it would seem far more exploitative for the news media to pimp this tale to the public than anything that VIP escort service did with the pitiable governor. His behavior was not really any more wretched than messing around with a young and vulnerable White House intern who didn't even get paid for her efforts, yet Bill Clinton survived that one, whereas Spitzer was presumed dead on the arrival of this "news." The New York Times, which editorially has supported the candidacy of Hillary Clinton, whose vast White House experience clearly did not include corralling her husband, now editorializes contemptuously about Spitzer's betrayal of the public trust as well as about his exploitation of his "ashen-faced" wife, who, like Hillary, stood by her man.
BUSH AND ELITES ARE DISGUSTING
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
KEEPING SPITZER IN PERSPECTIVE
The corporate media may be disappointed that New York Governor Eliot Spitzer announced his resignation today. He will leave office on March 17 and the media won't have the "sex scandal" to flog 24/7 the way they did the Monica story during the Clinton administration. Sex is so much more marketable than crony capitalism or torture or immoral wars. This commentary by Robert Scheer is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
The sad truth is that reporting on major corruption, say, the rationalizations of a president who has authorized torture, doesn't cut it as a marketing bonanza. Just days before this grand expose, the president vetoed a bill banning torture, and instead of being greeted with horrified disgust, the president's deep denigration of this nation's presumed ideals was met with a vast public yawn. Torture, unlike paid sex, doesn't have legs as a news story.
Sex sells, and frankly it would seem far more exploitative for the news media to pimp this tale to the public than anything that VIP escort service did with the pitiable governor. His behavior was not really any more wretched than messing around with a young and vulnerable White House intern who didn't even get paid for her efforts, yet Bill Clinton survived that one, whereas Spitzer was presumed dead on the arrival of this "news." The New York Times, which editorially has supported the candidacy of Hillary Clinton, whose vast White House experience clearly did not include corralling her husband, now editorializes contemptuously about Spitzer's betrayal of the public trust as well as about his exploitation of his "ashen-faced" wife, who, like Hillary, stood by her man.
BUSH AND ELITES ARE DISGUSTING
George W. Bush, attired in a tuxedo, made an appearance at the swanky Gridiron Club and sang a little ditty to the melody of "Green, Green Grass of Home." Bush mocked the multitude of scandals in his administration and the elite crowd there laughed uproariously. Murderous wars are funny now. Crony capitalism is hilarious. People going without healthcare is a hoot. Global climate change is rib-tickling. These people look upon the rest of us with contempt. We're here to do all the dirty jobs that make their cushy lives possible. This article by Cindy Sheehan is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
With the unbelievable 5th anniversary of "shock and awe" looming before us like a dark cancer that is out of control, the Buffoon in Chief, George W. Bush, once again tormented the nation with another obscene display of idiocy. This time at the Gridiron Club. Singing to the tune of "Green, Green Grass of Home" he warbles about the major scandals of his administration: Valerie Plame; Katrina; cronyism; Harriet Miers and Brownie; Dick Cheney and the fatal attraction (for our troops and innocent people in the Middle East) that they all have for the Saudi Royal Family, etc.
The worst thing about the performance, besides that anyone would think that almost 8 years of unpunished high crimes and misdemeanors is anywhere near approaching funny, the stellar-in-their-own-minds, Washington "Elite" and some of the press corps were laughing uproariously and gave the traitor wearing a tuxedo and a cowboy hat a standing ovation.
Cameras were banned that night and from what I understand, agreements were made that video would not be shot, but still the song can be heard on YouTube. I get the feeling when these modern day Vampires get together like this, they frequently laugh at the rest of us with their parodies of heartache and devastation and chuckle all the way to the bank when they cash their paychecks drawn on the blood of so many innocent people.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
March 11, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
A THREE DECADE DECLINE
The author of this article talks about the misleading picture provided by the Gross Domestic Product. The GDP is intended to provide a measure of economic growth. The GDP includes bad things as well as good things, as long as the bad things contribute somehow to economic growth. A new measure called the Gross Progress Indicator has been proposed. Using the GPI, most of us have seen a declining standard of living since 1975. This article by Robert Constanza is at www.latimes.com:
GDP measures the total market value of all goods and services produced in a country in a given period. But it includes only those goods and services traded for money. It also adds everything together, without discerning desirable, well-being-enhancing economic activity from undesirable, well-being-reducing activity. An oil spill, for example, increases GDP because someone has to clean it up, but it obviously detracts from well-being.
More crime, more sickness, more war, more pollution, more fires, storms and pestilence are all potentially positives for the GDP because they can spur an increase in economic activity.GDP also ignores activity that may enhance well-being but is outside the market.
The unpaid work of parents caring for their children at home doesn't show up in GDP, but if they decide to work outside the home and pay for child care, GDP suddenly increases. And even though $1 in income means a lot more to the poor than to the rich, GDP takes no account of income distribution.In short, GDP was never intended to be a measure of citizens' welfare -- and it functions poorly as such. Yet it is used as a surrogate appraisal of national well-being in far too many circumstances.
THE ABJECT FAILURE OF TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS
Pass by the boarded up windows of so many foreclosed houses and you can see the American Dream is going away. Pass by the corner gas station and see the breathtaking increase in fuel prices and you sense the Dream is gone. Try to find a decent job that pays livable wages and has benefits and confront the absence of the Dream. When the elites got their way with the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 they got even more greedy than they had been before. They have been busily squeezing the middle and working class, suppressing unions, outsourcing jobs, getting handsome tax breaks for themselves, ignoring the country's infrastructure, letting the educational system fall into ruins, and waging immoral wars to control natural resources they want. This is the result. This column by Bob Herbert is at www.rackjite.com:
Maybe now we can stop listening to the geniuses who insisted that the way to nirvana was to ignore the broad national interest while catering to the desires of those who were already the wealthiest among us.
We have always gotten a distorted picture of how well Americans were doing from politicians and the media. The U.S. has a population of 300 million.Thirty-seven million, many of them children, live in poverty. Close to 60 million are just one notch above the official poverty line. These near-poor Americans live in households with annual incomes that range from $20,000 to $40,000 for a family of four. It is disgraceful that in a nation as wealthy as the United States, nearly a third of the people are poor or near-poor.
Saturday, March 08, 2008
March 08, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH'S POLICIES SINKING ECONOMY
The latest jobs report shows a loss of 63,000 jobs last month. It's the second consecutive month of net jobs lost. Republican economics, especially the trickle down variety we've seen since Reagan, are toxic to the economy. No one except the very wealthy benefits from Republican economic policy. These guys can't leave the White House fast enough. This article by MICHAEL M. GRYNBAUM is at www.nytimes.com:
The economy shed 63,000 jobs in February, the government said on Friday, the fastest falloff in five years and the strongest evidence yet that the nation is headed toward - or may already be in - a recession.
Manufacturers and construction companies, reeling from the worst housing slump in decades, led the declines in payrolls. But the losses were spread across a broad range of businesses - including department stores, offices and retail outlets - putting increased pressure on consumers’ pocketbooks.
The unexpected decline raised anticipation on Wall Street that the Federal Reserve will lower interest rates again later this month, perhaps by as much as a full percentage point, as the central bank scrambles to stave off a steep economic slowdown.
BUSH IS THE REAL ENEMY
I've found the nastiness in the Democratic primaries disturbing. I have no doubt that both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have flaws. My first choice was John Edwards. But I also have little doubt that Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton are infinitely preferable to John McCain and the continuation of the toxic policies of the Bush administration. If Hillary Clinton, in particular, loves this country and wants what is best for the country, she will cease the nasty campaign against Barack Obama. What is best for the country should take priority, not personal electoral success. This article by Sherwood Ross is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
If Senator Obama spends his time between now and the Pennsylvania primary April 22 attacking Senator Clinton he will have focused on the wrong target. Public Enemy No. 1 in America today is George Bush, not Hillary Clinton. When there's a Mafioso in the White House you don't spend your time attacking a legislator he's got in his pocket that voted his way. You go after the capo de regime.
There's enough material on Bush's crimes for Obama to come up with a new j'accuse white paper every day---unless, of course, he prefers to go on quibbling with Hillary over health plans. Health care, after all, is perceived as Hillary's strong suit and the one radio spot she ran for Wyoming focused on it.
Obama, of course, is right not to respond in kind to Hillary's smears. As Bob Herbert pointed out in the March 8, New York Times, when asked if she believed Obama was a Muslim, Ms. Clinton replied, "there is nothing to base that on. As far as I know." Got that? So maybe Obama is a Muslim after all, Hillary hints.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH'S POLICIES SINKING ECONOMY
The latest jobs report shows a loss of 63,000 jobs last month. It's the second consecutive month of net jobs lost. Republican economics, especially the trickle down variety we've seen since Reagan, are toxic to the economy. No one except the very wealthy benefits from Republican economic policy. These guys can't leave the White House fast enough. This article by MICHAEL M. GRYNBAUM is at www.nytimes.com:
The economy shed 63,000 jobs in February, the government said on Friday, the fastest falloff in five years and the strongest evidence yet that the nation is headed toward - or may already be in - a recession.
Manufacturers and construction companies, reeling from the worst housing slump in decades, led the declines in payrolls. But the losses were spread across a broad range of businesses - including department stores, offices and retail outlets - putting increased pressure on consumers’ pocketbooks.
The unexpected decline raised anticipation on Wall Street that the Federal Reserve will lower interest rates again later this month, perhaps by as much as a full percentage point, as the central bank scrambles to stave off a steep economic slowdown.
BUSH IS THE REAL ENEMY
I've found the nastiness in the Democratic primaries disturbing. I have no doubt that both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have flaws. My first choice was John Edwards. But I also have little doubt that Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton are infinitely preferable to John McCain and the continuation of the toxic policies of the Bush administration. If Hillary Clinton, in particular, loves this country and wants what is best for the country, she will cease the nasty campaign against Barack Obama. What is best for the country should take priority, not personal electoral success. This article by Sherwood Ross is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
If Senator Obama spends his time between now and the Pennsylvania primary April 22 attacking Senator Clinton he will have focused on the wrong target. Public Enemy No. 1 in America today is George Bush, not Hillary Clinton. When there's a Mafioso in the White House you don't spend your time attacking a legislator he's got in his pocket that voted his way. You go after the capo de regime.
There's enough material on Bush's crimes for Obama to come up with a new j'accuse white paper every day---unless, of course, he prefers to go on quibbling with Hillary over health plans. Health care, after all, is perceived as Hillary's strong suit and the one radio spot she ran for Wyoming focused on it.
Obama, of course, is right not to respond in kind to Hillary's smears. As Bob Herbert pointed out in the March 8, New York Times, when asked if she believed Obama was a Muslim, Ms. Clinton replied, "there is nothing to base that on. As far as I know." Got that? So maybe Obama is a Muslim after all, Hillary hints.
Thursday, March 06, 2008
March 06, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
MCCAIN'S DISMAL RECORD ON IRAQ
The myth makers would have you believe that John McCain is a foreign policy expert, the kind of guy you want in charge during a foreign policy crisis. About the only real basis for that claim is that McCain served in the Vietnam war and was held by the North Vietnamese as a prisoner of war. It's a little like saying you've been in the hospital, so now you're qualified to do surgery. McCain has recently claimed that Bush's "surge" is working, but that we might be in Iraq for 100 years. This column by Walter C. Uhler is at www.walter-c-uhler.com:
In January 2003, the Arizona Senator with the supposedly impeccable national security credentials asserted: "I think the victory will be rapid, within about three weeks." In April, McCain claimed, "It's clear that the end is very much in sight." And in May 2003, a cheerleading McCain proclaimed, "the war in Iraq succeeded beyond the most optimistic expectations." That was almost five years ago!
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
MCCAIN'S DISMAL RECORD ON IRAQ
The myth makers would have you believe that John McCain is a foreign policy expert, the kind of guy you want in charge during a foreign policy crisis. About the only real basis for that claim is that McCain served in the Vietnam war and was held by the North Vietnamese as a prisoner of war. It's a little like saying you've been in the hospital, so now you're qualified to do surgery. McCain has recently claimed that Bush's "surge" is working, but that we might be in Iraq for 100 years. This column by Walter C. Uhler is at www.walter-c-uhler.com:
In January 2003, the Arizona Senator with the supposedly impeccable national security credentials asserted: "I think the victory will be rapid, within about three weeks." In April, McCain claimed, "It's clear that the end is very much in sight." And in May 2003, a cheerleading McCain proclaimed, "the war in Iraq succeeded beyond the most optimistic expectations." That was almost five years ago!
In short, the Senator with the supposedly impeccable national security credentials has been wrong on Iraq since day one. Until recently, McCain said you should believe him when he claims the surge is working, but be prepared to stay in Iraq until America succeeds - whatever that means - even if we are there for a hundred years.
Recently, however -- apparently sensing that his "100 year thing" won't stand up against Obama's or Clinton's promise to get out of Iraq or impress the 60 percent of Americans who now believe the war was a mistake - the straight talker flip-flopped. Forget my words about "100 years." Instead: "My friends, the war will be over soon." I've been talking to my friend, Senator Lindsay Graham [another wrong-headed interventionist], who recently visited Baghdad. He says, "it's generally quiet" there.
ANOTHER KBR TAXPAYER RIP-OFF
Kellogg, Brown, and Root is the number one war contractor in Iraq. KBR has made a mint from a war that was never necessary or justified. They've been taking from United States taxpayers to fuel their profits. But that's not enough, evidently. They've also avoided paying United States taxes by creating phony offshore companies in the Cayman Islands. This story by Farah Stockman is at www.commondreams.org:
Kellogg Brown & Root, the nation’s top Iraq war contractor and until last year a subsidiary of Halliburton Corp., has avoided paying hundreds of millions of dollars in federal Medicare and Social Security taxes by hiring workers through shell companies based in this tropical tax haven.
More than 21,000 people working for KBR in Iraq - including about 10,500 Americans - are listed as employees of two companies that exist in a computer file on the fourth floor of a building on a palm-studded boulevard here in the Caribbean. Neither company has an office or phone number in the Cayman Islands.
The Defense Department has known since at least 2004 that KBR was avoiding taxes by declaring its American workers as employees of Cayman Islands shell companies, and officials said the move allowed KBR to perform the work more cheaply, saving Defense dollars.
Sunday, March 02, 2008
March 02, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
A LOOK AT THE REALITY OF THE FREE MARKET
We've been told that globalization is a truly marvelous thing. Opening up borders and allowing competition will produce nirvana. When we look around, though, we see our manufacturing sector almost gone, along with the good paying jobs that went with the manufacturing sector, and we see our balance of trade totally out of whack with countries like China. Elitists like Thomas Friedman smugly proclaim that the "world is flat" and that developing economies are now free to compete with established economies such as the United States and Britain. In this commentary Thom Hartmann reviews a book called BadSamaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism by Ha-Joon Chang. The commentary is at www.buzzflash.com:
There are two glaringly obvious flaws in the so-called "free trade" theories expounded by neoliberal philosophers like Friedrich Von Hayek and Milton Friedman, and promoted relentlessly in the popular press by (very wealthy) hucksters like Thomas Friedman.
First, "infant" economies - countries that are only beginning to get on their feet - cannot "compete" with "mature" economies. They really only have two choices - lose to their more mature competitors and stand on the hungry and cold outside of the world of trade (as we see with much of Africa), or be colonized and exploited by the dominant corporate forces within the mature economies (as we see with Shell Oil and Nigeria, or historically with the "banana republics" of Central and South America and Asia and, literally, the banana corporations).
Second, the way "infant" economies become "mature" economies is not via free trade. It never has been and never will be. Whether it be the mature economies of Britain (which began to seriously grow in the early 1600s), America (late 1700s), Japan (1800s), or Brazil (1900s), in every single case, worldwide, without exception, the economic strength and maturity of a nation came about as a result not of governments "standing aside" or "getting out of the way" but instead of direct government participation in and protection of the "infant" industries and economy.
UNDOING THE RIGHT WING ASSAULT
Right-wingers will expound on the glories of the free market the way Pavlov's dogs would salivate at the ringing of a bell. We've had essentially thirty years of right-wing economic policy in place, and the grim consequences are like a moon crater in our economy. The tide may be shifting. People may be starting to realize that the unregulated free market is like a pack of wolves ravaging the sheep. This article by Donald Cohen is at www.commondreams.org:
The 2008 presidential race is clear evidence that the cone of silence is lifting and the narrative shifting. Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are talking openly about the need for more active government.
In a recent NY Times interview Sen. Clinton spoke openly about the need for active government role in the economy to balance the excesses of the market. “If you go back and look at our history, we were most successful when we had that balance between an effective, vigorous government and a dynamic, appropriately regulated market” Clinton said. “And we have systematically diminished the role and responsibility of our government, and we have watched our market become imbalanced.”
She proclaimed: “I want to get back to the appropriate balance of power between government and market.”
Clinton’s remarks signal a return to the ideas of the great economic minds of the 20th century - the British economist John Maynard Keynes and his disciple, the American economist John Kenneth Galbraith - whose thinking shaped the New Deal and Great Society policy agenda. They recognized the need for countervailing power in market based economies. Now 30 some odd years after the right-wingers declared war on these ideas, the mainstream of the Democratic Party is speaking again of the limits of markets left alone.
Barack Obama too has articulated an agenda that make clear that the philosophical framework and place he comes from is all about the common good and reinvigorating a sense of national purpose. His calls for regulating the subprime industry, fair trade deals and investments in social and physical infrastructure represent a clear understanding of government’s role vis a vis the market.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
A LOOK AT THE REALITY OF THE FREE MARKET
We've been told that globalization is a truly marvelous thing. Opening up borders and allowing competition will produce nirvana. When we look around, though, we see our manufacturing sector almost gone, along with the good paying jobs that went with the manufacturing sector, and we see our balance of trade totally out of whack with countries like China. Elitists like Thomas Friedman smugly proclaim that the "world is flat" and that developing economies are now free to compete with established economies such as the United States and Britain. In this commentary Thom Hartmann reviews a book called BadSamaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism by Ha-Joon Chang. The commentary is at www.buzzflash.com:
There are two glaringly obvious flaws in the so-called "free trade" theories expounded by neoliberal philosophers like Friedrich Von Hayek and Milton Friedman, and promoted relentlessly in the popular press by (very wealthy) hucksters like Thomas Friedman.
First, "infant" economies - countries that are only beginning to get on their feet - cannot "compete" with "mature" economies. They really only have two choices - lose to their more mature competitors and stand on the hungry and cold outside of the world of trade (as we see with much of Africa), or be colonized and exploited by the dominant corporate forces within the mature economies (as we see with Shell Oil and Nigeria, or historically with the "banana republics" of Central and South America and Asia and, literally, the banana corporations).
Second, the way "infant" economies become "mature" economies is not via free trade. It never has been and never will be. Whether it be the mature economies of Britain (which began to seriously grow in the early 1600s), America (late 1700s), Japan (1800s), or Brazil (1900s), in every single case, worldwide, without exception, the economic strength and maturity of a nation came about as a result not of governments "standing aside" or "getting out of the way" but instead of direct government participation in and protection of the "infant" industries and economy.
UNDOING THE RIGHT WING ASSAULT
Right-wingers will expound on the glories of the free market the way Pavlov's dogs would salivate at the ringing of a bell. We've had essentially thirty years of right-wing economic policy in place, and the grim consequences are like a moon crater in our economy. The tide may be shifting. People may be starting to realize that the unregulated free market is like a pack of wolves ravaging the sheep. This article by Donald Cohen is at www.commondreams.org:
The 2008 presidential race is clear evidence that the cone of silence is lifting and the narrative shifting. Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are talking openly about the need for more active government.
In a recent NY Times interview Sen. Clinton spoke openly about the need for active government role in the economy to balance the excesses of the market. “If you go back and look at our history, we were most successful when we had that balance between an effective, vigorous government and a dynamic, appropriately regulated market” Clinton said. “And we have systematically diminished the role and responsibility of our government, and we have watched our market become imbalanced.”
She proclaimed: “I want to get back to the appropriate balance of power between government and market.”
Clinton’s remarks signal a return to the ideas of the great economic minds of the 20th century - the British economist John Maynard Keynes and his disciple, the American economist John Kenneth Galbraith - whose thinking shaped the New Deal and Great Society policy agenda. They recognized the need for countervailing power in market based economies. Now 30 some odd years after the right-wingers declared war on these ideas, the mainstream of the Democratic Party is speaking again of the limits of markets left alone.
Barack Obama too has articulated an agenda that make clear that the philosophical framework and place he comes from is all about the common good and reinvigorating a sense of national purpose. His calls for regulating the subprime industry, fair trade deals and investments in social and physical infrastructure represent a clear understanding of government’s role vis a vis the market.
Saturday, March 01, 2008
March 1, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
HERE IN FREEPER LAND
Fresno is the home of the disgusting and reactionary website freerepublic.com, so it's probably no surprise to see a host of right-wing letters to The Fresno Bee.
You see lots of letters calling everything under the sun "socialism." You get letters saying that global warming is not real; it's just a plot to destroy the United States economy. Despite all the evidence to the contrary, you'll see letters claiming that Bush's invasion of Iraq was justified.
Lately, what sets off right-wingers is criticism of their idol Rush Limbaugh. I've seen letters claiming that Limbaugh is a "good man." People who criticize Limbaugh are "name calling," or drinking the "liberal Kool Aid." It seems a strange complaint from people who routinely use racism, sexism, and smear campaigns against their opponents.
One correspondent claimed that Al Franken and hosts on Air America were vile, but offered no specifics, of course. The writer then wanted proof of Limbaugh's hatemongering. It wouldn't take an extensive Internet search to find countless examples of Limbaugh mocking the poor, making outright racist statements, deriding feminists as "Feminazis" and all the rest.
Yes, right-wingers can go into extreme outrage about criticism of Rush Limbaugh, but an administration that lied us into this quagmire in Iraq isn't a problem. They deny global warming because, after all, Rush says there's nothing to worry about. The destruction of our civil liberties isn't a problem because they don't have anything to hide. The mixture of Church and state is okay because the United States is supposedly a Christian nation. The inequality we see thanks to Republican policies is fine because you can't "punish the achievers." It goes on and on.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
HERE IN FREEPER LAND
Fresno is the home of the disgusting and reactionary website freerepublic.com, so it's probably no surprise to see a host of right-wing letters to The Fresno Bee.
You see lots of letters calling everything under the sun "socialism." You get letters saying that global warming is not real; it's just a plot to destroy the United States economy. Despite all the evidence to the contrary, you'll see letters claiming that Bush's invasion of Iraq was justified.
Lately, what sets off right-wingers is criticism of their idol Rush Limbaugh. I've seen letters claiming that Limbaugh is a "good man." People who criticize Limbaugh are "name calling," or drinking the "liberal Kool Aid." It seems a strange complaint from people who routinely use racism, sexism, and smear campaigns against their opponents.
One correspondent claimed that Al Franken and hosts on Air America were vile, but offered no specifics, of course. The writer then wanted proof of Limbaugh's hatemongering. It wouldn't take an extensive Internet search to find countless examples of Limbaugh mocking the poor, making outright racist statements, deriding feminists as "Feminazis" and all the rest.
Yes, right-wingers can go into extreme outrage about criticism of Rush Limbaugh, but an administration that lied us into this quagmire in Iraq isn't a problem. They deny global warming because, after all, Rush says there's nothing to worry about. The destruction of our civil liberties isn't a problem because they don't have anything to hide. The mixture of Church and state is okay because the United States is supposedly a Christian nation. The inequality we see thanks to Republican policies is fine because you can't "punish the achievers." It goes on and on.
Monday, February 25, 2008
February 25, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
TELL ME A FREE MARKET STORY
You wonder if conservatives tell traditional fairy tales like "Goldilocks and the Three Bears" or "Jack and the Beanstalk." Maybe they opt instead for the story of the free market. You let business run free from regulation and all is right and good in the world, according to that fairy tale. We see once again how lack of government regulation has led to the housing meltdown. You don't have to be an economist to see the absolute lunacy of people getting mortgages that were almost certain to go bad in a few years. This article by Martin Crutsinger is at www.sfgate.com:
Sales of existing homes fell for the sixth straight month in January, dropping to the slowest sales pace on record. Median home prices were also down and many analysts predicted further price declines in the months ahead given high levels of unsold homes.
The National Association of Realtors said Monday that sales of single-family homes and condominiums dropped by 0.4 percent last month to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 4.89 million units. That was the slowest sales pace, going back to 1999, and was seen as evidence that the steepest slump in housing in a quarter-century has yet to hit bottom.
The median price of a home sold in January slid to $201,100, a drop of 4.6 percent from a year ago. Particularly alarming, analysts said, was the fact that the inventory of unsold homes jumped to a 10.3 months' supply, meaning it would take that long to sell the 4.19 million homes on the market at the January sales pace.
That was up from 9.7 months in December and just below a two-decade high of 10.5 months hit in October. During the peak of the housing boom in 2005, the supply of homes relative to sales stood at 4.5 months.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
TELL ME A FREE MARKET STORY
You wonder if conservatives tell traditional fairy tales like "Goldilocks and the Three Bears" or "Jack and the Beanstalk." Maybe they opt instead for the story of the free market. You let business run free from regulation and all is right and good in the world, according to that fairy tale. We see once again how lack of government regulation has led to the housing meltdown. You don't have to be an economist to see the absolute lunacy of people getting mortgages that were almost certain to go bad in a few years. This article by Martin Crutsinger is at www.sfgate.com:
Sales of existing homes fell for the sixth straight month in January, dropping to the slowest sales pace on record. Median home prices were also down and many analysts predicted further price declines in the months ahead given high levels of unsold homes.
The National Association of Realtors said Monday that sales of single-family homes and condominiums dropped by 0.4 percent last month to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 4.89 million units. That was the slowest sales pace, going back to 1999, and was seen as evidence that the steepest slump in housing in a quarter-century has yet to hit bottom.
The median price of a home sold in January slid to $201,100, a drop of 4.6 percent from a year ago. Particularly alarming, analysts said, was the fact that the inventory of unsold homes jumped to a 10.3 months' supply, meaning it would take that long to sell the 4.19 million homes on the market at the January sales pace.
That was up from 9.7 months in December and just below a two-decade high of 10.5 months hit in October. During the peak of the housing boom in 2005, the supply of homes relative to sales stood at 4.5 months.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
February 24, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
LEARN YOUR CLICHES
I was thinking about the great movie "Bull Durham." Veteran catcher Crash Davis is charged with preparing a rookie pitching sensation for "the Show" in the major leagues. Crash advises the young pitcher to "learn your cliches." It seems to me that right-wingers adopt that same philosophy. Any time negative information emerges about Republicans we can expect the old canard about the "liberal media."
That cliche was on display this week from the likes of Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh. Limbaugh claimed that a story such as the one about McCain's meetings with a female lobbyist would never be published about Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. It seems to me The Times published all kinds of stories about the non-existent Whitewater scandal and that Monica dominated the media almost 24/7 in the late 1990's. The media are only believable, in right-wing land, when they furnish ammunition against politicians who aren't to the right of Mussolini.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
LEARN YOUR CLICHES
I was thinking about the great movie "Bull Durham." Veteran catcher Crash Davis is charged with preparing a rookie pitching sensation for "the Show" in the major leagues. Crash advises the young pitcher to "learn your cliches." It seems to me that right-wingers adopt that same philosophy. Any time negative information emerges about Republicans we can expect the old canard about the "liberal media."
That cliche was on display this week from the likes of Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh. Limbaugh claimed that a story such as the one about McCain's meetings with a female lobbyist would never be published about Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. It seems to me The Times published all kinds of stories about the non-existent Whitewater scandal and that Monica dominated the media almost 24/7 in the late 1990's. The media are only believable, in right-wing land, when they furnish ammunition against politicians who aren't to the right of Mussolini.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
February 23, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
MCCAIN AND "INTEGRITY"
Senator John McCain, presumptive GOP presidential nominee, has advertised himself as a straight talker, ethical, and a man of integrity. His record belies that claim. McCain has been heavily involved with lobbyists. This story by Robert Parry is at www.consortiumnews.com:
John McCain must hope that Americans won’t read the entire New York Times story about his friendship with a female lobbyist, because if they do, they’ll realize that his statement - that he “has never violated the public trust, never done favors for special interests or lobbyists” - simply isn’t true.
Though the article focuses on the friendship between the 71-year-old Arizona senator and Vicky Iseman, an attractive 40-year-old lobbyist for telecommunications companies, it also recounts McCain’s complicated history as both a violator of congressional ethics and a champion for ethics reform.
WINGERS MAY REAP WHAT THEY HAVE SOWN
The New Deal reforms passed under the administrations of FDR and Harry Truman and expanded under presidents Kennedy and Johnson ushered in the most prosperous time in American history. Since 1972 things have been going in reverse. We've gone into full throttle reverse during the administration of George W. Bush. Growing inequality, growing government corruption, and a lack of faith in the political and economic systems have set the stage for major upheavals. This article by Sara Robinson is at www.alternet.org:
And here we are again: Conservative policies have opened the wealth gap to Depression levels; put workers at the total mercy of their employers; and deprived the working and middle classes of access to education, home ownership, health care, capital, legal redress, and their expectations of a better future for their kids.
You can only get away with blaming this on gays and Mexicans for so long before people get wise to the game. And as the primaries are making clear: Americans are getting wise.Our current plutocratic nobility may soon face the same stark choice its English, French, and Russian predecessors did. They can keep their heads and take proactive steps to close the gap between themselves and the common folk (choosing evolution over revolution, as JFK counsels above). Or they can keep insisting stubbornly on their elite prerogatives, until that gap widens to the point where the revolution comes -- and they will lose their heads entirely.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
MCCAIN AND "INTEGRITY"
Senator John McCain, presumptive GOP presidential nominee, has advertised himself as a straight talker, ethical, and a man of integrity. His record belies that claim. McCain has been heavily involved with lobbyists. This story by Robert Parry is at www.consortiumnews.com:
John McCain must hope that Americans won’t read the entire New York Times story about his friendship with a female lobbyist, because if they do, they’ll realize that his statement - that he “has never violated the public trust, never done favors for special interests or lobbyists” - simply isn’t true.
Though the article focuses on the friendship between the 71-year-old Arizona senator and Vicky Iseman, an attractive 40-year-old lobbyist for telecommunications companies, it also recounts McCain’s complicated history as both a violator of congressional ethics and a champion for ethics reform.
WINGERS MAY REAP WHAT THEY HAVE SOWN
The New Deal reforms passed under the administrations of FDR and Harry Truman and expanded under presidents Kennedy and Johnson ushered in the most prosperous time in American history. Since 1972 things have been going in reverse. We've gone into full throttle reverse during the administration of George W. Bush. Growing inequality, growing government corruption, and a lack of faith in the political and economic systems have set the stage for major upheavals. This article by Sara Robinson is at www.alternet.org:
And here we are again: Conservative policies have opened the wealth gap to Depression levels; put workers at the total mercy of their employers; and deprived the working and middle classes of access to education, home ownership, health care, capital, legal redress, and their expectations of a better future for their kids.
You can only get away with blaming this on gays and Mexicans for so long before people get wise to the game. And as the primaries are making clear: Americans are getting wise.Our current plutocratic nobility may soon face the same stark choice its English, French, and Russian predecessors did. They can keep their heads and take proactive steps to close the gap between themselves and the common folk (choosing evolution over revolution, as JFK counsels above). Or they can keep insisting stubbornly on their elite prerogatives, until that gap widens to the point where the revolution comes -- and they will lose their heads entirely.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
February 21, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
MCCAIN: NOT STRAIGHT TALK
Mr. "Straight Talk" has advertised himself as an opponent of money from special interests, but his entire Congressional career has been heavily influenced by special interest money. This article by Edward T. Pound is at www.usnews.com:
McCain has positioned himself as a die-hard opponent of special-interest influence. But a U.S. News analysis of his 25-year legislative career shows he has been an avid seeker of special-interest money to support his campaigns and initiatives. The pattern goes all the way back to his first House race in 1982. Moreover, as the boss or No. 2 member of the Senate Commerce Committee, he has drawn heavy support from pacs and individuals associated with industries overseen by that committee—especially telecommunications, media, and technology firms.
Between 1997 and June 2006, he collected nearly $2.6 million from such interests, according to the Center for Public Integrity, an independent watchdog group in Washington. In some cases, the review showed, McCain's positions mirrored those of his biggest supporters.
Big corporate donors also have given hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Reform Institute, a tax-exempt organization—once closely affiliated with McCain—that was established to promote campaign finance reform.
CONTRACTORS LOVE THE IRAQ WAR
While American military men and women get wounded or die in Iraq military contractors are doing very well by ripping off American taxpayers. As I've said before, there's nothing lower than a war profiteer, someone who makes money from death and destruction and misery. This war isn't about fighting terrorism or bringing democracy to the Middle East. It's about enriching filthy war profiteers and establishing U. S. control over the oil reserves. This article by David Jackson and Jason Grotto is at www.chicagotribune.com:
Inside the stout federal courthouse of this Mississippi River town, the dirty secrets of Iraq war profiteering keep pouring out.
Hundreds of pages of recently unsealed court records detail how kickbacks shaped the war's largest troop support contract months before the first wave of U.S. soldiers plunged their boots into Iraqi sand.
The graft continued well beyond the 2004 congressional hearings that first called attention to it. And the massive fraud endangered the health of American soldiers even as it lined contractors' pockets, records show.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
MCCAIN: NOT STRAIGHT TALK
Mr. "Straight Talk" has advertised himself as an opponent of money from special interests, but his entire Congressional career has been heavily influenced by special interest money. This article by Edward T. Pound is at www.usnews.com:
McCain has positioned himself as a die-hard opponent of special-interest influence. But a U.S. News analysis of his 25-year legislative career shows he has been an avid seeker of special-interest money to support his campaigns and initiatives. The pattern goes all the way back to his first House race in 1982. Moreover, as the boss or No. 2 member of the Senate Commerce Committee, he has drawn heavy support from pacs and individuals associated with industries overseen by that committee—especially telecommunications, media, and technology firms.
Between 1997 and June 2006, he collected nearly $2.6 million from such interests, according to the Center for Public Integrity, an independent watchdog group in Washington. In some cases, the review showed, McCain's positions mirrored those of his biggest supporters.
Big corporate donors also have given hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Reform Institute, a tax-exempt organization—once closely affiliated with McCain—that was established to promote campaign finance reform.
CONTRACTORS LOVE THE IRAQ WAR
While American military men and women get wounded or die in Iraq military contractors are doing very well by ripping off American taxpayers. As I've said before, there's nothing lower than a war profiteer, someone who makes money from death and destruction and misery. This war isn't about fighting terrorism or bringing democracy to the Middle East. It's about enriching filthy war profiteers and establishing U. S. control over the oil reserves. This article by David Jackson and Jason Grotto is at www.chicagotribune.com:
Inside the stout federal courthouse of this Mississippi River town, the dirty secrets of Iraq war profiteering keep pouring out.
Hundreds of pages of recently unsealed court records detail how kickbacks shaped the war's largest troop support contract months before the first wave of U.S. soldiers plunged their boots into Iraqi sand.
The graft continued well beyond the 2004 congressional hearings that first called attention to it. And the massive fraud endangered the health of American soldiers even as it lined contractors' pockets, records show.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
February 20, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE CONSTITUTION BUSH STYLE
I'm not expect in Constitutional law, but I wonder how many Constitutional scholars ever seriously considered the concepts of the "unitary executive," signing statements, or preemptive wars without Declarations of War before George W. Bush slithered into the White House. This is a rewording of the Constitution as it stands under Bush. The article by David Swanson is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
We the people of the Homeland, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, kill the terrorists, lock up the immigrants, and honor our Commander in Chief, do promise to vote, and shop, and watch the television news sometimes, and definitely to vote. Details follow.
Article I
Section 1. All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Unitary Executive of the United States, attended by a royal court which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
Section 2. The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the private election corporations hired by the several states. There shall be no election day, but rather an Election Year, thus limiting the work of members to the odd-numbers years of Our Lord.
No person shall be a Representative who shall not profess absolute loyalty to either the Republican or Democrat Party, or both, and God.
BUSH HAS WEAKENED THE MILITARY
If the intent of Bush's adventure in Iraq was to make us more secure, Bush has been a major failure. After years of an unnecessary war in Iraq, our treasury has been depleted and our military has been weakened, much in the way our military suffered from the Vietnam war. We're hearing arguments now similar to the ones we heard about Vietnam. Withdrawal from Iraq would be a calamity, we're told, just as we were told that Southeast Asia would fall to the Communists and represent a dire threat to our security. This article is at theboard.blogs.nytimes.com:
Two Washington-based think tanks, the Center for a New American Security and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, through its Foreign Policy magazine, have done the nation a huge service by surveying more than 3,400 current and former military officers, one of the few comprehensive polls of this segment of the population in the last 50 years.
Here are some results from the survey, which is being released today:
* 60 percent of the officers surveyed say the military is weaker today than five years ago, largely because of Iraq, Afghanistan and the punishing rate of troop deployments.
* More than half say the military is weaker than it was 10 or 15 years ago.
* Some 88 percent say the demands of the Iraq war have stretched the military “dangerously thin.”
* The officers rate their confidence in Mr. Bush — who was hugely popular with the military in the 2000 election — at a mere 5.5 on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the best.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE CONSTITUTION BUSH STYLE
I'm not expect in Constitutional law, but I wonder how many Constitutional scholars ever seriously considered the concepts of the "unitary executive," signing statements, or preemptive wars without Declarations of War before George W. Bush slithered into the White House. This is a rewording of the Constitution as it stands under Bush. The article by David Swanson is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
We the people of the Homeland, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, kill the terrorists, lock up the immigrants, and honor our Commander in Chief, do promise to vote, and shop, and watch the television news sometimes, and definitely to vote. Details follow.
Article I
Section 1. All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Unitary Executive of the United States, attended by a royal court which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
Section 2. The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the private election corporations hired by the several states. There shall be no election day, but rather an Election Year, thus limiting the work of members to the odd-numbers years of Our Lord.
No person shall be a Representative who shall not profess absolute loyalty to either the Republican or Democrat Party, or both, and God.
BUSH HAS WEAKENED THE MILITARY
If the intent of Bush's adventure in Iraq was to make us more secure, Bush has been a major failure. After years of an unnecessary war in Iraq, our treasury has been depleted and our military has been weakened, much in the way our military suffered from the Vietnam war. We're hearing arguments now similar to the ones we heard about Vietnam. Withdrawal from Iraq would be a calamity, we're told, just as we were told that Southeast Asia would fall to the Communists and represent a dire threat to our security. This article is at theboard.blogs.nytimes.com:
Two Washington-based think tanks, the Center for a New American Security and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, through its Foreign Policy magazine, have done the nation a huge service by surveying more than 3,400 current and former military officers, one of the few comprehensive polls of this segment of the population in the last 50 years.
Here are some results from the survey, which is being released today:
* 60 percent of the officers surveyed say the military is weaker today than five years ago, largely because of Iraq, Afghanistan and the punishing rate of troop deployments.
* More than half say the military is weaker than it was 10 or 15 years ago.
* Some 88 percent say the demands of the Iraq war have stretched the military “dangerously thin.”
* The officers rate their confidence in Mr. Bush — who was hugely popular with the military in the 2000 election — at a mere 5.5 on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the best.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
February 19, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE SINGLE LIFE
To hear conservatives tell it, the nuclear family consisting of the working husband, the stay at home wife, and two children is the way things were meant to be. Former Vice President Dan Quayle made a big thing about "family values," which became a staple of Republican rhetoric. To be single, especially by choice, is a terrible thing to such people. The nuclear family is supposed to offer societal stability, whereas we singles are a threat of some kind. Laws, including tax laws, are designed to discriminate against single people. This article by Bella M. DePaulo is at www.alternet.org:
I'm fifty-four years old and I have always been single. I love my single life. But for a long time I rarely said that out loud. I thought I was the only happy single person.
I didn't love everything about my single life. I didn't like that "poor thing" look I'd get when others first learned that I was single. I didn't like their assumption that I must be miserable and lonely and pining for a partner.
There were other things I didn't like that I thought I could pin on my single status, but I wasn't really sure. For example, sometimes at work colleagues with partners would assume that I could cover the tasks that no one else wanted. Maybe they presumed that since I was single, I didn't have a life and so had nothing better to do with my time. Socially, I was invited to lunch with my coupled colleagues during the week but not to their dinner and movie outings over the weekends.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE SINGLE LIFE
To hear conservatives tell it, the nuclear family consisting of the working husband, the stay at home wife, and two children is the way things were meant to be. Former Vice President Dan Quayle made a big thing about "family values," which became a staple of Republican rhetoric. To be single, especially by choice, is a terrible thing to such people. The nuclear family is supposed to offer societal stability, whereas we singles are a threat of some kind. Laws, including tax laws, are designed to discriminate against single people. This article by Bella M. DePaulo is at www.alternet.org:
I'm fifty-four years old and I have always been single. I love my single life. But for a long time I rarely said that out loud. I thought I was the only happy single person.
I didn't love everything about my single life. I didn't like that "poor thing" look I'd get when others first learned that I was single. I didn't like their assumption that I must be miserable and lonely and pining for a partner.
There were other things I didn't like that I thought I could pin on my single status, but I wasn't really sure. For example, sometimes at work colleagues with partners would assume that I could cover the tasks that no one else wanted. Maybe they presumed that since I was single, I didn't have a life and so had nothing better to do with my time. Socially, I was invited to lunch with my coupled colleagues during the week but not to their dinner and movie outings over the weekends.
Friday, February 15, 2008
February 15, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
REPREHENSIBLE BUSH
George W. Bush has no sense of shame, so maybe it's no surprise he took one of the worst moments in our history and used it for political advantage. September 11 was not a time for reflection, or sadness, for Bush. It was an excuse to lie us into a war with Iraq. It was an excuse to shred the Bill of Rights. It was an excuse to ram through tax cuts for his rich friends and dole our tax payer money to war profiteers. He has been shameless about weakening our military, about getting thousands of men and women in our military killed or wounded, and killing hundreds of thousands of civilians. He has been shameless about torture. This article is at www.lastchancedemocracycafe.com:
“American citizens must understand, clearly understand that there’s still a threat on the homeland. There’s still an enemy which would like to do us harm,” Bush said. “We’ve got to give our professionals the tools they need, to be able to figure out what the enemy is up to so we can stop it.”
“By blocking this piece of legislation, our country is more in danger of an attack,” he said.
Every word of this is a lie, of course. Delaying (or even withholding altogether) adoption of the FISA legislation won’t put America at risk. US intelligence agencies have all of the authority they need to conduct necessary surveillance without the statute. And as others have noted, even if there were some increased risk, the blame would rest squarely on Bush’s shoulders for holding the bill hostage to his demands for retroactive immunity for the telecommunications companies.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
REPREHENSIBLE BUSH
George W. Bush has no sense of shame, so maybe it's no surprise he took one of the worst moments in our history and used it for political advantage. September 11 was not a time for reflection, or sadness, for Bush. It was an excuse to lie us into a war with Iraq. It was an excuse to shred the Bill of Rights. It was an excuse to ram through tax cuts for his rich friends and dole our tax payer money to war profiteers. He has been shameless about weakening our military, about getting thousands of men and women in our military killed or wounded, and killing hundreds of thousands of civilians. He has been shameless about torture. This article is at www.lastchancedemocracycafe.com:
“American citizens must understand, clearly understand that there’s still a threat on the homeland. There’s still an enemy which would like to do us harm,” Bush said. “We’ve got to give our professionals the tools they need, to be able to figure out what the enemy is up to so we can stop it.”
“By blocking this piece of legislation, our country is more in danger of an attack,” he said.
Every word of this is a lie, of course
Monday, February 11, 2008
February 11, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
CONSERVATISM IS A CANCER
Let's not equivocate. Conservatism is a rotten political philosophy that puts the interests of the few above the interests of the many. It's a philosophy that finds rationales for hating people who are different, whether they be gay, African-American, or some other minority. It's a philosophy that puts short-term profits above the long-term interests of the country and the planet. It's a philosophy that seeks to call superstition science and that constantly seeks to revise history because history is not to its liking. This article by Alicia Morgan is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
Bush is the symptom; conservatism is the disease.
Even as liberals debate conservatives, we cede them the ‘rightness’ of their basic tenets, which I think is a mistake. I hope to show that conservatism – both social and economic – is detrimental to a democratic society. By ‘conservatism’ I do not mean prudence and moderation - which is what many people take conservatism to mean – but the political and social meaning which includes the myth of the ‘free market’, the elimination of as much regulation and taxes as can be gotten away with, the myth that privatization is the best way to deal with society’s needs, and that government is in itself a bad thing. The (usually) unspoken corollary to this is the ‘Conservative Golden Rule’ – he who has the gold makes the rules. In other words, the people with money and power are the best and most deserving – simply because they have the money and power! This is a strongly-held belief of many people, but it is not acceptable to say in so many words, so there are many euphemisms to describe it - ‘meritocracy’, ‘pulling yourself up by your bootstraps’, ‘reverse discrimination’, and so on. Conservatism’s message is connected to some very powerful societal myths that resonate deeply in the subconscious mind, making it easier to believe in the myths than the facts.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
CONSERVATISM IS A CANCER
Let's not equivocate. Conservatism is a rotten political philosophy that puts the interests of the few above the interests of the many. It's a philosophy that finds rationales for hating people who are different, whether they be gay, African-American, or some other minority. It's a philosophy that puts short-term profits above the long-term interests of the country and the planet. It's a philosophy that seeks to call superstition science and that constantly seeks to revise history because history is not to its liking. This article by Alicia Morgan is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
Bush is the symptom; conservatism is the disease.
Even as liberals debate conservatives, we cede them the ‘rightness’ of their basic tenets, which I think is a mistake. I hope to show that conservatism – both social and economic – is detrimental to a democratic society. By ‘conservatism’ I do not mean prudence and moderation - which is what many people take conservatism to mean – but the political and social meaning which includes the myth of the ‘free market’, the elimination of as much regulation and taxes as can be gotten away with, the myth that privatization is the best way to deal with society’s needs, and that government is in itself a bad thing. The (usually) unspoken corollary to this is the ‘Conservative Golden Rule’ – he who has the gold makes the rules. In other words, the people with money and power are the best and most deserving – simply because they have the money and power! This is a strongly-held belief of many people, but it is not acceptable to say in so many words, so there are many euphemisms to describe it - ‘meritocracy’, ‘pulling yourself up by your bootstraps’, ‘reverse discrimination’, and so on. Conservatism’s message is connected to some very powerful societal myths that resonate deeply in the subconscious mind, making it easier to believe in the myths than the facts.
Saturday, February 09, 2008
February 09, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE BEST STIMULUS PACKAGE
The chickens are coming home to roost again thanks to right wing economics. The economy has slowed almost to a stall and even retailers like Wal-Mart are concerned. People are redeeming gift cards for necessities. Congress has just passed an economic "stimulus" package to pump money into the economy, but the stimulus is likely to be a temporary fix. The best stimulus of all is to get rid of right wing economic policies. Let's do some basic things like raise the minimum wage. Let's get universal health care insurance. Let's stop these insane trade policies that export good paying jobs to other countries. Let's reverse Bush's tax cuts for the rich. Let's have a full throttled move to stop the use of fossil fuels and have a planet-friendly energy policy. This article by the Associated Press is at www.usatoday.com:
While consumers have had to contend with rising gas and food prices and a slumping housing market, there are signs that the job market is becoming a concern as well. On Friday, the Labor Department reported that U.S. employers sliced payrolls by 17,000, the first decline in more than four years. And on Thursday, the department said jobless claims fell last week by 22,000 , but the decline was smaller than expected.
"In this environment, simply cutting back on hiring will not be enough for companies to maintain earnings as demand slows; jobs will have to be cut too," said Ian Shepherdson, chief U.S. economist for High Frequency Economics in Valhalla, N.Y.
And while investors are hoping the Federal Reserve can avert a recession with a series of rate cuts, some economists say the moves may be too little, too late. Analysts also say that while the government's proposed economic stimulus package, which offers rebate checks for more than 100 million Americans, could help reignite spending, the lift would only be temporary.
As Perkins said, if the job market continues to deteriorate, "all bets are off."
Janet Hoffman, managing partner of the North American retail division of the consulting firm Accenture, agreed, noting she expects "some relief" but nothing "radical."
MIDDLE CLASS NO LONGER COPING
The most prosperous time in American history was from the end of the Second World War to about 1970 Since then, working class Americans have been losing ground. People have tried various coping mechanisms to compensate for the failure of wages to keep up. First, women entered the workforce in droves to provide a second income. In the 1990's people took out home equity loans because housing prices were rising and gave them enough equity to borrow against. Now, with the subprime mortgage disaster that option is no longer available. Then people began using credit to keep up. Credit is drying up now. This article by Robert Reich is at www.truthoutorg:
The fact is, middle-class families have exhausted the coping mechanisms they have used for more than three decades to get by on median wages that are barely higher than they were in 1970, adjusted for inflation. Male wages today are in fact lower than they were then: the income of a young man in his 30s is now 12 per cent below that of a man his age three decades ago. Yet for years now, America's middle class has lived beyond its pay cheque. Middle-class lifestyles have flourished even though median wages have barely budged. That is ending and Americans are beginning to feel the consequences.
The first coping mechanism was moving more women into paid work. The percentage of American working mothers with school-age children has almost doubled since 1970 - from 38 per cent to close to 70 per cent. Some parents are now even doing 24-hour shifts, one on child duty while the other works. These families are known as Dins: double income, no sex.
But we reached the limit to how many mothers could maintain paying jobs. What to do? We turned to a second coping mechanism. When families could not paddle any harder, they started paddling longer. The typical American now works two weeks more each year than 30 years ago. Compared with any other advanced nation we are veritable workaholics, putting in 350 more hours a year than the average European, more even than the notoriously industrious Japanese.
But there is also a limit to how long we can work. As the tide of economic necessity continued to rise, we turned to the third coping mechanism. We began to borrow, big time. With housing prices rising briskly through the 1990s and even faster between 2002 and 2006, we turned our homes into piggy banks through home equity loans. Americans got nearly $250bn worth of home equity every quarter in second mortgages and refinancings. That is nearly 10 per cent of disposable income. With credit cards raining down like manna, we bought plasma television sets, new appliances, vacations.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
THE BEST STIMULUS PACKAGE
The chickens are coming home to roost again thanks to right wing economics. The economy has slowed almost to a stall and even retailers like Wal-Mart are concerned. People are redeeming gift cards for necessities. Congress has just passed an economic "stimulus" package to pump money into the economy, but the stimulus is likely to be a temporary fix. The best stimulus of all is to get rid of right wing economic policies. Let's do some basic things like raise the minimum wage. Let's get universal health care insurance. Let's stop these insane trade policies that export good paying jobs to other countries. Let's reverse Bush's tax cuts for the rich. Let's have a full throttled move to stop the use of fossil fuels and have a planet-friendly energy policy. This article by the Associated Press is at www.usatoday.com:
While consumers have had to contend with rising gas and food prices and a slumping housing market, there are signs that the job market is becoming a concern as well. On Friday, the Labor Department reported that U.S. employers sliced payrolls by 17,000
"In this environment, simply cutting back on hiring will not be enough for companies to maintain earnings as demand slows; jobs will have to be cut too," said Ian Shepherdson, chief U.S. economist for High Frequency Economics in Valhalla, N.Y.
And while investors are hoping the Federal Reserve can avert a recession with a series of rate cuts, some economists say the moves may be too little, too late. Analysts also say that while the government's proposed economic stimulus package, which offers rebate checks for more than 100 million Americans, could help reignite spending, the lift would only be temporary.
As Perkins said, if the job market continues to deteriorate, "all bets are off."
Janet Hoffman, managing partner of the North American retail division of the consulting firm Accenture, agreed, noting she expects "some relief" but nothing "radical."
MIDDLE CLASS NO LONGER COPING
The most prosperous time in American history was from the end of the Second World War to about 1970 Since then, working class Americans have been losing ground. People have tried various coping mechanisms to compensate for the failure of wages to keep up. First, women entered the workforce in droves to provide a second income. In the 1990's people took out home equity loans because housing prices were rising and gave them enough equity to borrow against. Now, with the subprime mortgage disaster that option is no longer available. Then people began using credit to keep up. Credit is drying up now. This article by Robert Reich is at www.truthoutorg:
The fact is, middle-class families have exhausted the coping mechanisms they have used for more than three decades to get by on median wages that are barely higher than they were in 1970, adjusted for inflation. Male wages today are in fact lower than they were then: the income of a young man in his 30s is now 12 per cent below that of a man his age three decades ago. Yet for years now, America's middle class has lived beyond its pay cheque. Middle-class lifestyles have flourished even though median wages have barely budged. That is ending and Americans are beginning to feel the consequences.
The first coping mechanism was moving more women into paid work. The percentage of American working mothers with school-age children has almost doubled since 1970 - from 38 per cent to close to 70 per cent. Some parents are now even doing 24-hour shifts, one on child duty while the other works. These families are known as Dins: double income, no sex.
But we reached the limit to how many mothers could maintain paying jobs. What to do? We turned to a second coping mechanism. When families could not paddle any harder, they started paddling longer. The typical American now works two weeks more each year than 30 years ago. Compared with any other advanced nation we are veritable workaholics, putting in 350 more hours a year than the average European, more even than the notoriously industrious Japanese.
But there is also a limit to how long we can work. As the tide of economic necessity continued to rise, we turned to the third coping mechanism. We began to borrow, big time. With housing prices rising briskly through the 1990s and even faster between 2002 and 2006, we turned our homes into piggy banks through home equity loans. Americans got nearly $250bn worth of home equity every quarter in second mortgages and refinancings. That is nearly 10 per cent of disposable income. With credit cards raining down like manna, we bought plasma television sets, new appliances, vacations.
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
February 05, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
A "WAL-MART" ECONOMY DOESN'T WORK
Wal-Mart has probably been the model for greedy capitalists everywhere. Keep those wages low! Keep unions out! Don't provide any benefits to your employees! But a Wal-Mart style economy is catching up even with Wal-Mart. As more and more of us slide out of the middle class, we don't have the means to buy the things that keep the economy moving. We of the working class have been subsidizing the wealthy for years with low wages and high productivity, but things are changing. This article by Barbara Ehrenreich is at www.commondreams.org:
Consider how we got into the current credit crisis in the first place, through defaults on subprime mortgages. These went to plenty of affluent folks and have wreaked havoc in gated communities. But overall, subprime loans were designed for, and snapped up by, the poor. According to a recent study from United for a Fair Economy, 55 percent of subprime loans went to African Americans and 17 percent to whites. Among whites, they went far more frequently to low-income people than to the wealthy — 39 percent compared with 24 percent. Hence the subprime industry’s noble boasts about providing the opportunity for home ownership to people who might otherwise have been excluded from it.
And why were so many Americans poor enough to turn to subprime mortgages and other dodgy credit schemes? The chief reasons are low wages and job insecurity. Chronically low wages afflict about 25 to 30 percent of the population — more than twice the 12 percent the federal government counts as “poor.” And even earnings in the six-figure range can be canceled overnight when an employer downsizes or outsources, leaving a family without income or health insurance.
For years now, we’ve had a solution, or at least a substitute, for low wages and unreliable jobs: easy credit. Payday loans, rent-to-buy furniture and exorbitant credit card interest rates for the poor were just the beginning. In its May cover story on “The Poverty Business,” BusinessWeek documented the stampede to lend money to the people who could least afford to pay the interest on it: Buy your dream home! Refinance your house! Financiamos a todos! It wasn’t just the bottom-feeders that joined the unseemly frenzy to lend to the poor; big companies, such as Wells Fargo and Countrywide Financial , plunged right in. But somehow, no one bothered to figure out where the poor were going to get the money to pay for all the money they were borrowing.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
A "WAL-MART" ECONOMY DOESN'T WORK
Wal-Mart has probably been the model for greedy capitalists everywhere. Keep those wages low! Keep unions out! Don't provide any benefits to your employees! But a Wal-Mart style economy is catching up even with Wal-Mart. As more and more of us slide out of the middle class, we don't have the means to buy the things that keep the economy moving. We of the working class have been subsidizing the wealthy for years with low wages and high productivity, but things are changing. This article by Barbara Ehrenreich is at www.commondreams.org:
Consider how we got into the current credit crisis in the first place, through defaults on subprime mortgages. These went to plenty of affluent folks and have wreaked havoc in gated communities. But overall, subprime loans were designed for, and snapped up by, the poor. According to a recent study from United for a Fair Economy, 55 percent of subprime loans went to African Americans and 17 percent to whites. Among whites, they went far more frequently to low-income people than to the wealthy — 39 percent compared with 24 percent. Hence the subprime industry’s noble boasts about providing the opportunity for home ownership to people who might otherwise have been excluded from it.
And why were so many Americans poor enough to turn to subprime mortgages and other dodgy credit schemes? The chief reasons are low wages and job insecurity. Chronically low wages afflict about 25 to 30 percent of the population — more than twice the 12 percent the federal government counts as “poor.” And even earnings in the six-figure range can be canceled overnight when an employer downsizes or outsources, leaving a family without income or health insurance.
For years now, we’ve had a solution, or at least a substitute, for low wages and unreliable jobs: easy credit. Payday loans, rent-to-buy furniture and exorbitant credit card interest rates for the poor were just the beginning. In its May cover story on “The Poverty Business,” BusinessWeek
Friday, February 01, 2008
February 01, 2008
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH LEAVING A MESS
George W. Bush is the personification of the Peter Principle. It says that people rise to the level of their incompetence. Bush probably did that long before he stole the White House. If not born into privilege, Bush would be lucky to run a mini-mart somewhere. He will leave a bloody quagmire in Iraq, hatred around the world for the United States, massive environmental issues unaddressed, and gargantuan deficits. This article by Helen Thomas is at www.commondreams.org:
Bush is going out with a whimper, and leaving a stash of unfinished business.
Of course, you wouldn’t have known it from the boisterous welcome he received Monday night from star-struck members of Congress. Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle fell all over themselves to shake his hand and get his autograph.
He delivered his remarks in a defiant manner — sometimes dripping with sarcasm — such as his comments during Congress to make his tax cuts permanent.
“Others have said they would be personally happy to pay higher taxes,” he said with a smile. “I welcome their enthusiasm, and I am pleased to report that the IRS accepts both checks and money orders.”He was rewarded for that jibe with a big laugh from the crowd.
Bush, who once styled himself a “compassionate conservative,” did not tell the nation he is leaving behind a $9 trillion national debt — something for future generations to deal with.
IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
BUSH LEAVING A MESS
George W. Bush is the personification of the Peter Principle. It says that people rise to the level of their incompetence. Bush probably did that long before he stole the White House. If not born into privilege, Bush would be lucky to run a mini-mart somewhere. He will leave a bloody quagmire in Iraq, hatred around the world for the United States, massive environmental issues unaddressed, and gargantuan deficits. This article by Helen Thomas is at www.commondreams.org:
Bush is going out with a whimper, and leaving a stash of unfinished business.
Of course, you wouldn’t have known it from the boisterous welcome he received Monday night from star-struck members of Congress. Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle fell all over themselves to shake his hand and get his autograph.
He delivered his remarks in a defiant manner — sometimes dripping with sarcasm — such as his comments during Congress to make his tax cuts permanent.
“Others have said they would be personally happy to pay higher taxes,” he said with a smile. “I welcome their enthusiasm, and I am pleased to report that the IRS accepts both checks and money orders.”He was rewarded for that jibe with a big laugh from the crowd.
Bush, who once styled himself a “compassionate conservative,” did not tell the nation he is leaving behind a $9 trillion national debt — something for future generations to deal with.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)