Ex-president Manuel Zelaya, known as "Mel" in Honduras and as "Commander Cowboy" by cohort Chavez. Supporters of Mel are the US "left," Hugo Chavez, Daniel Ortega, Evo Morales, the UN General Assembly, Secretary Clinton, and the Castro brothers, etc.
Zelaya, a wealthy landowner/businessman and rancher from Olancho is a latino Dubya. Like Dubya, Mel's daddy, Manuel Sr., was also politically, shall we say involved, and supportive of the military's la Talanquera" massacre in the 1970s.
Commander Cowboy's ouster is said to be over the issue of tweaking or drafting a new constitution. That is what most "leftist" presidents do once in office (see Hugo). The US "left," and others, justify Mel's action as necessary because the Honduran constitution was written in 1982 - when Ronnie Reagan was US president. On the surface, that's ill-logic, but the intent is to say any constitution written when a republican was US president must be bad because the Hondurans were writing only to please their US oppressors.
Not really, but for "left" sheeple it somehow "connects the dots" - what the "left" really means is those poor foreign brown folks can only run their country correctly when they want what the "left" wants.
In the US or Latin America, or anywhere - the best way to get elected is to convince the voters you "cares about the poor." Some day maybe enough folks at the same time will realize it's not a question of left or right - but of which self-serving bonehead will rule us next, and hopefully not rule us for 50 years as in the left's best friend, Senor Castro.
Nicaragua in the 1980s, one among many, used the US constitution as a guideline when writing their constitution for a pluralistic representative democracy. So, while the US "left" has ranted for years about BushCo's abuse of their beloved Constitution - the same constitutional guidelines are not good enough for others? Go figure.
Zelaya's ploy to rewrite the constitution is illegal and represents high treason according to the Honduran constitution. I'm certain the "left" in America would weep and gnash teeth had Reagan or BushCo attempted a rewrite of the US constitution.
And what good would a leftist/progressive be if they couldn't also throw out there that someone in the current Honduran situation was trained at the notorious School of the Americas? General Romeo Vasquez is now in charge of the armed forces!!
Excuse me stupid, but Vasquez was sacked by Zelaya on June 25, 2009, for refusing to allow the armed forces to help in conducting a referendum on a constitutional change. Apparently Zelaya was content with Vasquez services until such time. Vasquez says he refused to help with the vote which was aimed at removing the constitutional term limit of one term per President because the Supreme Court had ruled the vote illegal. The same day Vasquez was fired he was reinstated by the SC but Zelaya ignored the ruling. And by the way, Zelaya is not a "leftist" no matter how hard the "left" tries to embrace him - hug him all you want but Commander Cowboy is not and never will be a member of the "left."
The SOA - the School of Assassins. If you ask me Yale and Harvard and a few others can produce questionable political/military characters. In my life in Central America I too meme'ed the message that the SOA grads were US puppets used for torture, terror, death ... in the fight against communism.
But having personally known a few grads the above rhetoric is no more true than stating the US troops are raping murdering grunts. There are good guys and bad guys. There are SOA grads working to improve the situation in their country. Lumping a group of people under one label is typical of folks who are too lazy and/or too ignorant to do their own research and thinking. Easier to believe the rhetoric written by those who have no honest interest in human rights or democracy, but in power. Those who control the message, hold the power. Some of the Russian and Cuban military training methods I saw in Central America in the '80s were no different than the US. Believe it or not, death and destruction are not the sole property of the US rightwing.
Never mind that the Honduran "coup" is more or less a done deal. Roberto Micheletti, acting president, was legal in line of succession and is supported by the Honduran high court, the military, the Congress, the people. The Honduran AG has said Commander Cowboy faces arrest and 20 years in prison for abuse of authority if he returns anytime soon.
On a brighter note, Mel and friends (Morales, Ortega, Chavez, Correa) are in earnest discussions on how to save Honduras from the deathgrip of US oppression. (I must say Correa is a handsome man and sharp dresser in this foto.)
'It will be the perfect date movie' … Michael Moore. Photograph: Stephen Chernin/AP
Michael Moore's new documentary comes billed as a tale of forbidden passion, charting a wild romance that flourished for decades before coming to a crashing, calamitous end in the autumn of 2007. It's title? Capitalism: A Love Story.
The film reportedly sets itself up as a spoof of the grand Hollywood romance, using the genre's hallmarks to examine the causes of the global economic recession. "It will be the perfect date movie," Moore said in a statement. "It's got it all – lust, passion, romance and 14,000 jobs being eliminated every day. It's a forbidden love, one that dare not speak its name. Heck, let's just say it: it's capitalism."
Backed by Overture Films, Capitalism: A Love Story is set for a US release on 2 October, a year and a day after the Senate approved its controversial $700bn (£432bn) bank bailout. The date also marks the 20th anniversary of the release of Moore's debut film, Roger and Me, which lambasted the actions of General Motors in the director's home town of Flint, Michigan.
According to Moore, the new film is about "the disastrous impact that corporate dominance and out-of-control profit motives have on the lives of Americans and citizens of the world. But this time the culprit is much bigger than General Motors, and the crime scene far wider than Flint, Michigan."
Thus far, it seems safe to assume that Moore has personally dodged the worst effects of the global recession. He is the creator of three of the six most successful documentaries in box-office history – Bowling for Columbine, Sicko and Fahrenheit 9/11.
---- I do not plan to view this one. After Columbine, Sicko, and F911 there's not much point in watching another docupropagandary made from the capitalist fatcat Michael Moore.
A documentary is supposed to be based on documented facts, done with objectivity. How Moore's films are considered documentary is anyone's guess. The "factual" segments are more distorted than the evening news and Moore displays no objectivity. The capitalist hound dogs of Lionsgate studio (Sicko and 9/11) and United Artists (Columbine) have sniffed out another audience to cater. As my grandparents did not recognize the disinformation documented in the news reels for their generation - today folks do not see the propaganda in their digital feed from their PR marketed artists, as if it's truth simply because, seemingly, the information is not coming from the Government or Big Business - but from the real truthseekers like Moore. Ever wonder if "they" have just found a new way to get you to swallow?
A Love Story, is from Overture Films, supposedly an outlet for independent directors, producers, etc., although partnered with Paramount for the release of A Love Story.
The biggest crime being perpetrated upon the public is the notion that capitalism came to "a crashing, calamitous end in the autumn of 2007" and the idea that "corporate dominance and out-of-control profit motives" has somehow been a recent phenomenon in world history. It is not.
Previously "out-of-control profit motives" were known as kingdoms, who now from necessity have placed many of their knights in pinstripe instead of armor, although we know a lot of armor is still used. Like it or not, these profit motives have contributed to the world population of 1 billion in 1790 to grow to 6+ billion in 2009, that is roughly 220 years, or 5-6 generations. Adding the survival of 5+ billion more of us in 5-6 generations is indicative that the human race has done something right. And it has not been done by living in communes with an egalitarian redistribution of the "wealth."
We have "out of control" corporate dominance, not because of greedy white folks and evil-doer corporations, but because you, yes you, buy into every trendy idea that is slopped in the trough and you are more than willing to die in debt and be buried in misery just to prove you look superior, smell better, eat better, have more things and have more fun, and live better than anyone else on the block.
You, my clueless people, have begged for domination - to feed your greed of living higher on the hog than any generation in US history. And like a hog, you have wallowed in as much trendy advertised mud as you can beg, borrow, steal, and buy on credit, all the while pretending you care about damage to the environment, about black children dying in Africa, about the US oppression of folks around the world. The same folks mining your diamond, sewing your shirt, weaving your cheap rugs, then move them out of your way for drilling to fuel your home, car, and place of employment or to feed the cattle that satisfies your BigMac attacks.
Make a donation - it's the only conscience you have. Then whine because the government and the CEOs aren't looking out for your well-being, your credit rating; rant because they are not saving the world and you want them to save it because you care so much - as evidenced by your preening self-aggrandizement and phony empathy. Then you follow new and better millionaire fatcats who tell you "out of control capitalism" is the problem, not you and your greed, and if you just give the new fatcats the power they will give you a kinder and gentler "ism," and they claim it will cost you nothing and will reward you with plenty, and you believe them because you are a coward who just wants to shop and wallow in every new promise being sold.
Pope Benedict called on Tuesday for a "world political authority" to manage the global economy and for more government regulation of national economies to pull the world out of the current crisis and avoid a repeat.
Parts of the encyclical, titled "Charity in Truth," seemed bound to upset free marketers because of its underlying rejection of unbridled capitalism and unregulated market forces, which he said had led to "thoroughly destructive" abuse of the system and "grave deviations and failures."
The pope said every economic decision had a moral consequence and called for "forms of redistribution" of wealth overseen by governments to help those most affected by crises.
Benedict said "there is an urgent need of a true world political authority" whose task would be "to manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result."
Such an authority would have to be "regulated by law" and "would need to be universally recognized and to be vested with the effective power to ensure security for all, regard for justice, and respect for rights."
"Obviously it would have to have the authority to ensure compliance with its decisions from all parties, and also with the coordinated measures adopted in various international forums," he said.
The pope's call for a supranational body to tackle global economic woes disturbed some Catholic capitalists.
The encyclical was addressed to all Catholics and "all people of good will" and was released on the eve of the start of the G8 summit in Italy and three days before the pope is due to discuss the global downturn with U.S. President Barack Obama.
Profit was useful only if it served as a means to a brighter future for all humanity. He said the current economic crisis was "clear proof" of "pernicious effects of sin" in the economy.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who had rebuked the pope earlier this year at the height of the row over a Holocaust-denying bishop, welcomed the encyclical as important encouragement for world leaders ahead of a G8 meeting in Italy.
"Pope Benedict has encouraged the state leaders to create rules so that this sort of worldwide economic crisis isn't repeated," Merkel told reporters. "I also saw this as an order to work toward a social market economy in the world."
---------- Hmmmm. The Vatican’s portfolio of stocks, bonds, and real estate comes to roughly $1 billion, and this doesn't include the art and artifacts which are listed at 1 euro because they are priceless. I wonder how much of that portfolio profit was made on the pernicious effects of sin in the economy (minus the alter boy payoffs).
The social market economy originated in Germany and was the model used in Europe during the cold war, and is not to be confused with socialist market economy which is the Chinese economic model implemented in 1978. Basically both are supposedly "mixed" economies, combining private enterprise and "collective bargaining" which is done on a national level not between one corporation and one union, but national employers' organizations and national trade unions.
The Pope's formal declaration of his opinion sounds like the same old new financial world order scheme to me, i.e. warm-fuzzy economics not based on profit but on humanitarian justice, run by a management body, or that "world political authority," a management team who will make the final decision on where, when, and how 6+ billion people will live, work, and die. And national boss organizations and trade unions will make it all seem legit and "structured." There will be lots of "structure."
Sort of a Hitler and Benito, Hoffa and Bill Gates, Frankie Roosevelt and Joe Stalin, Marx and Mao, Jesus and Allah and Yahweh ... all rolled into one global authority ensuring security for all, and the whole caboodle will be "regulated by law" where the mega-rich powerful folk will never again be above the law, and appropriately there will be fewer super rich once the redistribution begins.
Apparently, we have all forgotten and forgiven Pope Benedict the Ghoul for his mandatory Hitler Youth membership, or not a member depending on which lie you swallow, although I'm not certain the Islamic world has put aside comments the Pope made in 2006 at University of Regensburg. The Popester cited "an obscure medieval text that characterizes some of the teachings of Islam’s founder as “evil and inhuman." Personally, I feel the pro-pope spin men did an excellent job backpedaling on this one.
Don't you love it Bubba when folks intentionally say what they mean and then pretend it was not what they meant but the message got to the audience they wanted it to and then everyone is satisfied they heard what they wanted to hear? And now we're going to put all these geniuses and experts in charge of the world.
The Pope said every economic decision had a moral consequence and called for "forms of redistribution" of wealth overseen by governments to help those most affected by crises. Forms, eh. What forms would those be? Imagine the fraud, abuse, and corruption of your local/state welfare and social service system, or HUD, or FDA, etc. going global. World wide welfare, structured and managed by meatheads far away with names you cannot pronounce and faces you do not recognize - but they love and respect you because you are an asset in the family of man. And if you do not like the structure - who do you petition for redress of grievance? Why, your national labor union and/or head of state who also love and respect you because you are you, a little brother in a world of big brother hoods.
Just as our local, state, and national politicians love us - so too will the supranational shepherds of the flocked and fleeced. Monetary peace on earth, a goodwill store economy toward men, the idea is downright Biblical.
They will build monuments to the government heads, at least to those governments who freely agree to this b.s. (peacekeeper armies will handle those nations who hesitate to join).
Geeeezus Bubba, we can't even keep our local politics clean - what makes anyone think a world authority board of directors will be more ethical and moral? Sounds to me as if the German and Italian are still dreaming of being boss of empire. Didn't the US kick their wicked ass over that once already?
While surfing a few progressive sites early this morning I saw the "freedom isn't free" cliche and next to the phrase an emoticon vomiting, with the usual remarks about the US being the most fascist regime to ever exist, murdering, torturing, blah blah blah. Yea, I know ... I used to feel the same way and still have issues with the creep of government / corporate control of too many aspects of our lives.
However, rather than spew as the emoticon I saw this morning - I began to really think, I mean really think in the last few years, maybe even had an epiphany a couple of years ago, examining my own life experiences and developing my own opinion - I mean truly my own opinion - not parroting the mantras from the crowd that sounds most like the noise in my own head.
It's a smaller circle jerk when a person begins to really, really think for themselves.
Oh sure, I always thought I had my own opinions but I realized recently that I only mimicked the "left" side of the aisle because my exposure had been predominantly to the American "left." (Oddly, my mom was a Baptist democrat and daddy an agnostic republican but my running circles were socialist, communist.) Being honest with myself, I mean really honest, on inspection, retrospection - I am not a "leftist," not in the sense that is necessary today to be a member of that club.
Now I understand those people over the years who described me as a "traditionalist" or old-fashioned. Merriam gives the definition of traditionalist as "someone opposed to modernism, liberalism, or radicalism."
I'm not sure if such folks were labeling my political beliefs or my core values and social attitude, or all of the above. The folks who labeled me "radical" over the years were Bible bangers - based on the fact that I have no use for organized religion and no desire to find Jesus. The folks who labeled me "liberal" were those who disagree with me on such things as 4 year universities should be free for those who qualify, perhaps funded by profits from any future domestic oil fields. No one has ever accused me of "modernism."
I was disillusioned years ago listening to the endless discussions from the "left" aka "progressives" as they dissect the meaning of what it means to be left/progressive, what it means to be bourgeois or proletariat. The left/progressive debate the meaning of themselves and their creed a lot, and always conclude the world will be a better place once they unite and overcome the nonbelievers - rich people and their sheep people - who impede human progress.
The "left" seems to discuss "meaning" and the latest adventure of their "leaders" who regularly stage events that give the appearance of action and include the word "freedom." And should said leader be arrested or taken into custody for a day - it provides ample reason for blogging exclamation points!! (Code Pink, McKinney, Sheehan, and gobs of colored folk sponsoring a cause célèbre because the "left" has more writer-warriors than gnats on a dog butt.)
And then of course, there is the hard left - basically those left leaners who are willing and eager for revolution by any means necessary - and they will let you know as soon as they get a peoples army who will war to end all wars.
Heaven forbid your butt is sitting in the sand in Iraq this 4th of July. According to the "left" you're part of the impediment, a member of the murdering marauding capitalist system that squashes humanity - and either you have willingly knowingly agreed to work for the oppressors or you were dumb enough to be tricked into joining. Helluva category to choose from.
But I do notice a smidgen of hope - in particular when certain "leftist blogs" posting the typical "progressive" spiel on a topic - the writer will get a drubbing from more than one in the comment section, commenters who are on their way to becoming former "leftists" because they question the validity and honesty of the piece. Light bulb moments. Such comments are usually deleted if on the author's site - freedom of speech a la "left"?
Yea, I guess "freedom isn't free" is a trite phrase, but there is truth in it. Individually, freedom is not free. If you want some measure of personal independence and self-respect, which I associate with freedom, you have to keep your nose clean, work hard, and play by the rules (to some degree) in order to find a modicum of success and happiness.
If freedom were free you wouldn't have to do anything - no personal or social restraints to inhibit, no rules to stifle your impulses, no mundane work to waste your attention - you just wait for BigDaddy Government to deliver your share of free freedom (probably with a tiny Made in China sticker on the bottom).
Hey! You know what Bubba ... no personal or social restraint, guided by impulse, no work, government largesse - I think "freedom" has arrived for most Americans - but don't worry, it's not going to be on your tab - your grandchildren will pay dearly for it.
Not long ago when drug addled pop stars died the headlines for a day read "Jim Bonehead Dies From Drug Overdose, Fans Mourn." More often than not they made more money dead than alive, becoming cult and poster icons. Enough already. Michael Jackson died decades ago as a boy when his family, friends, promoters, and marketers used him at the cost of his mind and body. When did it become okay to idolize a crotch grabbing, self-mutilating drug addict turned white who pays others to breed living toys for him? At least now he is out of his misery.
Let's see. How many "revolutions" do we have going this past week... Honduras, Peru, Iran. Both the "left" and "right" are supporting the Iranian protestors. The "right" supports the Honduran protestors but the "left" says the Hondurans in the streets are US backed and the ousting of Zelaya is a coup. In Peru, the "left" support the indigenous protestors taking a stand against big oil - I'm not sure the "right" has noticed this one because the "left" says the MSM is ignoring it - but I think MSM is too busy rubbing our faces in the repugnant lives of folks like Jackson or Anna Nicole.
Speaking of singers, Joan Baez performs We Shall Overcome using some Farsi lyrics. You remember Joan - singing for social causes back in the 1960s. While previously not engaging in party politics, recently Joan said "At this time, however, changing that posture feels like the responsible thing to do. If anyone can navigate the contaminated waters of Washington, lift up the poor, and appeal to the rich to share their wealth, it is Sen. Barack Obama."
Lady, at your age you should have better instincts.
Okay, back to Iran, Peru, Honduras. Peru's president, Garcia, according to "leftists" is "our man." Not true, Garcia has sold Peru to China. The clash between indigenous Peruvians and the government is called "genocide" when the little people die, but when police or soldiers die it's righteous justice. Rather than genocide, a word overused these days, why not call it murder by both sides.
El presidente Garcia's poll numbers have been plummeting. Cabinet members are resigning. The PM has said he will quit in the coming weeks. The indigenous are gaining a lot of internal support and sympathy - it's always the PR, who's your public relations firm. Peru has announced it is suspending plans to open large tracts of land to foreign investment, etc. which were going to France, Spain, and US oil companies.
But, it seems it's business as usual with the privately owned Perenco Oil (France) receiving permission to drill in Amazon territories. Wait a minute Bubba, wasn't there something a while back with a French company involved in corruption and the Food-For-Oil program in Iraq? Oh yes, Nadhmi Auchi, former Ba'athist Iraqi who was convicted of fraud in the Elf Aquitaine (7th biggest oil company worldwide) scandal. In 1993 Elf held the exclusive contract to Iraqi and Saddam oil fields. And until 2001 the Oil-For-Food money transited through the French BNP Paribas bank, of which Auchi was the largest private shareholder. And Auchi was old friends and with Syrian Tony Rezko, bagman and political fixer to Obama. Does Auchi still have all that prime Chicago real estate to develop? Barry O. claimed he didn't recall if he ever met Auchi but did admit to knowing Tony the Bagman. You cannot mention much about Nadhmi Auchi - he'll send a pack of lawyers to threaten lawsuits and demand retractions - lies, lies, lies, everyone lies about poor little Nad the billionaire.
You know, I can see Michelle and Barry and the girls some day hobnobbing with the Paris elite, especially after Barack does all the damage he can here in the US.
But not to fret dear "leftists", all the Peruvian resource wealth isn't going to greedy rich white people - China is getting more than their share of Latin America. Five years ago the "left's best friend" Hugo Chavez signed petro deals with China, with Hugo grinning that "Chairman Mao and Simón Bolívar would have been great friends."
Observant folks might wonder why China is playing big stakes in the US "backyard" and US politicians are not saying a word against it. Hugo courts China and Russia, in order to break dependency on the United States - he believes being dependent on China will be a better deal. Don't we American peons envy the lifestyle of the average peon in Russia and China?
But what about the evildoers from the USA? Where's their share of Peru? Well friends, China wants to be instrumental in helping Peru too, to outgrow its dependence on the United States. Yessiree. The free Chinese and Western "left" are going to triumph and get the greedy US big oily white people out of Latin America.
The "left" uses Hunt Oil of Texas as the poster child for ugly exploiters, via the Camisea natural gas project in Peru. AmazonWatch, one of those we're-here-to-save-you groups that say things like "The Camisea Project is owned by two consortia of small companies with poor environmental records led by Hunt Oil - a Dallas-based company with close ties to the Bush administration."
You will probably never hear anything such as "led by so-and-so company with close ties to the Obama administration." Not that Auchi and Rezko have close ties to Barry...
The Camisea project is "led" by Hunt oil, a consortia composed of : Pluspetrol (36% Argentina); Hunt Oil (36%); SK Corporation (18% South Korea); Tecpetrol (10% Argentina). The gas pipeline consortia named TGP is operated by Techint (23% Argentina) and includes: Pluspetrol and Hunt Oil (22% each); SK Corporation and Sonatrach (11%) Sonatrach Algiers; Belgium's Tractebel (8%); Grana y Montero (2% Peruvian). Belgium's Tractebel was due to carry out gas distribution in Lima potentially financed by a Belgian export credit agency. I suppose all these folks could be white but I'm not betting on it. (It's okay to be a big brown, yellow, red, or black-owned corporation because everyone knows only white owned corporations are greedy and evil.)
From what I have read on the Peruvian indigenous villagers "uprising" and techniques being used - I believe I now know where the Sendero Luminoso disappeared to. Luminoso Maoists - China has been in Latin America longer than you think.
Maybe the silly American "left" will finally shut up when environmentally friendly, socialist-minded nonwhite folk run the world. But I have a sneaking suspicion they will still be singing we shall overcome ... something ... I'm sure they'll find something/someone ... greedy and evil, because it's going to take an eternity to stamp out wealth and poverty so the world can live as one ... guided by a board of international directors.
Mark Sanford, one of very few on the great GOP hope list for a possible 2012 presidential run - today admits he's been dipping his stick in Argentina. I felt a twinge of sympathy watching his press conference, for a moment, how humiliating, but he did it to himself. Of course, we seem to live in a culture of it's no-big-deal and everybody-does-it, but it is a big deal and not everybody does it. Politico is said to be breaking a story on millionaire Sanford using State funds to fund his fun. No big deal, everybody does it?
And to leave a public trail of emails to his mistress for his family to see the details, what a thoughtless unfaithful viagra'ed peckerhead.
Sanford to "Maria" email: "I could digress and say that you have the ability to give magnificent gentle kisses, or that I love your tan lines or that I love the curve of your hips, the erotic beauty of you holding yourself (or two magnificent parts of yourself) in the faded glow of the night's light -- but hey, that would be going into sexual details ..."
I'm sure in political circles Sanford's affair was known and gossiped about, affairs always are. Maybe his outing was payback for raising a stink about the "stimulus" money he didn't want to take for South Carolina. Maybe his office staff was disgruntled, forced to tap dance around questions to cover for his absences. Maybe his wife finally had enough - she didn't degrade herself by standing by her man at the press conference.
At 50 years old Sanford should be old enough to control lust and urges. Maybe the folks I know are old school but most of us learned self-restraint by 30, look but don't touch, fantasize - remember that word, fantasize? Where dear 58-year-old hubby in the fading glow of the night's light, with eyes slightly closed is still that big hunky bronze stud and everything on both of you is as perky and tight as it was at 21 or even 35. Where you look across the table at dear hubby, balding, bifocaled, less muscle mass to hold onto and more age spots than tan lines, and you're still turned on and there's never been anyone else?
It's called commitment folks. An obligation to life, love, work, family. Oh well, at least Sanford in his search for the perfect orgasm didn't hang himself as permanently as Carradine in Bangkok.
Ron Paul has introduced House Resolution 1207, to audit the Federal Reserve. I have not seen any chatter on MSM regarding this bill, but it is being discussed on some alternative sites. While I disagree with Paul on many issues, this one I can support.
“Neoliberalism is the root cause of rampaging gentrification and displacement, from New York to New Orleans to Atenco, Mexico.” Keen observers of political-economy would agree with this assessment from Zapatista-inspired community activists in Spanish Harlem, who recently organized an “encuentro” with similar minded Black and Asian activists. All concluded that the issue is bigger than Harlem: “This displacement is created by the greed, ambition and violence of a global empire of money that seeks to take total control of all the land, labor and life on earth.”
The Zapatista-inspired activists of the Movement for Justice in El Barrio speak much the same language as their fellow New Yorkers (and Chicagoans and Atlantans). In the MJB's “International Declaration in Defense of El Barrio,” issued shortly before this month's gathering, the group said:
“This displacement is created by the greed, ambition and violence of a global empire of money that seeks to take total control of all the land, labor and life on earth. Here in El Barrio (East Harlem, New York City), landlords, multi-national corporations and local, state and federal politicians and institutions want to force upon us their culture of money, they want to displace poor families and rent their apartments to rich people, white people with money. They want to change the look of our neighborhoods, with the excuse of 'developing the community.' They want to remove from the street the street vendors, who earn an honorable and dignified living, the families that have their own small businesses and small restaurants, small clothing stores, and the small bodegas on the corners in our neighborhood. They want to displace us to bring in their luxury restaurants their expensive and large clothing stores, their supermarket chains. They want to change our neighborhood. They want to change our culture. They want to change that which makes us Latino, African-American, Asian and Indigenous. They want to change everything that makes us El Barrio.”
KAB says ---- Long before Europeans, Blacks, Latinos, Asians arrived in what is now East Harlem, the Wecksquaesgek Indians settled there. But, I suppose it was "greed, ambition and violence of a global empire of money" that displaced the Wecksquaesgeks. The Dutch, without permission from the Wecks settled and built in the area, then the Brits came in 1664 and eventually changed the name from Nieuw Haarlem to "Harlem"..
During the latter half of the 1800s the Irish, German, and Italians arrived to Harlem. Between 1870 and 1910 approximately 65,000 apartments were built in East Harlem, a testimony to the demand for new housing and the ability of the private economy to provide the supply. The German and Irish began "moving on up" and out. In the 1930s, the Italian community in Harlem was the largest in the country.
"At the same time, Puerto Ricans began to arrive with some African Americans and West Indians. "Spanish Harlem" had a name by the 1940s. It was the natural destination for the migration from those sources to meet the economic boom of World War II and the dress and textile industry postwar. These populations replaced the Italians and Eastern Europeans who were moving out to the Levittowns, etc. By 1950, East Harlem was predominantly African-American and Puerto Rican."
Of course, during those eras the neighborhood cultural changes were not seen as evil; the Wecks did not accuse the Dutch of gentrification, nor were the centuries of change blamed on "neoliberalism," as that word only came about around 1945, and only very recently has the Left used neoliberalism as the scapegoat for current economic policies, rather than the failure of massive social programs.
So, to be fair ... if you really want a movement for justice, to stop the "white people with money" ... then give Harlem back to the Wecksquaesgek Indians. If that's not doable, then perhaps you should expect those white German, Irish, English, Dutch and Italians who moved out, to move back and gentrify the place. And of course not all those "culture of money" people who return to Harlem will be white. During the early years of the last century half of Harlem was owned by black American businessmen and entrepreneurs; most moved up and on. Yes, there were cultural turf disputes in Harlem's history, but the evil "culture of money" was not the mantra until most recently.
Remember the 1995 "Freddy's Fashion Mart" incident when the United House of Prayer, a large black landlord in Harlem, raised the rent on Freddy's Fashion Mart. Freddy's white Jewish owner is forced to raise the rent on his subtenant, a black-owned music store. A landlord-tenant dispute ensues. Many blamed Al Sharpton's belligerence as he said "We will not stand by and allow them to move this brother so that some white interloper can expand his business" and his group, the National Action Network set up picket lines; customers going into Freddy's are spat on and cursed as "traitors" and "Uncle Toms." Some protesters shout, "Burn down the Jew store!" and simulate striking a match. "We're going to see that this cracker suffers," said a Sharpton colleague, Morris Powell. On Dec. 8, one of the protesters bursts into Freddy's, shoots four employees point-blank, then sets the store on fire. Seven employees die in the inferno. The employees were Black and Latino. I guess Al and Morris missed the part about being judged on the content of our character and not the color of our skins.
This is why I have pulled away from Left mentality - they have one rallying boohoo for all injustice: rich white folks, and while that may have been a major factor a few decades ago, the "blame the rich white folks" thinking no longer works on me.
The Left create a cultural racial divide with warm fuzzy words like "movement" and "justice." This cultural justice club is funded predominantly by white folks in the distance, who seem to loathe assimilation for colored folks - who they encourage to raise a fist in air and chant, down with rich white folks empire, while straightening and bleaching their hair and skin, wearing Tommy Hilfiger and slopping on a BigMac - encouraged to be disdainful and fearful of absorbing the "white" folks capitalist system (never mind that their lives literally depend on the system). If you want to see a good example of what becomes of a culture forced into dependence and which cannot, will not, or is not allowed to assimilate - look no further than the Native American reservations.
These self-appointed leaders tell you to resist, resist the empire. Why not just say death to America since the pot isn't melting? Resist the white culture of money my tribal friends, while expecting the same "government and institutions" of empire to pay for the bulk of neighborhood amenities, housing, schools, food, utilities, and create jobs. All while claiming they want barrios safe from murder, drugs, robbery but every other arrest is deemed harassment and/or brutality - don't be a snitch, blame the system. Maybe, Bill Clinton (first black president fairytale) can lead the way from his offices in Harlem.
The Left tell their followers not to let whitey's "culture of money" machine control them - and rather than help one another move up or out as centuries of displaced immigrants have before, they would rather cling to "... the look of our neighborhoods ... what makes us Latino, African-American, Asian and Indigenous" ... which apparently is ethnic food and piñatas surrounded by crime, poverty and blight.
I have said for the past few years, under BushCo, while the leftwing blogosphere and progressive "leaders" incessantly fear-mongered that Bush would wage war on Iran, that I had no fear of war with Iran - it wasn't going to happen under Bush, and I reminded folks that both World Wars, Korea, Vietnam, Kosovo/Bosnia, etc. were all initiated by Democrat presidents. (Both republican Bush wars in Iraq have been an anomaly - are the Bushes closet democrats?)
Now, with current election protests in Iran, and a Democrat in the White House - I suspect the threat of US war in Iran is closer.
Watching massive doses of reports online and on cable, it's time for concern. Both left/right, conservative/liberal, dem/rep in the US are chanting support for the protesters in Iran because - the protesters want democracy, human rights, freedom. Hard to believe our government blabbers on and on about freedom and rights for Iranians while curtailing and interfering with our own at home.
When the US "right" holds up a photo of an Iranian woman being stoned for adultery the "left" accuses the right of using it as an excuse to go to war. When the "left" holds up the same photo it's issuing a demand for human rights. But it's political deceit and spin - because neither the democrats nor the republicans have a problem with dropping "smart stones" from the air on the same people - to free them of course.
The media is saturating us with the bloody images, arson, screams, fear, terror inside Iran, supposedly through twitter, facebook, etc. Why the Supreme Leader Khamenei and Ahmadinejad have not cut power to the www and cell towers is any one's guess, although initially it was reported there was a media blackout.
But let me point out a few things. Iran has a population of approximately 71 million, 50-60% said to be under 30. These would be the children of the 1979 revolutionaries who overthrew the Shah. It is very unlikely that these offspring have turned against the revolution of their parents and grandparents. The number of protesters has been cited as anywhere from tens of thousands to 1 million. Even if the number of protesters approached 1 million, say 710,000, that would be only 1% of the population, and it is likely the numbers are smaller. At 1% this is not a popular uprising - it is one political faction attempting a coup over the other faction.
Consider, 98% of Iranians are Muslim and the majority more or less support their theocracy - they do not seek a Western styled democracy.
I remind you too that whether Ahmadinejad or Mousavi was selected/elected - both men were handpicked by the ruling mullahs to run for office. Mousavi, contrary to what we are being told, is as much a hardliner as Ahmadinejad. And regardless how we as Americans feel about the system in Iran - it is the system made by Iranians.
The election protests in Iran are not about "freedom" as it pertains to the image conjured up by Bubba and Joe Blow - it's the equivalent of the Bush/Gore 2000 election. Had Americans responded with protests as the Iranians have, there would have been death and chaos - and troops, and Bush would still have been sworn in. Whether Ahmadinejad or Mousavi, Bush or Gore, they will always institute the policies of the ruling class, whatever that may be during that particular term of office.
Mousavi, has now stated he is ready for martyrdom. A martyr for what? Democracy, rule of the majority? 1 percent is not a majority.
Facts to remember regarding Mousavi: • The son of a tea merchant, Mousavi, 67, was born in Khameneh, in northwestern Iran — also the hometown of Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. According to a relative, Mousavi is the grandson of Khamenei's paternal aunt.
• Served as Prime Minister from 1980 to 1988, guiding the country through its war with Iraq and earning plaudits for his stewardship of the economy.
• While in office, he severed ties with Great Britain over the U.K.'s refusal to disavow Salman Rushdie, the British author whose The Satanic Verses spurred Ayatollah Khomeini to declare a fatwa calling for Rushdie's death.
• Was placed on the leadership council of Lebanon's Shi'ite militant group Hizballah by Ayatollah Khomeini when the group was founded in 1982. Mousavi does not recognize Israel, though he has condemned the Holocaust.
• Defended the seizure of 52 American hostages at the U.S. embassy in 1979. The hostages were held for more than 400 days; the two countries have not had normalized relations since.
• Has not served in the government since 1989, the year the prime minister's post was dissolved. Since then he has been a member of Iran's Expediency Discernment Council, which advises the Supreme Leader, and of the Supreme Cultural Revolution Council, which monitors artistic expression.
• Emerged as the leading challenger to Ahmadinejad after former President Mohammad Khatami, the leading moderate candidate, dropped out of the race in March, explaining that he did not want two reformist candidates to split the opposition vote. (Others have suggested his exit was spurred by fears of assassination if he remained in the race.)
Be careful, when the ruling parties and pundits on both Fox News and CNN agree on an agenda and are offering the same interpretation of events - especially tucking the words "democracy and freedom" in every other paragraph - it usually signals that the US is meddling and preparing to liberate someone at gunpoint.
Too Poor to Make the News - Barbara Ehrenreich. This spring, I tracked down a couple of the people I had met while working on my 2001 book, “Nickel and Dimed,” in which I worked in low-wage jobs like waitressing and housecleaning, and I found them no more gripped by the recession than by “American Idol”; things were pretty much “same old.” The woman I called Melissa in the book was still working at Wal-Mart, though in nine years, her wages had risen to $10 an hour from $7.
“Caroline,” who is increasingly disabled by diabetes and heart disease, now lives with a grown son and subsists on occasional cleaning and catering jobs. We chatted about grandchildren and church, without any mention of exceptional hardship.
But then, at least if you inhabit a large, multiclass extended family like my own, there comes that e-mail message with the subject line “Need your help,” and you realize that bad is often just the stage before worse. The note was from one of my nephews, and it reported that his mother-in-law, Peg, was, like several million other Americans, about to lose her home to foreclosure.
It was the back story that got to me: Peg, who is 55 and lives in rural Missouri, had been working three part-time jobs to support her disabled daughter and two grandchildren, who had moved in with her. Then, last winter, she had a heart attack, missed work and fell behind in her mortgage payments. If I couldn’t help, all four would have to move into the cramped apartment in Minneapolis already occupied by my nephew and his wife.
Only after I’d sent the money did I learn that the mortgage was not a subprime one and the home was not a house but a dilapidated single-wide trailer that, as a “used vehicle,” commands a 12-percent mortgage interest rate. You could argue, without any shortage of compassion, that “Low-Wage Worker Loses Job, Home” is nobody’s idea of news.
----- God, I feel little compassion for the above cases Ms. Ehrenreich writes about. For one reason, I know too many Wal-mart Melissas, Carolines, and Pegs. Mine too are "increasingly disabled" by diabetes, heart disease, etc. of their own making, usually 100 pounds overweight and their only exercise is a part-time job. Does Melissa's "grown son" work? Usually not, or at least not often and most of that goes to alcohol, cigarettes or dope, or paying fines and restitution and child support.
I too have "multiclass" relatives, and some like Peg, working to support a disabled daughter and grandchildren. Although my Peg's disabled daughter gets a sizable monthly disability check and a check on each of her dependents, plus Medicaid/Medicare, foodstamps, yet they struggle to make their $300 a month trailer payment, and they have trashed the thing to the point that even they no longer want to live in it.
But my Pegs and Melissas struggle because they will spend $200 a month on cable TV and DSL which for them is a priority over the rent and utilities, although they know they need a roof for the TV. And their kids, no daddy around, must have name brand clothing and spending money, to make momma look like she can support a pack of kids 'cause she "don't need no man around" (although she always seems to have a new man around). And in her words, her "kids ain't wearing no Wal-Mart shit."
I too, here in rural Podunk, see the same gentrification with folks moving in together.
We have two sections, one called Hillbilly Heaven (mostly white) and one called Sunset (mostly black). Hillbilly Heaven was originally small homes built by WWII GIs - now mostly poor white trash and meth heads. Sunset is on the westside of town and years ago you had to be back here by sunset. My daughter made mention of this Jim Crowism at a city council meeting and the section has now been officially renamed to - drum role - Horizon.
But, here's how hope and change came about in Podunk: Integration saw the inhabitants of Horizon creeping across town. The whites kept selling and moving north and east as the blacks moved in from the west. For 3 decades most of the rentals in this section of town have been owned by local slum lords - taking what were once nice homes in good neighborhoods and creating a Section 8 Heaven. (There is some truth to "there goes the neighborhood.")
Over the years as one single momma after another (black and white) moved in and out, trashing the house and the lot it sits on, no one seemed to mind - upper class folks continued to build newer homes east and north, the landlords got their inflated rents paid by BigDaddy Government, putting little back into the house, and kept them continually rented. Every 3 bedroom on this side of town became a 4 bedroom home because landlords walled off the dining room to get a 4th bedroom - 4 bedroom being a bigger section 8 check from the government. And momma didn't mind, with 4 or 5 kids she needed another bedroom more than a dining room, and everyone eats from a sack and wrapper in front of the TV in the living room anyway, dining rooms are for fancy folks.
Both the Heavens here are crumbling. In the last 4 or 5 years approximately 160 homes have been bulldozed on this side of town (Horizon). BigDaddy doesn't have as many vouchers as he used to. Broke my heart to see so many old homes demolished. I tried to convince the city to let homeowners salvage some of the grand and original woodwork and brick, doors and windows, etc. but they said no - bulldozed it all. Those of us who own here welcomed the bulldozers - it could potentially mean there's one less threat, one less predator in the neighborhood. Ah, maybe compassion is an affordable luxury when your neighbor wears a suit and tie instead of a pimp hat and gold chains.
But, with a shortage of housing now, some folks are doubling up. Around here that means instead of 3 or 4 kids on the street meandering in front of my house it's 6 or 7 teen boys trying to hold their pants up, while the young pre-momma girls threaten to kick one another's ass, I guess to impress the boys with their toughness. (It's painfully funny watching a guy hold his pants up, run/ jump fences, while trying to dispose of little baggies of crack with an overweight cop puffing right behind him.) And then there are the dogs. Almost every renter here in the 'hood has a dog, usually pit bulls without the mandatory insurance, chained next to the house - not a member of the family or beloved pet - but as an alarm. To bark, when the po-lice might be tipping around because someone inside is a dealer; gives you about 30 seconds after the first bark to see the swat team and flush the dope. Oh, and don't walk the dog, just let him off the chain now and then - he'll come home when he gets hungry.
On the other side of town, the old Hillbilly Heaven section, life isn't much different. I know a 72-year-old woman there who lives with her 4 middle-aged children and a few teen grandchildren and great grandchildren. Half of them are on disability and the other half on crack and meth. She has owned the house for 40 years, but when she's gone it will be bulldozed, and should be as no one has maintained it for 25 years. It has busted sewer pipes and leaking like a sieve. It's not that they never had funds for repairs, they just never spent the funds on something that wasn't entertaining. She has 9 kids and tells me not one of them is worth a damn and her 3 dozen grandkids aren't much better. She goes to church and wonders what went wrong. I would tell her but it's too late. I'm certain her 40-year-old kids will be receiving some sort of Government housing when she dies and they no longer have her house to flop in. The house she and their dad bought when they married and where these kids grew up - means nothing to them.
I grew up in poverty, have watched poverty in the US for at least 5 decades, have seen third world poverty up close - and what Americans are experiencing is not poverty, nor even hardship in comparison to most of the world. Economically the US is not even as miserable as the 1980s indexes, yet. Poverty, Ms. Ehrenreich, is always in the news - especially around election time, or to promote a book or movie, or when Big and Little Nonprofits are fundraising.
What I see is a poverty of minds, a lot of wasted lives. A lack of willingness to delay gratification between what people want and what people need. A generation where getting something for nothing is prized over all else. A generation whose greatest boast is they "are not judgmental" which is the go-ahead to do whatever ya want when ya want and not worry about consequences, after all, no one is going to be judgmental - being "nonjudgmental" is actually appropriate for a large segment of society - they have proven beyond doubt they lack good judgment on anything at all. A generation convinced that being materially poor is the fault of someone or something else; while they piss away money and shit where they eat, as if there is no tomorrow.
Ironically, those who would do the most with a little help are usually not eligible in the Welfare State. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Too many Americans are no longer in pursuit.
Have you watched the movie The Pursuit of Happyness?, based on the life of Chris Gardner who spent a year sleeping in shelters, cheap motels, and subway bathrooms with his young son while interning at Dean Witter in 1981, the company and coworkers never knew. If you haven't seen it I'm going to spoil the ending. This is the ending of the movie; the real Gardner walks by and Will Smith turns to look at him.
HEDGES: There are meetings being held Monday and Tuesday in Yekaterinburg, Russia, (formerly Sverdlovsk) among Chinese President Hu Jintao, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and other top officials of the six-nation Shanghai Cooperation Organization. The United States, which asked to attend, was denied admittance. Watch what happens there carefully. The gathering is, in the words of economist Michael Hudson, “the most important meeting of the 21st century so far.”
It is the first formal step by our major trading partners to replace the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. If they succeed, the dollar will dramatically plummet in value, the cost of imports, including oil, will skyrocket, interest rates will climb and jobs will hemorrhage at a rate that will make the last few months look like boom times. State and federal services will be reduced or shut down for lack of funds. The United States will begin to resemble the Weimar Republic or Zimbabwe. Obama, endowed by many with the qualities of a savior, will suddenly look pitiful, inept and weak. And the rage that has kindled a handful of shootings and hate crimes in the past few weeks will engulf vast segments of a disenfranchised and bewildered working and middle class. The people of this class will demand vengeance, radical change, order and moral renewal, which an array of proto-fascists, from the Christian right to the goons who disseminate hate talk on Fox News, will assure the country they will impose.
I called Hudson, who has an article in Monday’s Financial Times called “The Yekaterinburg Turning Point: De-Dollarization and the Ending of America’s Financial-Military Hegemony.” “Yekaterinburg,” Hudson writes, “may become known not only as the death place of the czars but of the American empire as well.”
“This means the end of the dollar,” Hudson told me. “It means China, Russia, India, Pakistan, Iran are forming an official financial and military area to get America out of Eurasia.
---- In 2005 the US, along with Pakistan, India, Iran, and Mongolia, asked for "observer status" - the US was denied. If I didn't know better I would have thought the US asked to attend this year's party but was "denied admittance." SCO membership: Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan, or basically the same ol' cold war Russia/China alliance.
Another noteworthy event to be held in Yekaterinburg, is the first BRIC meeting (Britain-Russia-India-China), June 16, and to cover issues including the world situation, a global financial system, the financial crisis, energy cooperation and environmental protection. Or ... how world leaders will transition to a global system where a tiny, tiny fraction of the human population will rule over the remaining 6 billion or so little people, and we will call it global cooperation. SCO is merely one bloc of the kumbayah campfire club. I call it the Rodney King Globalization/Can We All Git Along. And those who cannot git along will git their butts kicked.
Hedges believes the US will resemble the Weimar Republic or Zimbabwe - both suffered hyperinflation, one of course gave rise to Hitler. That's clever of Hedges, evoking Hitler without actually using the name Hitler.
This bankruptcy in turn will trigger "rage, hate crimes" and "engulf vast segments of a disenfranchised and bewildered working and middle class" who apparently Hedges believes are quite an ignorant class for they will act out, demand "vengeance, radical change, order and moral renewal" which will be imposed by the likes of Bible bangers and Fox News.
There's the subtle hint that these bewildered lower class folks will turn on one another with a vengeance - "hate crimes". Race-based. Obviously Hedges has no idea that down here in the 'hood, the trailers, the projects, the shanties, the blue collar tracts, and even the mostly white suburbs - there be a lot of race mixin'. Guys like the 88-year-old thug who gunned down a guard at the museum are few and far between, and even his family disown him.
I've disliked Hedges since his asinine article in 2007, Accustomed to Their Own Atrocities in Iraq, U.S. Soldiers Have Become Murderers. All his work is asinine though.
Hedges also states in the article above : The governor of China’s central bank has openly called for the abandonment of the dollar as reserve currency, suggesting in its place the use of the International Monetary Fund’s Special Drawing Rights. What the new system will be remains unclear, but the flight from the dollar has clearly begun. The goal, in the words of the Russian president, is to build a “multipolar world order” which will break the economic and, by extension, military domination by the United States. China is frantically spending its dollar reserves to buy factories and property around the globe so it can unload its U.S. currency.
Ummmm, suggesting the use of IMF SDR? Would that be the same IMF that Barry O. wants to give a $100+ billion bailout? So ... lemme see ... we are going to fund our own dollar demise?
China "frantically spending its dollar reserves around the world" to unload US currency? Got a link? Because to my non-expert mindset, and reading, China itself has dropped from double digit growth to single digit in the last couple of years, even while spending massive amounts internally on factories and property, etc. According to Gordon Chang's book The Coming Collapse of China ... "There will be a time when China runs out of money to pump into the system."
Beijing spending those dollars to keep China afloat?
Chang also argues that "... the Chinese people are tired of their overtly regulated lives, dictated by a microscopic minority and enforced by crude coercion..."
Running out of money, regulated lives enforced by crude coercion - which is quite similar to where most of the world stands today.
But it makes me wonder, why do writers like Hedges directly or indirectly suggest the US is the world's problem child, when frankly all world powers have built their strength on the backs of their own and other nation's people. Why do these writers push the warm-fuzzy notion of a "multipolar" world where, if the US would just get out of the way, we could all get along.
The ruling class are not suggesting anything new with multipolarity - they want one umbrella to cover several centers of power dictated to by a few acronyms - the "all git along" policy, until the next butt kicking. Nothing new or unique; it's been used by kingdoms and empires since day 1.
Let us hash out Sonia Sotomayor's controversial statement, not that it's worthy or important but does the media ever give us anything that is?
I just saw a clip of Obama in a limo with some pundit, who when asked if he stopped to watch the talking head shows when he passed by the many TVs in the White House, Obama said, no, he doesn't bother listening to the cable chatter. I chuckled, because when passing by the cable TV covering an Obama speech, I too do not bother to listen to his chatter. Although god knows he is slightly easier on the stomach than GWB.
But back to Sotomayor. Some on the right say her comment is racist. Those on the left say it is not. Supposedly she has made the same/similar statements a few times in her career.
SS:"First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."
According to Merriam Webster "wise" is having a deep understanding and the capacity for sound judgement, so contrary to the learned folks above - I believe there can be a universal definition. There are different types of wisdom, as in street wise, common sense wisdom, professional wisdom, etc. You may have an understanding of the street, the common, or a profession - that's not indicative of sound judgment though.
Is Sonia saying that she has street smarts, common sense, and professional wisdom? And a preppy Ivy league white man has less wisdom because he was born privileged? Being born of humble beginnings makes one reach a better conclusion because the humble experience is what ... enriching? Not so much enrichment that anyone wants to stay, and usually sounds good only to those who did not experience all the enrichment poverty can bestow.
What deep understanding does Sotomayor believe her humble Latina beginnings give her? What part of a Bronx childhood in the projects makes one capable of reaching a better conclusion than a white male who was born wealthy, or poor?
Sounds to me as if Sotomayor suggests her gender, ethnicity and social class bestow a richness of experience that the white male can never obtain. Would that also mean Sotomayor cannot understand the American black experience or Native American experience, etc. because she has not experienced them? Oh wait, Obama said her experience gave her "empathy." And we all know white men don't have empathy, in contrast to the inner city projects where humble folks empathize with one another (especially if you're seen moving in a flat screen that can be fenced).
Sotomayor is not Thurgood Marshall, neither is Clarence "Coke Can" Thomas for that matter.
Men and women like Marshall truly fought against the odds - opening doors for Thomas and Sotomayor, and even Obama.
Not to detract from Sotomayor's tenacity and accomplishments, but I do think she is of the generation suffering from affirmative action and "identity politics" - educated, employed, and appointed by white men, and now feeling a teeeensy bit superior to those who saddled the horse she rode into town on. (Put your foot in the stirrups honey, not your mouth.)
I once was a staunch supporter of affirmative action, not anymore. I've seen too many incompetents in positions they should not have been in simply because the white company/organization needed to meet a quota. And termination was out of the question as fear of a lawsuit forever loomed. The only hope was the employee would quit. There is nothing worse than a coworker who smugly knows they have management by the cajones. (Of course white folks also hire white idiots, look at George Bush.)
So, let's stop pretending we are led by people of great ability, "high caliber" men and women. It does not matter if Sotomayor is the best pick or not, black or brown, male or female. Her rulings will be geared to please that faction of the powers that be who groomed her ride.
What we have had for 3+ decades, regardless of race or gender or humble beginnings, are mediocre men and women. But the worst has been The Special Olympics of Politics - special because of the "handicap" of being black, brown, female, gay, or whatever politically unique card they can play, which has nothing to do with capability and talent. I know, I know Bubba you want to say - some of us have it harder.
Yes, and no matter who you are there's always someone else who has/had life harder. I have yet to find that one individual who has had the hardest life on earth, although when found he/she should be rewarded with something.
It's that old, old ploy of the humble public servant, the peanut farmer, the humble actor/comic in shirt sleeves,the blue shirt sleeves rolled up Bush clearing brush on the homestead, fatherless Obama on foodstamps, just like one of us Bubba, and they made it to the top, and by golly even as they gallop away to their new multimillion dollar townhomes or mini mansions and mix it up in New York, Paris, Rome, Brussels, ... in $4000 shoes and limos ... they're gonna do what's best for the commoners ... because they are one of us.
But you know Bubba, in a family as integrated as mine - black, brown, white, mixed, Jew and gentile, atheist and Catholic, millionaires to minimum wage - had Sotomayor made the above comment at the dinner table, we would have laughed long and loud.
Did she just say being a Puerto Rican woman from NY gives her a better understanding of the law? she's joking, right?
President Barack Obama's plan to give an extra $108bn to the International Monetary Fund was in danger of falling apart yesterday as Republican lawmakers opposed the extra funding and Democrat leaders scrambled to win enough votes without them.
Mr Obama has called for member countries to beef up the IMF to help it combat the global downturn. At April's G20 meeting he promised to increase the US contribution and secured similar promises from others. But he has run into problems in a Congress weary of bail-outs and concerned about the swelling budget deficit.
Ah, transparency. Perhaps you've read that the new era of candor in government spending has arrived. Except, apparently, when it comes to the $750 billion that the Obama Administration and other nations have agreed to provide the International Monetary Fund. In this case, it's all opacity all the time.
At the G-20 meeting in April, the world's big shots promised to provide $500 billion under credit lines to the IMF known as "new arrangements to borrow." The U.S. share was said to be $100 billion, which last week we learned is actually $108 billion. The Obama Administration is now asking Congress to appropriate the cash, except that the Congressional Budget Office is only scoring the cost at $5 billion. How so? Because the transaction is being called an "exchange of assets," which means the U.S. gives the IMF the $108 billion and the IMF gives the U.S. a promissory note. Which raises a question: If it costs so little, why not make it $200 billion. Or a trillion? It's free!
IMF History: The IMF has played a part in shaping the global economy since the end of World War II.
---- And a fine shape the global economy is in, heh?
This is probably the most shallow junk I've read all year. From none other than Crooks and Liars, who, while I'm not a regular reader, I was under the misguided notion C&L was somewhat of an objective site. Silly me, I guess their name is appropriate, taken from the famous remark of horseface John Kerry when he was describing his bedfellows in DC.
C&L: Sarah Palin is on a new jag or an old one actually. She's ranting about some New World Order nonsense and while introducing wingnut radio host Michael Regan in Alaska, told the audience that the government wants to control the lives of "the people."
Via CNN: Alaska governor Sarah Palin let loose Wednesday on the Obama administration for enacting fiscal policies that "fly in the face of principles" and "defy Economics 101."
Palin: We need to be aware of the creation of a fearful population, and fearful lawmakers, being led to believe that big government is the answer, to bail out the private sector, because then government gets to get in there and control it," she said. "And mark my words, this is going to be next, I fear, bail out next debt-ridden states. Then government gets to get in there and control the people.
There's something pretty weird hearing the term "Economics 101," being uttered by Sarah because she showed little knowledge of economics on the campaign trail, but that being said...the right wing constantly is reaching out to the far depths of the conservative movement and are trying to instill more and more fear into that base which will only increase the violence that comes out of those merky depths. "People control," really Sarah? She should stop hanging out with nutty talk show hosts.
Just to help her out a little bit, it was under George Bush and conservative---neocon warhawks that the global financial markets melted down and led us down the path of being "afraid." And wasn't it under her governance that she took money from the oil companies and handed it out to her people?
CC's Indecision (Comedy Central blog): It should just sit back and let the free market do its thing and, um, dispense the lucre…
In Alaska, where Palin is governor, natural resources are state-owned, and Alaska residents receive yearly dividend checks from a $30 billion state account built largely from oil royalties….
When home fuel and gas costs soared this year, Palin raised taxes on oil companies and used some of the money to boost residents' checks by $1,200. Every eligible man, woman and child got a record $3,269 this fall.
Even the grammar-challenged Governor knows there's word for that kind of redistributive policy. Starts with S.
---- Hmmm. I don't think the word "starts with S."
To C&L: Michael "Regan" should be Reagan, Ronnie's son. I have never listened to him so do not know if he's a wingnut or not - but then I don't get my news from Colbert or Jon Stewart either, as many "progressives" seem to do. I did google on over to Reagan's website and read a couple of columns. In one he described Boy Bush's era as "big government and wild-spending."
Pssssttt we've been doing that for decades, spending just gets wilder with each president.
As to the sniplet from CNN by way of C&L: "Just to help her out a little bit, it was under George Bush and conservative---neocon warhawks that the global financial markets melted down and led us down the path of being "afraid."
I suppose it's best to blame those "neocon warhawks" (haven't seen that phrase in a while), rather than look aghast at the money Obamasiah is throwing on the flames of those melting markets (and ignore the fact that Barry O. isn't antiwar, he was pandering to the sheople). And if you want to pin blame there's enough to go around at least back to the Clinton era of come one come all for toxic lending. In fact, I would say HUD/Fannie and Freddie were pretty much the Clintonistas damage. And, wasn't the housing market the first domino in this meltdown?
The question asked by CNN blog: "And wasn't it under her governance that she took money from the oil companies and handed it out to her people?"
Are you serious? The Alaskan PFD is not simply "handed out to her people." The Fund has been around since 1976, overhauled in 1982.
The governor Palin replaced in 2006, Murkowski, sought sweetheart deals for oil companies and Alaskan voters put him out of office. Several of the governor's negotiators were later indicted, accused of making back-room deals with the industry. It was Palin who scrapped Murkowski's deals, stood up to big oil, and raised their taxes. But ... " "it would be an overstatement to brand Palin as an enemy of Big Oil. Her husband works as a production supervisor for BP. And her support for drilling in the Alaska Natural Wildlife Reserve, as well as exploiting Alaska's natural gas resources, certainly won't endear her to environmentalists. "Personally, I have respect for the industry," she said in an interview with Fortune last year, "for the contributions it's made to our state ... and great respect for what their CEOs are doing. We know their mission, to take as much as possible and leave as little behind."
I'm stumped I tell you, stumped - why would "progressives" diss a pol who obviously stood up to Big Oil, and taxed them? One who so accurately calls corporate CEO's mission "to take as much as possible and leave as little behind." And isn't that what we've witnessed from both parties in the Halls of Power for the past 3+ decades?
On the other hand some Alaskans believe Alaskan politicians, the Fund managers and their operating costs, the corporations the Fund invests in, all benefit too much from the fund while sending stipends to the people.
Stipends that range from $300-$3200 per year per eligible person. Felons are not eligible, and if you owe taxes, child support, etc. the state will be keeping that PFD. Alaska had a population of approximately 686,000, and a PFD fund of $38 billion in 2008. Even if all residents are eligible, which they are not, the total paid out in 2008 (a record $2080-2100) would be $2.1 billion - around 5-6% of the total fund. Sarah also passed out a $1200 resource rebate check that year because of high energy costs. Sort of like the Bushobama rebates and stimulus checks, except Alaska could afford to do it.
But tell me, how will that work with other states not as fortunate, not sitting on oil and gas? California is struggling even with all the wealth from tourism, energy, agriculture, hi-tech, etc. Will all or only a few industries have their profits placed in a California State fund for yearly stipends to the state's 37,000,000 residents? What about those poor states like Arkansas and Kentucky? What about illegal alie....oops, I mean undocumented workers, would they get a stipend if they meet the eligibility requirements? Will Alaskans be angry when their stipend goes down in order to help stipenders in states like po' Mississippi and West Virginey?
Every state would have funds collected, from State run industries of course, and then BigDaddy Guvmint will dole out the dividend stipends, and it would need to be the same amount for every individual, just as it is in Alaska. So poorer states will get some of theirs from the richer states. From each according to his ability, to each according to his need? I don't think that's called socialism, and the BigDaddy State will never wither away - that happens only in neoprogressive dreams and chat rooms, usually after a little Maui Owie. (And if, as in Alaska, a felon is not eligible - guess what color and rung won't be getting a dividend.)
You know Bubba, there may not even be a word yet for the Government that's coming to redistribute the stipends, but my best guess is ... it will start with a T.
Obama's refusal to release more photos of abuse from Abu Ghraib has set the "leftish" folks to either ranting or waxing philosophically or just linking to one another with a reader ragbag of comments which always turn into personal attacks by keyboard warriors who do not know one another but can type words like asshole and troll.
Saw the usual and predictable torture/abuse stories today on Antiwar, PI, Commiedreams, the UK Telegraph, and the ever trusty NYT.
Consensus seems to be that the abuse/torture at Abu Ghraib was rampant, wanton, and no one was held accountable. Actually, a few were punished with prison terms, bad conduct or dishonorable discharges, reduction in rank, fines, etc.: Lynndie England, Michael Smith, Charles Graner, Sabrina Harman, Janis Karpinski lost a bird, Ivan L. Fredrick, Armin J. Cruz, and others.
I know, I know, we want to see Bush and Cheney blood but that isn't going to happen - so the next best thing for the "left" is to continue to fan flames with demands for more torture porn.
I notice most of the recent articles cite Maj. General Antonio Taguba. Be careful Tony, when the "left" embraces you it can be the kiss of death. They embraced Brig. General Janis Karpinski as she claimed she took the Abu fall for BushCo - poor woman. Never mind that the much quoted by the "left," Mr. Taguba, stated in the now famous leaked Article 15-6 Investigation of 800th Military Police Brigade that Karpinski:
"During the course of this investigation I conducted a lengthy interview with BG Karpinski that lasted over four hours, and is included verbatim in the investigation Annexes. BG Karpinski was extremely emotional during much of her testimony. What I found particularly disturbing in her testimony was her complete unwillingness to either understand or accept that many of the problems inherent in the 800th MP Brigade were caused or exacerbated by poor leadership and the refusal of her command to both establish and enforce basic standards and principles among its soldiers."
Or that Taguba also states more than once "Throughout the investigation, we observed many individual Soldiers and some subordinate units under the 800th MP Brigade that overcame significant obstacles, persevered in extremely poor conditions, and upheld the Army Values. We discovered numerous examples of Soldiers and Sailors taking the initiative in the absence of leadership and accomplishing their assigned tasks."
I venture to wager that most of the folks passing around the renewed chant for more torture photos have not read the above Article 15-6 by Taguba.
The "left" also welcomed former Bushista Lt. General Ricardo Sanchez, in fact he was tagged the Democrats General after he saw the light. Taguba came to believe that Lt. General Sanchez ... and some of the generals assigned to the military headquarters in Baghdad had extensive knowledge of the abuse of prisoners in Abu Ghraib ... Taguba was aware that in the fall of 2003—when much of the abuse took place—Sanchez routinely visited the prison, and witnessed at least one interrogation. According to Taguba, “Sanchez knew exactly what was going on.”
Seldom, if ever, does the "left" quote Taguba when he says things like "The M.P.s, were being literally exploited by the military interrogators. My view is that those kids"—even the soldiers in the photographs—"were poorly led, not trained, and had not been given any standard operating procedures on how they should guard the detainees."
Their leadership at the time being Janis and Ricardo - who became new best friends of the "left" blogosphere.
(Hmm was the "left" trying for another Ellsberg leak?) In the NYT oped above the author, as so many before him have stated: "Six months later, in April 2004, when the Harman and Graner photographs were leaked to the press, they shocked the world’s conscience."
What conscious world would that be? Anyone who claims their conscience was shocked is either a liar or a useful idiot. Tell me you were disappointed, discouraged, saddened to see our troops degrading and tormenting prisoners - but don't tell me your conscience was shocked (unless you have spent your life cloistered with no contact to the outside world).
If you glimpse any media at all you cannot possibly be shocked by what man does to man, parent does to child, or complete strangers on stranger, random and planned acts of ghastly perversion or brutal indifference in entertainment/news/music/art - 24/7 porno-violence. Don't tell me your conscience was "shocked" by a pyramid of naked males with a soldier giving a thumbs-up, or shocked at naked men with panties on their head, or of dogs growling at or biting a prisoner. Or a hooded man standing on a crate with a bag on his head. And yes, even of rape, a rape Sy Hersh eternally spins as a child but is age 15-16 according to Taguba's report. Yet here at home the "left" have insured that the rapist of a 5-year-old child will typically receive a wrist slap and counseling, soon to be released back into the community with the ACLU fighting for his right to privacy, and crime TV has fodder for more graphic episodes.
Taguba seems to be what most of the troops are: Honorable and decent. Don't let the "left" adopt you Antonio - you will have to denounce the entire Imperialist Army as murdering torturing capitalist swine, which you served loyally for 35 years, and when they're done - they will dump you faster than they did Mama Sheehan (I feel sad for Cindy, her latest crowd draw was 20).
P.S. Also sir, you might not want to repeat what you said in the New Yorker, that "The stress of combat is not an excuse," because the "left" consider such remarks are rightwing code talk for personal responsibility, and the "left" uses "stress" as an excuse for a lot of criminal shit.
Here is Chomsky's latest piece, predominantly a rehash on evil Caucasians of American history, particularly Ford to Clinton. Gosh, will the leftists, always big on inclusion, have to include mulatto Obama on the list of American Imperialists pigs?
Noam: "Historical amnesia is a dangerous social phenomenon ..."
Sigh, roll eyes, no - it is the nature of man, collectively taking 2 steps forward and 1 step backward - but hey, "historical amnesia is a dangerous social phenomenon" has the ring of a more ominous intellectual scary-world ooophm!
In a couple of sentences Noam mentioned what Japan did in China, France in Algeria, and the British in India. But, this hit piece was not about evil-doers of Europe or Asia - it is the god awful barbarism of the USA. A barbarism Noam calls American Amnesia.
Noam reminds American amnesiacs of crimes against all the world's colored folk, many in the US : Vietnamese , Blacks, Native Americans, Central and South Americans, and of course Middle Easterners, specifically Gitmo as torture chamber. I say reminding Americans, because we know the masses overseas are not reading Noam in Dong Thap Province, or in Chichicastanengo, nor the Mbuti or Fulani people. (The left's favorite metizo,Thank-You-Bush-War-For-Oil Chavez, does read and plug Noam, and then there was the 2007 Osama bin Laden tape praising Chomsky. If you don't know Chomsky's book sales are pumped/plumped by government funded educational purchases and mandatory academics you must be one of his disciples, and if you told me some intel acronym bought Noam's books to keep sales up, I wouldn't be surprised.)
Phenomenon, amnesia? No. This piece is to remind colored folks here at home, that maybe we should still be pissed about the barbaric practices of the USA - and it is never ending, era after era after era ... Good lord Bubba, is "white guilt" still trendy? Is it payback time?
Chomsky says he supported McKinney in the 2008 election, you remember McKinney. Had no political problems for 12 years as a representative, then suddenly shortly after WTC/911 she changed her hairdo, cried racism in the Capitol, and went Green. I still wonder what sociopolitical "change" Cynthia thinks is coming down the pike. Chomsky also stated that if Ron Paul ran against Hillary Clinton he would support Hillary. Hillary?! Puleeze ... talk about a corrupt career imperialist ... Is there some dementia going on here?
Of course Noam, like all great scholars of his genre, has no viable solution (although the Rodney King Doctrine comes to mind, "cain't we all just get along"), nary a plan, not one word of how-to or remedy for any of barbaric America's past, present or future atrocities (he predicts future US atrocities) - but as always Noam is just reminding us of our own merciless behavior (especially all you white imperialists), like a good Left pundit should. Or the usual solution, consider having the UN or some global body rule the world - which seems to be the favored solution from leftist scholars (hacks/hirelings), who reluctantly are forced to live well under the boot of American imperialism.
Noam has been stirring our memories for 40 years Bubba and look where US society is today - more divided, demoralized, and socially alienated than when Noam began his career 81 senile years ago. How awful it must be for a political activist to look back at a lifetime of lecturing on the evils of America and realize one hasn't politically or socially accomplished diddly spit, unless of course that was the initial goal.
There's only so much you can blame on republicans and neocons and slaveholders and the man - social critics like Chomsky too have played a subtle role in shaping this fractious society we call homeland. Guys like this seemingly don't believe we are or ever were the land of the free and home of the brave. No sirrrree - the US is a 233-year-old arrogant boot stomping on the neck, especially necks of color, of what would otherwise be a world of peace. (If you breathe too hot on the heels of left professional social critics/activists a few will concede a time or two when the US was the good guys, e.g. WWII.)
So here we are, crying and begging our leaders to be keepers of world peace, while hanging onto the words of old professorial farts telling us who to blame as the leaders/keepers fail time and again, war after war - but hey, we now have many learned folks to tell us who to blame - blame the US. You know Bub, world atrocities are about the only thing dumbed down, doped up, poverty-stricken Americans accept personal responsibility for - and it only took a generation to get there.
We've become an undulating mass of petty philistines choosing one or another famous social critic to mimic; a pastime for halfass activists who think, in between sips of Cha tea, that verbally bashing the Government is really living on the edge - don't let the hardcore "left" know you don't swallow - they will claim your IQ is double digit (considered a high insult), especially if you're not impressed with Chomsky's finger pointing.
But Bubba, the stumper is this - I don't know how Noam's career as America's most influential leftist intellectual ever lasted 4+ decades under the jackboot of Imperialist Amerika.
Teaching Math In 1950s: A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price. What is his profit?
Teaching Math In 1960s: A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price, or $80. What is his profit?
Teaching Math In 1970s: A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80. Did he make a profit?
Teaching Math In 1980s: A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80 and his profit is $20. Your assignment: Underline the number 20.
Teaching Math In 1990s: A logger cuts down a beautiful forest because he is selfish and inconsiderate and cares nothing for the habitat of animals or the preservation of our woodlands. He does this so he can make a profit of $20. What do you think of this way of making a living? Topic for class participation after answering the question: How did the birds and squirrels feel as the logger cut down their homes? (There are no wrong answers, and if you feel like crying, it's ok.)
Teaching Math In 2009: Un hachero vende una carretada de madera para $100. El costo de la producciones es $80. Cuanto dinero ha hecho?
Granddaughter Cate (guitar) and her band for this year's high school talent show are doing the anthem (last year was Another Brick in the Wall.). She likes this version from Laiyouttitham.
Not to pee on the parade - but it could be this whole officer-takes-a-stand scene is a staged op from the other faction of the ruling elite. In an environment of national news dominated by celebrity lives/death and sex junk – any anti-Iraq war "news" or personality, is questionable. Remember too, it's not that the other "faction" of the ruling elite are good guys when in power, they just prefer the appearance of legal slaughter.
This past week's mistrial in the Watada case has been hailed as a "blow to the Pentagon." It's not the Pentagon getting this blowjob folks. Don't look for any retrial; this will end as it began, nice and neat.
It now seems likely Ehren will resign his commission, receive a general discharge, and find other arenas in which to fight whatever he is fighting (right after the probable book deal) – or he could show up in 30 years as a heavy medal-chested planner in the Pentagon. But more likely a civilian political office is at the top of his to-do list.
--- I was under the impression that the 2 conduct unbecoming charges had been dropped in January 2007, but according to this story today, 05/06/09 "Fort Lewis leadership is still mulling how to handle two remaining allegations of conduct unbecoming an officer against Watada." But, as I more or less predicted, the Justice Department asked the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to dismiss the matter which they did yesterday. Obama will receive credit for not pursuing the matter, his administration being kinder and gentler.
And today, his attorney says Watada, "... plans to return to civilian life and to attend law school."
So .... guess that political office is on the to-do list. Maybe Ehren will study contract law, show folks how to get out of contracts/oath without any serious consequences; he may be real pol material.
In some ways, Watada is the male version of Sheehan - both "found" a conscience that catapulted them into new careers because they had the "courage to resist" Bush's Iraq war and the evil neocons or something like that.
Ft. Lewis is "mulling," which is code for the pseudo-left has finished with these two bullshit distractions. Hmm, catapult, an ancient military device for hurling missiles. Sort of like Ehren and Cindy were thrown at the public as icons of courage, although neither of them have shown any mental or moral strength.
Oh lord Bubba, are they this generation's Jane Fonda and John Kerry? Will our grandchildren have to suffer through their careers and appearances as I have Jane and John's?
Rate your representatives here. I have to wonder just who is grading as the bottom, F's, all seem to be democrats (although they probably deserve the grade).
Sample: 531. T. Bishop (D) NY-1st F 530. M. Capuano (D) MA-8th F 529. T. Childers (D) MS-1st F 528. J. Cooper (D) TN-5th F 527. J. Crowley (D) NY-7th F 526. H. Cuellar (D) TX-28th F 525. K. Dahlkemper (D) PA-3rd F 524. S. Davis (D) CA-53rd F 523. A. Davis (D) AL-7th F 522. B. Ellsworth (D) IN-8th F 521. S. Israel (D) NY-2nd F 520. H. Johnson (D) GA-4th F 519. M. Kilroy (D) OH-15th F 518. R. Kind (D) WI-3rd F 517. L. Kissell (D) NC-8th F 516. R. Larsen (D) WA-2nd F 515. J. Larson (D) CT-1st F 514. N. Lowey (D) NY-18th F 513. B. Lujan (D) NM-3rd F 512. D. Matsui (D) CA-5th F 511. J. McGovern (D) MA-3rd F 510. M. McIntyre (D) NC-7th F 509. J. McNerney (D) CA-11th F 508. G. Meeks (D) NY-6th F 507. G. Moore (D) WI-4th F 506. C. Murphy (D) CT-5th F 505. R. Neal (D) MA-2nd F 504. B. Pascrell (D) NJ-8th F 503. D. Payne (D) NJ-10th F 502. C. Pingree (D) ME-1st F 501. J. Polis (D) CO-2nd F 500. E. Pomeroy (D) ND F 499. S. Rothman (D) NJ-9th F 498. L. Roybal-Allard (D) CA-34th F 497. C. Ruppersberger (D) MD-2nd F 496. L. Sanchez (D) CA-47th F 495. J. Sarbanes (D) MD-3rd F 494. M. Schauer (D) MI-7th F 493. A. Schiff (D) CA-29th F 492. J. Serrano (D) NY-16th F 491. B. Sherman (D) CA-27th F 490. A. Sires (D) NJ-13th F 489. A. Smith (D) WA-9th F 488. J. Speier (D) CA-12th F 487. B. Stupak (D) MI-1st F 486. B. Thompson (D) MS-2nd F 485. J. Tierney (D) MA-6th F 484. N. Tsongas (D) MA-5th F 483. T. Udall (D) NM F 482. P. Visclosky (D) IN-1st F 481. T. Walz (D) MN-1st F 480. D. Watson (D) CA-33rd F 479. P. Welch (D) VT F 478. C. Dodd (D) CT F 477. N. Pelosi (D) CA-8th F 476. B. Frank (D) MA-4th F 475. R. Burris (D) IL F 474. S. Kosmas (D) FL-24th F 473. D. Moore (D) KS-3rd F 472. B. Rush (D) IL-1st F 471. H. Waxman (D) CA-30th F 470. B. Filner (D) CA-51st F 469. B. Boxer (D) CA F 468. H. Reid (D) NV F 467. D. Scott (D) GA-13th F 466. C. Wilson (D) OH-6th F 465. J. Murtha (D) PA-12th F 464. M. Waters (D) CA-35th F 463. D. Obey (D) WI-7th F 462. D. Feinstein (D) CA F 461. P. Murray (D) WA F 460. D. Stabenow (D) MI F 459. C. Brown (D) FL-3rd F 458. L. Capps (D) CA-23rd F 457. B. Markey (D) CO-4th F 456. G. Peters (D) MI-9th F 455. M. Watt (D) NC-12th F 454. C. Rangel (D) NY-15th F 453. H. Teague (D) NM-2nd F 452. H. Kohl (D) WI F 451. R. Menendez (D) NJ F 450. B. Lee (D) CA-9th F 449. A. Specter (D) PA F 448. M. Bennet (D) CO F 447. C. Schumer (D) NY F 446. C. Carney (D) PA-10th F 445. K. Castor (D) FL-11th F 444. J. Costello (D) IL-12th F 443. D. Halvorson (D) IL-11th F 442. B. Miller (D) NC-13th F 441. J. Olver (D) MA-1st F 440. A. Schwartz (D) PA-13th F 439. V. Snyder (D) AR-2nd F 438. N. Velazquez (D) NY-12th F 437. D. Wu (D) OR-1st F 436. J. Kerry (D) MA F 435. J. Jackson (D) IL-2nd F 434. X. Becerra (D) CA-31st F 433. D. Boren (D) OK-2nd F 432. S. Kagen (D) WI-8th F 431. Z. Lofgren (D) CA-16th F 430. J. Shaheen (D) NH F 429. J. Rockefeller, IV (D) WV F 428. M. Udall (D) CO F 427. J. Boccieri (D) OH-16th F 426. K. Conrad (D) ND F 425. L. Davis (D) TN-4th F 424. C. Gonzalez (D) TX-20th F 423. J. Himes (D) CT-4th F 422. R. Holt (D) NJ-12th F 421. C. Maloney (D) NY-14th F 420. M. Thompson (D) CA-1st F 419. T. Harkin (D) IA F 418. R. Grijalva (D) AZ-7th F 417. G. Napolitano (D) CA-38th F 416. B. Etheridge (D) NC-2nd F
1st place goes to Ireland - 811% External debt (as % of GDP): 811% External debt per capita: $549,819
2nd United Kingdom - 336% External debt (as % of GDP): 336% External debt per capita: $153,616
3rd Belgium - 327% External Debt (as % of GDP): 327% External debt per capita: $155,362
4th Hong Kong - 295% External debt (as % of GDP): 295% External debt per capita: $93,539
5th Netherlands - 268% External debt (as % of GDP): 268% External debt per capita: $145,959
6th Switzerland - 264% External debt (as % of GDP): 264% External debt per capita: $171,478
7th Austria - 191% External debt (as % of GDP): 191% External debt per capita: $100,787
8th France - 168% External debt (as % of GDP): 168% External debt per capita: $78,070
9th Denmark - 159% External debt (as % of GDP): 159% External debt per capita: $107,026
10th Germany - 137.5% External debt (as % of GDP): 137.5% External debt per capita: $63,767
11th Spain - 137.5% External debt (as % of GDP): 137.5% External debt per capita: $57,091
12th Sweden - 129% External debt (as % of GDP): 129% External debt per capita: $73,245
13th Finland - 116% External debt (as % of GDP): 116% External debt per capita: $62,579
14th Norway - 114% External debt (as % of GDP): 114% External debt per capita: $118,353
15th - United States - 95.09% External debt (as % of GDP): 95.09% External debt per capita: $44,358
Is it just me, or are most of these leading debtor nations also the countries the US left-leaners often claim are icons of social success stories, and we should yearn to imitate their "free" stuff programs?
Bubba, the left-leaning buffoons will claim their debt is the fault of Americans who are sinking the US dollar, at the expense of the above nations, and has nothing to do with the failure of socialist styled governments. But don't listen to 'em Bubba - these folks will cut off their own nose to spite their face.
I am not a supporter of the legalization of marijuana, but I have had a few laughs lately reading the standard arguments of pro-weed supporters; arguments that seem logical only if you are smoking some very good weed (or dream of a future in farming, production, sale of same). But, this latest claim making the Internet rounds has to be the most hilarious - weed cures cancer.
Rick Simpson, a Canadian, has made a name for himself, and a following, with the claims that THC cures cancer. Simpson has a free video on the how and wherefore titled Run From the Cure, and a website Phoenix Tears. Simpson claims to have cured himself of skin cancer. In this video, at approximately 1.45 minutes in, Rick gives you the method of making "hemp oil," the miracle cure. "He's a healer, not a dealer" as supporters like to refer to Rick.
Got that? Place good weed, preferably the buds, with a solvent, mix and stir with either pure naphtha or 99% isopropyl alcohol (naphtha is a petroleum product used in lighter fluid, paint stripper, etc.). Mix well, drain the liquid, take to a well-ventilated area, turn on the fan, use rubber gloves, keep away from flame, boil in a crock pot, pour in container, cool. You have just cooked up in your home lab - the cure for cancer.
Folks, this is the best laugh from Internet follies I've had in a while. Rick has basically just made a potent hashish. I need a rolling on the floor laughing emoticon.
Remember Cindy? The great white progressive peace hope? She is selling a $10 booklet by the above title, listing 10 myths:
Myth One: America: Greatest Nation in the Universe! Myth Two: Elections Matter Myth Three: There's a huge Difference Between Dems and Repubs Myth Four: It is Noble to Die in Robber Class Wars Myth Five: The Central Banking System is good for the Robbed Class Myth Six: It's a Privilege to pay Income Taxes to the Robber Class Myth Seven: Housing, Health Care and Education are Privileges, too Myth Eight: America has a Free Press Myth Nine: The Environment, Who Needs it? Myth Ten: 19 Muslims with box cutters were responsible for 9/11
Cindy divides us into the Robbed and the Robbers, with most of us on the Robbed side. The Robbed are essentially the working class, people who have to struggle for healthcare and higher education.
---- Let me tell you a story, one of many, many stories of the typical struggling working class "Robbed" folks of which I have firsthand information. This segment of the "Robbed" are the folks Sheehan and friends attempt to pander to.
The story is Oleta and Bill, both in their early 40s, with 3 sons ages 4, 6, 8. Oleta constantly feels robbed. She recently applied for foodstamps and bitched outrage for a month because she was not eligible. Bill has a decent job for unskilled labor, bringing in about $35,000 a year. Oleta performs clerical work off and on bringing in another $15,000, and the 2 older children bring in $14,400 from SSI disability (they were preemies with learning disabilities and asthma).
Bill has healthcare at work and the State also covers medical care for the 2 "disabled" kids. At the local health and dental clinic Oleta can have $600 worth of dental work for the sliding scale fee of $25 - and still complains, it should be free because she pays taxes. But, the $200 of Bill's $1400 partial denture, not covered by work insurance - really angered Oleta - she was robbed.
They own their home and somehow Oleta manages to qualify for every program that doles out dollars to low income homeowners, for repairs, upgrades, insulation, a new furnace, etc. Still, she feels robbed when events like the Fema funded cleanup crew after last winter's ice storm did not prune her trees. She might have to pay for that unless Bill decides to do it with help from Oleta's brother who has his own handyman cleanup business - unless she convinces her church she qualifies for free tree trimming, now that those faith-based grants are coming in to help robbed folks like herself.
Oleta has an associate degree - a degree for folks who attend college for 2 years but do not like school and really have no driving ambition or the brains to be higher educated; in the 'hood though an associate degree confers immense bragging rights and status, it's the ghetto PhD. Oleta's 2-year degree took 3-1/2 years to complete and was paid for by affirmative action and grant programs, which would have covered that BA if she had just had the oomph! to go for it. She was robbed again, not because she didn't delay having children for another couple of years, but because the State wouldn't pay for their maintenance while she took her time trying for that BA degree. Oh well, such is the unfairness perpetuated on the robbed class.
Of course Oleta expects her children should have State funded higher education, whether or not they have the mindset or ability is not important. If any of her "disabled" sons are fortunate, they will throw off the label of disabled and get a life, if not, they will draw checks the rest of their life - floating around the 'hood, having kids, brushes with the lawman, smoking the soon to be legalized marijuana and feeling robbed like mom and dad.
Last month Oleta felt robbed because the non-profit local community organization refused to throw some under-the-table work her way - robbed, because she could have used $400 which the organization could have paid her to mop and wax the community room - instead a couple of members volunteered to do it for nothing. Oleta's attitude is how can a righteous woman make a few bucks if some people are ignorant enough to work for free.
Oleta and Bill do not pay actual taxes to the Robber class - they receive $5000-6000 each year in refunds along with any other stimulus/rebate the Robbers deem applicable. Oleta has her own non-profit consulting "business" on the books, on paper, but it never makes any money, other than writing off everything remotely possible as an expense at tax time, computers, cell phones, a portion of home expenses for an office, etc. It was a little scheme she learned in those business courses toward that associate degree.
Oleta and Bill vote once every four years and then forget about it. They don't read much so are unconcerned about whether the press is free or not, besides if it is on CNN then it must be true - but most of their news comes from church bulletins, quasi-Rev. Wright pastors, social program pamphlets, or the uniquely garbled grapevine of Black political interpretation from local community leaders with associate degrees.
If concern for the environment is going to cost them out of pocket or create any inconvenience - forget it, they will feel robbed.
They know there is little difference between democrats and republicans - but they believe democrats always initiate a few more social programs - in fact, Oleta is eagerly awaiting to see if her home-based business qualifies her for a paid consultant position regarding a local low-income housing project. She believes she knows exactly what the "robbed" class here needs - but eeewww weeeee girl! if you could hear her regular gossip about the thieving, low-life lazy bums in the 'hood you would think she couldn't be paid to help them.
Oleta and Bill believe 19 boxcutters are possible because Oleta's cousin Jammer stole 6 cars in 1 day and the cops still don't know where the chop shop is located. Oleta and Bill have never served in the wars of the Robber class - nor have any of their immediate or extended family members - soldiering is for poor folks and fools and why serve when receiving is so respectably easy, especially if you have an associate degree and are slightly smarter than most of the other Robbed folks.
They do sometimes believe the #1 myth though - America the greatest nation in the universe - depending on how much free stuff they qualify for in a given year.
Oleta just returned from an Easter cruise to the Bahamas - her fake hair and nails need to be done after a week on the water and buffet dining, and she is broke until the boys checks come in this month. But even after a vacation Oleta is in a bad mood - always feeling robbed.
As to the case for revolution my dear defenders of the Robbed class - you better have lots of funding, because folks like Oleta and Bill aren't going to do anything unless there is money or a voucher attached.
You are being lied to about pirates - or so says Johann Hari. According to Hari these people (pirates) "have an extraordinary story to tell - and some justice on their side."
The defense of piracy by the criminal elements of the progressive movement claim pirates are pirating because bad people are dumping toxic waste and trawling in Somali waters - hence justice is on their side. Hari and ilk give new meaning to the word poopdeck.
I read AllAfrica regularly and have not seen anything on toxic dumping as the excuse behind multi-millionaire ransoming Somali pirates. Nigeria did have a group threatening to shut down an Italian oil company for dumping waste in their community, and Uganda protested e-waste being dumped locally. Kenya, Somalia, and Ghana have officially complained to the UN about illegal trawlers. Somalia worked out a deal with Yemeni fishermen who were often caught trawling in Somalian waters. It seems most of the Somali coastal poaching has been by fellow African fishermen.
Hijacked ships are usually hundreds of miles out, not the 12 mile coastal territorial limit for Somalia, although initially hijackings were closer to shore, and blow me down, they were not fishing boats. Yachts and cruise ships are also targeted now. I guess success breeds escalating and expanding business. In the last 24 hours these extraordinary pirates have hijacked in the Gulf of Aden a Lebanese cargo ship, a Greek bulk carrier, and 2 Egyptian fishing ships (Egypt has to go through the Aden Gulf to get to the Indian Ocean, poaching or not).
Part of Captain Phillips Maersk Alabama cargo was food aid for Kenya. How does that pertain to dumping/trawling?
Where has the $100 million (preferably paid in crispy U$D) from piracy fiscal year 2008 been spent? Given to Somali officials for the cause or given to the Somali people? Me thinks not me landlubber friends.
Johann also says "Pirates were the first people to rebel against this world. Once they had a ship, the pirates elected their captains, and made all their decisions collectively. "
Yep Bubba, pirates were egalitarian, socialists. Never mind that such notables as Laffite, Hawkins, and those Barbary Johnny Depps also dealt in the slave trade, they were democratic rebels amongst one another, and a historian or two claim some pirates "took in escaped African slaves and lived with them as equals." Mighty white of 'em, aye Bubba matey?
And what would excuses be if not the usual 400 or 500-year-old excuse of "What I did was to keep me from perishing. I was forced to go a-pirating to live." Surely the gentleman o' fortune Bernie Madoff and lily-livered bonused executives feel the same way today - they were just forced to go a-livin' higher than ye average perishing pirate.
Try as I might me barnacle encrusted biscuit eaters, I cannot make the connection between kidnapping for ransom and legitimate "protest".
Reminds me of brothers in the '60s who robbed armored trucks and claimed it was for the "cause," or the SLA who kidnapped Patty Hearst and demanded $2 million in food ransom for the poor of LA. Many poor had enough sense to be horrified and refused the food because they valued human life more than a sack of ill-gotten groceries.
But, my spongy Bubba baggy pants, that was in the days before so many folks bought into the liberal/progressive idea of criminality is okay if committed by po' folk against rich folk. Yo ho ho.
The idiocy of youth. Busting a few windows and hurling insults to topple the "capitalist" system - whoo hooo. What do these folks really want? I believe their motto is "social justice." Hmmm. Now what would a more just society entail?
A national healthcare system? Direly needed with the approaching 70% overweight/obese citizenry and associated health problems appearing at a younger age than ever before. The large number of drug seekers and hypochondriacs are plentiful. And the growing numbers of lifestyle "disabled" folks, addicts, slackers, octomoms, etc. who have floundered around their entire lives expecting others to pick up after them and clean up their messes. Not that the global corporatocracy will pay for all these sickly folks, no sirreeee, they will not. The shrinking middle class is expected to generate the tax dollars to cover these folks, for a more just society.
Quality education for one and all? Hmmm, how long has the government been promising quality education? This year alone our local high school has 3 times caught students having sex in the bathroom, 6 blowjobs on the bus, 25 sexting, 5 locker drug busts, and needing more tax dollars to enlarge the nursery for teen mommies (thank you Medicaid) who think they look so cute bringing infant carriers to school. Those teens who behave really badly are sent to the "alternative" school. Lesson? My 16-year-old granddaughter (who happens to be a virgin) can sit between 2 pregnant classmates discussing heartburn and frequent urination while she's trying to grasp the concepts of algebra. Can you see who is sacrificing here my pussface lemming brain comrades?
Human rights and equality. Oh Bubba, that's a hairy one. What are basic human rights/equality? Lets condense that to meaning: The right to personally pursue anything that does not harm others, and equality before the law - and you have these rights/equality simply by virtue of being human. The old right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And if your pursuit happens to cost me directly and indirectly?
Well, don't worry, according to progressive philosophy I'm not allowed to name it, blame it, or shame it - because that would be politically incorrect, however, I can be forced to contribute to the programs to aid whatever slovenly self-destructive pursuit you pursue, as long as you do not rob, beat, mug, maim, or murder me, it's not causing direct harm to me and mine. Right? And if you are incarcerated for anything I can sign a petition to free you because jails are full of guys and gals who didn't do it because cops frame everyone, and some who did commit the crime did so only because they were born in poverty, which is the 40-excuses-and-a-mule card.
We are all free to make our own anti-social bone-headed self-destructive choices and then demand and receive gratuitous pity from those in swanky offices doling out dollars to the slovenly and slattern living in squalor, and call it " social justice." Right?
Other platforms you must support somewhat to be a progressive: Gay marriage, single motherhood, gun control, save the planet, legalization of marijuana, be against capital punishment, and for many, many more programs from BigDaddy Guvteat - to furnish you all the milk of justice and equality you can stand.
Text of H.R.1388, Obama's Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education, (GIVE) Act.
The NEA (National Education Association) is pleased as they believe the act will:
* Strengthen existing service programs and create new innovative programs to help improve student achievement and graduation in low-income schools, including expansion of mentoring programs to help disadvantaged youth. * Provide new incentives for middle and high school students to volunteer in their communities, and allow them to earn a $500 education award to be used for college costs. * Increase the number of AmeriCorps volunteers and increase the education reward they receive to match the maximum Pell Grant scholarship award.
Yessiree Bubba. Now teens and tweens can volunteer for $500, which, if they utilize that benefit, could someday purchase a couple of college textbooks. Perhaps these teeny tweeny volunteers will go on to serve AmeriCorps and get a matching $4700 a year Pell Grant, if they qualify.
Some day Bubba, we'll be bumping into corps alumni all over the place. Sort of like the 1964 LBJ War on Poverty JobCorps program - which has attempted to help 2 or 3 generations of at-risk 16-24 y/o youth live at government funded facilities to get a GED, a "skill", and find a job - something parents should have could have done, if they were interested in their children.
GIVE will also target senior citizens for volunteering. Something many seniors used to do for free, but volunteering for free is so passe, so last century.
Speaking of JobCorps, their centers are operated for the Department of Labor by private companies through a competitive contracting process, e.g., ITT Industries; BDM International/Vinnell; ResCare, Inc. Privatizing welfare is nothing new of course. But the potential problems of profit motivation to minimize costs is always there. Competitive contracting with ITT, winky wink.
Let's see, we have JFK Peace Corps, LBJ Job Corps, Clinton AmeriCorps, now Obama GIVE corp. The GIVE package will give to so many more dot.orgs though Bubba. AmeriCorps NCCC ((National Civilian Community Corps) will triple its numbers to 275,000 invigorating volunteers. Learn and Serve America , another Giver nursing freely on the public teat will benefit, as will Campuses of Service, Clean Energy Corps, Investment for Quality and Innovation, Healthy Futures Corps (which may or may not address abortion) and a host of other corps and their affiliates, to be extended or created, including ACORN. No corps left behind. All promising to bring the poor out of poverty.
KAB interpretation? For a mere initial GIVE package of $6 billion the government will teach you to caulk windows, pick up park trash, hammer a nail, mow a lawn, plant a tree, ladle soup in a kitchen, empty bedpans, and hopefully do something on the p.c. other than porn and games.
Like all the programs which have come before - GIVE will give excessive amounts of tax dollars to overpaid administrators and contractors who will in turn dole out stipends to the serfs who in turn will engage in useless tasks while being told they are noble because they are performing in the name of national service.
No volunteer left behind Bubba, but you're gonna get a big wedgey with your own bootstraps.
US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner shocked global markets by revealing that Washington is "quite open" to Chinese proposals for the gradual development of a global reserve currency run by the International Monetary Fund.
The dollar plunged instantly against the euro, yen, and sterling as the comments flashed across trading screens. David Bloom, currency chief at HSBC, said the apparent policy shift amounts to an earthquake in geo-finance.
"The mere fact that the US Treasury Secretary is even entertaining thoughts that the dollar may cease being the anchor of the global monetary system has caused consternation," he said.
Mr Geithner later qualified his remarks, insisting that the dollar would remain the "world's dominant reserve currency ... for a long period of time" but the seeds of doubt have been sown.
The markets appear baffled by the confused statements emanating from Washington. President Barack Obama told a new conference hours earlier that there was no threat to the reserve status of the dollar.
"I don't believe that there is a need for a global currency. The reason the dollar is strong right now is because investors consider the United States the strongest economy in the world with the most stable political system in the world," he said.
The Chinese proposal, outlined this week by central bank governor Zhou Xiaochuan, calls for a "super-sovereign reserve currency" under IMF management, turning the Fund into a sort of world central bank.
----- Get it Bubba? Washington is "quite open" to Chinese proposals for the gradual development of a global reserve currency run by the IMF. Timmy's "quite open" to the idea, but Barry says "don't believe there is a need for a global currency." Liar. And you thought Obama was your new best friend.
The IMF is quite famous for its practice of Lending to Support Dictators - Pinochet, Duvalier, Suharto, Stroessner, Marcos, Barre, Mobutu, S. Africa apartheid, etc etc.
The IMF has done great work around the world, affectionately known as the international "lender of last resort" - sort of like Vinnie "Two Guns" down at the Social Club. Yea yea let's put IMF in charge.
This morning I have news on as background noise as I do laundry, sweep, dust. I catch bits or bytes: "... leftwing groups unite to push White House agenda ..." good grief, it is Karl Rove speaking, the former Bush brain according to leftwing groups.
On the web I read "... rightwingers unite to kill more brown people in Afghanistan, Gaza, Obama frees Gitmo ..."
Here we go - the us/them political mischief as usual, with little truth or importance in any of it, nor do these loud and fake pundits represent the thinking of anyone I know; please note - I said "thinking" people - not people who simply seek out those who reinforce their ideas, ideas which may be based on nothing more than someone told them it was a good idea.
Recently, it seems to me that most folks are under the mistaken impression that the "battle" for our hearts and minds, is the fight between Capitalism and Socialism. Contraire Pierre, I believe we are now watching the fight between Socialism and Communism - yes, the "c" word few want to mention. Sneaky folks are still arguing and politely calling it the push to socialism.
But lets look at the bare bones using the reasonable definitions of O'Sullivan:
Capitalism, defined as a system where most ownership is private, social objective is individual freedom, economic objective is efficiency, a system predominantly democratic and ruled by a few.
Socialism, defined as ownership is both public and private, the social goal is "equality", the economic objective is "fairness," and the system is predominantly bureaucratic, ruled by a few.
Communism, defined as ownership by the public, social objective is equality, economic objective is fairness; the system ruled by dictatorship.
Not much of a choice have we?
Using the above, it would appear the US seriously entered the socialist phase in the 1960s. The ideals of equality and fairness, run by bureaucrats, ruled by a few. Although one could argue serious socialism began under Roosevelt and the New Deal.
Using the above definitions, where do you think the US is at the moment? We have seen individual freedom curtailed - from being forced to alter personal habits - smoking, seat belts, helmet laws, sin taxes, etc. to BigDaddy Gov feeding the kids breakfast under the notion that it is social compassion, pretending that it's not mama won't get her butt out of bed to feed the kids Quakers instant oatmeal.
Individual freedom has been curtailed, socially and legislatively, by both Democrats and Republicans; whether bailing out big business or welfare mammies. Some call it the "nannie state." Good term for a nation of grubby incorrigible adults.
Over the past 40 years we have seen a great deal accomplished in the quest for "equality" and "fairness" - much of it earned by the blood and tears of an honorable generation willing to demand human dignity. But life is never completely equal and fair - and although we can all sit at the front of the bus, attend the same schools, live in any neighborhood we can afford - the ideal of equality and fairness pushes forward - but no longer honorably, for the push now is not to level the playing field - but to level the finish line.
To level the finish line the US powers-that-be give us Obama as step one to Communism or whatever future terminology they tag it: Government ownership, and equality/fairness as defined by a dictatorship. Or, if you prefer your reality wrapped in warm-fuzzies - call it a global village, mankind living as one, even if a few billion have to be forced into the village at gunpoint, the enforcers claim it's for their own social and economic good.
The State/public ownership of production seems viable to many, and so far has been gradual - through the heads of state and corporations rutting in the same bed, to State ownership via controlling shares of important business sectors. Those Joe Averages who are ignorant of reality will believe they "own the means of production" etc. The truth is the State will be the CEO and it will be business as usual - enriching corporate heads and government bureaucrats, with the added assurance and insurance that when greed and corruption intentionally drive businesses into the red, the public (you) will be forced to bail them out, after all, why shouldn't you since it is your company too (remember, you are the State).
Unless there is a catastrophic event (world war, big terrorist attack, extraterrestrial invasion;) the move to communism will likely take 1-2 generations. We already see a generation or two without a healthy "self" - devoid of self-motivation, no self-starting, no self-esteem - such qualities replaced with self-absorption, self-degradation, self-destruction - the result of folks who are convinced that doing what they want, when they want, where they want, is only "fair" because they are "free," with no concern for the social blowback and political fallout, and why should folks be concerned - the State "fair" safety net will take care of everything, and you are "free" to babble someone else is at fault for your failures.
WASHINGTON, March 13 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama was set on Friday to notify Congress of his first planned overseas arms deal, a Bell helicopter package to help counter drug-runners and other criminals in Mexico.
The Obama administration is proposing to send Mexico five Bell 412 EP twin-engine helicopters, valued at $93 million, as part of an anti-drug plan called the Merida Initiative, said a person with direct knowledge who asked not to be named because of the matter's sensitivity.
Established last year under former U.S. president George W. Bush, the Merida Initiative aims to help Mexico and Central America combat narcotrafficking, transnational crime and terrorism.
Fort Worth, Texas-based Bell Helicopter, a Textron Inc unit, would be prime contractor. The notice of such a potential sale is required by law. It does not mean a deal has been concluded.
---- Merida Initiative, a continuation of The Bush in the "war on drugs" or how to throw more money at programs that consistently fail. However, Bell Helicopter says thank you and the Mexican government says thank you, and the drug cartels say thank you because some of the folks flying these choppers will be cartel-ers.
Eight years ago we were in Mazatlan, lying on the beach, only yards from our hotel, when gunfire began - rival drug lords. Everyone hit the ground. I had to cover my 8-year-old granddaughter's eyes when we returned to our rooms as the street and sidewalk were covered in blood and a luxury car with bullet holes sat in front of the hotel with a couple of bodies hanging out; the perps got away. Broad daylight, in the middle of the street, with hundreds of witnesses. Within an hour or two the car and bodies were gone, the street cleaned, margarita time.
My daughter-in-law, a native of Zacatecas, Mexico, can no longer visit family there because a few months ago Mexican drug lords, who have been confiscating land, inquired as to the whereabouts of her father - to make him a deal he can't refuse regarding his ranch. The drug cartels have killed several local farmers who refuse to work with them.
Recently, Obama refused Texas governor Perry's request for troops at the border. Patricio Ahumeda, mayor of Brownsville, Texas, criticized Perry’s plan, calling him out of touch with what is really going on. Ahumeda and Perry both opposed "the wall." Perry stated you can build a 40 foot wall and the next day the number one business in Mexico will be 42 foot ladders.
Ahumeda “I appreciate and support Obama’s decision not to militarize the border because troops aren’t trained for this sort of thing. There was an incident where a national guard killed a shepherd in the El Paso area. It doesn’t work. The training is not the same. We’re not at war, and the violence and incidents that are occurring over there are not daily and are not spilling over here yet.” (Last year in Mexico there were 6290 drug-related murders.)
In 2007, Ahumeda spoke against the border fence, or wall. Mayor Pat also has a webpage.
Mayor Pat has petty problems - A current unresolved case of "thousands of dollars of city money deposited to the mayor's bank account." This was a City check issued to a NY based vendor. We used to call that embezzlement, now days it's usually called a mix-up. Reportedly, there is a video of the mayor making the questionable deposit, and the mayor "doesn't remember making the deposit."
The mayor also has issues with dogs - he picked up a dog he says was a stray, placed it in foster care, and when the dog's owner came forward the issue ended up in court. Another time it's reported he stole a dog from a local shelter because it was not being "properly cared for."
But! dogs aside, Mayor Pat has a solution for the border problem, solved without walls and/or troops. He has ... "... proposed to build a weir damn (lol, original spelling for dam) along the river, which will raise the water level from 123 to 126 feet above sea level, widen the river by 300 feet and back up the river for 42 miles — in essence creating a virtual fence that can easily be patrolled with high-speed boats, sophisticated electronic equipment and boots on the ground to deter any illegal activity along the border. It also offers many different economic opportunities to develop the river for tourism. This proposal is at a cost of $40.0 million, which is less costly and more effective than the border fence being proposed."
Sierra Club opposes any such dam as it would negatively impact the Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge. According to Brownsville public utilities the idea is gaining support.
Odd though, one of Mayor Pat's reasons for not wanting a fence is the loss of land to local landowners - but raising the sea level to widen the river for a "virtual fence" requires the same land loss. Hmmm... must be some damn, or dam, contractor buddies in there somewhere.
One problem with a river wall is it will cost much much much more than $40 million - all government projects do. And the creation of a deeper river invites boating cartels rather than deterring them.
Mexico's officials and some in the US declare the problem is the US market (supply and demand). True. And for the past 40 years we've been told to pity the addict as victim and spend billions to educate and cure his affliction. It's a "disease" - not the weakness of character or a sociopath. (Not to mention the legal prescription junkies.) Oh, I must mention too the progressive heart - demanding sanctuary and accommodation for the millions of illegal who are only here to feed their families with no ties to crime or the drug war. (Never mind that last year 40% of all Federal inmates were Hispanic - remember, if you're progressive, you believe it's racism filling the revolving door prisons, not real criminals.)
Also, so I'm told, I should be appalled and ashamed of the incarceration stats of the US - 2.3 million. I am not supposed to be ashamed the US produces so many thugs, thieves, molesters, murderers, abusers, junkies and dealers who end up incarcerated?
I managed to raise 5 children who never had any run-in with the legal system - it's not hard to do people. Whatever happened to "don't do the crime if you can't do the time." I believe it left the building around the same time that progressivism excused criminals as being victims of society - perps are people too (even if they are drugging, raping, killing, molesting, destroying, stealing, doping, dealing ... ).
I'm so old I can remember when the border was not a problem. I can remember when many of today's problems were not problems.
Has anyone yet said what the real border problem is? If not I will - it's social and political corruption. Money and corruption on both sides of the border.
We can build walls and rivers and troops, we can fund rehab for junkies and prisons for drug-related crime - but until the corrupt officials on both sides are nailed to the wall, until folks grow tired of the progressively imposed bullshit disguised as compassion - the "war" will continue on and on and on.
Republican SC governor, Mark Sanford, chief resister to Obama's stimulus said this week he'd reject $700 million of his state's $2.8 billion share of stimulus money unless he can spend it to pay down debt, and compared Obama's fiscal policies to those of Zimbabwe, saying the U.S. economy could collapse if it keeps spending money.
Along comes Rep. Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., who said Sanford's remark was "beyond the pale" and could have racial implications. Yesterday he said Sanford's request to use stimulus money to pay down debt "flies in the face" of Obama's intent that it be used to create or save jobs.
Sanford reasons that if "... you're buying into the notion of we just print some more money that we don't have, send it to some states, we'll create jobs. If that's the case, then why isn't Zimbabwe a rich place?" Sanford says elsewhere the stimulus package is "predatory lending" by the feds - true, as eventually we and future generations are gonna pay for being stimulated.
(Zimbabwe has been in economic meltdown ever since the South African nation began a chaotic land reform program. Its official inflation rate topped 11 million percent in 2008, with its treasury printing banknotes in the trillion-dollar range a.k.a. spending money you don't have.)
Clyburn comments that Sanford, "... happens to be a millionaire... he may not need help for the plantation his family owns, but the people whose grandparents and great-grandparents worked those plantations need the help" ... in the form of federal money.
Clyburn further says that Sanford is comparing Obama to Zimbabwe's Mugabee, is insulting Blacks, and the usual "progressive" (white) bloggers have rallied around also claiming the Sanford's remarks are racial.
So, who is Jim Clyburn? He's majority whip in the House, first elected in 1992 after South Carolina's 6th district was redrawn as a black-majority district. I searched high and low for House bills by Clyburn in his 17 year career, and found one bill he sponsored to preserve and interpret the Gullah/Geechee culture ($10 million over 10 years), a worthy cause if the money goes for what it says it will.
I did find Clyburn cosponsored 224 bills - nearly all frivolous (most of congress is), such as AIDS awareness, commemorative postage stamps, recognizing the contributions of Black basketball players, a bill to establish a Caribbean heritage month, and a bill recognizing the 100th anniversary of the founding of LasVegas.
Personally, I find Clyburn's "plantation" analogy more insulting than Sanford's Zimbawe reference. I don't believe Sanford was referring to race, but to out of control economic policies. Clyburn, on the other hand, is blatently race-baiting with the usual "you owe us" plantation mentality.
It's the modern plantation mentality because too many Black Americans choose to stay on the plantation - exchanging the master's chitlins for foodstamps, the slave cabin for section 8/projects, and instead of master choosing which slaves will breed, most of whom would not know their daddy, today's black men/women willingly breed for the master's prison industry, many never knowing their daddy, or momma.
Guys like Clyburn are overseers - patting your nappy heads like a Sunday preacher and whipping you with the chains of your own thinking.
(Subtitle: How to Mimic the Clintons Without Even Trying)
Underscoring her commitment to the plight of America's military families, Mrs. Obama used a trip to Fort Bragg as a stage for her first television interviews since the inauguration. One, with ABC's "Good Morning America," aired Friday morning.
In the interview she said she wanted military families to know they have a friend in the White House.
"It hurts. It hurts," Mrs. Obama said of hearing about military families on food stamps. "These are people who are willing to send their loved ones off to, perhaps, give their lives — the ultimate sacrifice. But yet, they're living back at home on food stamps. It's not right, and it's not where we should be as a nation."
Michelle, Michelle, could you not find some other dire-need "cause" to lend your attention to? Gang violence, deadbeat dads, ghettos, political and corporate corruption? Oh, I forgot, the progressives reamed you guys when Barack made his infamous Father's Day speech last year, some called it the Black Men Are Lazy, Stupid, Violent Junkies Speech or Obama Catering to the White Folks Speech. Wouldn't wanna go there again.
GIs on foodstamps is an old gimmick Mickey. Gore and Bush used that sound byte almost a decade ago, back in 2000. Even at that time the number of troops receiving foodstamps was 0.45% of the 1.4 million, or 6300. The need for foodstamps is usually due to average GI Joe having a large family, one income, a lot of credit card debt, and flawed spending habits.
The average enlisted soldier does not expect to get rich on military life, or even live upper class without several years on duty. The lowly E-3 earns $35,105 per year; that includes housing, medical, the px, etc. Not a fortune but not poverty unless spending fast and frivolous.
Progressives/liberals have convinced two generations of Americans that foodstamps are nothing to be ashamed of - unless you're in uniform and then it's shameful. If the Obamas have their way, that shame will be worth $40/month more in military pay. Whooo hoo.
What's shameful (and "hurts") is not teaching our young people, in and out of uniform, how to make responsible choices, to save and spend wisely. What's shameful is 6000 troops on food stamps is not a real issue, but merely fills the air with pseudo-support the troops rhetoric.
What's shameful is the First Lady using old campaign spin as a platform and photo-op for "change." She made the same promises to Norfolk military wives in August 2008 - stumping for votes.
Michelle, as all polcats do, is simply stumping ahead to the next election.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said yesterday that the federal government may have to spend even more money to shore up the nation's ailing economy, on top of the more than $1.6 trillion so far approved by Congress.
Pelosi's remarks came after senior House Democrats met behind closed doors with four prominent economists, who praised the actions taken by Washington to ease the effects of a recession that threatens to be the most severe since the 1930s. The $787 billion stimulus package, a $700 billion bailout for the U.S. financial system and President Obama's proposal to stem the tide of residential foreclosures are all sound policies that should begin to make a difference in the coming months, they told lawmakers.
Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it has obtained documents from the Department of Defense (DOD) detailing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's multiple requests for military air travel. The documents, obtained by Judicial Watch through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), include internal DOD email correspondence detailing attempts by DOD staff to accommodate Pelosi's numerous requests for military escorts and military aircraft as well as the speaker's last minute cancellations and changes. The following are a few highlights from the documents, which are linked in full below:
* In response to a series of requests for military aircraft, one Defense Department official wrote, "Any chance of politely querying [Pelosi's team] if they really intend to do all of these or are they just picking every weekend?...[T]here's no need to block every weekend 'just in case'..." The email also notes that Pelosi's office had, "a history of canceling many of their past requests." * One DOD official complained about the "hidden costs" associated with the speaker's last minute changes and cancellations. "We have...folks prepping the jets and crews driving in (not a short drive for some), cooking meals and preflighting the jets etc." * The documents include a discussion of House Ethics rules and Defense Department policies as they apply to the speaker's requests for staff, spouses and extended family to accompany her on military aircraft. In May 2008, for example, Pelosi requested that her husband join her on a Congressional Delegation (CODEL) into Iraq. The DOD explained to Pelosi that the agency has a written policy prohibiting spouses from joining CODEL's into combat zones. * Documents obtained from the U.S. Army include correspondence from Speaker Pelosi's office requesting an Army escort and three military planes to transport Pelosi and other members of Congress to Cleveland, Ohio, for the funeral services of the late Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones. Pelosi noted in her letter of August 22, 2008, that such a request, labeled "Operation Tribute" was an "exception to standard policy." * The documents also detail correspondence from intermediaries for Speaker Pelosi issuing demands for certain aircraft and expressing outrage when requested military planes were not available. "It is my understanding there are no G5s available for the House during the Memorial Day recess. This is totally unacceptable...The speaker will want to know where the planes are..." wrote Kay King, Director of the House Office of Interparliamentary Affairs. In a separate email, when told a certain type of aircraft would not be available, King writes, "This is not good news, and we will have some very disappointed folks, as well as a very upset [s]peaker." * During another email exchange DOD staff advised Kay King that one Pelosi military aircraft request could not be met because of "crew rest requirements" and offered to help secure commercial travel. Kay King responded: "We appreciate the efforts to help the codel [sic] fly commercially but you know the problem that creates with spouses. If we can find another way to assist with military assets, we would like to do that."
--- Gulfstream V, designated C-37A in U.S. Air Force service, the Gulfstream V fulfills missions for government and Defense Department officials. The US Navy also operates one C-37A.
The aircraft has a flight management system with a worldwide satellite-based Global Positioning System. The C-37A is capable of cruise at 51,000 feet. Features include enhanced weather radar, autopilot and head-up display for the pilot. Safety features include Enhanced Vision Systems that allows increased visibility in adverse environments. The aircraft is also equipped with commercial and military communications equipment to provide secure voice and data capability. The U.S. Air Force equips the C-37A with a basic crew of two pilots, one flight engineer, one communications systems operator, and one flight attendant.
--- Apparently, the "ailing economy" has absolutely no effect on government perks.
Until today I have never heard of Jason Mattera, the reporter in the video below. Apparently he's a roving reporter out to expose liberals/democrats, etc.
One comment on that page claims not to support this "particular tactic" - you know, the tactic of going up to Rangel like a regular Joe Friendly Fan and then asking embarrassing, although true, political questions.
That's right folks, you must immediately inform pols so they know which class face to put on and which side of their mouth to speak from. Rangel would never have said "mind your own goddamn business" to ... to ... hmmm ... well, he was tricked, that's right Charlie was tricked into exposing his bad side.
The Obama administration's new mortgage relief plan, launched Wednesday, aims to help up to 9 million borrowers qualify for more affordable mortgages and stay in their homes.
It has two parts: First, it makes refinancing easier for those who are able to make their payments but pay a high interest rate and would otherwise not qualify because they do not have enough equity. Second, it encourages lenders to make loan modifications by providing $75 billion in incentives to alter the terms of loans.
Who qualifies?
For the refinance plan: Borrowers with mortgages backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — generally, those with loans of less than $417,000 — who are current on their payments and who owe no more than 105 percent of the current value of their home, and no less than 80 percent. (That means a homeowner whose home is worth $400,000 only qualifies if her loan balance is between $420,000 and $360,000.)
For the loan modification program: Borrowers with loans of up to $729,750 who are having difficulty paying their mortgage. Reasons for the difficulty, the government says, can include a drop in income from the loss of a job, a medical hardship, or a spike in the mortgage payment. Applicants will be required to document their income and provide an "affidavit of financial hardship," which the government will verify.
How will loans be modified?
Lenders will change the terms of the loan so payments, including taxes and insurance, amount to no more than 31 percent of a homeowners' income. They may lower the interest rate to 2 percent, extend the term of the loan to as many as 40 years, or forgive some principal, although it must be repaid if the house is sold. The government will subsidize some of the cost and provide cash payments to banks as an incentive to work with borrowers.
Not everyone who has a hardship will qualify. Banks will determine whether it makes financial sense to modify a loan.
---------- Government largess to the little people? No, it's politicians funneling money to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The banks will determine which loans make sense to modify. The same banks who thought it made financial sense to make the loans in the first place. I guess the Bush administration's bailout last year was insufficient. Keep throwing bad money after bad money.
I watched Obama's body language, facial expressions, in his speech to the Marines at Camp Lejeune today and twice, yes twice, I believe BHO was scowling. Did Barry's handlers tell him this crowd might not be receptive, not the adoring tingling fans he's accustomed to playing?
Pundits say Obama received a resounding welcome - they did cheer when he mentioned their pay raise, but overall I thought the crowd was subdued, the applause light. I wonder Bubba, do you think they screened the audience for troops who were pro-Obama as the "left" said was done for Bush?
(Answered my own question - "Before President Barack Obama's arrival, service members were asked to greet the president with a "rambunctious" welcome." )
Of course, the bumper sticker to buy now is Out of Iraq in 18 Months - but leaving 35-50,000 troops in country, to cleanup ... or train, advise, and guard that huge embassy ... it isn't really out of Iraq, it's a bone from Obama (or boning). Actually, his plan is only a remake of the Bush idea of "redeployment to other areas in the region."
Because, amidst all the Obama's praise for US troops and the 3-phase withdrawal plan by August 2010, I guess I missed the part where Barry told us that most of those "returning" troops will actually be detouring to the other war - Afghanistan, along with Pakistan. (Again, a remake, Redeployment Part Deux).
And as with nearly all remakes, many of the lines and scenes are same ol' same ol' - BHO has assured the hawks that if the situation on the ground changes - so will the planned withdrawal - which, come to think of it, didn't Iraq War (starring Bush) have approximately the same withdrawal time line? Oh, that's right ... it was called a "horizon for troop pullout," subject to change if conditions in Iraq began to erode, the U.S. would reconsider troop withdrawal.
You see the change Bubba? You change the Bush "timeline" to the Obama "timetable" but keep "if the situation on the ground changes." More or less the same script but a new star playing the president, although many other bad actors return to play the same roles.
Show time! Plunder & Pillage, At Home & Abroad, Part III. Or is it IV?
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama would reform the healthcare system with a 10-year fund of $634 billion in a budget proposal he put forward on Thursday. He offered few details but the budget reflects new priorities:
* It stresses a shift from an unwieldy paper-based health system in which doctors and clinics share little information to health information technology, including electronic records.
_______ Ah, remember when computers first came on the scene a few decades ago and we were told by boasting giddy voices the machine would reduce paperwork. Well, anyone who has ever worked in most any field knows that never came true and never will - simply because so much still has a hard copy from which the information is entered into the computer; and a hard copy is excellent CYA if anyone tampers, screws up, or loses electronic records. And those never ending printouts that have to be filed.
* Obama is gambling that although costly in the beginning, the system will reduce errors caused by poor communication and scribbled prescriptions, save tens of thousands of lives every year and billions of dollars that go into the federal Medicare and Medicaid health insurance programs.
_______The majority of deadly errors made are human stupidity and carelessness - and that will continue whether done from a keyboard or handwritten. Currently, written medical information (rx, orders, tests, etc.) are seen by several sets of eyes (physicians, nurses, pharmacy, transcribers, techs), hence more chance of spotting errors. With higher tech methods and a single person directly entering the incorrect drug or dosage or a procedure, it will almost certainly go unnoticed. People tend to have faith that if a computer says so - it must be correct, never mind that computers are only as smart as the person entering the data; even if the computer says you cannot give that much heparin to a newborn how long will it take to chase the chain of command to set it right, and if it's an emergency? Have you seen the young doc whizzing through the hospital p.c. touch screening prescriptions, procedures, labs, etc.? Have you seen him proofread or double check anything? For the love of god, he has to tee off at 3.
* The budget includes a controversial $1.1 billion measure for the federal government to get into the business of comparing medical treatments. This is often left up to the private sector now, and drug companies have little interest in proving the benefits of cheap, generic treatments although studies have shown they often work better against disease such as heart failure and diabetes.
_______ Another government bureaucracy is born. Billions of dollars to compare the fact that Dollar Store aspirin works as well as Percocet on that stress headache - but you can't get high on aspirin, and since you eat narcotic pain killers like candy for those headaches you can't substitute an aspirin because it eats your stomach - better to be a prescription hophead.
* It allocates $6 billion for cancer research at the National Institutes of Health. Cancer is the No. 2 killer of Americans and costs billions of dollars. For instance, the U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality estimates the average hospital cost for a single lung cancer patient in 2006 was $14,200 or about $1,900 a day. The total cost for all lung cancer patients was about $2.1 billion in 2007.
_______ Over the last few decades trillions have been spent on cancer research, and some advances have been made for certain types of cancer, yet the 3 oldest ancient forms of treatment are still the norm - cut, burn, poison. Overall, this money would be better spent on preventive health maintenance rather than research on how to cut, burn, poison us more effectively. Besides, there is ample cancer research already, here and worldwide.
NIH will hand out the $6 billion in the form of grants; the same NIH which a couple of years ago "Following a string of high-profile scandals, the US government ... pushed for stricter oversight of grants given by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The trend has many researchers worried that they might have to start accounting for their time and money or face being investigated."
What? Hold researchers and their institutes accountable? Have you lost your mind? These men are gods, gods, I tell you. Also, can someone tell me who the US government "pushes" when it wants stricter oversight? Does it push itself, reluctantly?
The typical "scandal" involves doctors/researchers, recipient of grants, who were also receiving payments from pharmaceutical companies. Or testing drugs on minority foster children.
But! There will be "government oversight." Yessirree, because someone in the government is going to push for it.
* The budget proposes cleaning up inefficiencies and reducing overpayments in Medicare, the federal health insurance plan for people over 65 and the disabled, which covers 45 million people and makes up 13 percent of federal spending.
_______Whut? No more medi-millionaires/billionaires? Like Bill Frist and HCA.
* The budget says that using more competitive bids for Medicare will save more than $175 billion over 10 years. Critics call this unrealistic.
_______ When the government claims it will save money anywhere at anytime on anything, I call it bullshit.
"Competitive bids" - that's politicalspeak for top companies who work out an arrangement and take their turn feeding at the trough. Sort of like mafia dons agreeing on how much and who gets a cut of the take.
A couple of things struck me as oddly ludicrous about BHO's speech last night. One, it resembled a State of the Union address - but it's too early in his term for that. Is there a reason we're getting so much of the new president so quickly? Is time running out or something?
Barack does give a good speech. Average Joes come away feeling euphoria and hope - we will rebuild, we will recover, we are not quitters, the hardest-working people on Earth, now is the time to act boldly and wisely, build a new foundation for lasting prosperity.... rah rah rah.
So .... if we're going to boldly and wisely build a new economic foundation ... why are the hardest-working people on Earth using old Europe ideas?
That's right Bubba, in particular the Italian model from the first half of the last century: Increased State intervention in industry. Italy's Institute for Industrial Reconstruction (IRI) was set up in 1933 to help ailing industries and banks; a giant State firm, using public money to buy shares and "bailout" ailing industries.
IRI was meant to be temporary, but is still around today, offering government genius and business wisdom from experts.
OBAMA: Over the next two years, this plan will save or create 3.5 million jobs. More than 90 percent of these jobs will be in the private sector -- jobs rebuilding our roads and bridges; constructing wind turbines and solar panels; laying broadband and expanding mass transit.
Remember, Benny Il Duce made the trains run on time - he too was big on public works projects. Infrastructure stuff Bubba, infrastructure. Il Duce rail system was mostly propaganda, although Italian railways were repaired post WWI, rail efficiency was hyped to convince Italians of the efficiency of fascism. (Gosh, I hate to use that word.)
In the US, such efficient antics are labeled as necessary, mandatory or else, stimulus packages, a financial stability plan. Brought to you now by the Obama and Tim Geithner. Tim, former employee of Kissinger & Associates (yes, Henry), was a director at IMF, worked under Robert Rubin, etc., you can be sure Tim & friends know how to make and burst bubbles. And Tim was vetted by progressive obamamites?
I suppose Democrats/progressives now favor public liability for private debt? Last September they were shouting "Bush bailouts perverse ... an insidious act of vile turpitude..." Last September progressive/liberal bloggers claimed Bush was using fear to force congress to hand him a $700 billion blank check.
I guess when you own man is turpitudy the word has a different meaning. And don't worry Bubba, VP Biden is going to handle the oversight on this blank check. (Maybe Joe can hire his son and brother to help with oversighting.)
So Bubba, if you mistake what's going on as change - remember the definition of politics: Strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. (Ambrose Bierce (1842 - 1914) - The Devil's Dictionary. )
There is less strife of interests these days Bubba, because, if you do away with the hollow party rhetoric, both parties are on the same track, and you are going to pull the train. Chooo chooo you think you can, you think you can.
The president signaled in his campaign that he would support addressing the retirement system’s looming financing shortfall, in part by applying payroll taxes to incomes above $250,000. But that would ignite intense opposition from Republicans, especially with the economy deep in recession.
Consider too that the super-rich collect most of their income from investments - and investment and corporate income is taxed differently (lower) than earned income - so BHO's plan to tax those "rich folks" making 250K is not going to touch the wealthy elite. Obama today says he will allow the "Bush tax cut for the rich" to expire as scheduled in 2010, but wait and see on that one.
"There were ... 132.6 million tax returns filed in 2005 that had a positive AGI, not just the returns from people who earn enough to owe taxes. From other IRS data, we can see that 90.6 million of the tax returns came from people who paid taxes into the Treasury. That leaves 42 million tax returns filed by people with positive AGI who used exemptions, deductions and tax credits to completely wipe out their federal income tax liability. Not only did they get back every dollar that the federal government withheld from their paychecks during 2005; but some even received more back from the IRS. This is a result of refundable tax credits like the Earned Income Tax Credit." (EIC, or the yearly bribe to the miscreant and/or poor so they don't revolt.)
Earning $250K today puts you in the top 1 or 2 or 5% of earners, depending on who and which stats you look at. Many folks in the remaining 95% believe more taxation on those at $250+K is a good idea.
Consider this though - the majority of these $250K earners are two income earner households, who may be living better than you, but they are nowhere near club members of the wealthy elite. And not everyone earning $250K is corrupt and feeding at the public trough; most are not hiding assets in offshore banks. Many of them are small business owners - not multinationals living off government contracts and nepotism. They are the upper middle class, the largest group of taxpayers, standing between the über-rich and the nonworking/working class poor. But, as in all backward nations, there can only be two classes - rich/poor - so let us hurry and rid ourselves of these upper middles.
The problem in not that taxes are too low on income earners of $250,000 - the problem is government spending. Only the village idiot would think it's a good idea to raise taxes on wage earners and give the government more funds; the village idiot is always convinced these funds will trickle down to him.
Citigroup Inc. is in talks with federal officials that could result in the U.S. government substantially expanding its ownership of the struggling bank, according to people familiar with the situation.
While the discussions could fall apart, the government could wind up holding as much as 40% of Citigroup's common stock. Bank executives hope the stake will be closer to 25%, these people said.
Any such move would give federal officials far greater influence over one of the world's largest financial institutions. Citigroup has proposed the plan to its regulators. The Obama administration hasn't indicated if it supports the plan, according to people with knowledge of the talks.
When federal officials began pumping capital into U.S. banks last October, few experts would have predicted that the government would soon be wrestling with the possibility of taking voting control of large financial institutions. The potential move at Citigroup would give the government its biggest ownership of a financial-services company since the September bailout of insurer American International Group Inc., which left taxpayers with an 80% stake.
The talks reflect a growing fear that Citigroup and other big U.S. banks could be overwhelmed by losses amid the recession and housing crisis. Last week, Citigroup's share price fell below $2 to an 18-year low. Bank executives increasingly believe that the government needs to take a larger ownership stake in the institution to stop the slide.
----------What does it all really mean? Bailing out who exactly?
MAJOR DIRECT HOLDERS Holder ----------------Shares Reported MAHERAS THOS ........ 2,440,092 FORESE JAMES ..........1,809,500 PANDIT VIKRAM ...........1,707,503 PRINCE CHARLES .......1,612,732 MILLS WILLIAM .............1,373,229
TOP INSTITUTIONAL HOLDERS (in Citigroup) Capital World Investors Barclays Global Investors UK Holdings Ltd STATE STREET CORPORATION VANGUARD GROUP, INC. (THE) Capital Research Global Investors AXA DODGE & COX INC Bank of New York Mellon Corporation MORGAN STANLEY UBS GLOBAL ASSET MANAGEMENT (AMERICAS) INC
TOP MUTUAL FUND HOLDERS (in Citigroup) GROWTH FUND OF AMERICA INC INVESTMENT COMPANY OF AMERICA WASHINGTON MUTUAL INVESTORS FUND VANGUARD 500 INDEX FUND DODGE & COX STOCK FUND SPDR TRUST SERIES 1 INCOME FUND OF AMERICA INC VANGUARD TOTAL STOCK MARKET INDEX FUND SELECT SECTOR SPDR FUND-FINANCIAL VANGUARD/WINDSOR II
Own any stock, or maybe your employee pension invested in such companies? Has your retirement plan been giving merit pay to talented investment managers who invested in companies that need bailout? Hmmm. Let's look at one - take Vanguard Windsor II.
Vanguard month-end ten largest holdings as of 01/31/2009 Rank Holdings 1 Occidental Petroleum Corp. 2 Wyeth 3 Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. 4 International Business Machines Corp. 5 Verizon Communications Inc. 6 Imperial Tobacco Group ADR 7 AT&T Inc. 8 ConocoPhillips Co. 9 JPMorgan Chase & Co. 10 Philip Morris International Inc. Ten largest holdings = 28.9% of total net assets.
Tobacco, pharma, oil, big business ....
Seems like only yesterday Prince Walid bin Talal of Saudi Arabia was the biggest shareholder in Citigroup - oh wait, it was 1991 when the prince first invested in the financially reeling Citicorp. My my, 18 years ago Citigroup's predecessor, Citicorp, was reeling from loan losses in Latin America and real estate.
Travelers Group and banking giant Citicorp wowed the business community with the announcement in April 1998 of plans for the largest merger ever to hit Wall Street. The merger was finalized in October and a new financial powerhouse – Citigroup – was born.
Citi"group", now barely 10 years old - not even out of puberty, and reeling again.
But! Long before Citi, group or corp (aka Citibank), the company operated under the name of National City Bank.
Recap: On June 16, 1812, with $2 million of capital, City Bank of New York (now Citibank) opened for business in New York City. In 1968, First National City Corporation (later renamed Citicorp), a bank holding company, became the parent of Citibank. After the 1929 market crash the federal government rescued NCB with multimillions. In fact, DC lawmakers blamed National City for the bubble/crash of 1929 and passed the Congress passed the Glass-Steagall Act, which Bill Clinton and congress would eventually do away with.
In the 1980s, Citi ran into trouble over loans made to in Latin America. Citi faced billions of dollars in potential losses when Mexico became insolvent in 1982. The federal government came to the rescue with the Brady Plan to help sell Latin American debt and have the banks write off some of it.
Citi needed help again during the recession of the early 1990s. Holding $10 billion in bad loans, related to leveraged buyouts or commercial real estate, their stock price fell and rumors of bankruptcy began to circulate. Again, the Federal Reserve came to the rescue with several interest rate cuts.
In 1998, all Citicorp divisions merged with all divisions of Travelers Group to form Citigroup Inc. Citibank continues under the Citigroup umbrella.
Get ready folks, you have a lot of large, reeling umbrellas to hold.
Mother of five (four in military uniform including daughter-in-law). Grandmother of seven. Central America (under Reagan/Bush) - Been there, done that. When I was 17 it was a very good year for small town girls....married to a Sicilian ... been there done that too.
Ex-president Manuel Zelaya, known as "Mel" in Honduras and as "Commander Cowboy" by cohort Chavez. Supporters of Mel are the US "left," Hugo Chavez, Daniel Ortega, Evo Morales, the UN General Assembly, Secretary Clinton, and the Castro brothers, etc. 
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
