The Democratic Promise: Saul Alinsky and His Legacy - Documentary blurp: "Alinsky's hard-nosed politics were shaped by the rough and tumble world of late 1930's Chicago. Back then, the city, still in the grips of the Great Depression, was controlled by the Kelly-Nash political machine and by Frank Nitti - heir to Al Capone's Mafia empire. In 1938, with a freshly minted graduate degree in criminology from University of Chicago, Alinsky went to work for sociologist Clifford Shaw at the Institute for Juvenile Research. He was assigned to research the causes of juvenile delinquency in Chicago's tough "Back-of-the-Yards" neighborhood. In order to study gang behavior from the inside, Alinsky ingratiated himself with Al Capone's crowd, and came to realize that criminal behavior was a symptom of poverty and powerlessness."
Another blurp: Famed abolitionist Frederick Douglass wrote, "Power concedes nothing without demand." THE DEMOCRATIC PROMISE: SAUL ALINSKY AND HIS LEGACY is the story of ordinary people making demands for the power to govern their own lives. Narrated by Alec Baldwin, the documentary examines both the history of community organizing - through the work of Saul Alinsky - as well as the current state of community organizing, as shown by contemporary organizations in New York and Texas.
How can ya not win over the hearts and minds of disempowered folks when using the names of Douglass, Baldwin, and Capone. A Black icon, a Hollywood beefcake, and a member of the romanticized Mafioso. Who better to learn community organizing from than an international street gang? Badabing.
Note I use the word disempowered meaning you have been deprived of power/authority, but the "Left" prefers "disenfranchised," meaning you have been deprived of some privilege. The Left/progressives do like the term "empowerment," particularly the women's movement, meaning "official authority" usually to act on someones behalf. The World Bank also likes to use the term "empowerment." It may be code for "here let me do that for you while I pick your pocket and screw your children."
Alinsky is considered the pioneer, the father of "community organizing." An icon of the '60s social movements and influence on many today. Hillary Clinton's senior thesis at Wellesley College was on Alinsky, There Is Only The Fight...": An Analysis of the Alinsky Model. In the '80s Alinsky disciples hired Obama as a Chicago community organizer.
When I was young and dumb Saul was an icon of mine too. His theory is to organize and select a leader to take your fight to the man ... as we can see, the "leaders" usually do quite well after they meet with "the man" but I fail to see where the little people have benefited much with Alinsky's methods.
Alinsky "came to realize that criminal behavior was a symptom of poverty and powerlessness." Hmmm, I grew up poor among other poor folks and we never considered crime an option. But that was an era of parents without societal excuses, when delinquency and thuggery were a family shame - not a ghetto badge of manhood, or a symptom of something outside mom and dad's control that could be cured with mo' money.
And how does Saul explain the rich and powerful who exhibit criminal behavior just as often as those in poverty? Explain to me how the hundreds of folks I have known in Central America, decent and generous, who would literally give you the shirt off their back, their last bowl of soup, living in the worst poverty, and live so without criminal behavior.
This docudrama "is the story of ordinary people making demands for the power to govern their own lives." Alinsky may have improved the lives of some in his era - but it has since become that making demands translates to electing community leaders to squeeze more funds from BigDaddy Government and in exchange, Government Authority will run your dependent little life for you. If you cannot squeeze enough to meet your demands and you choose crime - then you can say "the government made me do it."
We have transformed into a nation of ordinary thugs and thieves, from top to bottom, with too many folks looking for a way to extort ("get over on") someone or something, where simple day-to-day respect for others is the exception rather than the rule. We are the least self-governing society I know - preferring to be government franchised (privileged) rather than accepting authority over our lives.
Looking back I don't know if guys like Alinsky began their theories and careers with sincerity or if they were manipulating the public for their own ego and financial gain, and/or political ideology - when you get in bed with dogs like the Capone crowd you usually get up with fleas. Not to mention the US is run like an organized crime ring with most folks awaiting their allotted share from the family don.
I'm the least religious person I know, but I sometimes think of the phrase about false prophets and ye shall know them by their fruits. And looking around in the year 2008, America is in no better position with the legacy/fruits of Saul Alinsky or his disciples.
I'm wondering: Obama and his handlers have, more or less, portrayed Barack as the product of a single parent household, where at times his Kansas momma used food stamps; a boy with simple working class grandparents.
So who paid tuition for his private prep school in Hawaii (the school today runs about $17,000 per year)? His first 2 college years before Columbia U were at Occidental, another private Ivy type college. This website says Obama at Occidental was on a scholarship but not what type - I've read elsewhere it was an athletic scholarship. Seems to me Bubba that Barry was not the brilliant scholar until later.
How did Obama manage to fund his way through Columbia University and Harvard (his daddy's alma mater)? He claims to have "worked his way" through college but according to Factcheck Barack had 3 summer jobs during his college career - construction, deli worker, telemarketing - hardly sufficient for the Ivy League schools above. He also says student loans paid his way but his years at Columbia and Harvard were during the Reagan era when higher education loans and grants were hit hard by Ronnie and Poppy Bush. Even so, student loans are not enough to pay for an Ivy League education. Myself and other family members know what it means to "work your way through college" and it's working 12 months of the year - not just summers wrapping lunchmeat or teledialing. Even with "affirmative action" and special minority grants an Ivy league education carries a hefty price tag. And do you know how difficult it is to get into Columbia or Harvard?
Did his grandparents help? Obama has never said they contributed financially to his education. Nor has he credited his father, stepfather, or his mother; Stanley Ann seems to have spent a good deal of her life as a struggling student.
Obama's years between Columbia and Harvard (approx 1983-1988) were spent in Chicago "Black community organizing." Sometimes I read this is low paid altruistic work, other times it's nice work if you can get it. Obama's biggest claim to organizing fame was registering voters for the Chicago Democrat machine. In either case it's doubtful Obama was pinching pennies to save for Harvard law school. During his community organizing he joined Rev. Wright's Trinity church, where he apparently napped during Jeremiah's fiery tirades about whitey's America.
In an interview with Percy Sutton, an aging Harlem politician and Malcolm X lawyer, it was said that back in the 1980s Donald Warden a.k.a. Khalid al Mansour had lobbied for Saudi prince Alaweed bin Talal to fund Barry's education. But left/progressive bloggers and Obama's camp are denying this story.
I cannot find enough teeth in the story to believe it or disbelieve it. I tend to think there may be a grain of truth as Obama's connections to Tony Rezko and possibly Nadhmi Auchi have been discussed here numerous times, hence other Middle East connections would not be a stretch. Is Percy Sutton senile? Is Warden/Mansour godfather to Obama? Or is it a rightwing conspiracy theory to push Obama with radical Islam connections?
I do believe Obama is not what he appears to be and his backers are not who we are led to believe. Odd as it may sound, Obama may be politically backed by the same folks behind BushCo - but regardless who they back the goal over the past 30 years has been the destruction of the US, which they seem close to accomplishing.
Which makes me wonder why so many "progressives" want to see the collapse of their own country. What the hell do they think will replace it?
I also wonder why mainstream media has not made more noise over Obama's shady connections. Oh sure, they've mentioned Bill Ayers but he's no longer a bomb building anti-establishment type. Which makes me ask - how come so many radical felonious folks rose from the underground to become well-paid "respectable" members of the status quo? Ever wonder why so many medal tossing long haired flag burners became life-long members of the political establishment? Ever wonder why all the "social" movements in the '60s ended overnight?
Ever wonder why Obama wants to change the education system since it apparently worked so well for him, the fatherless child of a Kansas mother?
Ever wonder if almost everything you think you know is mere b.s.?
CAGW’s (Citizens Against Government Waste) 2007 Congressional Ratings came out yesterday and you may be wondering how the presidential nominees did.
• Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) 2007 rating was 10 percent, making his lifetime score 18 percent. The 2008 Congressional Pig Book contained 53 earmarks worth $97.4 million for Sen. Obama, including $1,648,850 for the Shedd Aquarium.
• Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) received the worst possible rating in 2007 with 0 percent, while his lifetime rating is 22 percent. According to the Pig Book, Sen. Biden had 70 earmarks for a total of $119.7 million in fiscal year 2008, including $246,100 for the Grand Opera House in Wilmington.
• Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) received a score of 100* percent and has a lifetime rating of 88, has never requested nor received a single earmark, and has pledged to veto any spending bill that contains any earmarks.
*Sen. McCain was only present for 11 of the 35 Senate votes that CCAGW tallied. Therefore, he was not eligible for the Taxpayer Super Hero Award.
This is how Republican Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin described Barack Obama’s win over Hillary Clinton to political colleagues in a restaurant a few days after Obama locked up the Democratic Party presidential nomination.
According to Lucille, the waitress serving her table at the time and who asked that her last name not be used, Gov. Palin was eating lunch with five or six people when the subject of the Democrat’s primary battle came up. The governor, seemingly not caring that people at nearby tables would likely hear her, uttered the slur and then laughed loudly as her meal mates joined in appreciatively.
“It was kind of disgusting,” Lucille, who is part Aboriginal, said in a phone interview after admitting that she is frightened of being discovered telling folks in the “lower 48” about life near the North Pole.
Then, almost with a sigh, she added, “But that’s just Alaska.”
------------ This could be true of Palin, but I need more than hearsay. Surely someone this racist has been caught on tape, a la Biden with his 7/11 store and Indian accent comment. Surely someone brave will come forward with their hand on a Bible and swear Palin is a racist.
Remember Biden's more recent comment : "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy," Biden said. "I mean, that's a storybook, man."
Obama and Jesse Jackson both claimed Joe B.'s remark was not offensive ... but you can bet that's not what they said in private about it.
Republicans are often open and blunt with their racism - Democrats more subtle (Osambo is clean, bright, and good-looking). No pol from either group has been caught yet doing a Dog the Bounty Hunter rant or Rush Limbigot tirade.
(I have family members who have lived in Alaska for many years. They tell me Palin has done a lot of good for the people in her short time as governor. Alaska's PFD (Permanent Fund Dividend) checks have risen to $2069 with a bonus of $1200 this year to help with fuel costs. Every eligible man, woman, child receives a PFD check. They agree with Palin's stand on environmental and drilling issues. I also believe Alaska is a strange place - having attracted a lot of social escapists from the lower 48.)
Also of note, Todd Palin is of Yu'pik Eskimo descent. Sarah Palin writes that "... her family has been ''blessed'' by learning Yup'ik traditions and stories from Helena Andree, her children's great-grandmother and a one-time Bristol Bay Native Corporation Elder of the Year. The Palins named their oldest daughter ''Bristol'' in honor of the region many of their family members still call home."
Opponents have rushed to claim Todd Palin is not Eskimo enough - is he 1/8 or 1/4? Although the same not-enoughers will label anyone with 1/8 or 1/4 Negro heritage as being black enough. By the way, some folks say the word "Eskimo" is not politically correct, it should be Inuit or Indian, but most Eskimos don't mind being called Eskimos and not all Eskimos are Inuit.
The questions are: Is Palin a mean racist? is Hillary a bitch, is Obama the first clean Negro? Are Joe Bid and John Mac lovable old crackers? Hmmm, not much changes in politics.
Progressives are picking Palin apart and finding nothing of importance to zoom in on. They claim the bridge to nowhere thanks but no thanks was a lie, but I think I would put that pork at Senator Ted Stevens feet. Progressives need to be careful trying to link the inexperienced newbie Palin to oldhand Stevens - it might cause folks to focus on Obama's long-time connections to the Chicago Machine.
As always in the carnival of presidential runs the issues have become brief sound bytes, and the focus heavy on personalities who promise to make you better off. Magically you will be given more money, education, healthcare, housing, and jobs - the American dream. All you have to do is get off the couch for a day and mark the ballot.
It's the Two Mavericks versus the Militant & Seasoned Milquetoast.
Progressives are playing the race card every chance they get - but it's a bridge stretched too far to believe. For example: an LA Times opinionator: "Elitist" is another word for "arrogant," which is another word for "uppity," that old calumny applied to blacks who stood up for themselves."
Or this from The Hill : "Democrats have charged that the Republican campaign to paint the Illinois senator as an “elitist” is racially charged, and accused them of using code words for “uppity” without using the word itself." Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.) told reporters, “When I hear the word ‘elitist’ linked with Barack Obama, to me, that is a code word for 'uppity.' I find it extremely offensive and John McCain should know better.”
Oh please. Elitist is not code for "uppity." It's the word for belonging to a group that believes themselves superior in knowledge or taste. And if you listen objectively to Michelle and Barack they are at times speaking New Snobbish. Acquiring money and status often does that to folks. Remember Michelle's joking about buying a $600 pair of earrings with the stimulus check. Or Obama's dismay over the price of arugula. How many of their followers can pay $600 bucks for baubles; how many had to ask what's arugula?
Progressives are also playing the "theocracy" card, Palin says Iraq war is 'task from God'. Been there done that with GW Bush. Has society moved any closer to a theocratic state in the last 8 years? "Liberation theology" in goddamn America is okay though.
Progressives sneer about McCain's pick of VP as being the typical impulsive and erratic "going with the gut" decision of McCain. I thought progressives encouraged getting in touch with the inner self, trusting your instincts, etc., yet Obama picking DC insider Biden was calculated to "get under McCain's skin." Skin and gut politics.
One of my favorites stumbled on this week is this: " Max Blumenthal of The Nation reports last week, while the media focused almost obsessively on the DNC’s spectacle in Denver, the country’s most influential conservatives met quietly at a hotel in downtown Minneapolis to get to know Sarah Palin. The assembled were members of the Council for National Policy, an ultra-secretive cabal that networks wealthy right-wing donors together with top conservative operatives to plan long-term movement strategy."
Hahahaha, "ultra-secretive cabal." Sure, I don't know where their next meeting will be held but you can read previous speeches online from various evil-doing Christians, Mormons, Pentecostal, Catholics, etc. My god, look at that, novelist Tom Clancy is a cabalist at CNP.
Not to slight anyone, progressives also have a "secretive left-wing group" Tides: What makes the pairing with Tides troubling is that organization's secretive funneling of cash from private foundations -- such as Heinz, the Pew Charitable Trusts and many others -- to extreme left-wing activist groups whose interests include exclusion of humans from both public and private lands, anti-war protests, opposition to free trade, banning of firearms, abolition of the death penalty, unlimited abortion rights, gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender advocacy, as well as and environmental extremism.
Progressives make us self-indulgent degenerates and conservatives keep us vulgarly poor, is that it?
Progressives are sooooo pee'ohd because Republicans trumped them. The old man maverick chose not only a young pol with more than enough charisma to match Obama - but a woman - surely Hillary grinds her bleached teeth at her own party's good ol' boy sexist snub. Hahaha - the feeble cries of sexism from Hillary supporters now claim there is nothing sexist about the jabs at Sarah Barracuda.
And no matter how hard progressives spin Obama's Indonesian/Hawaiian prep school, surrounded by educated role models and banking executive white granny - it will never reflect the typical Black childhood experience in America. And then the Republicans have the gall to give us a small town, basketball playin' hunter and fisherwoman, wife and working mother of 5 with an unwed pregnant teen daughter who we little folks are supposed to relate to. The nerve.
I dunno folks. It seems democrats/progressives had their brains sucked out and have been on their knees ever since Bill lied about those blowjobs. Republicans have made Democrats their bitch, is that it?
GENEVA (Reuters) - George Clooney has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama by headlining an exclusive event for Americans in Geneva, one of the world's most affluent cities.
Dressed in a black suit and tie, Clooney signed autographs but did not comment as he squeezed his way past fans gathered in the narrow streets of Geneva.
Some 170 contributors paid $1,000 a head to hear him speak at a cocktail party held at a museum in Geneva's Old Town.
And 75 high-rolling supporters spent $10,000 each to attend "an intimate seated dinner" with the 47-year-old star which followed at the organizer's nearby apartment, according to the American lawyer who set up the twin "private" events.
Earlier, organizer Charles Adams said on local morning radio that the event was "fully subscribed."
"Actually most of our guests for dinner are coming from elsewhere -- people are flying in from Los Angeles, Prague, London, Zurich and so on," said Adams, who serves on Obama's National Finance Committee.
"I personally assured George Clooney that Geneva is a city where reserve is a way of life, that he won't be attacked by fans trying to tear off his shirt," he told the daily Le Temps.
The two events could infuse more than $900,000 into the Democratic war chest ahead of the November 4 election which pits the Illinois senator against Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona, who is due to be formally nominated on Wednesday.
In keeping with U.S. laws, only American citizens were allowed to buy tickets to the fundraiser which has had normally sober Geneva buzzing.
Klein is touted by some as the new Chomsky. Here at CommonDreams she defends her book, The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism against "attacks" from the right.
Personally, I think Klein is just interested in pushing the book as long as possible. The public seems to lose interest quickly from one "bestseller" on the list to the next and it takes a lot of blow and hard to keep your book front and center at the cash register.
Klein addresses one such attack on The Shock Doctrine, from Jonathan Chait in an article at The New Republic, title Dead Left. Lol, how appropriate.
Klein claims she resisted responding to the "attacks" but now feels compelled to do so for her fans have spoken and request it.
It seems some disagree with Klein's portrayal of Milton Friedman as a supporter of the Iraq war.
KLEIN: I am not the one who should be embarrassed. Despite his later protestations, Milton Friedman openly supported the war when it was being waged. In April 2003, Friedman told the German magazine Focus that "President Bush only wanted war because anything else would have threatened the freedom and the prosperity of the USA." Asked about increased tensions between the U.S. and Europe, Friedman replied: "the end justifies the means. As soon as we're rid of Saddam, the political differences will also disappear." [Read the whole interview in German and our translation.] Clearly this was not the voice of anti-intervention. Even in July 2006, when Friedman claimed to have opposed the war from the beginning, he remained hawkish. Now that the U.S. was in Iraq, Friedman told The Wall Street Journal, "it seems to me very important that we make a success of it."
Why, I don't know, but I did my own translation and came up with more or less the same version as Klein's translation - however, I did not draw the same conclusion, that of Friedman clearly being "not the voice of anti-intervention." Friedman did not sound particularly pro- or anti-intervention in Iraq, but he did appear to support one of the leftwing's foe/faux talking points - "tax cuts for the rich".
Friedman: The only right way is tax cuts. Then the government is forced to spend less. FOCUS: But then the gap between high and low wage earners increases. Friedman: Naturally those with the highest tax rate profit first. But they use their tax savings not only to eat or drink more. No, they invest – and that gets the economy going and helps all citizens in the long term.
Chait at TNR writes a much more articulate piece, and Klein's rebuttal is quite puny. But as she says, she was " clinging to summer vacation" ... before feeling the necessity to address the "attacks" for her fans.
All I can say is if you have read the old fart libertarian, anti-intervention, small government Friedman, have read Klein's work, and are objective you will have to conclude Klein is out of her league with this one.
Her arguments and conclusions in The Shock Doctrine are what's disastrous - largely tweaking facts to fit her audience, which seem to be "young radicals." Even if very few radicals actually read her book - they buy her rhetoric. The more radical of the "conspiracy" radicals are disappointed with her 9/11 stance, rightly so, as she takes the safe no-government-involvement road, the same as Chomsky - these two stand a little to the left side of the gate, keeping their audiences safely corralled, and some frustrated.
Question: Have you noticed how so many of the "young radicals" are also extremely anti-Zionist, anti-AIPAC controlled congress, US bowing before Israel, those five dancing Israeli, yadayada, etc. yet most of their intellectual gurus are Jewish?
As for Friedman's statement on the Iraq War in the WSJ "... it seems to me very important that we make a success of it," well Naomi, many of us who protested the war have come to the same conclusion. As to what Klein has done for the anti-corporate globalization movement, she's about 28 years too late.
WaPo : Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican vice-presidential nominee who revealed Monday that her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, earlier this year used her line-item veto to slash funding for a state program benefiting teen mothers in need of a place to live.
After the legislature passed a spending bill in April, Palin went through the measure reducing and eliminating funds for programs she opposed. Inking her initials on the legislation -- "SP" -- Palin reduced funding for Covenant House Alaska by more than 20 percent, cutting funds from $5 million to $3.9 million. Covenant House is a mix of programs and shelters for troubled youths, including Passage House, which is a transitional home for teenage mothers.
According to Passage House's web site, its purpose is to provide "young mothers a place to live with their babies for up to eighteen months while they gain the necessary skills and resources to change their lives" and help teen moms "become productive, successful, independent adults who create and provide a stable environment for themselves and their families."
"The explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support," she wrote in a 2006 questionnaire distributed among gubernatorial candidates.
--------- I wasn't going to bother with the Palin pregnancy hairballs but changed my mind. Seems this is the "news" for most progressive pundits who know their audience.
(Disclaimer: I support no political party.)
Palin cutting funds in Alaska doesn't bother me one way or the other for the simple fact that the programs aimed at troubled youth, and particularly teen mothers/pregnancy, have taught few to become "productive, successful, independent adults" and when they do it is the exception - not the rule.
Children need to be mentored long before they are troubled teens and temp shelters are not the outreach I would choose. Honest, involved, loving parents might work. But for some unknown reason the State and/or society cannot interfere with parenting - until the damaged results are kicked to the curb.
The above traits - productive and independent, used to be part of parenting - not State funded charities. The State fails miserably when attempting to re-do what's left of throw-away children. And there are those scandals of authorities physically and sexually abusing the very children they are charged to protect. Not to mention the siphoning and corruption of funds.
Why is it that society has thrown billions at social programs for 40 years and yet the crisis deepen? When will society approach the problem at the core rather than waiting until the victim is a troubled runaway? Because we don't have the right to interfere with parents? So we can ignore the messes and horrors, and then fund attempts to clean up a fraction of the ruined lives?
Often it's the blind leading the blind and you cannot teach what you yourself do not know. But you would think success is rampant if you attend the charity fundraisers. They're gonna put themselves out of business if they're not careful.
Covenant House, founded by 2 New York priests, is a faith-based international program and "the largest privately-funded childcare agency in the United States providing shelter and services to homeless and runaway youth."
Passage House , an offspring of Covenant House, is a 10-bed residential program for "pregnant and parenting women ages 17-20" in Alaska.
Palin must have been very saddened by her daughter's pregnancy, because regardless of how well you think you're doing the job of parenting, you will blame yourself for the mistakes your children make - you will ask yourself where did I go wrong, where did I fail. (Unless you're the Casey Anthony family living blissfully self-deluded, and always have been to produce a daughter such as Casey.)
Modern parenting - all appearance and little substance.
Palin says she does not support funding for "explicit sex-ed programs." Note the word "explicit." I agree. It is not the State's job to teach my children how a condom is used.
What are parents teaching children if the State needs to teach explicit sex education? Our children are exposed 24/7 from all media directions with sex education - however, crude and pornographic it may be, and many are exposed to anything and everything at home by the parents.
Are you unaware of what today's teens are uploading and watching on the internet?
I have no problem with children learning the biology of reproduction in school - they do not need demonstrations on how to unroll a rubber.
The progressive howling about Palin's "slashing" funds for a charity in Alaska is hype. If this is all they have to make her ugly they'll need to dig deeper.
Maybe the accusation she pressured someone to get her former brother-in-law fired will do the trick, although he's still working. I read somewhere the brother-in-law, 4 times married and divorced Mike Wooten, used a taser on his 11-year-old stepson, poached game, drank in his patrol car, threatened Palin's dad would "eat a f*cking lead bullet" if he helped his daughter (Palin's sister) get an attorney - maybe that's why progressives are not running harder with that accusation.
Last week, Comcast -- the second-largest Internet service provider in the country -- announced that starting Oct. 1 it would officially set a threshold for monthly Internet usage.
In an online announcement, the service provider said that although it already contacts residential customers who use excessive amounts of bandwidth, it had never provided a specific limit. Now, Comcast said it will amend its user agreement to say that users will be allowed 250 gigabytes of monthly usage.
Kos diarist is claiming Sarah Palin's last child is really her grandson - the child of her teen daughter. A few pics of mom not large enough at 7 months, according to Kos diarist, and a couple of pics of her daughter with a tummy bulge is evidence.
As "proof" of something Diarist says: "Sarah began leaking amniotic fluid. Instead of checking into a hospital, she instead made a call to her doctor, and delivered the keynote speech. The oddities only grow from here on, as instead of rushing to a Dallas medical facility that could treat a mother who's amniotic fluid has been draining for hours on end (made even more crucial due to the fact that this is occurring a full month prematurely), Sarah & Todd instead opted to... Fly all the way back from Texas to Alaska. A dangerous choice, as with each pregnancy (once again, in this case after four previous), a mother's window of labor to delivery grows shorter and shorter."
----My water leaked with one of my pregancies - it was a holiday season and I continued on with shopping and other preparations for 24 hours before going to the hospital. And after multiple pregancies the labor and deliveries grow longer again, a physician once explained it to me as the result of uterine muscles not working as well with multiple pregancies. Labor and delivery window gets longer again usually after birth #3.
The Kos Diarist's facts about Down syndrome are also misleading. Down syndrome is more common in older women but more are born to younger women because of the "overall fertility" of that age group. The Kos Diarist must have gotten his data from wiki.
Kos Diarist states: "Eight months pregnant. A 6.2 pound fetus. No one notices a visible trace. By the third trimester, a perfectly fit woman not wearing anything less than a space suit should be easily spotted as pregnant."
Not true - with a couple of my children I was still able to wear my jeans (unbuttoned/unzipped) and a baggy shirt into the eighth month. Here's a clue - good stomach muscles keep many women looking smaller in the third trimester. Good stomach muscles are from exercise and diet before pregnancy in the "perfectly fit woman". Not every woman wants to flaunt her pregnancy with tight clothing, like so many trendy celebrities seem to enjoy doing these days.
Does Kos know how desperately pathetic this hit piece makes progressives / democrats look? Probably. The goal of mainstream "left/progressive" has been to discredit themselves, and they continue doing a good job of it. It's enough to make a genuine leftist wanna cry, and the rightwing cheer.
Update: The 17-year-old daughter of Palin is pregnant and plans to marry the father.
Putin: US orchestrated Georgia conflict, suggests motive was to affect US president election.
Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin accused the United States on Thursday of instigating the fighting in Georgia and said he suspects a connection to the U.S. presidential campaign — a contention the White House dismissed as "patently false."
"We have serious grounds to think that there were U.S. citizens right in the combat zone" during Russia's war with the U.S.-allied ex-Soviet republic, he said the interview broadcast on state-run Russian television. "And if that's so, if that is confirmed, it's very bad. It's very dangerous."
"The American side in fact armed and trained the Georgian army," Putin said. "Why hold years of difficult talks and seek complex compromise solutions in interethnic conflicts? It's easier to arm one side and push it into the murder of the other side, and it's over.
The United States has close ties with the Georgian government and has trained Georgian units. The Pentagon has said that the U.S. had about 130 trainers in Georgia when the fighting erupted earlier this month, including a few dozen civilians who were all working to prepare the Georgian forces for deployment to Iraq.
But Russian officials have made statements aimed to convey the idea that Americans may have directly supported Georgia's offensive.
-------- Is Putin serious? Sort of like the old US accusations regarding Russia's backing, arming, training the "commies" around the world and in our backyard - Nicaragua, El Salvador, etc. It's not as if the USSR had close ties with Cuba for decades, oh wait ... Russia did do those things.
Did the US push Georgians into murdering the other side? That's harder to prove. Unless of course you tend to believe Georgians are ignorant backward patsies who can be pushed around by the US, not that Russia would ever push them around.
Doesn't Putin know US rulers don't need no stinkin' conflict to get one party elected over the other - America's ruling class (like Russia's) can count the vote any which way they want?
I think Putin reads "left" bloggers who have been claiming the motive behind the Georgian conflict was to effect the US election (for McCain). And some believers, such as this one claims Russia is in on it. "WE MUST ELECT BARACK OBAMA IF WE ARE TO SAVE OUR WORLD FROM THESE MADMEN!!!!"
Loosen that tinfoil man, you've interrupted the brain's blood flow.
An acquaintance here in the 'hood, nickname Pookie, made a comment weeks ago that I've been mulling over ever since. Not a particularly bright man and uneducated by any standard, he does run a successful auto detailing and body shop, and in the last few years has tripled his business. His comment : "I'm votin' republican 'cause when them dems get in, the folks with money holds their money tighter to themselves."
His success at small business makes it apparent he has innate good sense, is intuitive, and his comment has the ring of logic. He also admits to not voting - doesn't have time for politics. We need more Pookies.
You might say Pookie's logic is what progressives have scorned as the "trickle down" effect. Not that you ever really hear installed Democrats complain seriously about corporate tax cuts - but those Dems running for office promise tax relief for the lower and middle class will be achieved by raising taxes on the rich, the corporations, etc. And for 8 years we have been bombarded with the mantras that Bush tax cuts are a break for the rich, blah blah blah. Rich folks like Bill Clinton claim that, even though he did not need it, he benefited from BushCo tax cuts. Didn't see him giving it back to Uncle Sam though.
Supporters of corporate tax breaks claim corporate tax breaks are necessary in order for American companies to compete globally, blah blah blah. Opponents would have you believe the rich are getting richer off your money (even though you don't have much money to begin with, if the rich paid more taxes you would somehow get more - it doesn't work that way because it's a rigged game but democrats/progressives would have you believe you'll win the Utopian scratch-off if you just vote for them).
It's all jingoistic b.s. politically oriented to get elected - leaving Bubba and Joe Average with a lot of spin and little reality of economics. This "tax the rich" mantra every 4 years is a ploy for the poor - because anyone with even a little money knows how to legally avoid paying much more in taxes, and wait it out until the next election.
So, I've been searching around for a way to explain Pookie's insight. I'm not sure I can, but will continue on with this blog post anyway.
The average family focuses on visible taxes such as property taxes, sales taxes on purchases, and personal income and payroll taxes. All of which, other than Federal income taxes, are determined at the state and local level. Some states have no income tax, some have no taxes on food products, some state, county, and city sales taxes are higher than the next state or county; the neighborhood you're in determines property tax.
Generally when corporate taxes are higher the cost is passed on to the consumer. You may or may not agree with this depending on the brand of political soap used to wash your brain. The corporate cost will be passed on in higher prices, lower wages, fewer benefits, lost jobs, etc. If you don't believe me, just remember that most manufacturing jobs bled out of the US under Clinton.
Now, you might argue that a company such as say Walmart should pay more taxes. Or you could argue that had progressives been on the ball they would have ensured unionization to fight for better wages and benefits, or perhaps politicians should have fought to keep manufacturing jobs at home. While Democrat pols swear support for union labor they vote for NAFTA, CAFTA, go mum on halting the outsourcing of jobs; not to mention support and sympathy for immigrant labor - your low-wage competition.
You could say one administration plows and plants and the next administration reaps the harvest - it's how the two-in-one party system works. Clinton did a lot of plowing for BushCo.
Meanwhile, rather than tell you the truth, both parties jump on the most stupid unimportant out-of-context comment to sensationalize and distract you from what they're really doing on the Potomac. The mainstream media, and 99.9% of the "alternative" media, go on and on about nothing that will make any change in the status quo (follow the funding).
I found an interesting article at the Tax Foundation site on the cost of corporation taxation to Mr. and Ms. Average. This appears to be a nonpartisan website but that's for you to decide; I doubt anyone is completely nonpartisan - other than those few souls who stand back disconnected from the duplicity in all political partying. Someone has to fund "foundations" and the hands doling out the funds always expect a certain doctrinal tilt to the results.
Tax Foundation economists Andrew Chamberlain and Gerald Prante have some interesting charts, most interesting is the corporate tax burden by congressional district.
Tax Foundation: "From a political perspective, it is interesting to note that four of the top five districts with the highest per-household corporate tax burdens are all represented by Democrats. However, looking at the top 25 districts, or even the top 50 districts, shows that the parties are roughly evenly represented. The bottom end of the rankings, by contrast, is heavily tilted toward Democrats. Eight of the 10 districts with the lowest corporate tax burdens are represented by Democrats. Of the 25 lowest districts, only four are represented by Republicans."
These lowest places include Yuma, El Paso, Chico, CA. One of the highest is the 14th, Silk Stockingdistrict in NY, represented by congresswoman Maloney.
According to Chamberlain and Prante ... "... low-income households pay more in corporate income taxes than they pay in personal income taxes. Geographically, households in largely urban congressional districts and metropolitan areas bear a disproportionate share of corporate income taxes today and, thus, would receive a significant boost in living standards if the corporate tax burden were reduced."
While the average per-household burden of the corporate tax is $2,757, a disproportionate share of the burden falls on urban areas where households have higher wages and more capital income. However, lower-income households tend to pay more in corporate income taxes than they do in personal income taxes. This indicates that a general cut in corporate income tax rates (or other taxes on capital) would provide a greater benefit to low-income households than would further rate cuts in individual taxes. Indeed, there are 43 million Americans who already have no income tax liability after they take advantage of their credits and deductions. Those households would benefit most from a cut in corporate taxes.
Does the average progressive Joe Blow understand how taxation works? I don't think so and what he thinks he knows is backasswards. But Pookie understands, even if he doesn't articulate it very well.
What Pookie sees is that when Democrats (or Republicans) promise to cut his taxes - they lie - because your state, county, city, sales, property tax are determined locally, and have you ever seen a reduction in your paycheck taxes under any administration? Raising the taxes on mega corporations does not return money to your pocket or living standard because Big, Inc. will pass the tax cost on to you every time. Small to mid-size businesses like Pookies are sometimes taxed out of business. Big, Inc. and government are fine with that too; wouldn't want too many independent folks out there.
What Washington, D.C. does with this extra tax money from the rich, when and if they "raise taxes on big business" is fund new or existing bureaucracies that are here to help you - although after administrative costs, graft and corruption Joe Average will see little to none of it. These extra tax dollars from "the rich" should flow to the local level from the Feds, which could make your standard of living better, but such funds always peter out by the time they reach the town council level, and then local taxes rise to repair those potholes and playgrounds. Pookie will pay more local taxes to keep his business going. Those "richer" folks across town will pay more local tax and use Pookie's services less often. Big, Inc. corporation will raise prices for the products necessary for Pookie to do business; his insurance rates rise along with local fees and taxes.
But you might ask - then how come the cost of energy/oil, which drives up the price of everything, is so high? The war? Tax breaks for the rich? Falling dollar?
Maybe you agree with Michael Greenberger:
The Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 or CFMA (Public Law 106–554, §1(a)(5) [H.R. 5660], December 21, 2000), was passed by the United States Congress and signed by Bill Clinton in December 2000 to allow for the creation, for U.S. exchanges, of a new sort of derivative security: the single-stock future. Also known as the "Enron loophole" as it exempts over-the-counter energy trades and trading on electronic energy commodity markets. The "loophole" was drafted by Enron Lobbyists working with senator Phil Gramm.
The Enron loophole, so they say, allowed oil speculators to drive up oil prices. It sounds logical but is it true? Doesn't seem to be, and speculation can continue on in London, Singapore, other locations outside the NYSE.
While pols continue to promise you hope and change by taxing the rich - they conveniently omit the cost of living has little to do with forcing the "rich" guy across town to pay a few hundred or thousand more in taxes and more to do with buddy legislation where both parties cooperate to the fullest with any PAC or lobbying group who donates the most. In 2000, Only 4 members of the House, 1%, voted Nay on the CFMA, 2 republicans and 2 democrats, Ron Paul was one No vote. Progressive favorites voted Yes on the Enron loophole - Kucinich, McKinney, Murtha, Barney Frank, Patrick Kennedy, Barbara Lee, etc.
You have to really wade around in these govtrack and Thomas bills. Often, if tabled or voted down, a bill seems to change numbers and resurface, or attached to another bill with little to no change, and then pass into law.
Some experts say legislation to curb global trading by speculators would cut oil by $30-60 per barrel, or bring it down to $2 per gallon, which in turn would lower the cost of everything else, overnight they say. Bipartisan efforts worked to repeal the "Enron loophole."
In May of this year the Farm Bill which Bush vetoed closed the Enron loophole, but the senate voted to override Bush's veto. Oil hasn't dropped dramatically but maybe the effect needs a few more over nighters. What little price drop at the pump we've seen - is it because of closing the speculator loophole or because it's an election year? It apparently did not have any effect on food or energy prices. Did they lie about oil prices being tied to speculators? Apparently someone lied somewhere. The IEA says there's no connection between speculators and oil prices.
Who can you believe?
Should Big Oil pay more taxes? Sounds good to me. But will you see your standard of living rise if they pay more tax? Or will the "trickle down" trickle out in the last pocket of a bureaucrat's suit? Will Big Oil simply pass more legislation so you subsidize more oil production?
What has government done directly in the last 30 years that raised your living standard to any degree?
Am I defending big business? Hardly. If I had my way Walmart would not be using sweatshops in China. If I had my way any oil pulled from American soil would be nationalized. If I had my way PAC/lobby groups would be illegal. If I had my way there would be term limits and hard prison time for corruption. If I had my way higher education would be free; we would have unquestionable fool-proof voting methods; we would have more direct legislative participation and less need for lying politicians.
When things change economically for Pookie he adapts and works around it because he knows all political parties exploit him, and work together to do it. We need more Pookies, who are too busy living to waste time on phony political carnivals.
Hillary was out - no one likes the Clintons anymore and she can use the next 4 years to mend her image, and besides, she's a woman who has played second fiddle long enough and is not gonna go there anymore.
Edwards pecckerdillo on a dying wife - he's out.
Bill Richardson didn't have a chance - too many clingy white folks would turn from this mix Mex (one minority on the ticket is enough), and Richardson had abandoned his good friend Hillary for Obama only because he hoped for the VP slot - the career climbing too obvious. No one likes a brown-noser (no pun intended).
Those never-heard-of-'em such as Kathleen Sebelius had nary a chance - Obama needs muscle, not makeup - it was a brief sound byte for Obama to pander to the feminist vote.
Evan Bayh was out because too many of us might remember daddy Birch Bayh's incident with Pixie Grismore.
(You know, when they talk about the body count of politicians they're not kidding.)
Biden is to Obama what Cheney is to Bush (handler/babysitter, ready to step in and be president).
August 18, statement from Biden upon return from the Russia/Georgia conflict: "When Congress reconvenes, I intend to work with the Administration to seek Congressional approval for $1 billion in emergency assistance for Georgia, with a substantial down payment on that aid to be included in the Congress' next supplemental spending bill. This money will help the people of Georgia recover from the damage that has been inflicted on their economy and send a clear message that the United States will not abandon this young democracy. I hope this $1 billion commitment will be matched by others in the international community.
"Russia's actions have already erased the possibility of advancing legislative efforts to promote U.S.-Russian partnership in the current Congress, including an agreement to allow for increased collaboration with Russia on nuclear energy production and the repeal of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment, which currently blocks the country's integration into the World Trade Organization. Russia’s failure to keep its word and withdraw troops from Georgia risks the country’s standing as part of the international community. That is not the future the United States or Europe want – but it is the future Russia may get if it does not stand down its forces and live up to its commitments."
---- Note the "emergency" spending (see Welfare/Warfare below).
Obama's original statement on the Russia/Georgia "crisis," August 8, was a generic call for cooperation and the usual UN "peacekeeping" solution, yadayada, but on August 9th Barack flip-flopped to "condemn Russia's aggressive actions...," after hearing hawk McCain's response, and after Biden told Obama to talk tougher.
I remember Biden from the '80s as the "Drug Czar." Under the Reagan administration Joe created the nation's Drug Czar Office to oversee the federal government's anti-drug strategy. Another "War on" that will never be won but forever funded.
Using the above grading Biden scores 70% on the Personal Score and 10% on Economic Score.
Personal Score measures how much one believes government should intervene in people's personal lives. Personal issues include health, morality, love, recreation, prayer and other activities that are not measured in dollars. Above 60% means the candidate believes in tolerance for different people and lifestyles. A score below 40% means the candidate believes that standards of morality & safety should be enforced by government.
Economic Score measures how much one believes government should intervene in people's economic lives. A low score (below 40%) means the candidate believes that a good society is best achieved by the government redistributing wealth.
Essentially, Biden, with a P score of 70% believes we the unwashed masses can self-govern when it comes to personal choices e.g. sex, drugs, recreation, pulling the plug on a loved one, god - but with a 10% E score, Joe believes that only the State is qualified to give us the "good society," after all, we have been too busy doping, dumbing down, and f*cking around to take care of ourselves.
In truth, the welfare state and the warfare state are inseparable, because they are two aspects of the same thing, the state itself. Countless people depend on both for their income. Both expand inexorably. We always hear calls for emergency spending; there is no such thing as emergency saving. And ... emergencies — as defined by the state — just keep on coming.
In the days of monarchs, a man at least knew who the state was: the king. "L’etat, c’est moi," and all that. When there was a war, everyone knew it was the king’s war. When the king imposed taxes, everyone knew who was paying whom. It might be tyranny, but you knew what was what; there was no nonsense about self-government. Government meant some people ruling others.
But in the age of Democracy, people think, confusedly, that they themselves are the state, when they actually have no idea what the state is doing in their name--at least, not until it does it to them. An encounter with a bureaucrat may throw cold water on the notion that the government is "we." We no longer really know who it is. But whoever it is, we no more control our rulers than our ancestors controlled their kings.
Let’s stop kidding ourselves. This amorphous, global, bureaucratic empire has nothing to do with liberty, democracy, or self-government. Or the U.S. Constitution.
Cameron Strang "Why I Accepted and Then Declined to Pray at the DNC."
Strang is the young evangelical, Oral Roberts U grad, Florida based and founder of Relevant magazine - described as a hip/edgy mag for young Christian folks, and a member of Church in the Son, self-described as "... a church for people who don't like church."
A non-denominational, Church in the Son in Orlando, is where a 100 or so young adults in tank tops and flip-flops enjoy impassioned singing and pulsing lights and a conversational sermon from biblical passages, with clapping, crying and talk of God's "furious love."
"We don't get hung up on the trappings, the legalisms, the stuff that worries fundamentalists," Strang says.
In other words - religion for folks who don't want to strictly follow the traditional Christian teachings - you know, folks who would prefer the 10 commandments lighten up a little, who feel Jesus is Savior, but more a relaxed hip-hop homey than a stern legalist on the "stuff" that worries the older folks (some of whom may be clinging to god and guns). The new Jesus untrapped - more a populist, or "progressive" god with strobe lights and flip-flops for the 18-34 age group.
Cameron is/was part of the Obama camp's outreach to prove Obama's Christian credentials. Previously, Cameron and his dad, Steven Strang (founder of Charisma mag) accepted an off-the record meeting with Obama.
Cameron: A few weeks ago, I was asked if I’d be interested in possibly praying at the Democratic National Convention. Taken aback, but intrigued at the opportunity, I accepted. Then I found out the invocation was to be on the main stage, opening night of the DNC. Part of the national broadcast. Most people would jump at such an exposure opportunity, but it gave me serious pause. Through Relevant I reach a demographic that has strong faith, morals and passion, but disagreements politically. It wouldn’t be wise for me to be seen as picking a political side, when I’ve consistently said both sides are right in some areas and wrong in some areas. (And truth be told, I haven’t yet made up my mind about who I’m going to vote for this November. There are a lot of specifics I’d like to hear the candidates talk about before my decision will be made.)
Strang says most people would jump at the exposure op but it gave him serious pause. Uh, please. LOL. You did jump goofball and then had to decline - there was no pause, serious or otherwise, anywhere.
I don't really believe people when they say they "haven't made their decision" yet, especially at this late date when candidates have been campaigning for 2+ years. But doesn't it make one sound thoughtful and wise to pretend they are still contemplating and weighing the issues?
Truth be told, I bet daddy Strang thumped Cameron on the head over this one.
This latest Reuters/Zogby poll is a dramatic reversal from the identical survey taken last month – in the July 9-13 Reuters/Zogby survey, Obama led McCain, 47% to 40%.
Okay, I'll say it: I told you so, 6 months ago in The Obama Fling.
Now of course, "progressives" are declaring Obama tricked them into thinking he was the real deal and not simply the left cheek on the corporate ass.
Poor progressives - fooled again, and again and again. Except those few hundred progressive Naderistas and McKinneyites - they weren't fooled by Obama's ability to read a good speech with passion and seductiveness.
(Obamamania is like the roller coaster ride of a lust-based relationship, hot damn up and down and you can't get off until it stops and then you stagger away a bit weak in the legs but it was worth it ... maybe ... you hope.)
But whine not Obamamites - the votes may be counted until they add up right, to install Obama in the White House. I'll tell you where the country is headed the day after election. Not that either political party will take us in the direction the majority of we the people want to go - but one ride is always bumpier than the other (sort of the lesser of two evils meme).
Remember too, Obama has not been officially nominated ... :)
Investigative reporter Ron Suskind's new book, The Way of the World charges that the White House, seeking to justify its invasion of Iraq, ordered the CIA in late 2003 to forge evidence of a link between Iraq and al Qaeda.
Suskind, a Pulitzer-winning reporter and relentless chronicler of this administration's secrets, depicts a White House with a simpleminded bully in the Oval Office taking direction from a paranoid vice president -- and caps off his latest expose with what he acknowledges sounds a lot like an impeachable offense.
"Suskind writes in his new book that the order to create the letter was written on 'creamy White House stationery.' The book suggests that the letter was subsequently created by the CIA and delivered to Iraq, but does not say how.
---- Yawn. Actually, I would say Bush is simply simpleminded and Cheney is the paranoid bully - and both are ordered around by the Poppy Bush 1000 points of light political faction. I would also say this administration has no secrets - they've been slapping the crap out of you with the real world of politics for 8 long years.
A recurring figure in Suskind's latest book is the head of Hussein's intelligence service, Tahir Jalil Habbush al-Tikriti - a bad guy in the Saddam regime and now with a State Department $1,000,000 price on his head.
The London Telegraph first reported on the allegedly forged Habbush letter in December 2003 - Newsweek quickly reports that the document is probably a fabrication, citing both the FBI’s detailed Atta timeline and a document expert who, amongst other things, distrusts an unrelated second “item” on the same document, which supports a discredited claim that Iraq sought uranium from Niger (the Wilson/Plame distration). "It will later be revealed that many forged documents purporting a link between Iraq and al-Qaeda were left in places for US troops to find."
Would that be the CIA clandestine services dropping documents for troops to find? Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy work - where was Mossad when BushCo needed plausible forgery.
The faked "letter" or memo dated July 1, 2001, is supposedly written by Habbush to Saddam "describing a three-day “work program” Atta participated in at Abu Nidal’s base in Baghdad. The link between Saddam and 9/11. The order to do a fake Habbush letter was written on "creamy" White House stationery, which George Tenet took back to CIA and let guys like Robert Richer take a peek. Although Tenet vehemently denies such a creamy White House letter ever existed.
Three-day work program? Sounds like a short college work/study stint. And the CIA so dumb they didn't even check the itinerary of Atta to assure it meshed with this 3-day program in Baghdad?
Suskind's main snitch in TWOTW is Robert Richer, former CIA #2 man in clandestine operations. Richer quit in 2005 because he was unhappy with Porter Goss' direction. Richer, with 35 years in the Agency reported he "lost confidence" in the agency's leadership." Richer, the spy manager, "wanted something more expansive in reforming and expanding the clandestine service within the CIA, while reducing the side of the agency that conducts analysis..." He wanted to e-x-p-a-n-d the clandestine. Clandestine services (HUMINT-think job creation) encompasses international, military, and political issues. Richer wanted more covert surveillance. Maybe Richer should have waited around as Goss left a few months later, to be replaced by General "Let's-Spy-on-Everyone" Hayden.
It sounds to me Bubba like Mr. Suskind has seen one too many Tom Clancy spy thrillers where one faction of the government keeps a creamy letter implicating higher ups in the government, their chip in the big game of Clear and Present Danger. Except the big screen's CIA head is Harrison Ford, a good guy and way better looking than Tenet, and Ford has to break into the bad guy's safe to steal a peek at the damning creamy colored document.
(Suskind, won his Pulitzer as a feature writer for WSJ - and we all know the Wall Street Journal is trustworthy. His feature stories for the Pulitzer in WSJ were about Cedric Jennings, who Suskind met in 1994, an inner-city honor student in Washington, D.C. Suskind later wrote A Hope in the Unseen, the legitimate story of the Jennings odyssey from inner city to Ivy League. Hope Unseen is mandatory reading in many college courses.)
Since Hope Unseen, Suskind has written articles and books predicting things to come, i.e. Bush would privatize Social Security immediately upon reelection in 2004.
In the book The One Percent Doctrine Suskind states Osama bin Laden (apparently still alive and well) wanted Bush reelected in 2004.
If you like writers who focus on becoming NYT bestselling bashers you will love Ron Suskind, and his counterpart, Jerome Corsi, who had bestselling hits with Unfit for Command (Kerry bashfest), Atomic Iran (democrat pols corrupted by Iranian money), and his latest The Obama Nation. Corsi is also known as a 9/11 truther and impeach Busher, but he did co-author a rebuilding America book with Ohio political crookster Kenneth Blackwell. Corsi has been accused of plagiarism - but heck, when so many pop culture authors are shilling the same themes - they're gonna sound alike.
Kind of reminds me of what's his name, Michael Moore - all these guys (and gals) wetting their fingers in the wind to see what trendy political/social plot might sell next.
Oddest thing is, the US is a nation of non-readers and politically apathetic bumpkins - so who buys these books? Go figger. Maybe the CIA buys a lot of copies - just to make ya think damn near the whole nation is reading and believing these political peddlers - armed with no proof, no credible witnesses, no hard facts, no smoking guns - just pushing bullshit and hearsay - check publisher listings for price and availability.
November 2004, Madrid: Rio Ferdinand has said he was ready to come off the field after Spanish fans hurled abuse at England's black players in Wednesday's friendly in Madrid. England's Shaun Wright-Phillips and Ashley Cole were subjected to monkey chants from sections of the crowd.
February 2008, Madrid: Racist who taunted Brit track ace Lewis Hamilton during pitstops could cost Spain its Grand Prix, F1 chiefs warned last night. Whizkid Hamilton — a hate figure among Spaniards after a bitter row with ex-McLaren teammate Fernando Alonso last year — faced boos and racist chants as he tested his new car on Saturday. And last night a motor racing website displayed disgraceful photographs of so-called F1 supporters wearing black make-up and dark wigs at the track yesterday.
August 14, 2008: A photo of the Spanish men's Olympics basketball team, using their index fingers as if to slant their eyes, has sparked controversy with Asian rights groups. The image, showing the players pushing up the outside corners of their eyes, was taken before the team left Spain for Beijing.
There are a lot of folks who use the labels liberal, progressive, and "Left" interchangeably, and most will argue there are major differences - but there is little if any difference.
Liberals are Democrats. Tax and spend, create more government programs to "help," and allow government to assume responsibility for your needs. In the last decade the adjective "liberal" has become an embarrassment, a sort of synonym for personal immorality and/or a political wuss. Which is why so many Democrats now refer to themselves as "progressive." Claiming to be change artists without changing much of anything. Examples: Obama, Kucinich, Kennedy, Hillary, etc. but all support the status quo of the State. (I have to laugh when Obama and/or Kucinich are called "far-left.")
Progressives are said to be left leaning - Democrats, Greens, some Independents, sometimes third party. They more often advocate "interventionist" economics - believing that redistributing more of the wealth to the poor will solve US social and political problems and save the world. Example: Nader, John Edwards, McKinney, Jesse Jackson, Sharpton, etc. Most Democrats consider themselves "progressive" but both Democrats and progressives are standard issued pols with the State's stamp of approval.
Many claim to be anti-war yet in 2001 all but one member of congress, Barbara Lee, voted YES for AUMF (Authorization to Use Military Force in Afghanistan) which led us into the current Middle East mess, and which they continue voting to fund.
The "Left," including Socialists, Maoists, Marxists, etc., generally believe in abolishing capitalism. Many common folks who call themselves "progressives" are actually socialists but the term socialist is not mainstream or acceptable in the US, hence most timid souls use the word "progressive", and continue to trawl for "hope and change" among the usual political suspects - all while dreaming of tyranny by their brand of social and economic justice; some refer to one another as comrades, brothers/sisters, citizens of the world (sometimes with the gang mentality of relentless loyalty to the group, but aspiring for a collective global gang).
But therein lies the problem with American politics - there is no “Left.” There are only liberals, progressives, Democrats, and a pseudo-left: A bunch of folks unable to reason independent from the State, unable to stand by themselves and unable to contribute anything other than the politically correct mantras allowed by the State, but of course flavored with their own profitable modifications and axes to grind. They are easily bought off with trifles and trinkets, and charisma and hot air go a very long way. More frightening is they are completely unaware of what they are, and adamantly believe they have the solution; understandable as most folks cannot acknowledge when they are vacuous and/or full of shit.
Liberals, Dems, Progressives, and the so-called Left - all are conduits of the imperial capitalist State - pretending they know how to create a better world and will give it to you (all you have to do is repeat their manifesto and follow). And all you are gonna get is more State - good and hard.
Essentially, you can say the same for the "Right." Instead of liberals, Democrats, progressives, Left - just insert conservatives, Republicans, neocons, Christo-Zionists.
The "left/progressives" have ranted to their followers, continuously, of the US police state, the failing dollar and US economy, the spreading global US hegemony, etc. etc. And they are not good at lying about it. For example, the Left "police state" is based on such things as KBR being awarded a contract to build detention centers.
The centers have not been built, and won't be unless there's a need (another Katrina or Mariel boatlift). Add in a bureaucracy like Infraguard and a few progressive lies and you have Left fear mongering at it's finest. According to "whistleblower" Matthew Rothschild the FBI has deputized Infragard members who can kill at will in a martial law situation - it's not true, but made ya scared. Favorite sites for such barkers are Progressive.org, Alternet, DemocracyNow, Dissident Voice, Opednews, etc.
And let's not forget all those snoop laws, habeas, FISA, airport searches that can see through your clothes, etc. The government is just waiting to storm troop into town, roust you from your bed in the middle of night, ship you to a yet-to-be-built KRB detention center where you will be murdered and disposed of in those plastic coffins (see previous post below).
Progressives pimp the solution as you need more "free" stuff from a benign loving government, which only democrats/progressives, or the "left" can secure for you.
And amidst all this doom, gloom, whine, and phoniness - the number of super rich continues to grow. In 1985 there were 13 billionaires in the US - today there are over 1000. Granted, a lot of this wealth is through government contracts or funds in some form or another, etc., as it usually is - in case you haven't noticed how many of the wealthy are made in America with government aid in some way or another.
While progressives moan about tax breaks for Halliburton, KBR, Exxon, etc. those same breaks benefit the overnight millionaire landowners in western North Dakota , who have a much better chance of striking it rich from oil than they do playing the lottery.
These tax cuts also benefit most every member of congress and all your favorite politicians, pundits, and celebrity heroes. (By the way Dummie Bush did not ask for these tax cuts. Congress added them to the 2001 tax-cut bill, which was enacted at a time when policymakers assumed budget surpluses would surpass $5 trillion over the coming decade, Bush and congress have continued the cuts.)
You don't really believe those tax returns released by politicians, read that way when they are out of office do you?
The rich get richer and the poor, thanks to socialist styled programs, get their tax rebates, EIC, stimulus checks - and other "free" stuff - housing, foodstamps, Medicaid, job training, etc.
Progressives would have you believe there is a ship of really big "free" stuff coming in (when they are elected), and it will be funded by taxing the rich. Not true - the rich have always gotten out of paying their fair share of taxes - but progressive sheople are taught their station in life is dependent on government programs which must be funded by the greedy rich.
That's right Joe Chump, you are helplessly and economically downtrodden unless the government gives you the substance you need. (Psssst, that's the same oppressive, imperialist, capitalist government you rail against.)
Progressives lead you to believe, after their candidate is elected, that a good-hearted government daddy is going to pay for your lifestyle - but you're gonna get punked. In case you're too young to notice, or too clueless, over the past 40 years there has been a direct correlation between the growth of social programs and the taxes withheld from your paycheck, and the "fees" and other hidden taxation you pay on everything necessary for the needy lifestyle. You have paid and will pay for your "free" stuff - not the wealthy, not the ruling class.
What frightens the ruling class is that you, little schmucker, might one day acquire an education and some ambition - imagine how crowded the economic playing field would be. Please stay poor, helpless, and ignorant.
Imagine the empty tax coffers if more folks were self-employed and/or knowledgeable on how to avoid unnecessary taxation. It's much safer to have the "poor" led by those faux-angry big-hearted "progressives" demanding "free" programs for you, assuring you that you cannot work your way through college (too strenuous), you cannot and need not speak intelligible English (ebonics and Spanglish are fine), and it is not your fault at all that you are ignorant and criminally inclined - it's the government's fault, it's rich folks fault.
Progressive folks recently turned on their own, The Obamassiah, when he chastised Black men for not being responsible fathers. It's not culturally cool to play dad, especially when Jaquita herself doesn't know for sure who's the daddy. Thank god for the department of family services and DNA.
Oops, some on the Left might accuse me of that ugly terminology "personal responsibility." Or, my favorite, I'll be accused of worshiping the rich; by those on the left who earn theirs from "worshiping" the poor.
In the meantime, almost no one champions the disappearing middle class, clinging to god and guns and prone to traditional family-ism. But hell, the middle class is in the way of all that "free" stuff to come, who needs 'em.
Okay folks - I no longer fit into the progressive/leftist/liberal category. A few reasons why:
1. FARC. The recent rescue of Ingrid Betancourt and 3 American hostages had many on the Left bashing the victims. The "left" still defends Colombia's FARC as a legitimate rebel group - never mind FARC condones child soldiering (30% under age 18), never mind that the "rebels" rape, murder, kidnap, use extortion and drug running ($200-300 million a year criminal income) - crime is okay if it is your "rebels" doing it. It must be the Left equivalent of "freedom isn't free" and even $200-300 million is not enough to buy it for FARC. Or take Hugo Chavez (please), who is building his "socialist" empire on the profits from war in Afghanistan/Iraq - apparently blood profits are okay if dear leader is giving cinder block houses, vaccinations, and pencils to the have-nots. (Please do not look at the Hummers and mansions of the new Hugo "haves".)
2. AIPAC/ZOG (Zionist Occupation Government). Many Left scholars, such as James Petras, write often of Zionists/Israel control of the US. Never mind that there are thousands of other non-Jewish PACs and powerful entities who influence the politicians and policy of the US - the Jews are the goat to stake to the post. Oops, I mean the Zionists, the bad Jews. Personally, the most hideous and insidious control by Jews is on US culture, not policy, and is via Hollywood. But then, if you're stupid enough to be spending hours viewing the big screen, tube, or MSM - you deserve your shit-for-brains.
3. Tinfoil. I believe in as many conspiracy theories as the next guy - but sometimes the Left goes so far that even I have to laugh hilariously at them. For example, this 500,000 cheap, plastic, empty coffins in Georgia! The government getting ready to bury us en masse. First of all, this "500,000" number is pulled from someone's imagination. Judging by the video it's unlikely there is anywhere near that many "coffins" at this site. And they are not plastic coffins - these are Polyguard vault liners, mandatory in some states as they keep the soil from sinking after burial. Yes, the company does get government contracts, and is a corporation registered in Dick Cheney's state of Wyoming. I smell graft and corruption/cronyism - but not the mass murder of American "dissidents" after martial law is declared, as some on the "left" are shaking in fear believe these vaults are awaiting.
4. Socialism versus Capitalism. The Left/progressive solution is a hardcore faith that socialism will save us from capitalism. But - capitalism is not the problem - corruption is the problem. And after watching the last 40 years of "socialist" styled programs injected into the US, I see no real improvement in Joe Blow's life and happiness - Joe is morally, intellectually, and materially as poor as ever, however, he has a cell phone and can text message. Socialism is as corruptible as capitalism. What modern "socialism" has accomplished is not a redistribution of wealth, but in spreading the poverty around. And let us not forget the USSR grand experiment with a State owned economy. (Any question why Putin and Hugo Chavez are new best friends?)
5. Obama. Many "progressives" eyes half-closed and ears shut, believe Obama is progressive. Never mind that he is a member of the long corrupted Chicago machine and has close ties to foreign crooks and liars (Rezko/Auchi). Never mind that he has thrown his preacher, his momma and his white grandmomma under the bus. Never mind that he found Jesus at the same time he found his political calling. He's a long cool lanky phony, giving fist bumps to Michelle (he will be fisting you later).
6. "Alternatives." Those on the progressive Left not believing in the Obama Phenomena shout other names such as Nader, McKinney, Paul, and Kucinich. Pay no mind to the fact that all 4 have lived most of their adult lives in and around the D.C. political cesspool, living off tax dollars and benefits (did you know you only have to spend 5 years as a congress critter to receive lifetime benefits?), or in the case of Nader, who fathered behemoth corrupt bureaucracies such as EPA and OSHA. Never mind that not one in this fab 4 group would or could usher in the Left's "socialist" utopia.
Here is how I see the candidates. McCain, praised in the past by progressives for his willingness to step away from the Republican party on certain issues, is now portrayed by the same progressives as a doddering senile old man who is no more than an extension of the Bush term. Personally, I think McCain's somewhat unique life experiences make him more apt to clean up the Middle East mess. He is old, he is weary, and wants to leave something notably good behind, although possibly he will only manage to hold the line at what and where we are now. McCain is stubborn - which could be a plus if used correctly. As my dad used to tell me -"You're not stubborn, you're just determined."
Obama, is the best chameleon in politics in a long time. Obama spoke of a bitter, clinging class of Americans - because he himself is one. Young, with a well-hidden racial chip on his shoulder, hungry for recognition, and easily duped by men who have been in the power game for generations. Like many who reach pinnacles, Obama believes he is where he is not only because of his hard work and ambition - but because of some supernatural force, some cosmic karmic mystery, some special-ness bestowed upon him by the gods of fate - or as he assures the unwashed Bible believing masses - Jesus. Obama, like Bush the Boy, feels "chosen." And, reasoning as chosen people do, since he is "chosen," he can do no wrong. With Obama, the US runs a very high risk of world war and national collapse - why else would TPTB install a Black man to take the fall?
Youngest daughter married July 5. Whew! Everything went great. Beautiful bride, handsome groom. Honeymoon in Hawaii. Pics coming soon. (Uh, at 28 y/o you guys might want to think about starting a family soon :).
Mother of five (four in military uniform including daughter-in-law). Grandmother of eleven. Central America (under Reagan/Bush) - Been there, done that. When I was 17 it was a very good year for small town girls....married a Sicilian ....
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
