Winning the WaterCooler Wars

May the Best Team Win: Or how to live and learn to love the instant replay

2010-07-01T06:18:00.000-07:00

I am old and grew up with American sports where the emphasis was always on, “may the best team win”. At first this sounds ok, but having lived with it, I find it capitalistic and boring. The American “best team” is usually the richest team. The team that can buy the best players, or in youth sports, the team that can "recruit" the best players. And after they spend the money, they deserve (?) to win, ala NY Yankees or LA Lakers.

In recent World Cup games there have been some bad decisions made by referees. This is too bad (meant sincerely). It would be nice if the referees were super-human and made no mistakes. And if the goal of the sport is for the best team to win, this is disaster. But I would ask you to define “best team”. In American sports it is easy. In basketball, LA Lakers are the best team and they win most of the time. To be sure the best team (Lakers) prevail, there is a 80 plus game season and seven game tournament series. This would preclude a team other than the "best" from accidentally winning. Kinda like Germany accidently beating England. Maybe England and Germany should have the best 4 out of 7. Some would argue that England is a better team than Germany and should have won. And if there were more referees, like American sports, and instant replay, England would have prevailed. But I say, on that day, Germany’s skill and luck prevailed. If you want to review referees’ decisions after the game to decide if they are fit to continue as referees, go for it, but dont ruin soccer with the American instant replay.

If there is a god, soccer god that is, please tell FIFA to forget the instant replay and play on.

For youth sports, I wish the emphasis would be to have a good, competitive game and the hell with the “best team”.

So You Think You Can Revolt?

2010-05-30T20:13:00.000-07:00

It is a popular for some to suggest that we still have the revolution card to play. I don’t think so. I think it is romantic to think that the downtrodden will rise up and cast off the chains of oppression and reestablish our Democratic Republic, but not likely. First of all let’s look at who is going to be on whose side in this revolution. Let’s break the population into four classes.

The tea-bagger/uninformed voters/gullibles or whatever,

the apathetic middle class that don’t want to be involved as long as Dancing With the Stars(?) is still on,

the informed, educated, liberal, professionals

and the ruling class/corporatists.

So while some of the educated, liberal class pretend to support an armed revolution, the tea-baggers are actually making the motions. And they actually have guns and of course are easily lead. So this is how I see the revolution happening. The tea-baggers, backed by our corporate overlords (the ruling class) will revolt. But they will revolt against the liberals. They will undo whatever is left of our Constitution in the name of “freedom”. Can you spell Patriot Act? They will readily embrace Dick Cheeney as their new Democratic Dictator (or unitary executive as Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts would call him). John Yoo will be their high priest.

Now go ahead and mock me, I am used to it. I survived high school so this is nothing. But if you honestly think there is a way an armed revolution can take us back to a Constitutional controlled Democratic Republic, please tell me, I am honestly interested.

Laying all the blame on BP is counter productive.

2010-05-23T08:48:00.000-07:00

Of course BP shares some blame, but remember, they are a corporation and in spite of what the SCOTUS says, they are not human. BP doesn’t not have a conscience. Their sole goal is to make profit and as much as possible. They will cut corners and cheat the regulations at every turn. In some cases corporations have decided it is more profitable for them to neglect safeguards and pay the measly fines.

Bad analogy time:
If the candy store owner doesn’t buy a door and the guard sleeps on duty, should the neighborhood children shoulder the complete blame for getting into the candy?

We have inadequate regulations and very little enforcement of those regulations we have. Sadly, I doubt this president will do much about it. Oh something token will happen to BP, probably a punishment that they come up with. They will promise to never again let the battery run down on their blow-out preventer valve. Trust them. But IMHO they will never clean up this mess and they will do little to prevent the next one. Their sole goal is profit and they are willing to risk extreme damage to the environment and even human deaths (11 died on the Deepwater Horizon. Massey Energy killed 29 miners and nothing was done. I wonder how many deaths are allowed before we would do something.

Unregulated capitalism will be our downfall.

Is Buy Stocks Investing or Gambling?

2010-05-19T14:30:00.000-07:00

What happened to our economy? A number of things, many in the Bush years but also Clinton didn’t help by signing the bill that allowed the banks that you and I put our money in to “invest” (read gamble). So some will say that it’s just the “free market” at work, let the chips fall where they may. There are a couple of things wrong with that thinking. One, if I wanted someone to gamble with my money I’d go to Las Vegas myself. Two, we the taxpayers provide insurance to the gamblers (banksters). If they lose big, we make it up to them. Now remember it is our money they are gambling with and it is our money we give them when they fail. This may be win-win for the banksters but definitely lose-lose for the tax payers.
Another thing is that when stocks are bought in the market, we are not really “investing”. We are buying the stocks from another gambler that is betting the price will go down. We of course are betting the price will go up. Millions of these bets are made each day with virtually none of the money actually invested in companies to build factories or increase production.
We have seen plenty of evidence of how easy it is for the insiders to manipulate stock prices. For example, if an investment house strongly supports a stock, the popularity increases and so does the price. We, the general public are just trying to get in on the bubble. Now let’s say the investment company that is promoting the increase of the stock price, bets on the price falling and at some point stops supporting the stock, bingo, the price falls and the investment house (and or their favorite clients, make big money. One guess who loses. The poor bastards (you and me) that are just trying to make some money for retirement.
Goldman Sucks and others have done similar tricks with whole countries economies. In countries like Iceland, Ireland, and Greece they help make the countries’ economies look healthy, and then bet against the strength of the economy (they buy insurance against collapse). Of course they know the economies are over-stretched, because they helped put them in that position.
The banksters without regulations are manipulating our economy and making hundreds of billions and even trillions at our expense. We need tough regulations immediately.
I am sure that if an economist reads this they would cry, but it’s how I see it.

The Goose That Laid The Golden Egg

2010-05-08T08:31:00.001-07:00

Once upon a time their was a goose that laid golden eggs, otherwise known as the American economy. For decades the goose delivered the eggs and everyone prospered. It was very important to protect the goose from the greedy that would want more than the goose could produce, therefore there were regulations that protected the goose. This worked for decades until the American people started to forget the 1920’s, the last time the goose was killed. In the 1980's the powers to be decided to listen to the wizard Alan Greenspan who said that the goose could give more gold. Alan, in the name of his God, Ayn Rand, assured everyone that guarding the goose wasn’t necessary. He said that instead of regulating the amount of gold taken, we should let the smart business minds decide on the amount to be taken. After all, he said, they would never kill the goose because that would be against their own best interest. Many other economists cried out that it was essential to protect the goose, but their cries went unheard. Now the goose is severely wounded and Mr. Greenspan says that no one could have foreseen the disaster. Apparently Mr. Greenspan doesnt understand greed.

A little late but the American people woke up and voted for change. Time to heal the goose. Sadly, the change didn’t materialize. Instead of getting a new doctor to heal the goose, the new president kept the same doctors that harmed the goose. Apparently the new president is powerless against the cons.

Move your money out of stocks. You wont be able to out guess the cons.

Top Corporations Pay Little or No Taxes

2010-04-23T06:06:00.000-07:00

“Most corporations, including a large majority of foreign companies doing business in the United States, pay no income taxes, according to a report released today.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that two-thirds of both American and foreign companies doing business here end up avoiding all income tax obligations to the federal government, despite corporate sales totaling $2.5 trillion.
According to the GAO, each year from 1998 to 2005, an average of 68 percent of the foreign companies operating in the United States paid zero federal income taxes. During the same period, 66 percent of U.S. domestic corporations paid no federal income taxes to the government.”

Some of the corporations not paying any taxes in the U.S. were Bank of America, General Electric and CitiBank.

http://blog.aflcio.org/2008/08/12/we-pay-taxes-most-corporations-dont/

http://www.forbes.com/2010/04/01/ge-exxon-walmart-business-washington-corporate-taxes_slide_8.html

How's That Trickle Down Workin For Yeah? You Get Trickled On Yet?

2010-04-18T07:14:00.000-07:00

For almost 40 years every President, from Truman thru Carter, reduced our national debt. Bringing it down from 120% to approx 30% of GDP. But the Reagan and Bush I years saw the national debt skyrocket from 30% to about 65%. Clinton successfully reversed the trend and reduced the debt down to about 55%. Then Bush II drove the debt back up above 70%.

Two things are certain to grow when a Republican is in the White House, unemployment and the National Debt. Yet the Republicans accuse the Democrats of over spending.

These huge debts run up by the Republicans are a result of the infamous “Trickle Down Economics” theory. This theory claims that by giving the wealthy large tax breaks, they will invest that money into factories and production thus creating jobs. Well Republicans, how’s that working for yeah? If failed for Calvin Coolidge and now also for Reagan and the Bush’s. It’s been shown that the results of “Trickle Down”, is the redistribution of wealth from the middle class to the super-rich.

Clinton balanced the budget five times. Reagan, Bush I and Bush II never had a balanced budget.

Thanks to Mike Kohl who posts on DU:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=271842&mesg_id=271842

and:

http://bureaucountydems.blogspot.com /

GUANTANAMO PRISONERS

2010-04-09T10:14:00.000-07:00

After the disaster on Sept 11, 2001, the Bush administration needed to be perceived as tough and effective in finding and punishing those responsible for the attacks of 9/11. Close to 800 individuals were picked up in a short period of time without any due process and shipped to Guantanamo prison. These prisoners were initially called detainees then enemy combatants so the Bush administration could rationalize not treating them humanely, as required of prisoners of war.
Colonel Wilkerson, who was General Powell’s chief of staff when he ran the State Department, claimed that the majority of detainees — children as young as 12 and men as old as 93, never saw a US soldier when they were captured. He said that many were turned over by Afghans and Pakistanis for up to $5,000 each. Little or no evidence was produced as to why they had been taken.
Colonel Wilkerson was most critical of Mr Cheney and Mr Rumsfeld. He claimed that the former Vice-President and Defense Secretary knew that the majority of the initial 742 detainees sent to Guantánamo in 2002 were innocent but believed that it was “politically impossible to release them”. They feared that releasing them would harm the push for war in Iraq and the broader War on Terror, according to a new document obtained by The Times.
Referring to Mr Cheney, Colonel Wilkerson, who served 31 years in the US Army, asserted: “He had absolutely no concern that the vast majority of Guantánamo detainees were innocent ... If hundreds of innocent individuals had to suffer in order to detain a handful of hardcore terrorists, so be it.”

The above was from:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7092435.ece

In my opinion, Dick Cheney and the Bush administration had no respect for either national laws, international laws, the Constitution, or human decency. They rounded up approx 800 people, not caring that most were innocent. They treated these people, including children, horrible and tortured many. This is what tyranny looks like.

What Do We Call The Tea-Baggers?

2010-03-29T08:00:00.000-07:00

At one point, in their ignorant stupor, they proudly called themselves “teabaggers”. Then when the left continued to laugh at them for not recognizing the irony, they decided to change to “tea-partiers”* and that those calling them teabaggers were being gross and disgusting. Funny how that’s exactly the feeling of the left when the ‘baggers first called themselves teabaggers. Glen Beck is still gross and disgusting.
Recently, I was warned of being banned from commenting on a newspaper forum for using the term teabaggers. Seems my free speech isn’t as important as CorpAmerica. But it’s cool, there are so many names that can be used. Morans is one of my favorites but it’s so last year. I coined “gullibles” but it hasn’t caught on. I have seen “hatriotic’s” but I think I am going with one I first saw on DU, “Foxholes”.

* Of course the Foxholes don’t recognize that the original tea-partiers were rebelling against the tyrannical capitalism of the largest corporation in the world at the time, The East India Company. Idiots, er I mean Foxholes.

Ten Immediate Benefits of HCR

2010-03-22T16:09:00.000-07:00

From crooksandliars.com

By karoli Sunday Mar 21, 2010 5:45pm

Here are ten benefits which come online within six months of the President's signature on the health care bill:

1. Adult children may remain as dependents on their parents’ policy until their 27th birthday

2. Children under age 19 may not be excluded for pre-existing conditions

3. No more lifetime or annual caps on coverage

4. Free preventative care for all

5. Adults with pre-existing conditions may buy into a national high-risk pool until the exchanges come online. While these will not be cheap, they’re still better than total exclusion and get some benefit from a wider pool of insureds.

6. Small businesses will be entitled to a tax credit for 2009 and 2010, which could be as much as 50% of what they pay for employees’ health insurance.

7. The “donut hole” closes for Medicare patients, making prescription medications more affordable for seniors.

8. Requirement that all insurers must post their balance sheets on the Internet and fully disclose administrative costs, executive compensation packages, and benefit payments.

9. Authorizes early funding of community health centers in all 50 states (Bernie Sanders’ amendment). Community health centers provide primary, dental and vision services to people in the community, based on a sliding scale for payment according to ability to pay.

10. AND no more rescissions. Effective immediately, you can't lose your insurance because you get sick.

Dont ever forget that the Republicans to a person did not want these benefits. They totally to the person support the predatory health insurers.

HCR Will Reduce Deficit to the Chagrin of Repubs

2010-03-19T06:28:00.000-07:00

One major Republican talking point against health care reform is that it is too expensive. Well now the Congressional Business Office (CBO) has evaluated the Senate Health Care Reform bill and found to no ones surprise that the Republicans are full of crap. The CBO estimates that the new Senate passed HCR bill will REDUCE the deficit by $138 billions of dollars. But when shown the facts the Republicans still don’t want to vote for the bill. They are too heavily in debt to the predatory health INSURANCE industry.

Now it should be pointed out that these same Republicans voted for Medicare Part D when they were in power which the CBO estimates will INCREASE the deficit by $394 billions of dollars. And they voted for Bush’s 2003 tax breaks for the wealthy which the CBO estimates will INCREASE the deficit by $348 billions of dollars. And of course they voted in favor of the 2001 Bush tax breaks for the wealthy which the CBO estimates will INCREASE the deficit by $1.3 TRILLIONS of dollars, yes that’s trillions with a T. When the Republicans were in power they voted these bills thru with no provision to pay for them. They borrowed the money from Communist China and your children will pay off the debt via new TAXES.

But when we get a bill that will not only save lives (never a big deal for the Republicans) but will REDUCE the deficit, the Republicans are against it. When are the gullible T-baggers ever going to catch on to this theft? (rhetorical)

Danziger Bridge Killings

2010-03-12T21:04:00.000-08:00

Jeffrey Lehrmann, a former police detective for the New Orleans Police Dept pleaded guilty in federal court to a charge that he failed to report a cover-up in the investigation of the Danziger Bridge shootings in New Orleans, the Department of Justice said in a statement Thursday, March 11, 2010.
Lehrmann also admitted he helped compile a false report on the incidents, and was with others when they planted a gun as part of the cover-up, according to court documents.
Last month, former police Lt. Michael Lohman pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice in connection with the cover-up.
Two civilians were killed and four others wounded in the shootings on September 4, 2005, six days after Katrina slammed into the Gulf Coast.
The incident on the morning of Sept. 4, 2005, occurred on the Danziger Bridge, which crosses the Industrial Canal in eastern New Orleans. Ronald Madison, a 40-year-old mentally disabled man, was shot to death outside a motel on the Gentilly side of the bridge.
James Brissette, 19, was killed on the eastern side of the bridge, while four people walking with him with were seriously wounded. Susan Bartholomew lost part of her arm in the shooting and her husband, Leonard Bartholomew III, was shot in the head. Their daughter, Leisha Bartholomew and a nephew, Jose Holmes, suffered multiple gunshot wounds. Leonard Bartholomew IV, a teenage son, was uninjured.
The police claim they were being shot at, although there was no evidence to prove that claim except a gun that was later determined to be planted by the police.
One of the suspects, Lance Madison, was arrested and charged with eight counts of attempted murder against police officers.
"I didn't do anything wrong, and I had no reason to be arrested. I was up here trying to seek help for me and my little brother, trying to evacuate from the devastation going on down here," says Madison, a 49-year-old former college wide receiver, standing at the foot of the bridge where the incident occurred.
Madison, a 25-year employee of Federal Express, has no criminal record and is a member of a respected New Orleans family.
The man he was with -- referred to by the police as "the unidentified gunman" -- was his brother, 40-year-old Ronald, who had mental retardation. His family describes him as a childlike soul who loved the family's two dachshunds and watched Three Stooges videos.
Lance says that on that Sunday morning, he and Ronald -- their homes flooded -- were crossing the bridge on their way to another brother's dental office where they were staying after the storm.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6063982
Not only did the police fail to help citizens in need, they brutalized them. They terrorized them, shooting and killing without cause and without warning.
It should not go unnoticed that the police were white and the victims were black. Nor should it go unnoticed that the victims were poor and fleeing for safety to a higher class neighborhood.
It should also not go unnoticed that there was little corporate media coverage of this story. I guess there were already too many stories of white police killing innocent black citizens. Damn liberal media.

You Cant Have Democracy Without Free Elections and a Free Press

2010-03-09T10:58:00.000-08:00

Mark Crispin Miller wrote an article for The Free Press on July 24, 2005, summarized by Mary Anne Saucier. The article is at: http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1383

None dare call it stolen - Ohio, the election, and America's servile press

In the article Mr. Miller lists the copious evidence pointing to a stolen election, easily available on the web or in paperback, from Michigan Representative John Conyers’ report, Preserving Democracy: What Went Wrong in Ohio. More than dirty tricks, it covers “the run-up to the election, the election itself, and the post-election cover-up,” listing “specific violations of the U.S. and Ohio constitutions, the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1968, the National Voter Registration Act, and the Help America Vote Act.”

The Conyers report details the disenfranchisement of Democrats through “intentional misconduct and illegal behavior, much of it involving Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell, the co-chair of the Bush-Cheney campaign in Ohio.”

* There was unequal placement of voting machines [apparently to favor Republican districts].

* County boards of elections were ordered to reject all Ohio voter-registration forms not printed on white, uncoated paper of not less than 80 lb. text weight. [Making it easier to pick and choose which registrations to reject]

* “Caging”was used to challenge 35,000 individuals who did not sign for registered letters sent to new voters.

* There was restriction of media from covering the election and conducting exit polls.

* There was a prearranged FBI terrorist attack warning in Warren County which kept reporters from observing a post-election ballot-counting.

* In Cuyahoga and Franklin Counties, “the arrows on the absentee ballots were not properly aligned with their respective punch holes, so that countless votes were miscast.”

* In Mercer County, 4000 votes were mysteriously not in the final count.

* In Lucas County a polling place never opened because no one had the key.

* In Hamilton County, many absentee voters could not vote for Kerry because his name was not on the ballot.

* In Mahoning County 25 electronic machines were found to change Kerry votes to Bush.

* Dirty tricks included:
Telling voters to go to false polling places;
Telling Democrats were to vote on November 3;
Volunteers offered to take absentee ballots to the election office;
Voters were challenged to prove eligibility to vote.
The “Texas Strike Force” (25 people registered at a Franklin County Holiday Inn, paid by the Republican Party) threatened targeted people from a pay phone, if they voted.

* On December 13, 2004, it was reported by Deputy Director of Hocking County Elections Sherole Eaton, that a Triad GSI employee had changed the computer that operated the tabulating machine, and had “advised election officials how to manipulate voting machinery to ensure that preliminary hand recount matched the machine count.” This same Triad employee said he worked on machines in Lorain, Muskingum, Clark, Harrison, and Guernsey counties.

[Not only does it appear the election was stolen, our corporate media totally ignored the discrepancies. mo]

For-profit prisons, the new growth industry in America

2010-03-08T11:22:00.000-08:00

A Tyler, Texas man gets 35 years in prison for possession of marijuana.

http://www.dfwnorml.org/forum/here-home/tyler-texas-man-gets-35-years-46-ounces-marijuana-852.html

Interesting that Tyler, Texas is the home of a for-profit prison, T. Don Hutto. Hutto is famous for detaining suspected illegal immigrants for “processing” which seems to take an extraordinarily long time, making them bigger profits. Innocent children, many American citizens, are held there behind bars costing the taxpayers a bundle, more than housing them in a first class hotel.

The for-profit prison system is the newest growth industry in America. It’s a win-win for everyone. The investors, like Dick, son of Satan, Cheney, and the prison-corp CEO’s make millions from the prisons profits. And Nancy Grace is in hog heaven (really no pun intended) over the tough sentencing. “No sentence is too tough”, for Nancy.

The prison’s even have lobbyists that pay legislators money to pass harsh penalties. The tougher the sentences, the more profits. Everybody happy?

Government Insurance is OK for the Rich

2010-03-06T08:36:00.000-08:00

Dick Cheney has had five heart attacks and he is still plugging along. Some say he made a pact with the devil but that’s a discussion for another day. But Dick Cheney gets excellent health care. Yes he does. Mr. Cheney is very wealthy and really doesn’t need insurance but he has great insurance. He has the government run insurance that all the republicans in Congress have. They love it while telling the gullibles among us that such insurance is SOCIALISTIC and will kill America and Democracy and Mickey Mouse. The gullibles haven’t figured out that the rich republicans are happy with their government run insurance but won’t allow the less fortunate among us the same opportunity.

We need Medicare because the for-profit insurance companies would never insure our elderly. Why cant we allow others that cant get insurance access to Medicare?

Dear gullibles: “It isn’t that they want you to die, they just don’t care if you live.”

Capitalism is Like a Beast

2010-02-27T07:59:00.000-08:00

Uncontrolled capitalism will ravage everything in sight and eventually turn on itself like it did in 1929.
Throughout history there never has been a successful government/economic system based on unrestrained capitalism.
Some people romantically think that capitalism is linked to democracy. Not so. Unrestrained capitalism always moves towards fascism.
In fact, throughout our history there has been a largely antagonistic relationship between democracy and capitalism. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis commented, “We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can’t have both.” Moneyed interests (capitalists) have been opponents not proponents of democracy.

In the late 1930’s capitalism was brought under control and this country had 50 years of prosperity. The greatest middle class the world had ever seen developed. Zero bank failures. And during that time, capitalists still flourished if they had a product or process that was successful. Then in the 1980’s when many of the generation that suffered thru the Depression were dieing off, the capitalist with favorable government support, started to undo the restraints on capitalism. The result was our debt rose, unemployment rose, the standard of living of the middle class started a free fall, banks failed, and the wealth of the top 1% skyrocketed. And then came 2000 when capitalism went on steroids. Between 2000 and 2008 while huge fortunes accrued at record rates, an additional six million Americans sank below the poverty level; median family income declined by over $2,000; consumer debt more than doubled; over seven million Americans lost their health insurance, and more than four million lost their pensions; meanwhile homelessness increased and housing foreclosures reached epidemic levels.

Sadly it appears that the current administration can not stop this free fall into the next Great Capitalist Depression.

I used info from Michael Parenti and DU's Time for Change

Idolize the Wealthy and Deplore the Poor

2009-08-04T08:51:00.000-07:00

This is what the authoritarian followers do. They idolize the wealthy because they view wealth and power as the indicators of success. This is what they want so very badly. It doesn’t matter how the wealth is obtained. They idolize Dick Cheney because he has power and money and are willing to overlook whatever he did.

The authoritarian followers emulate the wealthy and look down on the poor as failures that deserve their fate. They rationalize that the poor don’t deserve help because of their lifestyles and behavior. The poor should just get a job and pull themselves us by their boot straps. And they will throw the code words “personal responsibility” into the argument somewhere.

And these same authoritarian followers will swear they live by the Bible’s teachings. Their brains can’t see the hypocrisy.

I recommend "The Authoritarians" by Bob Altemeyer available free on the internet.

Bravo Pat Buchanan

2009-07-22T05:13:00.000-07:00

He does what the others in the ruling class won't do. He is up front with his bigotry. He makes it crystal clear what the others of his kind are too afraid or to wary to admit. Their thinking: White people (meaning rich white people) founded this country. They allowed in minorities for labor purposes only. For example, George W. Bush did nothing to discourage the millions of illegal immigrants from flocking to the U.S. which provided cheap labor for his rich friends. But they look down on us as inferior.

They, the rich white people, still think they OWN the rest of us.

But this is not just a racial issue. This is class warfare. Pat and those like him (the rich, white, ruling class) are absolutely convinced that they are superior to the rest of us, no matter what race, sexual orientation, or gender we are. They feel that their wealth is confirmation from God of their worth.

Wasn't it Barbara Bush that said to those starving in the Astrodome after the Katrina disaster, "Let them eat candy."?

I think this recent exchange between Ms. Maddow and Buchanan is classic. Buchanan, the classic representative of the rich, white, male, ruling class verses Rachel, the epitome of everything they hate (and fear).

Bravo Ms. Maddow, you are my favorite.

Is the Republican Party Just a Distraction Now?

2009-06-14T06:46:00.000-07:00

I have been sputtering incoherently for a number of posts on DU lately about who the real enemy is. How the moderate-right republiCons and their K street friends are sneaking into the Big D tent. Well, Sen Arlin Specter hardly snuck.

Christopher Hayes writes a good article about this in “Naming the Enemy” in the June 22, The Nation.

“While the Republican Party shrinks, corporate interests are deftly molting their old K Street Project skin and crawling en masse inside the big tent being pitched by the Democrats.” “the new strategy is to subvert legislation through co-optation, as in healthcare and cap and trade. …corporate lobbies are trying to have it both ways: to block reforms while changing overt power struggles over the future of the economy into seemingly cooperative negotiations.”

I see a number of problems with this:

It will be much harder to tell who the enemy is if everyone is wearing the same uniform.

Battles between progressives and the right will have to be fought in the primaries as in the cases like Lieberman and Lamont and between Sen Specter and Rep Joe Sestak. Who will Rahm Emanuel back and the DLC support?

And Democratic Underground will have to change it’s name to Underground.

Liz Cheney the New Neocon Spokesperson?

2009-06-13T07:08:00.000-07:00

The Wiki definition of Neocon (roughly) says that Neocons believe in using economic and military force to “bring” democracy to foreign countries. The Neocons including William Kristol and Dick Cheney influenced our invasion of Iraq and are continuing to promote an invasion of Iran. A chip off the old block, Liz Cheney seems to be following her dad in this mission. In a recent debate when confronted with video of thousands of young Iranians demonstrating for the overthrow (via election) of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Liz responded:

“I don’t think it makes to much of a difference who wins the election in Iran …I think they will continue to pursue the same policies.”*

It is very important to the Neocons to have Iran as an enemy, then we are justified to invade. Liz doesn’t care who is leading Iran, she is sure they will hate us regardless.

*For exact quote see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JteSb2Tbiw8&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.democraticunderground.com%2Fdiscuss%2Fduboard.php%3Faz%3Dshow_topic%26forum%3D385%26topic_id%3D323123&feature=player_embedded

You Are Not Pro-LIfe if You Condone Killing

2009-06-03T09:47:00.000-07:00

Here are some bit and pieces from NanceGreggs posted at Democratic Underground:

"If you are arrogant enough to hold that your God, your religion, your church’s doctrine should be foisted on others, whether they adhere to the same doctrine or not, you are laughable in the eyes of whatever god it is you think you worship and revere.

If you decry abortion but cling to capital punishment, unprovoked war, the use of torture, or the justification of death in any form, you are not pro-life in any sense of the word – you are pro-hypocrisy.

The very people who brag about their pro-life position are the same people, more often than not, who get their respective knickers in a twist over things like sex education and the use of contraception. They’re not anti-awareness, they are pro-ignorance – and the consequences of that position be damned.

It has also not escaped my attention, nor that of the people of the world, that while the alleged pro-life crowd talks a good game when it comes to women being forced to birth unwanted children, children born into poverty are dismissed out-of-hand as the offspring of “welfare queens”, and are automatically perceived as undeserving of basic needs – like nutritious meals, an education, and medical care that comes at the expense of tax dollars."

Posted at: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5773558&mesg_id=5773558

See other rants by Nance at http://nancerants.awardspace.com/

I believe that an organization outside the Democratic Party may be needed to save the Party

2009-05-31T20:22:00.000-07:00

That is take the party back from the corporatists.

The grass roots of the party do not control the party. Granted the grass roots elected Pres Obama, but he thanked us by dumping Dean in favor of Emanuel. In my opinion the DLC, DCCC, DSCC, and DNC all reek of corporatism.

The Party leaders chose Lieberman over the people’s choice Lamont and now they are backing Specter in lieu of any true Democratic challenger. This demonstrates to me that whoever is running the Democratic Party isn’t interested in grass roots choices, only maintaining the good ole boy corporatist status quo.

Thom Hartman says that we need to get into our local Democratic Party organizations and take over. I am working on that but it looks like a decade project. We haven’t the time. We need to unseat the Dino’s, but I don’t believe we can via the Party organization. Maybe an external organization like Moveon or PDA can raise the money to counter the huge sums offered by the corporations.

The General Motors Scam

2009-05-30T08:03:00.000-07:00

General Motors is claiming to have lost hundreds of billions of dollars. This is a fraud. The money they claim to have “lost”:

a. Was invested in profitable foreign auto plants.

b. Was given to executives as part of ridiculous compensations packages.

c. Was lost on gambles in the stock market.

d. Was accounting maneuvers aimed at showing a loss where none existed.

All the while that GM was supposedly losing billions, they continued to pay their execs huge salaries. Hmm. Could it be because the execs were successfully executing the fraud? After all what is the down side for GM losing billions (on paper)? They will get to raid their employees retirement fund and literally steal the employees money. They will get to disregard existing labor contracts. And they will get the American taxpayers to GIVE them hundreds of billions of dollars. And we threw Bernie Madoff in jail.

See more at: http://socialistworker.org/2009/04/20/what-killed-the-auto-industry

This was also posted at DU by Hannah Bell: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5747611

Health Insurance Simplified

2009-05-29T14:36:00.000-07:00

As a compassionate people we pull together in times of need to help out our neighbors that might be less fortunate.

So if someone has an unexpected illness the rest of us pitch-in to help. One way is to wait until the problem occurs and then take up a collection. A more efficient method is to take up collections and have a fund set aside before the problems occur. We will call this fund insurance. There isn’t a lot of overhead required for this type of fund, the “government” handles it fine for about 3%. And, of course, the over-all goal of such a fund is to help people in need.

Now along comes Joe the businessman and says he can run the fund for us. This, for some strange reason, appeals to some that I call the gullibles. Joe of course has a lot of friends in the government because he gives generously to them. And they help him with laws and regulations that are friendly to him. Joe also has lots of money for propaganda and tells the public that his method is free enterprise and not government soocialismmmm. The gullibles buy this crap hook-line-and-sinker. But what the gullibles don’t see is that Joe’s goal is to make a profit and not help people. In fact, there is no limit on the amount of profit Joe would love to make from managing this fund. So instead of the 3% operating expense of the government, Joe’s operating costs come in around 35%. This means less coverage and higher premiums for the members. And don’t think Joe will be satisfied with a mere 35%.

Let the gullibles have their free-enterprise insurance if they want it, but let me have government run insurance.

Is the Big Tent Democratic Party big enough for Colin Powell?

2009-05-23T08:05:00.000-07:00

The moderate republiCons are watching their party disintegrate before their vary eyes as Rush, O’Reilly, Hannity and of course Cheney drive stakes thru the heart of the party. The wacko’s that run the party are even trying to kill the moderates like Gen Colin Powell and Sen Specter.

With the rank and file moderate republiCons abandoning the party what are the moderate leaders going to do? Maybe Sen Specter is showing the way. He is now a Democrat but has sworn to keep voting as a republiCon. He fits right in with the DLC and Red Dog Democrats that often support republiCon issues. They already pretty much control the Senate.

I think that if more big name moderate republiCons defect it would strengthen the DLC/corporate part of the party at the expense of the left. And most importantly the moderate republiCons switch would bring the big corporate money with them. The big corporations are ready to dump the wacko’s of the republiCon party and make friends with the moderate Democrats and ex-republiCons in the country.

Who Could Have Seen This Coming?

2009-03-26T13:59:00.000-07:00

On May 6, 1999, on the Senate floor, Democratic Senator Byron Dorgan-ND said in reference to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, “This bill will, in my judgment, raise the likelihood of future massive taxpayer bailouts”.

Later he said, “I think we will look back in 10 years [2009] time and say we should not have done this….”

See what Rachel Maddow has to say:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_hbezbsJ8s

How Did We Get Into This Mess

2009-03-25T08:06:00.000-07:00

Seems like no one in the so-called “liberal” media wants to talk about how we got into this economic mess.

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was enacted Nov, 1999, written by Phil Gramm (repub) repealed part of the Glass-Steagall Act. This republican sponsored bill allowed commercial banks to get into the investment services game (read gambling). The bill passed in the republican controlled Congress and after considerable pressure from Congress, was signed by the president.

Then in 2000 the republican controlled Congress passed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. This bill repealed the Shad-Johnson jurisdictional accord, which had banned single-stock futures in 1982. The legislation also provided certainty that products offered by banking institutions would not be regulated as futures contracts.

These two laws unregulated the banking industry allowing the banks and insurance companies to literally gamble with the money they were, up until then, supposed to keep for emergencies. These unregulated banks and insurance companies literally gambled away all the money they had plus money they borrowed. Now they want us to repay their gambling debts.

This is explained a lot better at Democratic Underground:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=8278459 and

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=8278475

The Party of Lies

2009-03-17T10:11:00.001-07:00

The mouth pieces for the republiCon party, like Glen Beck, Hannity, Rush, etc. are favoring bankruptcy for auto makers but not banks. Why? Because bankruptcy for auto makers will help the wealthy execs and harm the blue collar employees. But for banks bankruptcy would hurt only the wealthy execs. The republiCon party is all for the wealthy.

The republiCon talking point for justifying reducing the pay for the auto maker workers is that they supposedly get paid $70 per hour. This is a republiCon lie aimed at harming the workers. No worker gets paid $70 per hour.

According to Johnathan Cohn at: http://www.uaw.org/auto/11_25_08auto2.cfm

Here is how the $70 per hour breaks down:
$28 actual wages approx
$10 approx benefits bring it up to about $38 per hour
The remaining $32 per hour is money that the current employees DO NOT GET. It is money that is being distributed to retirees. Money that the automakers ALREADY PAID to employees but kept it “safe-keeping” for their for retirement. republiCons want to steal the employees retirement money and give it to the execs.

In any case the republiCon talking point is to lie and state that current workers are paid $70 per hour. I believe the pay for the non-workers (execs) is approx. $5000 per hour.

Why Did the John Adams Mini-Series Get So Much Hype?

2009-02-27T12:18:00.000-08:00

Why not Tom Jefferson, Ben Franklin, George Washington or Tom Paine?

Although Adams did fight hard for the independence of the United States from Britain, after he became president he supported a strong executive branch.

He badly wanted religion to play a larger role in government. I believe he fought with Tom Jefferson about this as well as many other issues. EDIT. After reading "Moral Minority", I retract this sentence. In later years Adams concluded that religion should be separate from government. He became a Unitarian.
He had his own version of the Patriot Act which was actually four acts:
The Naturalization Act, The Alien Act, The Alien Enemies Act, and the Sedition Act. Under the pretense that these acts would make America safer, they were actually brought about to suppress political opposition of the Democratic-Republicans.
He did not support the Bill of Rights (I need to check this).
And he was famous for trying to appoint 250 of his Federalist friends as judges and other government officers, between the time Tom Jefferson (voted to succeed him) was elected and inaugurated. This was know as the "Midnight Judges".

The above facts are as I remembered them from history class. Corrections are welcome.

Update: I have received some good input and am off to research further. Thanks.

I would love to see a mini series about Thomas Paine, arguably the father of the American Revolution.

Are the republicans political geniuses or cutting their own throats?

2009-02-11T20:37:00.000-08:00

Tell me if I got this right:

Within 6 months of the election, both Georgie bush and Sen McStrangelove said the economy was in good condition.

Within 1 month of the inauguration, bush’s stogie, Paulson, tells us the economy is in crisis and if we don’t give him 700 billion within days the country will collapse.

The republicans in Congress break their necks to give Paulson at least 350 of the 700 billion with absolutely no strings attached.

Paulson says the money will go to banks to “free up” credit.

In fact the money is used by the banks for various things like CEO salaries, acquiring other banks, and having elaborate parties, but NOT freeing up credit. Thanks to the republicans this money doesn’t have any effect on solving the economic crisis.

Then President Obama takes office and wants to build a true economic recovery package. The republicans obstruct at each and every turn. They say the Democrats plan won’t work, like they would know what would or wouldn’t work. They say they want to continue the tax breaks for the rich program that got us were we are today. It is their only song and they continue to sing it.

President Obama makes every effort to appease the republicans, reaching across the aisle, and apparently making a compromise.

Compromise or not, each and every republican in Congress but three, vote against the plan. They were careful not to stop the bill but now can say they opposed it. Shear political genius. The country may collapse but they look good.

We need use the strength we demonstrated in election President Barack Hussein Obama, and go after all of the republican Senators at their next elections.

Republicans Shoot Them Selves in the Head Again

2009-02-10T15:41:00.000-08:00

I think that a true liberal will tell you we need two strong parties to make our government work. When one party dominates it leads to corruption as we have seen in the last eight years. The republican party was once an honorable party, the party of Lincoln and Eisenhower. The party of my grandfather, my father and me, until Nixon. Now they are the party of corruption, greed and hypocrisy. In the elections of 2006 and 2008, the Democrats kicked their asses. One might hope they would have learned a lesson. Not so. The temptations of corruption, greed and hypocrisy are too much for them as proven by their choice for head of the republican National Committee. Michael Steele represents everything corrupt about the republicans. I guess they need their asses kicked some more.

Also posted at democraticunderground.com

George Bush, the Poster Child for Inheritance Tax Reform

2009-02-05T21:00:00.000-08:00

George Bush, arguably (with a few anyway) the worst president ever, got to that position from his family wealth and power. He certainly didn’t do anything in his life that qualified him for the job. He barely got through college and was known for his drinking and drugging during that period. When it came time to support his country and fight in Vietnam, his influential poppy got him a cushy assignment in the Air National Guard. And he didn’t excel there, but actually when AWOL before his time was up. From there he had numerous attempts at starting oil company on money Saudi Arabia gave him because they liked his poppy and his daddy’s influence. He went from job to job but had no affinity to even work. He was accused of insider trading where he made millions but was cleared by the SEC which some feel were influenced by friends of his poppy. He made a cool $14 million on his investment in the Texas Rangers. Not through anything he did mind you, but because a friend of his poppy wanted to be very generous to the son of the president of the country. George W. Bush became the president of the United States, not because he was qualified, but because he had the wealth and influence of his family behind him.

The founding fathers of this country fought against the tyranny of power wielded by the wealthy. They were against rule by heredity because they saw the tyranny it could bring. This is why they supported heavy taxes on inherited wealth. Inherited wealth, not taxed, will accumulate over generations and thus build family dynasties and the tyranny that can come with it.

Thomas Paine said in his pamphlet “Common Sense”: “One of the strongest natural proofs of the folly of (the) hereditary right in kings, is, that nature disapproves it, otherwise she would not so frequently turn it into ridicule by giving mankind an ass for a lion.” This means that in nature the strongest prevail, the strongest earn their power, however, heredity can give man an “ass” for a leader. If you didn’t get it, George W. Bush is the ass Tom Paine was talking about.

The rich republicans what to get rid of the inheritance tax so that they can build the tyrannical dynasties that our founding fathers fought so hard against.

In His First Ten Days

2009-01-30T16:27:00.000-08:00

(from berni_mccoy at Democratic Underground http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8154609)

President Obama

1. He removed the ban on federal funding for family planning that includes birth control and abortion, on NGOs that operate outside the U.S. (corrected by cali)

2. Promote disclosure of the administration under FIA

3. Directed the U.S. Military to develop plans to withdraw from Iraq

4. Reduced secrecy given to Presidential Records

5. Ordered the closing of Gitmo and immediate review of all detainees

6. Promoted the passage in the House of the economic stimulus package

7. Signed into law the expansion of SCHIP to provide coverage for 4 million children who go without

8. Allowed states who want to enforce stricter-than-EPA standards to do so

9. Shamed Wall Street for giving out $18 billion in bonuses after being bailed out by the American people

10. Froze salaries of people working for the Administration

11. Removed lobbyists from the administration

12. Revamped Whitehouse.gov

13. Signed the Libby Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. (Thanks clusterblog)

14. Formed a task force headed by Vice President Biden, for the middle class. (Thanks clusterblog)

Economic News or Reaganomics 101

2009-01-30T07:56:00.000-08:00

While the economy shrank at a 3.8 percent pace at the end of 2008, the worst showing in a quarter-century, Exxon Mobil Corp reported a profit of $45.2 billion for 2008, breaking its own record.

I believe it is the largest profit by a corporation ever in the history of the world.

Liberal vs. Conservative

2009-01-29T21:34:00.000-08:00

(from Thom Hartmann's transcript section of thomhartmann.com)

"A true progressive, a true liberal, gets it that we're all in this together; all of life together; we're a community; we humans and all other living things, we're a community; that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Progressives see peace as strength not as weakness and see war as an admission of failure, not a noble venture.

Now, true conservatives - Alexander Hamilton, John Adams, Ulysses Grant, Herbert Hoover, Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney - true conservatives believe that each man is an island. It's every man for himself. That humans are superior to all other forms of nature and so killing nature for fun or for recreation or simply as, you know, as a routine thing, no big deal. "So what? Half the species are going extinct, who cares?"

Conservatives think that strength always wins over weakness, no matter what its impact is on community. This whole idea that, you know, the powerful win: survival of the fittest. It's not, you know, the reality isn't survival of the fittest. The reality is survival of the co-operator. If an individual organ in your body decided that it was going to take over the rest your body and start consuming all the resources in your body, that's not called survival of the fittest - that's not called winning competition - that's called cancer."

Why Do Republicans Hate Wolves?

2009-01-25T12:25:00.000-08:00

The Seattle Time ran an article recently about how the loss of wolves (from trapping, poisoning, and shooting,etc) may be unraveling one of the most beautiful ecosystems in the US.

Article link

"But the loss of the stealthy predators in the early 1900s left a hole in the landscape that scientists say they are just beginning to grasp. The ripples extend throughout what is now Olympic National Park, leading to a boom in elk populations, overbrowsing of shrubs and trees, and erosion so severe it has altered the very nature of the rivers, says a team of Oregon State University biologists. The result, they argue, is an environment that is less rich, less resilient, and — perhaps — in peril."

"We think this ecosystem is unraveling in the absence of wolves," said OSU ecologist William Ripple."

While some are just figuring Nature's balance out, the Alaskan republicans (aka Palin) still love the "sport" of slaughtering wolves by shooting them from helicopters. The deaths of the wolves is slow, painful, and horrible. And all to make it easier for rich republicans fly to Alaska to find and kill plenty of moose.

TORTURE IS A DOMESTIC CRIME AND A WAR CRIME

2009-01-12T10:52:00.000-08:00

Weatherboarding is torture. Duh. When the Nazi’s water boarded, WE called it torture. But Bush and Cheney say water boarding is not torture. The Bush administration, Gonzales, re-defined the word torture so George could say, “We don’t torture”. Right Georgie, we water board but don’t torture.

But even using the Bush/Gonzales new definition of torture we torture. Possibly as many as 100 people have died do to our "enhanced" interrogation techniques. That’s torture even per the Bush/Gonzales memo.

And now Susan J. Crawford the top Bush administration official overseeing the military trials of terrorist suspects held at the U.S. prison in Cuba told The Washington Post that the United States tortured a Saudi man in 2002. She said that even though the specific methods might not have been torture, the way they were used did amount to torture.

Sensory deprivation is not torture per Bush/Gonzales but it can cause insanity within 48 hours. Detainees have been sensory deprived for months by the Bush Admin. One American citizen was arrested and confined in a tiny cell without seeing daylight or other individuals for 22 months. He is now legally and medically insane. This is torture.

President Obama can not over look these crimes.

Mo