Monday, January 31, 2011

ThinkProgress » Rallying Against The Koch Agenda, Van Jones Warns Of ‘Excessive Concentrations Of Economic Power’

ThinkProgress » Rallying Against The Koch Agenda, Van Jones Warns Of ‘Excessive Concentrations Of Economic Power’

"...when the predatory, monopolistic dimension of the economic system starts to gain momentum, then the question of justice and democracy has to come forward too. Not just liberty and property rights, but justice and human rights, and democracy, and the people’s rights to be free from economic tyranny and economic domination. We will not live on a national plantation run by the Koch brothers."

In a nut shell ladies and gentlemen, in a nut shell.

More work to do.

Immigration -- Attack on Birthright Citizenship

Immigration -- Attack on Birthright Citizenship

Let's file this under "None of us know what we're doing."

In United States v. Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court rejected "the idea that one's status depends on his parent's status." In the rare chance that the Supreme Court does strike down birthright citizenship, the result would be chaos. "The court cannot create a timeline, indicating all those born of the undocumented before a certain date are grandfathered in and all of those after are not," wrote Joe Sigg of the Arizona Republic. "So, if the court makes a change and reverses itself, the citizenship of 311 million Americans is in doubt and must be proved - this means everyone - no exceptions...All would temporarily be undocumented or illegal aliens!"
Ok. Got that Senator Paul? Senator Vittor? May I just say that your ideas are "crazy" not well suited to the real world?

More work to do.

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Death Threats | GOP in Charge? | SOTU Poll

Death Threat for a Palin Critic | Mother Jones

Here in Alaska, it's trickled down and reached levels wherein strangers take their cues from supposed 'leaders' and target fellow citizens with bone-chilling threats. How broken is our system of justice that allows these kinds of horrid threats to continue unchecked?"
This is the crux of the debate.  The leaders who use violent imagery and rhetoric do indeed have a dramatic effect on their followers. It is the folks at home who see these leaders extolling them to great things violence and promoting liberty and freedom the violent overthrow of the government that will show us the results of this volatile political atmosphere. This simple concept escapes Ms. Palin and her lackeys.

The GOP in charge?

Republicans have won..... what?  The way they talk you'd think they've achieved world domination. Because they've won a majority in the House, do they now expect total capitulation by the minority?  They are acting like it.

Nope.

They've won the chance to offer legislation that will address the needs of our nation. Oops, see the above comment... HR 1 Repeal Health Care; HR2 Deny all non-existent Federal Funding for Abortion (Question:  If they DENY Non-Existent funding, does that mean that they will be restoring the lost funding FOR abortions?)

So when do we get started on jobs?  When do we get to start rebuilding the middle class?  When will we begin to upgrade our infrastructure?  When will we build up public education?  When will we begin to develope scientists, mathemeticians, economists, historians and TEACHERS (a big shout out to the Pres for his great words of respect in the SOTU last night!).  Well?  House Republicans? When can we get started?  What's on your plate?

SOTU Poll

Note to the obstructionist GOP.  President Obama's speech last night got a 91% approval rating from AMERICA last night. (At least the 500 who were polled...) Question: When we are inspired to move forward, to invent, to create, to build, Americans respond in big ways and in big numbers.  Compare and contrast your political strategy of repealing America back to the 19th century and how popular it might be if folks actually knew what you are trying to do.

More work to do....

Monday, January 24, 2011

Corporate Robbery: The Hidden Government Subsidy for Banks

Quantitative Easing': The Hidden Government Subsidy for Banks | Rolling Stone Politics | Taibblog | Matt Taibbi on Politics and the Economy

No,this is not for wonks! In fact there is a cute little cartoon at the beginning that is required watching for anyone who is wondering where all the money went, and where all the money is going.

Do you wonder why Republicans are so bent on spending cuts public theft?  This is the clientele they are serving so admirably.  The fighting hard for the support and the $$ of the Banking Community Robber Barons.  Help me please!  Just point out that this article should be filed in everyone's "We're Screwed" folder.  When enough folks realize the damage being done maybe a new True Blue party will be started and raise it's voice for financial and social justice.

More work to do...

Thursday, January 20, 2011

The GOP's war against the poor and sick - Federal Deficit - Salon.com

The GOP's war against the poor and sick - Federal Deficit - Salon.com

Andrew Leonard - "The Tea Party version of government apparently just doesn't believe in helping people who can't help themselves. For the modern Republican Party, it's far far more important to ensure that those who will never need Medicaid -- the richest 1 percent of Americans, the people who are already doing quite fine as their market portfolios swell -- get their big fat tax cuts, adding up to $700 billion over the next 10 years, than that the poorest Americans get another $15 billion a year so that they can die in a manner that befits a nation that dares considers itself civilized."

Spending cuts anyone? Can the issue be any plainer? Can the choice be any clearer? No apologies necessary for either side. It's time to choose.

More work to do...

Goodlatte's Folly

This letter hit my inbox yesterday from Congressman Goodlatte's office. Of course the outcome of his vote is symbolic at this point but the meaning is clear. Mr. Goodlatte is bound and determined to replace the current health care law and put in its place something called "commonsense measures."  That's a pretty interesting choice of words considering that none of these measures have yet been brought to the light of day.  It is true that there are some proposals being generated in the right wing think tanks and some of these are floating around in the blogosphere.  Yet, Mr. Goodlatte's intention with this letter is not to inform, but to shill unashamedly for the corporate cruelty of the status quo.

We begin after the jump:

Thursday, January 13, 2011

Do Americans Have the Right to Bear Weapons of Mass Destruction?

Robert Creamer: Do Americans Have the Right to Bear Weapons of Mass Destruction?

No. This debate needs to happen now. The talking points in this piece are sound, make sense, and need to be interjected into the debate.

...beyond the question of what the Constitution means by the "right to bear arms," we must also remember that no right is absolute. Each person's rights are constrained by the extent to which they impinge on another person's rights.
...the question is not whether Americans have the right to bear arms, but rather how that right should be limited because it conflicts with other rights.

None of our rights are absolute. All of our rights come with the responsibility to ensure that they do not infringe the rights of others.  Reasonable protections are expected from the state and our system of laws to make sure that our rights are not impinged. Mr. Creamer correctly points out that the right to bear arms is already "infringed."  His comments about plastic guns, nuclear weapons, stinger missiles, are not overblown and his point that the limitations on the "right to bear arms" should be a national concern, especially now in this climate of shock and horror around the tragedy in Tucson.

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

A Sane Discussion of Violence and the political climate - Gabrielle Giffords

Salon vs. Salon: Violence and the political climate - Gabrielle Giffords - Salon.com

Here's a dramatically sane discussion of what's been happening in the discourse of late concerning the assassination attempt on Rep. Giffords. These two Salon writers carry different views but somehow manage to influence each other's opinion and in the process, enhance the debate.

S.K.: I guess my main point is that it's entirely possible that, as out there as it has been at times, the right's rhetoric and tactics had absolutely no direct or indirect role in what happened on Saturday. And -- for now -- I haven't seen any compelling evidence that suggests otherwise.

A.P.: Right. Well, I can't argue with that. My main point is simply that people -- even crazy, incomprehensible people -- are products of the culture. It's foolish to try to definitively prove a direct link, and as you say there's absolutely no evidence for Loughner having anything resembling conservative principles as they're generally understood, but we're all shaped by media and environment.

Attention Media! More please...

Tuesday, January 11, 2011

Loughner a "textbook" case paranoid schizophrenic

Loughner a "textbook" case paranoid schizophrenic - Jared Loughner - Salon.com

The fault lies, once again, with cutting necessary government services. Sarah Hepola at Salon interviews an expert who nails it. When discussing what can be done to take mental health seriously, the answer:
It would mean you would actually have the resources to do something we haven't done yet, which is get people treatment. We have been very good at emptying the hospitals. What we haven't done is to offer treatment once people are out of the hospitals. In Arizona, for instance, they closed down most of the hospital beds. They are next to last in the United States in the availability of hospital beds for the population, and they have closed down some of the outpatient clinics. If you want to get serious about mental illness, then you need to provide the resources so people can be treated.
And then the tricky question is: Where do those resources come from?
This has been, for 200 years, the state's responsibility. That's why state hospitals were built. This has not been, primarily, a federal responsibility. Ultimately the states are responsible, therefore the governor's responsible, the legislature is responsible. And the Department of Mental Health should be held responsible. This is not rocket science. We know what the good programs are. Everyone has decided: It's better to save money, and we'll close down hospital beds; people who want to get help, we'll try to get them help, but we won't do much more than that. If you keep doing that, you will continue having these kinds of disasters. This is not new. If enough people become sufficiently angry, they will demand that their state government do what they should have been doing all along. Until a sufficient number of people become angry enough, it's not going to happen.

There you have it friends and neighbors.  Public theft of vital resources intended for the general welfare of the population.  Call it starve the beast, call it "fiscal responsibility," call it whatever you'd like.  What we have is a refusal to pay for the things we need.  What we have is a strong protective system for wealth and a weak protective system for life.  Pro-life anyone?  How about pro-life for those who are already alive?

David Sirota: The Tucson Shooting's Most Important Questions

David Sirota: The Tucson Shooting's Most Important Questions

Important questions all... My comments.

- Aren't calculated political assassination attempts by definition "political?" If so, then how can anyone argue that anyone is trying to "politicize" the Tucson shooting?

Was it a calculated political assassination? Yes and no. Yes because a politician was targeted, but so were many innocent bystanders. If it was only political, why the massive killing spree? Perhaps it could better be described as an act of political terrorism. The added elements of crazed zealotry and twisted ideology make this much more plausible as a terrorist act.

It could also simply be a crazy guy with a gun heading for the nearest target following the path of least resistance. The stream of violent vitriol from the media machine carried this man directly to his target and helped him pull the trigger… many times.
- Since the shooting, has a single conservative movement leader denounced violence-glorifying political rhetoric?

Yes, many of them. These leaders are politicians remember, and they only exist to serve their constituents, mostly by getting elected again. Sincere statements of principle are not in their DNA. Their denunciations of the violent rhetoric are perfunctory because the customers they are serving are violent and prone to over the top rhetoric.

The world they live in is carried along by a profitable media stream that is at its core a capitalist enterprise and as such, completely with out morals, good or bad. It's a for-profit movement that WILL take care of its bottom line. It sells over-wrought, over-the-top, sometimes-violent, borderline bigoted, hyper-active, wide-eyed "news." It's very successful and it will take a serious push back in the style of what's happening to Glen Beck to ever change the culture enough for it to trickle up to the leadership.

- If cultural conservatives believe violent video games and comic books are dangerous because they can foment violence, why don't those same conservatives believe violent rhetoric broadcast on TV and radio won't do the same thing?

Similar to the previous answer, the cultural conservatives aren't particularly concerned with the morals of their ideology. For them you can use the same answer as above but substitute "salvation" for "profit." If salvation is the only goal of cultural conservatives, it really doesn't matter what sin you accept or reject. Again, it's a profit motif not a moral one. If redemption is available all upon repentance, the license to sin is absolute in these folks view. The gap between what the say and what they do simply widens…

Monday, January 10, 2011

Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck Collude to Rewrite Their History of Violent Rhetoric

Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck Collude to Rewrite Their History of Violent Rhetoric

Again I say, Don't believe anything Palin or Beck say. By their own words, you'd have to be an idiot! The problem is not with these political humorists, the problem is with those who believe what they say, including the mass media.

The blogosphere is agog with everyone's version of how volitile rhetoric is culpable in this tragedy. I haven't seen or heard anyone say that it is our fault. The fault lies with those who believe what they say or who believe that the media and blogosphere ranting about these folks is in any way serious.

The attention given to the political theater smells but it sells. The real fault lies with those who take it seriously.

That being said, If a radical goes into a mental hospital and rages for violence against the government and then goes to a Ruritan meeting and rages there, it's pretty likely that none of the Ruritans will be going out to commit violence. It's not such a sure thing at the mental hospital.
Media folk who broadcast the vitriol AND the media who report the media that originate the vitriol have to know that what they are saying and reporting about will be heard by the sane and the insane. That makes them culpable. It's not exactly their fault, but it throws gas on the fire...

Sunday, January 9, 2011

Sarah Palin Aide Rebecca Mansour: Our Crosshairs Map Had Nothing To Do With Violence Or Guns

Sarah Palin Aide Rebecca Mansour: Our Crosshairs Map Had Nothing To Do With Violence Or Guns

This is extremist ignorance followed by desperate spin. Ms. Palin, no you can't use violent imagery in the public eye even with an honest innocent naivete. Your violent words do indeed have consequences.

Ms. Palin, if you would ever venture outside your protected space and try out your rhetoric on different kinds of audiences, you would become quickly aware of the effect of your constant word associations with violence. The words you use matter.

Your actions of scrubbing your websites and your associates desperately spinning this for you are ample evidence of your guilty conscience. In this case you are not suffering from innocent naivete, you knew exactly what you were doing. Shame!

Friday, January 7, 2011

The Great Middle Class Swindle

The Great Middle Class Swindle | Mother Jones

This is the best explanation of the GOP Policy of Public Theft I've seen yet. Because of the complexity of the economics involved, there will never be a smoking gun, or empirical evidence that the richest 1% have literally stolen wealth from the middle class, but Mr. Drum builds a solid case suggesting strongly that something has happened to cause the current disparity in wealth. This tells it all:

That would be 673 Billion dollars that went from the bottom of the wealth ladder to the very top.  Something made it happen! Mr. Drum accurately points out that the dominant economic policies of the past 30 years have been the continuation of the Reagan "Voodoo" economics.  Of course it's way more complicated than that, but the income disparity exists. It's real. I'm in the throes of it, hoping my savings account and retirement income will keep me alive for a while.  Got a better idea?

More work to do...

Thursday, January 6, 2011

Reading Between the Battle Lines of the Constitution: An Annotated Guide

Reading Between the Battle Lines of the Constitution: An Annotated Guide

This is a nice summary of the constitutional battles to come. The Tea Party's desire to return to the past is clear, their intent to repeat the mistakes of the past is tragic.

More work to do.

Tuesday, January 4, 2011

Despite Demanding ‘Bipartisan Discussions’ On Health Reform, Republicans To Vote On Repeal Without Hearings

ThinkProgress � Despite Demanding ‘Bipartisan Discussions’ On Health Reform, Republicans To Vote On Repeal Without Hearings

Welcome to the new American Fascism. Government by and for the corporate interests, using the power and wealth of the corporatocracy to make policy ruthlessly and secretly.

And the Congress hasn't even begun....

In Killing Ohio’s High-Speed Rail Project, Kasich Eliminated Private-Sector Jobs He Promised To Create

ThinkProgress � In Killing Ohio’s High-Speed Rail Project, Kasich Eliminated Private-Sector Jobs He Promised To Create

Can anyone explain the logic of Gov. Kasich's position? To me it sounds like, "In order not to stick it to the taxpayers for a new rail system, we're going to stick it to the taxpayers AND the business community by ignoring a big chance for growth in the private sector."

Is there a label for this? How can nonsensical policy like this even be fought? When no logic is the only logic, what good are facts?

This is another example of the Tea Party children getting control of the family fortune and chucking it down the rat hole.... I think our country is strong enough to survive this, but I'm not sure.

More work to do.

Monday, January 3, 2011

If Social Security is going broke, then why are you trying to cut it more?

Open Left:: If Social Security is going broke, then why are you trying to cut it more?

And From Bob Schrum:

"...an "Early Bird" movement of seniors, progressives, and working Americans should organize campaign events to demonstrate, demand answers, and hold candidates to account. They could pin Republicans as anti-Social Security. They could make Democrats do what they haven't yet done for themselves-run as champions of Social Security."

I"m ready to demand that Social Security should be taken off the table with regards to the national debt debate. Public Theft of Social Security funds meant for my mom, myself, my spouse, my brother, my children and grandchildren should be denied at all cost. Democrats, progressives, PEOPLE... unite on this issue. We are the champions of Social Security. Those who oppose this safety net should be called out at every opportunity and labeled loudly and often as such.


Repeat after me...., "Social Security, by law, is not funded by adding to the national debt.  It is separately funded.  It is a social contract that depends on the workers of America working together to fund each others retirement.  LEAVE IT ALONE."

Incoming Energy Chair Rep. Fred Upton: ‘I Don’t Think We Have To Regulate Carbon’

ThinkProgress � Incoming Energy Chair Rep. Fred Upton: ‘I Don’t Think We Have To Regulate Carbon’

So is Carbon a problem or not? Mr. Upton thinks it is and that it isn't. This is what happens when Congress Critters are in their "Customer Service Mode."

"Anything else I can do for you sir?" His customer? Americans for Prosperity, funded by oil and energy companies.

This is the face of the new Republican Fascism. Corporatization of America. It's graft. It's pay for play. It's the real grab for power.

Mr. Upton, YOU are a crook!

Saturday, January 1, 2011

The New Monarchy

Corporate Personhood Allows Corporations to Rule Over Democracy as Virtual Monarchs | BuzzFlash.org

The Robber Barons of the 1800's have been replaced by the Wall Street high rollers and the multi-national corporations. As Thom Hartman via Mr. Karlin notes:
...the largest transnational corporations fill a role today that has historically been filled by kings. They control most of the world's wealth and exert power over the lives of most of the world's citizens. Their CEOs are unapproachable and live lives of nearly unimaginable wealth and luxury.

This from Mr. Karlin,

Was the American Revolution fought so that the corporations could reign over democracy as monarchs?
So this is what we have on 1/1/11. A new monarchy, fueled by blood oil, supported by a political establishment for the benefit of the few.

Got some work to do.

Happy New Year...

A Killer Climate and a Resolution for the New Year

ThinkProgress � 2010 Closes With Yet More Killer Climate Disasters

The energy profiteers who pretty much run the show now are still going to try and sell their products any way they can. The Congress critters in their pockets will continue to shovel taxpayer dollars into their money bins and will cry "BOGUS" to any scientific evidence of climate change.

I think "Energy Profiteer" is pretty mild. "Oil Baron" has a nice ring to it but doesn't really tell the story. "Earth Rapists" might be getting close, but sounds like a wild-eyed radical. I'll be using these terms interchangeably in my blogs for the new year as part of a New Year resolution.

More terms to push into the debates:

Public Theft instead of Tax Cuts
Government for Profit instead of Small Government
Greed Crisis for economic crisis
Failing Citizens instead of Failing Schools
Corporate Cruelty instead of Profit Maximization
and
Deadly Coal instead of Clean Coal.

My goal this year is to NEVER allow the "instead of" terms enter the debate, and ALWAYS use the new progressive vocabulary in their place. I will also be on the lookout for new terms to push back against those who have so successfully dominated the public discourse.

Will you help me?