Heading Off Any Trouble

This is posted over at Roger Ailes:

Today, some jackass sent an insulting e-mail to Oliver Willis which was designed to look like it came from me. I cleared things up with Oliver, who was very gracious. Around the same time today, I received an e-mail which was designed to look like it came from someone other than the real sender, which was sent through a re-mailer.

If anyone gets an e-mail like this which supposedly came from me, please let me know. I can assure anyone who recieved something like this that it did not come from me.

In case something's up - anyone who has received any e-mails from me that might be offensive, check with me and make sure it's from me.

Continuing on this point - Anyone that has received any e-mails from me that make me look stupid, it wasn't me. If I should have put the addresses in the BCC and instead put them in the CC in that e-mail Monday - it wasn't me. If I accidentally sent everyone 10 copies of the Robert Reich Commonweal Institute endorsement - it wasn't me. Richard, if you got an e-mail from me that said, "Blow me" - it wasn't me. If the e-mail in any way indicates that I might owe you money - it wasn't me. If it had any misspellings or typos - it wasn't me. If I turned down a free dinner invitation - it CERTAINLY wasn't me.

If you believe it was me, then the terrorists win. It was Bill Clinton that did it.

Voting Machine Additions

I have added new articles/websites to the Collection of Voting Machine Articles.

Voting Machines: Vote Tampering in the 21st Century (NOT the same site as "Black Box Voting - Ballot Tampering in the 21st Century")

Caltech-MIT Voting Technology Project

Another Voting Machine Article

Commonweal Institute's Uncommon Denominator: "new computerized voting machines are vulnerable to tampering."

Clinton Fighting Terrorists

From BuzzFlash: Tired of Getting Those Wingnut Emails Saying Clinton Did Nothing for Terrorism? Well, Send Them This Page.

Scalia and Self-Government

Remember civics and history class, where we learned about our constitution and our government, and how America is about democracy and "the people" and self-government? The fundamental concept underlying our country is that we are self-governed.

America was the first country with true self government. Until then the underlying concept of western government was that government's powers existed because of God's authority. This was the "divine right of kings" -- you did what you were told because the king ruled with authority granted by God. According to St. Paul, "For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God."

Our "Founding Fathers" broke away from those essentially theocratic beliefs to form the United States. Their Declaration of Independence states that governments derive "their just powers from the consent of the governed." Our Constitution begins with the words, "We the People of the United States". Our country's fundamental founding concept is that our government derives its authority from the consent of the governed - WE THE PEOPLE make the decisions.

America made enemies when it declared that people should be governed by people. Royalists, monarchists and oligarchists do not believe these things. Many now believe that corporations and markets are better suited to make society's decisions. The enemies our country has historically faced have been those who believed that someone at the top decides, not the people. First England, with its God-chosen King. Germany's Kaiser Wilhelm II. Hitler's Nazis with their ideology of "God's chosen people" as Hitler privately referred to "the Aryans." The Soviets were ruled by dictators who worshipped an ideology. Even our Civil War was fought against those who believed God gave them the right to own other people.

Does America's concept of self-government still have enemies? Self-government is rejected in favor of God's government in a shocking May, 2002 article, God's Justice and Ours, [alternate source] written by Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. The article is a refinement of January, 2002 remarks Scalia made at a U-Chicago panel discussion.

In the panel discussion and subsequent article Scalia explains his reasons for his belief that the death penalty is moral. His argument is that government - the State - is allowed to do things that regular people cannot do because government has a higher authority granted to it by God. He writes, "The death penalty is undoubtedly wrong unless one accords to the state a scope of moral action that goes beyond what is permitted to the individual." He believes God chooses humanity's leaders, and democracy obstructs God's wishes by imposing ordinary people as the decision-makers. He condemns the "tendency of democracy to obscure the divine authority behind government".

If one believes this, then one has the problem of how to identify the leaders that God chooses. Scalia appears to think that the way to identify legitimate God-chosen leaders is when they seize power in conflict, demonstrating that God chose them over others. He writes,

"These passages from Romans represent the consensus of Western thought until very recent times. Not just of Christian or religious thought, but of secular thought regarding the powers of the state. That consensus has been upset, I think, by the emergence of democracy. It is easy to see the hand of the Almighty behind rulers whose forebears, in the dim mists of history, were supposedly anointed by God, or who at least obtained their thrones in awful and unpredictable battles whose outcome was determined by the Lord of Hosts, that is, the Lord of Armies. It is much more difficult to see the hand of God—or any higher moral authority—behind the fools and rogues (as the losers would have it) whom we ourselves elect to do our own will. How can their power to avenge—to vindicate the “public order”—be any greater than our own?"

THIS is the thinking of the guy who, in an electoral conflict, put Bush into the White House, blocking the democratic recount because a vote count showing Gore winning would harm Bush's legitimate position as president-elect. Does Scalia see the Bush v Gore case as a "battle" that demonstrated that god chose Bush over Gore? Did Scalia think that he was acting as the people's - the Constitution's - agent in this, or instead as God's agent?

The fact is that there are plenty of individuals, even in America, who do not believe in democracy. Think about the statements that voters in Florida are "too stupid to vote." Just read the messages at any libertarian message board. Just think about the underlying philosophy behind the Republican corporatists: democratic government is bad and so should be weak, corporations are good, the rich are good, one-dollar-one-vote is the market way to make decisions. Just think about how the Christian Right controls much of the Republican Party now -- powerful people and organizations that believe America is violating the laws of God by following concepts of self-government.

But OUR system believes that the PEOPLE govern. OUR constitution says that WE THE PEOPLE determine our destiny. And Scalia swore an oath to uphold and defend OUR Constitution!

Scalia writes, "The reaction of people of faith to this tendency of democracy to obscure the divine authority behind government should not be resignation to it, but the resolution to combat it as effectively as possible." How far is this from a call to overthrow our constitutional government and replace it with a theocracy? This guy should not be on the Supreme Court. This sure sounds like he does not believe that the law comes from "We the People," as the constitution says it does, and does not believe that the very principles underlying our form of government are legitimate! He calls for "people of faith" to combat democracy because it obscures "the divine authority behind government"!

How far have we come from the country I used to know - from the things I learned in my high school civics class? If our system were functioning properly Scalia would never have been nominated to a seat on our Supreme Court. If our system were functioning properly he would never have been confirmed. If our system were functioning properly Scalia would be impeached. Article VI, Clause 3, of our Constitution, says: "judicial Officers ... shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation to support this constitution." How could it possibly be more clear that Scalia does not fulfill his oath of office? It's a testament to how far we have come from our self-governing roots that we are not in the streets demanding the resignation of such individuals. It is a testament to the strength of the forces in our country who oppose democracy and want to impose theocracy/corporatocracy! This is the battle we are engaged in with the right.

Does President Bush's view of the law resemble Scalia's? Do you remember when Bush attended a secret meeting with the Christian Far-Right's Council for National Policy and emerged with the entire right-wing communications apparatus -- the "Mighty Wurlitzer" -- lined up behind him? What did he promise them? What about the snippets leaking out of the White House concerning Bush's belief he is chosen by God to lead the Christians against Islam? Scalia himself endorses the idea that God authorizes Christian revenge, when Scalia writes, "government carries the sword as "the minister of God," to "execute wrath" upon the evildoer." Is that Bush speaking, or Scalia, or do the two really sound like one?

I have been corresponding with Eric Zuesse, author of the book, Why the Holocaust Happened: Its Religious Cause & Scholarly Cover-Up, who has been studying Scalia's speech for some time, and who has a yet-to-be-published article that demolishes Scalia's interpretation in his speech of St. Paul's writing. Zuesse says,

"My analysis criticizes Scalia's assertions as regards their historical falseness about Romans 13:1-5, and also as regards the beliefs they indicate to have been behind his actions in Bush v. Gore.

I especially criticize his implicit repudiation of the Declaration of Independence saying, that "governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed," and the U.S. Constitution saying that "We, the people of the United States ... do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." Both contradict Scalia's "Government, however you want to limit that concept, derives its moral authority from God."

So which is it going to be? Are we going to continue self-government? Or are we going to change to an authoritarian system, ruled from the top by a God-chosen leader? Is a theocracy the right-wing vision that Bush is implementing? Did Scalia already give us "the God-chosen leader" on December 9, 2000?

A Threat To Peace

A Threat To Peace.

How Voting Machines Should Work

I left this as a comment over at Ruminate This.

Here's what people mean by a paper backup:

The voting machine makes the voting easy and the new technology ensures that there are no invalid ballots. After you vote the machine prints out a paper backup of YOUR vote, for YOU to examine. Then YOU take that paper ballot to the desk where the voting officials are sitting, and you deposit that paper backup into a LOCKED BALLOT BOX. All the officials at the table watch you do it and watch each other to make sure everyone keeps their hands out of the ballot box.

At the end of the night that locked ballot box is opened and the ballots are counted. All the officials are watching and verifying this counting. They compare this count to the count shown by the machine. THEN the machine is allowed to transmit its totals to election headquarters where computers are able to quickly tabulate election results. The election officials write down the results of their own counting, lock the ballots back in the box, and take the box AND their written records to headquarters for use in case of a recount.

This is a foolproof system. It does not rely on accurate machines, instead using human verification of every step.

I've worked in polling places in San Mateo Country, CA, and this is similar to how it is done now, except for the improvement of technology making the voting easier and ensuring that there are no invalid ballots.

Update - Question - "...as I see it, your entire audit procedure relies on a separate but equal paper voting system. If that is your deal, why bother with the machimes at all?"

Answer: Because good touch-screen machines make the voting easier, prevent invalid votes and confusion (like Palm Beach Jews voting for Buchanan), report reliable counts to computers at headquarters so the election is over in a few hours, and the paper trail ballots they print out are uniform, evenly marked, valif, and verified by the voter.

Voting Machines Story Spreads

The voting machines story has reached Slashdot.

Update - one comment in the Slashdot piece points to a good blog entry about voting machines here.

Thanks to Cursor I discovered this excellent article, "Lying Us Into War: Exposing Bush and His "Techniques of Deceit," exposing the 14 "techniques of deceit" that Bush has used to sell the war to the public.

Never Mind

News report - "False Alarm? Terror Alert Partly Based on Fabricated Information":

It was only after the threat level was elevated to orange — meaning high — last week, that the informant was subjected to a polygraph test by the FBI, officials told ABCNEWS.

So forget the duct tape, plastic sheeting, safe room, etc.

Convenient timing, though, what with Bush's polling numbers down and the U.N. inspector's reports and all.

My Mind Keeps Coming Back to This

My mind keeps coming back to what I read at Daily Kos the other day. I think this is important. WE COULD LOSE THE WAR.

I've dreamed up scenarios involving China taking Taiwan, Korea doing something, Iran getting involved, but the posts and comments over at Daily Kos are much more realistic, and some of the comments are from people with military experience. I suggest reading "One war scenario" along with the comments posted at the end, and if nothing else, even if you don't read the first, read "Follow up on "One war scenario." It will reposition your thinking.

EVERYTHING I read or hear from the mainstream press, and EVERY comment I hear from regular people presupposes a really quick, maybe 5 day war that we win easily. But if the Iraqis fight, they could win, especially if they really DO have weapons of mass destruction. (And don't forget that Iran isn't likely to sit and wait for us to regroup and then come after them. Plus, China and Korea, etc.)

Be Responsible

Be responsible and go over to PLA and read the whole Responsibility Era series. This is great stuff. Go to PLA and scroll down. There's "The Balanced Budget Amendment,"The 9/11 Investigation," "Foreign Policy" and "The Responsibility Era."

The very best of blogging. This is why everyone reading this should be telling everyone they know who is is thinking person to start reading weblogs!

Not Posting Much

I'm not posting much because I have a cold or something.

Joke

I got this joke in my e-mail this morning:

During a propaganda tour, president Bush visits a school to explain his politics to kids. He invites the kids to ask him questions. Bobby stands up and tells him "Mr. President, I got 3 questions:"

1. How come, that although the count of votes was not in your favor, you still won the election?
2. Why do you want to attack Iraq without an imminent reason?
3. Don't you also consider the bombing of Hiroshima the biggest terrorist attack of all times?

Before the president can answer, the recess bell rings, and the kids leave the room. After they came back, Bush invited them again to ask questions. Joey stands up and tells him "Mr. President, I got 5 questions:"

1. How come, that although the count of votes was not in your favor, you still won the election?
2. Why do you want to attack Iraq without an imminent reason?
3. Don't you also consider the bombing of Hiroshima the biggest terrorist attack of all times?
4. Why did the recess bell ring 20 minutes early?
5. Where's Bobby?

No Title

Interesting.

Voting Machines in the Guardian Today

Paranoid party rights today in the Guardian. (Thanks skimble).

This story is creeping up the food chain. I also added this to my collection of articles and websites that cover this issue. I've added several new items there so check it out.

This is an important story. It is ready to make it into the mainstream. So it's time for all of us to work to move it up to the mainstream. Start writing letters to the editor, calling newspapers asking about covering this story, calling radio stations, calling politicians. Refer them to BlackBoxVoting.com.

Noticing Ruminating

Ruminate This is being noticed BIG TIME! FAIR has them listed with the heavyweights, like Eric Alterman, John Nichols, Tom Tomorrow, not to mention Washington Post and, especially, Hollywood Reporter. Media Whores Online added them to the cherished Unbiased Dailies list. AND The Guardian. Go check it out! Weblog power grows!

Secret Revealed - I'm Not Atrios

In my day job I wrote an article that is published over at History News Network. I'll write about that article in a separate piece very soon.

Seeing the Forest has been an anonymous blog. I previously wrote,

I want this to be a weblog ABOUT, not a weblog BY. I think I have some good reasons for that. First and foremost this focuses criticism to content. I mean this limits a critic's ability to attack the content by attacking & attempting to discredit the author - a favored right-wing technique. If you don't know who the author is you're stuck with having to look at the content and argue with that. Too bad.

I'm not saying that I expect to be writing anything worthy of right-wingers taking note. My second reason is more that this is NOT an ego-based endeavor so why put my name on it.

But in my day job I'm publishing articles that I write because I think the subject matter is important. Publications identify the authors of articles. When I link to articles I've written readers learn my name.

Should Seeing the Forest remain an anonymous blog, for the reasons above? Should I continue to use "IssuesGuy," and you'll also know who I am? Would it be stupid to continue writing pieces here and leaving comments on other weblogs as "IssuesGuy." If Bush gets to have everything both ways then why can't I?

Meanwhile Ive been told now that they have a name tied to the all-important Seeing the Forest weblog, Karl Rove is personally supervising the dirt-digging operation. Reporters are gathering on my lawn. Teenage girls are swooning. Hollywood producers are sending me scripts.

I wish.

More Voting Machines

Rebecca Mercuri writes,

Security expert Peter Neumann and I were interviewed recently by NPR about voting technology. The segment is supposed to air on Monday in the "Morning Edition" show. This is a multi-segment show that is repeated in some listening areas. For times, check your local
NPR listings, sorry we don't know which segment we will be in, or even if the segment will air on Monday for sure, but thought the "heads-up" notice would be appropriate. The segment will be on the NPR website after it airs, so you can hear it there if you miss the broadcast.

For those interested in elections who have not yet seen David Dill's excellent website about voter-verified audit trails and the recent hearings in Santa Clara County, do check it out at: http://verify.stanford.edu/evote.html

I have also added this website to my collection of voting machine-issue websites. The website contains this good news: Friday, February 6, 2003. Very good news California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley announced that he will be forming a task force of experts to study this issue! Perhaps there will be a statewide solution.

A while back I wrote:

Sometimes lately - since Bush v Gore - I imagine I'm looking at current events as if I am a future historian, tracking the record of "what happened" - sort of like how we now look back at Germany in the 30's, trying to understand how it happened.

Some important words over at Daily Kos today:

What to do? First, spouting off in the blogs and staying engaged and informed, trading opinions and sharpening arguments, and conceding an opponent’s well-made points is healthy and good for all of us. It helps us find common ground where possible and identify issues that bother all of us. People who read and participate in blogs or get their news significantly from the Internet may be better informed than most. This doesn’t make us better than others, but it does give us the opportunity and responsibility to do something more than complain amongst ourselves. Yes, it means writing, faxing, or emailing your elected officials to let them know when you deem an issue to be important. But take the time to build an email mailing list and fax numbers made up of key US senators or representatives. What good is getting mad today about the GAO decision and your fears about the 2003 version of the Patriot Act if you don’t fire off a quick email or fax to these office holders about it? First off, they will be surprised to see that folks are paying attention. Secondly, although it may feel as if your message won’t make any difference, the experience of the right-wing media Wurlitzer of the last two decades shows that a small group of well-informed people who keep the heat up and gradually spread the effort around can convince officeholders and the media that people are paying attention to something other than the establishment spin.

Third, you should also have similar email and fax address books for the key people of your local newspaper(s) and TV stations, and just as importantly, the national writers, editors, and punditocracy. It is in my mind more important for the media to hear that today’s developments bother a significant group of folks, because in the absence of such dissent, our largely lazy corporate media won’t bother to hunt out dissent from the masses, and left to their own devices will return to the conservative establishment spin that is being fed to them at the Beltway cocktail parties and White House events. I have first hand experience at seeing several reporters and national columnists gradually change their coverage and tone on an issue when they see that people are paying attention and sending in emails and faxes challenging the spin being handed to the reporters at the government briefings. It may not happen overnight, but it can and does happen. The media will pay attention to well-informed opposition and those who are willing to stand up and make a reasonable opposition argument.

Fourth, instead of feeling alone with your concerns, join groups on issues that interest you so that you can network, obtain more information, be a better lobbyist of the media and officeholders, and build local networks of like-minded people. Even if many issues are of concern to you, there are many groups you can join for little money on a wide variety of issues that need you, and can allow for you to be heard by the local media.

There's more so please go read the whole Daily Kos piece.

Voting Machine Story Link Collection

A new, complete collection of articles and resources on this subject is available at the Commonweal Institute. Also see "Making the Integrity of Electronic Voting Into a National Issue".

I put together a collection of voting machine stories and websites. Let me know if you know of other good articles or other resources on this subject.

My "What's Wrong with this Picture?", Seeing the Forest

Who makes the vote-counting machines?

"If You Want To Win An Election, Just Control The Voting Machines"

To Register Doubts, Press Here, New York Times, May 15, 2003

New Voting Systems Assailed - Computer Experts Cite Fraud Potential, The Washington Post, March 27, 2003

Black Box Voting - Ballot Tampering in the 21st Century - a website dedicated to this issue.

Electronic Voting - Rebecca Mercuri, Ph.D. - contains many links to websites and stories about this issue.

Diebold - The face of modern ballot tampering

American Coup: Mid-Term Election Polls vs Actuals

Atrios on right-wing Christian Reconstructionists buying voting machine companies

Voter Fraud 2002: Death Stalks America's Democracy (Includes a collection of links.)

Computerized Balloting is Taking Over Elections In Maryland--But Can We Trust the Results?

The Nightmare Scenario Is Here - Computer Voting With No Paper Trail

THE SECRETIVE WORLD OF VOTING MACHINES

Can we trust the vote count anywhere? In any race? In any election?

Hagel’s ethics filings pose disclosure issue

Republican Manufactured Voting Machines Involved in Election Fraud

Votescam: The Stealing of America

Electronic voting system an invitation to trouble

Votescam in the Electronic Age

How to Rig a Touch Screen Voting Machine

HOW SAFE ARE OUR VOTING MACHINES? - Rage Against the Machine

The Real Scandal Is the Voting Machines Themselves

Area Democrats say early votes miscounted, Court hearing delayed as meeting planned on touch-screen problems

Vote Fraud in America

Lynn Landes' analysis of the 2002 Elections

Voter News Service: What Went Wrong? and Sideshow's essay linking to this.

Voting machines must provide a voter-verifiable audit trail - David Dill's website about voter-verified audit trails and the recent hearings in Santa Clara County, CA. - with links to to other sites on the voting machine issue.

Computer ballot outfit perverts Senate race, theorist says. At The Register. Also read the reply.

Paranoid party rights in The Guardian.

Commonweal Institute's Uncommon Denominator: "new computerized voting machines are vulnerable to tampering."

Voting Machines: Vote Tampering in the 21st Century (NOT the same site as "Black Box Voting - Ballot Tampering in the 21st Century")

Caltech-MIT Voting Technology Project

If voters get a record of their ballot, they can check on the system. A San Jose Mercury News editorial today acknowledged the voting machines problem. 2/21/03

Board faces key decision on voting by computer - POTENTIAL FOR FRAUD WORRIES SUPERVISORS -- The San Jose Mercury News front page story, 2/24/03

* Great resource!* Electionline.org - The Election Reform Information Project

Paperless Voting Machines Under Fire - Newsday, Feb. 25, 2003

Election Guardians

** Key Story -- Scientists question electronic voting, SF Chronicle, March 3, 2003

Voting Technology, California Voter Foundation

Computer-Related Elections, Peter Neumann

Which Corporation Owns Your Vote over at AlterNet.

Election Fraud & Voting Machines - You can't vote them out if you never voted them in. Cronus Connection

Are American elections fixed?

Britain to Launch Electronic Voting Systems -- International Herald Tribune, April 20, 2003

Voters must have faith in the vote count," by the chief elections officer, San Mateo County, California, San Jose Mercury News, May 19, 2003.

Far Out!

Psychedelic Republicans.

(Pointed to by Dan Gilmore.)

Microsoft and Technology Investment

Brad DeLong is writing about Microsoft making it appear that the Opera web browser doesn't work correctly.

How much of the Silicon Valley slump - and the national technology slump - is the result of the Bush administration's deal letting Microsoft off the hook from their anti-trust conviction?

You simply can not get venture money, or any other type of funding, if you are in any area where Microsoft is, or possibly could be. Of course this is having an effect!

The Bush-Microsoft deal dried up technology investment. You would have to be a fool to invest when a predatory monopoly is given government protection to operate as it pleases. Look what just happened to WebEx, after Microsoft bought PlaceWare. Palm is laying off because of Microsoft's competition in PDAs. How soon does Microsoft take over the embedded software market - cell phones, etc.? Look how many software companies have gone out of business because of Microsoft.

The idea of the anti-trust remedy was to restore competition and innovation. Has there been a SINGLE investment in ANY company that Microsoft could compete with, since the Bush-Microsoft deal?

Some More on Jobs

Here's a story from this morning's San Jose Mercury News, Sales sluggish in January
WINTER NOT SUCH A WONDERLAND FOR MANY OF NATION'S RETAILERS, confirming what I wrote below. The January "retail jobs surge" wasn't.

Understand the Numbers

Here's the explanation of what's going on with today's employment report, U.S. Unemployment Rate Drops in January,

Economists had predicted that retail hiring would pick up because holiday employment was well below normal. This meant that fewer seasonal workers were laid off in January.

In other words, this is an adjusted employment number. USUALLY there is a lot of retail hiring for the Christmas shopping season, so they adjust for a large number of layoffs in January. Obviously there wasn't as much hiring this year, so there were 100,000 or so fewer layoffs in January. Adjusting for the 100,000 expected layoffs makes it look like the retail sector is strong now. Everyone knows it isn't.

Here's another story that talks about this, U.S. jobless rate falls to 5.7%.

Because of the way the government adjusts the figures for seasonal factors, both December's loss and January's gains in retail are probably illusory. Read more about the seasonal problems.

That last reference is to this story, Job growth could be an illusion.

When the government reports its monthly numbers, it adjusts them for seasonal factors to allow economists and us interested amateurs to see underlying trends more clearly. But sometimes the seasonal adjustments serve only to cloud the issue.

For instance, retail hiring typically soars in November and December as retail outlets get ready for the holiday rush. The seasonally adjusted government data tries to smooth out that seasonal bump, so that normal seasonal hiring would appear as zero job growth in the reported data.

But if the normal seasonal patterns are disrupted, the number becomes distorted. That's what happened this year.

UPDATE - The first story changed since I posted this morning. The first story now has this quote,: instead of the one above

Holiday hiring was well below normal, meaning fewer seasonal workers were laid off in January. That means seasonal adjustments accounted for January's large gain, economists said.

"The big swing of 101,000 jobs in January was statistical, not real," said Joel Naroff, president and chief economist of Naroff Economic Advisors.

Voting Machines

Ruminate This is writing about voting machines.

Good News / Bad News

The good news is that the comments have been restored. The bad news is that comments left yesterday appear to have been lost.

The Lesson

The lesson for history to learn from this Korea story (if there is a history after all this is over) is: Never, never give a big speech and declare a group of countries to be "evil," and say you're going to attack first, and start preparing to attack one of the countries, unless you're in a position to do something about it if they BELIEVE YOU! Obviously Korea believed you!

Lesson #2: Don't put your POLITICAL ADVISOR in charge of your foreign policy and war planning, (even if there IS a Congressional election coming up.)

OK, now, with these Korean activities in mind, I have a message that I'd like you to rush straight to General Rove. You also threatened Iran, and they haven't forgotten this, and they're sitting there next to Iraq waiting for our forces to to be preoccupied with that situation. They're heavily armed, and they're smart, and they aren't going to sit and wait for General Rove's attack, currently planned for October 2004. They're also figuring out how to fight back. Just like Korea is doing. DUH!

(Also posted at No War Blog.)

What Liberal Media?

What Liberal Media?

Is the Republican Party a Cult?

Everybody go read The 8 Basic Elements of Mind Control at Blah3. (Unfortunately I can't link to individual articles over at Blah3 so you might have to scroll or look in the archives to find this.) (Referred by Skippy.)

Even More on Voting Machines

A reader sent in a link to this article "from Bruce Schneier, one of the foremost security experts in the world."

Did you Do Your Homework?

Did you do your homework assignment? Here is what you would have seen, from The Money Behind the Media:

Over the past 30 years a small group of wealthy conservative philanthropies have quietly funded a movement to change the social, legal, educational, media and political landscape of the United States. Using tax-exempt funds these philanthropies have coordinated their giving to create a suppy-side machinery for implementing their mostly Republican agenda.

The test will be comprehensive. Study up, here's the library: Articles and reports tracing the formation of the right-wing ideological movement, how it is funded and how it operates.

Wow

Wow. Go read the comments to the post titled "Jobs Going Away," the entry about the e-mail I received from a guy who can't get a job because so many jobs are being shipped to India or because of competition from H1B workers here. (And if you have time, read the Business Week Article that it points to, because I'm going to be writing more about it. Yeah, I know, more homework.)

Homework

Here's your homework assignment. Go read The Money Behind The Media, over at Cursor.org. (Be sure to click "Next" at the bottom of the pages.)

Stocks

A bunch of scary economic outlook news from Skippy, including "Market Timers Foresee Imminent Crash for Stocks".

Voting Machines

Testify! has a good piece on the voting machine problem here. (Scroll down to "Vote Scam 2002/2004".)

Last Day to Comment on FCC Ownership Regulations

skimble points out that today is the last day to comment on FCC proposals to relax media ownership regulations, and tell you how to do it.

Word

Hunter S. Thompson, in a Salon interview:

"Who does vote for these dishonest shitheads?" he writes, referring to the people currently occupying the White House. "They are the racists and hate mongers among us -- they are the Ku Klux Klan. I piss down the throats of these Nazis."

I couldn't have said it better myself.

And on that note, I begin another day's blogging.

What's Wrong with this Picture?

See also the Voting Machine Story Link Collection

So the voting machine story is starting to be talked about by more and more people in more and more places - another major story driven by webloggers. I've written about it here, here, here, here and maybe a few other times - there are a number of links to other sources in that last one. Atrios and Sideshow, Bartcop and Testify! have also been writing about this, as have a number of others. (Let me kow and I'll add a link to you.)

For now let's not get hung up on whether Nebraska's Hagel, or Georgia's Chambliss or anyone else won in 2002 because something was rigged. There is no way to know, and it's over, and nothing is going to change anything. Instead, let's just look at what we have here:

- Really rich, far right-wing "Christian Nation" fanatics involved in the ownership of the companies that make the voting machines. That alone should set off alarm bells.

- Electronic voting machines that leave no verifiable, auditable trail beyond what the machine reports as the vote count. You can't verify that whatever was recorded as your vote was what you actually voted, and there is no way to do a recount of the totals other than what the voting machine itself reports. That alone should set off alarm bells.

- Voting machines that come with contracts forbidding looking at the code, so there is no way to check what the machines are actually doing. You can't look at the code that comes with the machines to see if it is set up to download special code on election day. You can't set one up on election day to see if it is downloading code, unless you steal the machine. (And there are ways to tell if the machine is being checked. For example, you don't send code to any machine that someone working for the company isn't looking at, in a polling place, and checking that the modem line isn't monitored.) These contracts alone should set off alarm bells.

- These are voting machines with modems, supposedly to report results, but modems can receive as well as send. The RAM can't be checked because you have to turn it off to move it to check what's in RAM, so the contents of RAM are wiped. And you can't run pre-election tests because the machines might be testing for the right time-and-date before downloading special code.

Who would have imagined that any district would EVER buy such machines? But they do. What competitive company would design such a thing? But they did. The unaccountability of results is suspicious enough, but when you learn WHO is involved with these companies this goes over the top.

This is an easy situation to fix. Demand that voting machines come with a paper printout that the voter looks at to verify that the vote was recorded correctly, and puts this paper record in a ballot box that is watched. That's all there is to it. Why in the world don't these machines come with this simple, common-sense security measure?

Dan Gilmore writes in Saturday's column,

The right to vote -- and for that vote to be counted with integrity -- is at the heart of liberty. People are already skeptical. If we continue on this path, pure cynicism will corrode what's left of public trust in an already frayed system.

Skepticism is the least of it. Paranoid nutcases like me will let our imaginations take us a lot further than just skepticism when we see "Christian Nation" fanatics buying up the voting machine companies and pushing unauditable voting systems on the public. Oh yeah, we can.

Voting Machines

Atrios is talking about voting machines again today. Here's another about voting machines.

Update - Problems at blogspot today - just go to Atrios for now and scroll to "Thom Hartmann tells us more about voting machines and Chuck Hagel. " I'll update the link and remove this note when the correct link is working.

Busy

I've been busy, so please read Dan Gilmore's Saturday column on voting machines here.

And Atrios on this topic here.

Jobs Going Away

I got an e-mail from someone today, titled America: the first post-modern agrarian society. ...Thanks to American Big Business...

There are soooo many ways to title this message:

American Technology Leadership: R.I.P

America: We Used to Be Relevent, Now All We Have are Nukes

American Business to American Technologists: Drop Dead!

Congress to Technologists: Too bad you didn't bribe us first!

Business to Technologists: "Hey, You f*cked up! You trusted us!" (w/apologies to J. Belushi)

I've never been a "protectionist" but I now understand exactly why the protectionists have been whining so much about the actions of American businesses. I'm out on the job market and I now get it in a really, really big way.

Apparently, American companies want Americans to buy their very expensive products, just as long as they don't have to hire them to invent/design/produce or otherwise pay them to make such purchases possible. How, exactly, will this country maintain its edge in technology if there are no technology jobs and American business isn't interested in paying anyone except the CEO and the Board?

Another interesting trend I've seen (and been confirmed by several recruiters I know) is making requirements in job postings so fantastic (requiring 15 yrs experience in 20 technologies that didn't exist 15 yrs ago, etc.) that they cannot possibly be filled and then using the "lack of qualified applicants" as a ruse to bring in H1B candidates as just above minimum wage. This is going on all over NYC.

Just try and get a programming or system admin job at a large firm in NYC. You won't.

Think such tactics are illegal? Guess again.

Oh, and don't think going to your congress-weasels will help you -- they rammed an H1B extension (and added a several *million* increase in available visas) through as a hidden rider to a bill just before they split for their December break.

So, while they "decry" the problems in the tech industry and the lack of jobs/jobs-going-overseas they are quietly taking money from all the usual suspects (tech firms, brokerages, et al) to put it to American technology workers as hard and as fast as they can.

He then points to this Business Week article.

I believe that he's on the East Coast. Here in the Silicon Valley area we hear rumors that things are much better on the East Coast. Things are certainly bad here - 25% office vacancy rate. Very high unemployment. Stores closing. Friends whose unemployment runs out and they go on food stamps.

I don't see how it's going to get better. People are in debt so spending is unlikely to increase. No one is getting raises. I see nothing that promises to bring back the tech industry around here. I mean, sure, the engineer getting $10,000 a year in India will eventually spend some money, but that's a net loss of spending of $90,000 per year for each engineer here who was getting $100,000, and a loss of the whole $100,000 spent here. The overall pool of paid talent is not increasing - these are replacement jobs.

And what do we hear from our country's leaders? Tax cuts for the rich and permanent massive budget deficits for the future are supposed to bring us out of this? They say it will increase the investment capital? Investing in what? They already have zillions and they aren't investing that! It's the old, "It isn't working, so let's do more of it."

The Huge Spending Increase

From a story about federal budget deficits in today's NY Times:

The Congressional Budget Office said today that the federal government shortfall would rise to $199 billion this year from $158 billion last year — even without any of Mr. Bush's new tax or spending proposals.

So WITH the war, tax cuts and spending increases, we might be looking at a $300-400 billion deficit THIS year.

That means that next year, and every year thereafter, we will have to pay somewhere from, $10-30 billion to cover the interest on THIS YEAR'S borrowing, depending on interest rates. That is a HUGE spending increase. And the following year the spending will INCREASE again, because of THAT year's deficit.

Want to talk about where that money goes? Who GETS that $10-30 billion? How much control over U.S. policy will they be buying?

out of toucfh

NY Times today
This puts both men squarely at odds with American consumers, who are quite fearful about the economy, judging by confidence figures released Tuesday that came in at a nine-year low. Stock investors, who are famously positive well before an economic recovery is evident, also seem stuck in a doubting mood, unwilling to bet yet on a turnaround that both Mr. Bush and Mr. Greenspan seem to be anticipating.


McNeil Leher yesterday - $1-200 per person, not even enough to buy a dinner for one person. That was the person criticizing Bush's plan!

Everyone in the debate is paid at the top. Unrealistic, out of touch

One of the participant said that giving more money to the rich means that there is more money available for investment. How out of touch are these people? There are billions and billions of dollars in venture capital funds, just sitting in the bank. There are trillions that have been taken out of the markets, waiting on the sidelines for a good investment environment.

Money

Obviously someone else has noticed that you can get a pretty good return on your money just by moving it to Euros.

A Few More Words About the Speech

Terrify, then harvest!

Dean

I'm not sure yet who I support for President, but I like what I hear from Dean. I'm posting a "Dean Meetup" button on the left, scroll down a ways. It's a great idea - go check it out.

The Speech

I really think that Bush is surrounded by people who are afraid to contradict him or bring him bad news. I think he isn't aware of events outside of the good news that is brought to him. "Yes sir, you are the chosen one, sir. GOD has chosen you, sir."

No one even told him that the aluminum tubes story turned out to be phony. No one even dares tell him it's pronounced "nuclear."

Spines

CNN: Kennedy to seek new measure on war with Iraq.

Senator Kennedy is asking for a new vote.

"Much has changed in the many months since Congress has debated war with Iraq," the Massachusetts Democrat said in a statement released after President Bush's State of the Union address, in which Bush tried to rally the American people to the need to disarm Iraq.

"U.N. inspectors are on the ground and making progress, and their work should continue," Kennedy said. "Osama bin Laden and the Korean nuclear crisis continue to pose far greater threats [than Iraq]."

It looks like the Dems are growing spines.

Double Standard

skimble writes about the difference in treatment of Martha Stewart and Thomas White (ex-Enron, current Bush Administration.) Stewart is a Democrat and will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law with public humiliation, White has a get-out-of-jail-free card and a look-the-other-way pass from the press.

Another Scenario

A friend writes with a scenario - U.S. and British forces invade and become bogged down in house-to-house fighting in Baghdad's suburbs, taking and causing heavy casualties. There are very heavy civilian casualties that are well publicized by the European press. (Civilians initially refuse to enter shelters, remembering the 1991 U.S. bombing of a civilian shelter bunker with a "penetrator" bomb that incinerated everyone inside.)

The heavy casualties result in massive civilian protests in London, some erupting into riots. There is a no-confidence vote and Blair's government falls. The new government withdraws British forces, leaving the U.S. alone and bogged down in urban street fighting.

Scenarios

February, 2003, America invades Iraq.

Two days after U.S. invasion begins, China attacks Taiwan. Simultaneously North Korea attacks South Korea. America must divert some forces to Asian theater. Iraq campaign slows.

Responding to right-wing American think tanks' public advocacy that America follow Iraq conquest with initiatives to change other Middle Eastern governments, the Saudis, Syrians and Kuwaitis begin secretly supporting and funding Hamas, Hezbollah and other organizations to send fighters to Iraq to attack and bog down the American troops. American casualties begin to climb.

Late February, Kurds seize northern Iraq and part of Turkey. Kurds, having infiltrated Iraqi intelligence, convince Iraqi “sleeper” agents to launch biological attacks on Israel, hoping to goad Israel into attacking Baghdad, thereby weakening Iraq’s ability to oppose to Kurdish state. Israel responds against Iraqi cities.

March, Iran responds to “axis of evil” threats by attacking US fleet and invades Iraq from the west. They announce they have developed a dozen nuclear weapons and will use them on our forces and American homeland if their forces are attacked with nuclear weapons in any American attempt to reverse their gains. With insufficient forces in the Middle East American forces overwhelmed and begin retreat. Iran seizes western Iraq and southern oil fields.

Late March, Al-Queda launches major attacks in Kashmir, driving India to attack Pakistan. Islamic fundamentalists seize power in Pakistan and Indonesia, immediately supplying al-Queda with nuclear weapons. U.S. initiates bombing campaign against Pakistan.

April, responding to heavy civilian casualties in Iraq, Iran and Pakistan, Asian and European civilians demand boycott of U.S. products. International investors begin selling assets and pulling funds from U.S. OPEC announces oil will move to the Euro currency for all transactions. Dollar plunges, reaches eight dollars per Euro, causing oil to exceed US$240 per barrel. Stock market plunges to 1200. U.S., unable to borrow money to finance deficit, begins to default on bonds.

Scam E-mail

A friend received the following e-mail.

From: PayPal@billingdept.com
Subject: PayPal information UPDATE. *URGENT*

Dear Paypal Member Case #840650,
We have worked hard to help your Paypal experience be even better. However, we have to ask aII our members for updated\correct biIIing information. PIease be advised this is mandatory. lf we do not get your updated biIIing information, your account wiII be revoked and put under review and may be canceIIed. Before we start we will need you to provide us with your email address and password. To send us that info please visit our Secure Site Paypal Billing Site http://updatepaypal.cjb.net

She wants to know what law enforcement agency this can be reported to. Does anyone know?

IMPORTANT - In case you don't "get it," do not go to this website and provide your account and password!

Moon Bush

Other webloggers have been writing about the close ties between the Moonies and the Republicans, so I'll take this opportunity to link to a piece I wrote in July, titled "Moon Bush."

Why Punish Achievement?

I saw one of those typical right-winger letters to the editor yesterday saying we should cut taxes on the rich because, "Why Punish Achievement?"

I was thinking, this crowd thinks we shouldn't tax income that comes to people through an inheritance. So that's taxing achievement?

Who Is Our Economy For?

In today's New York Times there's a story, Is There Such a Thing as a Jobless Recovery? From the story,

After falling into recession in 2001, the economy did indeed recover in 2002, hard as that is to believe. Despite a sluggish fall, most economists believe the United States expanded at close to 3 percent last year (final statistics are still being compiled).

But because productivity — the amount of goods or services produced for each hour worked — is climbing relatively fast, last year's relatively tepid expansion created almost no new jobs. Instead, businesses are finding ways to get more production out of each current employee. In fact, the unemployment rate has risen from 3.9 percent in 2000 to 6 percent today.

So the unemployed aren't finding jobs, more people are becoming unemployed, the people still working have to work harder to do the jobs the unemployed were doing, and many of them are afraid they're going to lose their jobs.

Productivity means increases in wealth. But whose wealth? When you're working harder on the job for the same pay, that's called a productivity increase, and SOMEone is getting richer. But obviously it isn't YOU. Statistics show the wealth in America is concentrating at the top. WE're working (if we have jobs) and THEY're getting rich.

Who is our economy for? Why are we tolerating this?

Bush Has Squandered Our Trust

I posted this as a comment at DailyKos, and decided to post it here and No War Blog as well.

What gets me is that Iraq could very well be the threat that the Bushies say. Iraq could very well be working on biological weapons or hoarding chemical weapons. They very well could be a threat to us, supplying terrorists, planning to hit us with smallpox, etc.

If so, Bush has handled this outrageously! He has lied about Iraq. He lied about connections with Al-Queda. He lied about that report saying Iraq could have nukes in 6 months. He lied about the aluminum tubes. Getting caught lying at a time when they need the world to trust them is very bad. That, and other things he has done, have split us off from the rest of the world.

Then, Bush pumped fear into the country, instead of being a leader that helps the public with their fears. They pumped fear into the population and then used that to get more of their far-right agenda passed. That is a very divisive thing to do and the country will be divided as a result for a long time.

And Bush has politicized Iraq as well as the war on Al-Queda. They blatantly used Iraq to manipulate the election. This was even more divisive, but worse than divisive it undoes their credibility even with their own supporters who now assume everything has a wink and a nod behind it - that they're "only saying that" to win. Even the supporters don't trust Bush but go along because they fell Bush is doing what he has to do to beat the liberals and want to be on the winning side.

And there has been this whole secrecy thing! Particularly excluding Democrats from consultation on matters of national security! What happens if this war in Iraq goes badly and they have to come to us for emergency appropriations, or for an emergency draft? They've divided the country before the war even starts.

So here we are, unable to trust our own leaders. We may very well be under the kind of threat they say! If so, they have squandered their ability to pull us together by using the divisive tactics, and squandered the world's trust by lying to us. So here we are, not really knowing for sure if we're threatened, pumped full of fear by our own leaders... what a mess!

Even More Pension Trouble

I've been writing about problems with pension funds for a while. Finally the problem is becoming publicly serious enough that it is gaining the attention of the mainstream press. (The problem isn't growing - awareness of the problem is growing. The problem is already huge.)

Companies that promise employee pensions are required to set aside enough money to cover their future pension obligations. During the big stock runup, pension funds grew faster than the obligations, and companies TOOK MONEY OUT of the funds, increasing their apparent profit. Now that stocks are in the process of returning to reasonable levels, the companies need to put that money back, plus enough to cover additional shortfalls. This means that the companies must report lower profits, reducing their stock price.

An additional component is that companies must calculate future obligations, which involves forecasting the rate of return the funds will receive on the money they have. Companies have been using very high rates of return for these forecasts. The higher the forecasted rate of return, the lower the amounts they need to have in the fund now, and the money not put into the fund goes to the bottom line, which raises their stock prices, which means executives get huge bonuses. (See where this is heading?) They're using forecasts of 8.5% returns!

This is my most recent entry about the pension problem. It references earlier entries

Sad

Go read The Agora. I read it in reverse order, from the "last" entry on the top, scrolling down to Tuesday.

The Fattest Target Since Pearl Harbor

From a great, great piece by Gene Lyons:

It doesn't appear to have registered that if the White House geniuses really thought Saddam capable of attacking with "weapons of mass destruction," the well-publicized U.S. troop buildup in Kuwait offers the fattest target since Pearl Harbor.

Not to mention the need for a draft to replace them - if we REALLY believe he has weapons of mass destruction and would use them. But I think the Korea situation shows us the reaction of the Bushies to a country that they actually DO think can harm us - instead of just using that as a rationale for a war they want.

Update - Korea. What I said the other day - "Speak loudly and carry a don't-do-squat stick!"

Propaganda

I just ran across a great site discussing propaganda. Go have fun.

Exploring Other Weblogs

Dave Winer writes this about the cost of prescriptions and later points to this scary story at Brian D Busk's Weblog, about what can happen to you if you do not have health insurance. READ IT and be very afraid.

Nathan Newman on China.

TalkLeft has the Gary Hart speech that we should all read.

Everything at The Hamster is good today, as always.

Toby’s Political Diary talks about the relationship between Bush’s Texas record as executioner, and his drive for war against Iraq.

Thinking it Through writes, ANOTHER DAY, ANOTHER RIGHT-WING NUTJOB GETS A JOB WITH THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION.

Everything at TBOGG is always great every day.

Slacktivist has a bunch about Bush’s new appointee to the Presidential Advisory Commission on HIV and AIDS.

skimble caught a piece about Helen Thomas calling Bush “the worst president ever” and then read the piece below that.

I Report - You Decide

Got this e-mail from a reader. In the right-wing Fox Limbaugh Drudge spirit of just passing this kind of thing along, here it is:

The Bush administration is about to start shipping a lot of smallpox vaccine. During the cold war the US spooks always watched for any kind of mass vaccination program against biowarfare agents. We knew that the Soviets vaccinated its military VS several agents, so we supposed that biowarfare was an option in battle situations. But civilian protection would presage something more sinister. Now the US is doing exactly that but under the excuse that we are afraid that somebody else will spread smallpox into our population.

Supposedly, only a couple or three smallpox stocks were left in freezers after the disease was eradicated form the earth. The US, of course, has one of those acknowledged stocks and perhaps some that are more carefully hidden. Add to this the fact that the Anthrax spores used in the mail attacks came from a US Government lab (1) and you realize that was a practice run to gauge the public reaction and response.

If Smallpox is released in this country, it will be by some elements in this current government and blamed on Iraq and/or Bin Laden. The Patriot Act and some other enabling legislation allows a virtual suspension of civil liberties in case of such a public health crisis. Doesn't this remind you of an analogous turn of events (Reichsteig Fire, etc.) in Germany (2) during the late Twenties and early Thirties.

(1) Graduate training as a medical microbiologist and service on an industry advisory board to the EPA's anthrax task force convinces me of this fact.
(2) Don't forget, those events staged by the Nazi party were partly financed by G.W. Bush's Grandfather.

You decide. Leave me out of it. Remember - if Clinton were President, imagine what the wingers would be posting! They flatly claim he launched that strike on Bin-Laden to divert the press from Monica stuff - saying he "bombed an asprin factory." Now they'd be saying that his poll numbers are down, so he would do something like this. But leave me out of it. :-)

State of the Union (2)

I came across this great preview of the State of the Union speech. Hilarious!

State of the Union Speech

I expect that President Bush will use the State of the Union speech to do everything he can to scare the crap out of the American people. Rather than use his position of leadership - the "bully pulpit" - to calm a frightened public, Bush will continue to use language intended to whip up fear.

This is their tactic. Our fear has been so useful to them. A terrified public will rally behind their leaders for their own protection. When we're under attack we must stand together. We will support our leader and will not tolerate breaking ranks.

They terrify us and then they harvest the results.

By terrifying us the right keeps us distracted, and uses the panic to push their agenda through the Congress. The Republicans politicized "the war" and the fight against terrorism. They drummed up the Iraq scare to influence the election – and it worked. A terrified public supports massive increases in military spending. It supports restrictions on the media. It supports restrictions on political criticism.

Terrify us, then harvest the results.

Terrify, then harvest. The new mantra of the Republicans: "Terrify, then harvest. Terrify, then harvest!"

Thanks BuzzFlash

Some of the best things to read here are:

Paying for the War, Military, Etc.

When Facts Collide with Support

The Commonweal Institute - Heritage Foundation of the Left

Getting Rolled

Remember to bookmark Seeing the Forest and visit again!

New - BuzzFlash Headlines

Scroll down a ways and you will see on the left (of course) a new section at Seeing the Forest - news headlines from BuzzFlash!

More about BuzzFlash - see this piece.

Raising some Rabble with the Righties

I just posted this as a comment (in the "Standards" entry) over at tacitus.org. (In response to a comment by "nerf" in the entry below.)

Let me get this right - Bush went AWOL for 18 months, because he refused to take a drug test - and you guys don't think there's anything wrong there?

That's desertion in time of war. Whether the Nat Guard was called up to VietNam or not, it's STILL desertion in time of war. Not to mention the drug implications!

You want to bring up Clinton? Ok, Clinton got a student deferment - JUST LIKE CHENEY DID. Just like ALL OF THE LEADERSHIP OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY DID.

And Clinton got a blow job. Get over it.

Now, let's talk about Bush. He was a military pilot who refused a drug test. He deserted the military in time of war. That's a capital offense, guys! Please, tell me again how this is not a big deal.

Go over there and raise some rabble.

Skippy Pointing to Bush AWOL Questions

Skippy pointed me to a site titled A Military Career Distinguished Only by Favoritism looking into Bush's National Guard AWOL situation.

Where was Bush? Why is this not a major issue? Even if just to be cleared up! What do we have here, Stalin? No one can question the king?

More Pointing

Now I'm going to point to Paul Krugman's column today, which ends with the line,

Trust me: we're going to miss Rubinomics. Maybe not today, and maybe not tomorrow, but soon, and for the rest of our lives.

He's saying here that we'll eventually pay a great price for Bush's deficits.

I want to point out that the costs of tax cuts for the wealthy arrive sooner than that. We currently pay over $300 billion per year for interest costs because of Reagan's budget deficits. That amounts to a $300 billion tax increase, paying for Reagan's tax cuts for the wealthy. The kicker is, by and large, the wealthy receive that interest.

So what we saw in the early 80's wasn't just a tax cut for the wealthy, it was also the creation of a huge government spending program, almost the largest item in the U.S. budget, almost entirely to the wealthy. This is also what the Bush tax cuts mean for our future. A huge spending increase - increased future debt interest payments from us to the wealthy.

The current tax cuts are coming out of our Social Security money! We pay into Social Security, it runs a surplus, but that surplus is going out to the tax cuts for the rich. So not only will will have to pay interest to the wealthy, we will have to pay that interest instead of retirement payments to ourselves.

Pointing To

Someone pointed out that I have been doing more "pointing to" than "talking" here lately, and he's right and I want to apologize. I know how much many of you depend on me so much, and I have been letting you down. (Especially you, Mr. Green Ralph Nader voter, Bush elector. You know who I'm talking about.) There will be much talking soon and the masses shall rejoice. Then, of course, Mr. Green Ralph Nader voter, Bush elector, will tell me I'm talking too much. But that's why I have a blog and he doesn't. (Yet.)

In the spirit of pointing to instead of talking, I want to point you to The Sideshow today, writing about a poll showing most Americans believe that most or some of the Sept. 11 hijackers were Iraqis! Sideshow writes about the press allowing the Bush lies through, but also points out something important here:

Still, bottom line: Ordinary people should bother to notice. Yes, the press at this point should be spelling out that none of the hijackers were Iraqi, but a year ago their actual nationalities were all over the media and now only 17% remember that?

I've written that you can often tell the message that leaders are sending by checking out what the intended audience is hearing. But the intended audience has SOME responsibility, especially when they are allowing the country to go to war.

SlashDot

I see I'm a moderator over at SlashDot today. I'm taking bids here to "mod up" posts. Leave a comment including a dollar amount and your credit card number, and I'll go "mod up" your message or "mod down" a message you disagree with.

(If you don't know about SlashDot and their moderating system, read the next post instead.)

Trying Too Hard

The right is trying a little too hard to smear John Kerry. They're circulating a story that he said he "EXPRESSED 'HATRED' OVER TRIPS TO IOWA."

Actually he said - about the need for campaign finance reform - "I hate going to places like Austin and Dubuque to raise large sums of money. But I have to."

He hates having to raise the money. The right smears him, claiming he said he hates Iowa. Typical.

Remember when they dredged up a letter Clinton wrote as a student, saying that he could understand why some people loath the military, and turned it into a widely-repeated smear that Clinton had written that he "loathed the military"?

Terrify, then Harvest

Bush and the rest of the right-wingers have been working hard to scare the hell out of the public for some time now. And they have been harvesting the results politically. Now they're harvesting cash, too.

Here's the headline piece in today's right-wing Heritage Foundation TowhHall.com e-mail. (To help you get the flavor of TownHall, today's e-mailing links to articles by "Thomas, Novak, Mackenzie, Fields, McCaslin, Williams, Kudlow, Elder, Chavez, Bartlett, Tyrrell, Chapman, and Coulter".)

BIOCHEMICAL ATTACKS ON U.S. COULD BE IMMINENT
Are you ready to protect your family? Unfortunately, most Americans aren't prepared to survive terrorist attacks. Worse, the U.S. government has told us nothing about what we can do to protect ourselves. Don't be a sitting duck! Find out what you can do to protect yourself from coming attacks.

So let's click on the URL, and find out how to protect ourselves from IMMINENT chemical and biological attacks.

While you are vulnerable, you are far from helpless. In a moment I’ll share five simple but potentially life-saving steps to take immediately to protect yourself. But first, you must understand the threat:

Saddam Hussein Could Launch
Deadly Biochemical Attacks Against
America Within 60 Days

...

A few missiles fired against the U.S. could set off a nationwide plague, which would cripple, disfigure, and even kill millions of American citizens.

...

Terrorists Already Have Nuclear Weapons

And, eventually, it gets to the point,

I've been selling Surviving Terrorism in various newsletters and magazines for $199.00. Hundreds of people have bought it at this price. I’m convinced the potentially life-saving information it contains is worth every penny. In fact, this is still the price I am selling it for to the general public (check out my home page here).

However, for a limited time, you can have this life-saving special report for only $97.00. That’s less than half price!

I used to write direct mail, so I understand how this is being used. TownHall sent it out - so it's approved. Their approval demonstrates that they recognize how this "wartime Presidency" crap is about selling stuff to the rubes.

Bush formula: Terrify, then harvest.

P.S. One of the TownHall articles promotes Lieberman's candidacy!

Code Words for Southern Bigots

In case anyone missed the point, Bush chose Martin Luther King's birthday to announce he opposes Affirmative Action.

You can be sure the message was heard clearly by those for whom it was intended. "Lott's gone, but we're still with you."

Adjustments

Jobless claims down by 32,000. But they warn that it might be off because -

The level was much lower than Wall Street economists had been expecting but a Labor analyst warned that adjustments intended to deal with seasonal fluctuations in claims may have had a downward impact on the numbers.

"The seasonal factors expected a lot more (claims) than we experienced," the analyst said.

I'll bet this is the adjustment they made - this time of year there are a bunch of new unemployed because retailers lay off the Christmas help. They adjust for that so we don't get suddent huge jumps in the new unemployment claim figures. But this year retailers didn't HIRE as much extra Christmas help, so the adjustment wasn't needed. They made this mistake at the end of summer. They adjusted for all the kids who usually leave summer jobs, even though very few were hired this year.

This is why the monthly employment numbers look so much worse than the adjusted weekly numbers. The monthly numbers are calculated using a different method, including surveys - actually checking with homes and businesses to see what's going on out there.

Democrats Didn't Cave!

The Democrats didn't cave. That's news, and it merits a headline.

And guess what, when they didn't cave they got what they wanted.

Animals

I'm a vegetarian, and this LA Times op-ed piece today tells you why. (I eat some fish and once in a while I eat non-corporate-farmed turkey.)

Factory farmers may do as they please in the care of animals, with no standard to consult but industry norms dictated by a rigid economic calculus and a view of animals as unfeeling machines.

It's just one more aspect of the corporate ethic that is harming us all in so many ways. No regard for the environment. No regard for our kids. No regard for the poor. No regard for the elderly. No regard for our health. And this kind of stuff - horrible, cruel treatment of animals.

In the merciless calculations of industrial production, the animals are not allowed to move because they would burn off more calories and require more feed. In short, as former presidential speechwriter Matthew Scully wrote in his book "Dominion," "Instead of redesigning the factory farm to suit the animals, they are redesigning the animal to suit the factory farm."

In their overcrowded battery cages, the birds would peck each other to death. The producer responds to this descent into cannibalism by searing off the birds' beaks.

The tendency of stressed pigs to bite tails is addressed just as summarily by lopping off the tails.

What cannot be achieved through genetic manipulation is achieved by blunt force and sharp tools. For the misshapen and mutilated animals on factory farms, there is no breeze, no ray of sunshine, no rich soil under foot, no opportunity to root or graze in pasture.

What sort of harm does eating meat - participating in this corporate atrocity - do to our humanity? Is there karma? Do we have a spirit? I don't know. I just know when something is really, really bad I shouldn't participate.

An examination of the industrialization of animal agriculture raises important questions about public policy issues, including water and air pollution, public health threats from overuse of antibiotics and the loss of small farms as a result of corporate consolidation. But above all it raises questions of conscience and human responsibility in the care of animals.

I was volunteering at the Santa Cruz SPCA several years ago, and one day I took care of a little pot-bellied pig. It was just like a little dog. It wagged its tail and came running over to me. It liked it when I scratched it behind the ears. I haven't touched red meat since that day.

Some of us distance ourselves from the violence of meat, milk and egg production through vegetarianism. But we can all agree on this: If animals are reared for food, their lives should not be plagued by the occasional torture and the daily torments and deprivations of the factory farm.

To My Green Friends

My Green friends will like this over at Testify!

You already know what I think.

Update - Here's what Zizka thinks. Also here. He left a comment, but I'm pointing it out here.

Shit Approaches Fan

I have been writing about the problems with corporate pension funds. This Dow Jones Newswire story just appeared online, Most Pensions Funds Suffer Shortfalls

And it will be worse that you hear about. This appears in the story,

The median expected rate of return on pension assets for S&P companies in 2001 was 9.2 percent, according to Credit Suisse First Boston Corp. analyst David Zion, the author of a well-regarded study on pension underfunding.

Zion said numbers for 2002 aren't yet available, and predicted the median rate for 2003 will be 8.5 percent.

In other words, they're in as much trouble as they are in, and that is with them reporting expected earnings of 8.5 percent on their funds next year. Yes, that's right, they're saying their funds will increase 8.5% in 2003. Part of why they are in this trouble is they reported "expected" increases of 9.2% in 2001, which, of course, didn't happen. Imagine how bad the books would look if they were reporting realistic returns on their pension fund investments!

skimble

I noticed that skimble has some great stuff up today and the last few days. Take a look.

The Game

Go pretend you're Bush and play the Middle East War game!

Are You in a Union?

Are you in a union? Not in your line of work, you think? You're a programmer? Working in sales? A middle manager? Marketing? (Weblogger?) Two years ago programmers, system administrators, web designers, product managers, marketing managers, all thought they owned the world. Now many can't find a job and have been looking for 6 months or a year or more. Wages are dropping, working conditions are deteriorating, jobs are being exported and the people they are exported to aren't paid squat so they aren't going to be buying whatever we do still make here.

Click here for some things to think about. Wherever you work. Whatever you do. This is a good time to learn what would be involved in getting a union or a "professional association" going at your company. Assuming you're still employed, that is. Otherwise, maybe you should have gotten that union going while you still had time! (YES I'm talking to all of you HP workers, too, now that the second wave of layoffs is underway!)

From the AFL-CIO page, How & Why People Join Unions,

People who work for a living know about the inequality of power between employers and employees. Workers want to form unions so they can have a voice on the job to improve their lives, their families and their communities.

The AFL-CIO site is a good website. Take a look around. Take a look at Executive Paywatch in the Eye on Corporate America section!

Fury and Accusations

I'm reading this story, and I come across this line:

The GOP response to these demands Tuesday was fury and accusations.

So I'm thinking, "What else is new?" It doesn't matter what the article is about, does it? The Republican response to anything that doesn't go their way is always fury and accusations. Like a whining little kid. "It wasn't me! Billy did it!"

Why Was Bush on Cipro?

Testify! wants to know.

Former U.S. Secretary of Labor Robert Reich Endorses Commonweal Institute

Former U.S. Secretary of Labor Robert Reich has provided an endorsement for the Commonweal Insititute.

Bold

In the news: Bush Could Revive 'Bold Initiative' for N. Korea

Gotta give those right wingers credit for sticking to their talking points. A week or so back a focus group must have said that X% of target demographic Y responds favorably to the word "bold." So now everything is "bold."

Even this message is bold. (That's an HTML insider joke.) I'm on board with the great white father, please don't put me in an internment camp.

Was Bush a Bed-Wetter?

Democratic Veteran is looking for a FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) expert to help him get Bush's DD-214 released. From DemVet:

The DD-214, for those of you not familiar with them, is a document given to everyone who separates from the service. The reason it's important is that it contains a "characterization" of the serviceman/woman's service. Pre-1974 or so, the program used what were called Separation Program Codes or Numbers (they are called both) which gave a very interesting set of characterizations to the separating member. Some of them were things like "bed-wetter", "homosexual"; you get the picture. Now for the punchline, a person could get an Honorable Discharge and have an SPC/SPN which was far from a characterization of Honorable. This system was amended in the '70's after it became common knowledge about the unfairness of the system and its often arbitrary application to people who were ummmm not mainstream or just not great performers or just did not show up, but you couldn't Courts-Martial sound like anyone we know?

I think this is a worthy cause. Let's find out what Bush is hiding.

New Weblog Links

You may have noticed that I have added quite a number of weblogs to my Essential Links list. I went crazy last week and added so many that I forgot everyone I had added so I didn't mention that I added any. Please let me know what's missing.

ALSO I have changed my method of keeping my links up-to-date. I am using Blogrolling.com instead of manually adding links myself with hand HTML. One advantage is that Blogrolling also keeps track of whether blogs are recently updated, so if you see |UP| before the name of a weblog, it means that it has been updated in the last 3 hours. (I can change that.) If YOU are a weblogger and you use Blogrolling, just click the "Blogroll Me" link on the left to add Seeing the Forest to your links. If you are a weblogger who has not added Seeing the Forest to your links ... well ...

ALSO go try out the "Roll your own me-zine" link over on the left there. I'd put a link here as well but then you wouldn't go try it over on the left there like I told you to.

And finally, you can syndicate Seeing the Forest using the XML link over there.

Pension Trouble

I've been writing about a coming crisis with pension plans. There's more news. In today's NY Times, Companies Fight Shortfalls in Pension Funds,

After a three-year bear market, many major American companies are spending large amounts to shore up pension plans that have deteriorated, sometimes drastically.

Many companies are also considering ways to reduce their pension obligations to workers, possibly undermining benefits for millions.

The story goes on, (and here it gets a bit technical),

The council, a business group that lobbies on employee benefits issues, is urging Congress to make permanent a temporary interest rate increase it granted companies for use in calculating total liabilities in 2002 and 2003. Without Congressional action, the temporary rate will expire at the end of this year, possibly doubling the amounts some companies will have to put into their pension plans, Mr. Gebhardtsbauer said.

In other words, they want to CLAIM that they are earning up to 10% on their accounts when calculating how much they will have in their pension accounts, which means that if they do NOT earn 10% (and they aren't), the funds won't be there for retirees and they will have to reduce promised payments. As the NYTimes story says, allowing companies to claim high returns also means that their shortfalls are actually as much as double what they are currently claiming! Maybe even more.

All of this also means that many companies are less healthy than their books currently show. So stocks that already have really high PE ratios, actually would have even higher PE ratios if you had a way of knowing how healthy the companies REALLY are. (Earning 10% - give me a break.)

A second story today, US Airlines Pension Gaps Seen Wider -Fitch,

"These growing obligations will inevitably lead to large increases in required cash contributions to pension plans, compounding the financial stress and cash flow concerns that already exist in the industry," he said.

I've also been writing about how 401K plans actually screwed workers and handed the money that would have been used to fund their pensions over to the rich. (Pension plans - the company puts the money in and promises you a monthly amount for life. 401Ks - you put the money in (or not) and you try to make it grow (or not) and maybe you have money when you retire - but you must save enough to last if you live to 100 just in case you do, where a company pension plan only has to put in enough for the average lifespan. The ENTIRE obligation for retirement is thrown onto your back. The money that used to go to employee pensions is handed to the stockholders instead, 90% of them being a few rich people.) If you read the NY Times article, it looks like the people who were able to stick with pension plans instead of being shuffled off to 401Ks are also about to get screwed.

How many of them do you think were convinced to vote Republican?

New Congressional Ethics Rules

The new Republican Congress has removed many of the tough ethics rules. One example, lobbyists can now deliver food to members of Congress and their staff, up to $50 per person per meal. So what do Republicans say about a $50-per-person meal?

"What we are talking about is Chinese food," said Jo Powers, the spokeswoman for David Dreier, the Republican representative from California who leads the rules committee. "It's not like steaks are being delivered."

That's how Republicans feel about meals that cost "only" $50 per person!

Another change allows charities to pick up the tab for travel and lodging for members to attend their events. Critics say this harks back to the days when House members cavorted with special interests on free trips to golf resorts. But, Ms. Powers said, "sometimes a member will be a big draw for charity." "If it will help the charity double their take, it's worth bringing them down," she added.

Just to be clear, the Heritage Foundation is a "charity." Scaife's foundations are "charities." The Federalist Society is a "charity."