"Ask laid-off workers what is to blame for the woes, and they point to imports, low wages in China, the strong dollar, production moving overseas, President Bill Clinton for embracing the North American Free Trade Agreement and President Bush for focusing only recently on the crisis.This reminds me of the poor people in Alabama who voted to keep their taxes high and their schools unfunded so that the rich people in Alabama don't get a tax increase. Also reminds me of the 70% of Americans who believe Iraq is behind 9/11. There is a HUGE gap in the information you and I get, and the information that people out there in the mainstream of America get.
Robert White, a laid-off steelworker who voted for Mr. Bush three years ago, said: 'He's slowly getting his eyes awakened to what's going on. The air has been going out of the balloon for a long time, and he's trying to stop it. But the air is almost out of the balloon.' "
9/13/2003
Laid-Off Steel Workers Blaming CLinton
As Factory Jobs Disappear, Workers Have Few Options:
9/12/2003
Scoobie Davis / Buzzflash / Krugman
Scoobie Davis Online quotes a bit of the Buzzflash interview with Paul Krugman. Be sure to see it.
The Party Of The Confederacy
Republican poll seeks to identify Rebel flag supporters. The Republicans know who their voters are.
What I don't understand is why Democratic candidates, especially in the North, don't brand the Republicans as the Party of the Confederacy. No one in the North has any business voting for candidates from a party that supports, more and more openly, neo-Confederates.
What I don't understand is why Democratic candidates, especially in the North, don't brand the Republicans as the Party of the Confederacy. No one in the North has any business voting for candidates from a party that supports, more and more openly, neo-Confederates.
Voting Machines Story
Newsday.com - Gaffe Casts Doubts on Electronic Voting
Silicon Valley computer experts have long criticized touch-screen voting machines, which do not normally provide a paper receipt and which send digital votes directly to a computer server. Programmers say software bugs, power outages or clever hackers could easily delete or alter data -- and recounts would prove impossible without paper backups.
How The Right Spins
Take a look at this story, Jupiter homeowner faces foreclosure for flying U.S. flag.
What a terrible thing! What is our country coming to? A man is losing his home for flying the American flag! Those damn libruls!
The homeowner association had a rule against flagpoles. He knew about the rule and moved in anyway, violated the rule, and then refused to pay after a court ruled that homeowners associations have the right to make rules!
This reminds me of the right's tactic of saying a person is "arrested for praying" when the person was blocking a major intersection by sitting down in the middle of the street and shouting about Jesus. Or the right's tactic of saying people are forbidden from "praying in school" when teachers aren't allowed to try to convert the classes to one or another religion or version thereof. Anyone can pray whenever (not necessarily wherever) they want.
What a terrible thing! What is our country coming to? A man is losing his home for flying the American flag! Those damn libruls!
Defiant flag flier George Andres once again is facing the prospect of losing his Jupiter home after a Palm Beach County judge ruled Wednesday that his homeowners association could go forward with a foreclosure sale next month to collect legal fees.Wait a minute -- the headline said he was facing foreclosure for flying a flag, but the story says something else! He is facing foreclosure because he refuses to pay legal bills for refusing to go along with homeowner association rules.
The homeowner association had a rule against flagpoles. He knew about the rule and moved in anyway, violated the rule, and then refused to pay after a court ruled that homeowners associations have the right to make rules!
This reminds me of the right's tactic of saying a person is "arrested for praying" when the person was blocking a major intersection by sitting down in the middle of the street and shouting about Jesus. Or the right's tactic of saying people are forbidden from "praying in school" when teachers aren't allowed to try to convert the classes to one or another religion or version thereof. Anyone can pray whenever (not necessarily wherever) they want.
Big Voting Machines Story
See Scoop: Diebold Confirms U.S. Vote Count Vulnerabilities.
Read these e-mails from Diebold. Their ONLY concern is making the sale (of the voting machines), and if it involves hiding the security problems from the customer, so be it. If you have been in business, you will see in these e-mails that they are sales-driven, and you will be familiar with people with sales-driven attitudes. It's natural they will see anyone complaining about problems with their product as pests and threats.
The e-mails show they (and who else?) have known about security problems for ten years -- which means that ten years of elections handled by Diebold election machines are suspect.
Read these e-mails from Diebold. Their ONLY concern is making the sale (of the voting machines), and if it involves hiding the security problems from the customer, so be it. If you have been in business, you will see in these e-mails that they are sales-driven, and you will be familiar with people with sales-driven attitudes. It's natural they will see anyone complaining about problems with their product as pests and threats.
The e-mails show they (and who else?) have known about security problems for ten years -- which means that ten years of elections handled by Diebold election machines are suspect.
9/11/2003
Where Your Job Is Going
The Zeitgeist talks about where YOUR job is going, so your CEO can pocket more millions - and send a big check to The Party.
Who is our economy FOR?
Who is our economy FOR?
Voting Machines Issue Reaching Senators
Following is an e-mail from Senator Corzine, chair of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. It reads like someone in Washington has heard that some people are upset about something to do with voting machines, didn't bother to find out WHAT people are upset about, but let's see if we can get them to contribute money.
But hey, it's still good news -- awareness of the voting machines issue IS penetrating to the top. One of these days they'll actually stop to learn what it is ABOUT the voting machines that is a problem!
Republicans have sunk to a stunning new low.Right, return the money you gave to the RNC and everything will be all right. Right. But what about fixing the machines with a voter-verified paper trail, so we can see for sure that they recorded votes correctly? They don't get it yet.
First there was Florida and the theft of the 2000 presidential election by the Supreme Court. Then there was the California recall. And of course, there is Tom DeLay trying to rig the Congressional elections in Texas to ensure that the Republicans keep the majority in the U.S. House so they can advance their radical agenda.
Now to show that Republicans will truly stop at next to nothing to win elections and hand the keys of the national treasury over to their fat cat donors - there is Walden O'Dell, the CEO of Diebold Inc. Diebold is the company that wants to get the contract to provide and program voting machines in every state for the 2004 election and O'Dell is raising money exclusively for President Bush and the Republican National Committee (RNC).
O'Dell, in a fundraising letter on August 14th, committed "to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year" according to the Associated Press. In the 2002 election cycle, O'Dell gave $5,965 to the RNC while Diebold gave the RNC $95,000.
This is outrageous!! Not only does Mr. O'Dell want the contract to provide every voting machine in the nation for the next election he wants to "DELIVER" the election to Mr. Bush. In fact, Mr. O'Dell's fundraising appeal on behalf of President Bush came one day before Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, also a Republican, was set to qualify Diebold as one of three companies eligible to sell upgraded electronic voting machines to Ohio counties in time for the 2004 election. INCREDIBLE!! On the day before the Ohio Secretary of State was set to qualify Diebold to provide voting machines for the state of Ohio, its CEO said in a letter he will "DELIVER" Ohio for President Bush.
There are enough conflicts in this story to fill an ethics manual but suffice it to say when it comes to an issue as sensitive as how and who tabulates the votes of the American people this episode is truly outrageous. Either Diebold should cease seeking the contracts for voting machines or Mr. Bush, the RNC and its affiliated committees should return the campaign cash they have received from Mr. O'Dell and his fundraising appeals and from Diebold.
HELP US STOP ANOTHER ELECTION FROM BEING STOLEN! Today, I'm asking you to sign a petition to the Chairman of the DSCC, Senator Corzine, to show your support for fighting back. Republicans must stop trying to steal elections.
Sign our petition and send them a message today: http://www.dscc.org/information/stopvotingmachines/
After you sign the petition, forward this to everyone you know. People MUST be educated about the tactics Republicans embrace. Their sickening attempts to hijack fair elections must be stopped. Florida 2000, California 2003, Texas redistricting I could go on and on. Don't let Republicans get away with it. Sign the petition today.
Sincerely,
Andrew Grossman,
Executive Director, DSCC
But hey, it's still good news -- awareness of the voting machines issue IS penetrating to the top. One of these days they'll actually stop to learn what it is ABOUT the voting machines that is a problem!
Voting Machines
I just had a thought about a simple way to scam elections that use electronic voting machines that do not have paper trails.
You go to polling places in areas that traditionally vote a certain way, and bring a big magnet. Maybe it's a really big electromagnet in a truck. Maybe it's a device (and here) that generates an electromagnetic pulse. You go near the machines, turn the magnet on, and wham - everything in those machines is erased or screwed up, and the votes from that polling place cannot be counted, swinging the election toward the preferences of people in other precincts.
Call your Congressional Representative and demand voter-verified paper trails. It doesn't MATTER how secure they say these machines are. If I can't see for myself how that my vote is recorded correctly and backed up, I simply will not trust the election results.
You go to polling places in areas that traditionally vote a certain way, and bring a big magnet. Maybe it's a really big electromagnet in a truck. Maybe it's a device (and here) that generates an electromagnetic pulse. You go near the machines, turn the magnet on, and wham - everything in those machines is erased or screwed up, and the votes from that polling place cannot be counted, swinging the election toward the preferences of people in other precincts.
Call your Congressional Representative and demand voter-verified paper trails. It doesn't MATTER how secure they say these machines are. If I can't see for myself how that my vote is recorded correctly and backed up, I simply will not trust the election results.
Diversions
Two years ago our country was attacked by an organization called al-Queda, based in Afghanistan. Now, two years later, our country is tied up in an occupation of Iraq -- a country that had nothing whatsoever to do with the September 11, 2001 attack.
ONE country - Afghanistan - provided territory and resources to the al-Queda organization. For reasons that are still not entirely clear to any of us, our government has convinced much of the public that this OTHER country - Iraq - was responsible for what happened to us, and attacked that country.
Meanwhile, while diverting unbelievable amounts of money to cronies of the president's family, (both from revenue reductions and sweetheart contracts,) driving the once-wealthiest country into severe debt, money needed to protect the public for further attack is not forthcoming.
So much is happening so fast. We are all overwhelmed by the attack on our country's traditional values. Overwhelming the opposition is a tactic. Bush said yesterday, in another context, that the way to win wars "is to stay on the offensive..." The right knows what they're doing. And we're on the defensive, not even able to catch our breath before being hit by next attack on our values. "Healthy Forest Initiative" that lets logging companies profit by cutting down the trees. "Clean Air Initiative" that lets companies profit by polluting the air. School vouchers designed to gut public school funding because "government schools" (and here and here and lots more) indoctrinate children into socialism. The far-right nonsense is endless but THEY ARE IN CONTROL OF THE GOVERNMENT!
The historical implications of current events are almost too enormous to hold in the mind.
Update - I left out one important point. While ONE country - Afghanistan - provided territory and resources to the al-Queda organization, the terrorists involved in the September 11, 2001 attack themselves, came primarily from, and are rumored to have been financed by ANOTHER country, Saudi Arabia -- A country where the Bush family has extensive business interests. al-Queda's leader is a member of a family with whom the Bush family has extensive business interests. Meanwhile, Bush and the Republican Party are blocking investigations into failures of government agencies that led to the September 11, 2001 attacks, and into the relationship between Saudi Arabis and the terrorists. What is that all about? And why does Bush and the Repubican Party continue to block attempts to answer those questions? I report, you decide.
ONE country - Afghanistan - provided territory and resources to the al-Queda organization. For reasons that are still not entirely clear to any of us, our government has convinced much of the public that this OTHER country - Iraq - was responsible for what happened to us, and attacked that country.
Meanwhile, while diverting unbelievable amounts of money to cronies of the president's family, (both from revenue reductions and sweetheart contracts,) driving the once-wealthiest country into severe debt, money needed to protect the public for further attack is not forthcoming.
So much is happening so fast. We are all overwhelmed by the attack on our country's traditional values. Overwhelming the opposition is a tactic. Bush said yesterday, in another context, that the way to win wars "is to stay on the offensive..." The right knows what they're doing. And we're on the defensive, not even able to catch our breath before being hit by next attack on our values. "Healthy Forest Initiative" that lets logging companies profit by cutting down the trees. "Clean Air Initiative" that lets companies profit by polluting the air. School vouchers designed to gut public school funding because "government schools" (and here and here and lots more) indoctrinate children into socialism. The far-right nonsense is endless but THEY ARE IN CONTROL OF THE GOVERNMENT!
The historical implications of current events are almost too enormous to hold in the mind.
Update - I left out one important point. While ONE country - Afghanistan - provided territory and resources to the al-Queda organization, the terrorists involved in the September 11, 2001 attack themselves, came primarily from, and are rumored to have been financed by ANOTHER country, Saudi Arabia -- A country where the Bush family has extensive business interests. al-Queda's leader is a member of a family with whom the Bush family has extensive business interests. Meanwhile, Bush and the Republican Party are blocking investigations into failures of government agencies that led to the September 11, 2001 attacks, and into the relationship between Saudi Arabis and the terrorists. What is that all about? And why does Bush and the Repubican Party continue to block attempts to answer those questions? I report, you decide.
Repost - $50 Million Crony Contract
In this post I referenced a story about an Iraqi company that bid $300,000 to fix a Bhagdad bridge, but, instead, an American company was awarded $50 MILLION to do the job.
This should be a big story. If a $300,000 bridge repair becomes a $50,000,000 graft deal, where is the rest of that $87 billion going?
Come to think of it, where is ALL of the money that the Bush administration manages really going? A year ago I wrote about Koch Oil getting the contract to supply the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. That is worth billions and billions, especially at the inflated price of oil. Koch is one of the major funders of the far-far-far right.
Just how much of our tax money is being paid out to Bush cronies or companies that have direct links to the Bush Crime Family?
This should be a big story. If a $300,000 bridge repair becomes a $50,000,000 graft deal, where is the rest of that $87 billion going?
Come to think of it, where is ALL of the money that the Bush administration manages really going? A year ago I wrote about Koch Oil getting the contract to supply the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. That is worth billions and billions, especially at the inflated price of oil. Koch is one of the major funders of the far-far-far right.
Just how much of our tax money is being paid out to Bush cronies or companies that have direct links to the Bush Crime Family?
9/11 Tribute to President Clinton
On his radio show, Tom Hartmann just reminded us that the Republicans mocked Clinton for being obsessed with Bin Laden. They accused him of "wagging the dog" for sending cruise missiles to try to kill Bin Laden in Afghanistan, and mocked him for "bombing an aspirin factory" for sending cruise missiles to destroy a chemical manufacturing plant owned by Bin Laden & suspected of manufacturing components of nerve gas.
While the Bush administration has, so far, effectively blocked any serious investigation into the failures of government agencies that occurred before 9/11, we do know that the outgoing Clinton administration tried very hard to get the incoming Bush administration interested in pursuing Bin Laden, and that the Bush administration refused to do anything -- even blocking funding for several anti-terrorism efforts. Also, see the post below about the unanswered questions.
While the Bush administration has, so far, effectively blocked any serious investigation into the failures of government agencies that occurred before 9/11, we do know that the outgoing Clinton administration tried very hard to get the incoming Bush administration interested in pursuing Bin Laden, and that the Bush administration refused to do anything -- even blocking funding for several anti-terrorism efforts. Also, see the post below about the unanswered questions.
Fuzzy Jobs
Bad news on jobs. New claims for unemployment rose by 3,000 from 413,000 to 422,000. (Remember, Bush = fuzzy math...)
How come the fuzzy math always makes things look better than they really are?
The Labor Department said first-time filings for state jobless benefits rose by 3,000 to 422,000 in the week ended Sept. 6. The climb, which pushed claims to their highest level since early July, defied predictions on Wall Street for a drop to 400,000 from the 413,000 originally reported for the Aug. 30 week.Except Brad DeLong shows that it isn't 400,000, it's 357,000. More fuzzy math.
The 400,000 level is seen by economists as a dividing line between a deteriorating and improving labor situation.
How come the fuzzy math always makes things look better than they really are?
9/10/2003
Webloggers
If you see your weblog listed on the left, please put a link to Seeing the Forest on your weblog! (The technical term for this is "linkslutting.")
Suckers
Voters in Alabama overwhelmingly rejected a plan to cut their own taxes and raise taxes on the rich a bit. Instead the state services they receive will be cut dramatically.
The beneficiaries are a coalition of "bankers, farmers, small-business owners, timber interests and conservative groups like the Alabama Christian Coalition and Americans for Tax Reform."
Never forget what we're up against -- the Right's marketing people are the same people who convinced millions of people to kill themselves, but hand over their money first. These people are GOOD at what they do.
Update -From a Washington Post story:
Update - Read the comment from Romberry, who was working on this in Alabama!
The beneficiaries are a coalition of "bankers, farmers, small-business owners, timber interests and conservative groups like the Alabama Christian Coalition and Americans for Tax Reform."
Never forget what we're up against -- the Right's marketing people are the same people who convinced millions of people to kill themselves, but hand over their money first. These people are GOOD at what they do.
Update -From a Washington Post story:
Alabama has the nation's lowest state and local taxes per capita and ranks near the bottom in tests of public school performance. It also has more than 28,000 inmates in a prison system built for 12,000, and its state police force has only six troopers patrolling 67,500 miles of roadway after midnight. Riley's plan also aimed to shift the tax burden to the wealthiest Alabamians, who pay an effective tax rate of 3 percent, from the poorest, who pay 12 percent.What can I say? The right OWNS them. I was in the car earlier and Rush was saying that the librulmedia can't "get away with" anything anymore because there are enough people getting their information from him, and Fox, and Drudge and other far-right sources... He's right. ("Right" -- get it?)
[. . .]
Perhaps most striking was opposition among low-income voters, whose taxes would have been cut dramatically. A poll conducted late last week by University of Alabama at Birmingham communications professor Larry Powell found that low- and middle-income voters opposed the plan by a margin of about 30 percentage points. Upper-income voters, who would face tax increases, opposed it by a margin of 14 percentage points.
Update - Read the comment from Romberry, who was working on this in Alabama!
Republicans Say Howard Stern Show Is News Program
The "Family Values" Republicans now say that Howard Stern Show Is News Program. This is a technicality, so Stern can plug Arnold.
Actually Arnold is another great example of Republican family values -- on AND off the screen. This all shows just how dedicated the Republicans really are to "Family Values" when it comes up against the interests of The Party.
Actually Arnold is another great example of Republican family values -- on AND off the screen. This all shows just how dedicated the Republicans really are to "Family Values" when it comes up against the interests of The Party.
9/09/2003
Your Tax Dollars At Work
From the weblog Bhagdad Burning: (Please read the whole piece)
Update - Read this too, it's informative.
As May was drawing to a close, his manager told him that someone from the CPA wanted the company to estimate the building costs of replacing the New Diyala Bridge on the South East end of Baghdad. He got his team together, they went out and assessed the damage, decided it wasn’t too extensive, but it would be costly. They did the necessary tests and analyses (mumblings about soil composition and water depth, expansion joints and girders) and came up with a number they tentatively put forward- $300,000. This included new plans and designs, raw materials (quite cheap in Iraq), labor, contractors, travel expenses, etc.And we all just know that the company getting the $50 million contract is kicking back a percentage to The Party. (Or maybe just the Bush Crime Family.)
Let’s pretend my cousin is a dolt. Let’s pretend he hasn’t been working with bridges for over 17 years. Let’s pretend he didn’t work on replacing at least 20 of the 133 bridges damaged during the first Gulf War. Let’s pretend he’s wrong and the cost of rebuilding this bridge is four times the number they estimated- let’s pretend it will actually cost $1,200,000. Let’s just use our imagination.
A week later, the New Diyala Bridge contract was given to an American company. This particular company estimated the cost of rebuilding the bridge would be around- brace yourselves- $50,000,000 !!
Update - Read this too, it's informative.
Never Mind
It looks like I may have miswrote earlier. I read summaries of the PNAC report, which made it sound much more like the PNAC report was asking for the US to develop "biological weapons 'that can target specific genotypes." For example, the commentary written by the former British cabinet minister said, "It also hints that the US may consider developing..."
Now I am reading the report itself (see page 60) FOR MYSELF and it says that this is a potential aspect of warfare in the future. The report does not specifically call for the US to develop these weapons.
Mistakes were made. Never mind. It isn't saxaphones and violins that people are upset about. (Let me know if you get that.)
Now I am reading the report itself (see page 60) FOR MYSELF and it says that this is a potential aspect of warfare in the future. The report does not specifically call for the US to develop these weapons.
Mistakes were made. Never mind. It isn't saxaphones and violins that people are upset about. (Let me know if you get that.)
Suckers
Thanks to Sideshow I found this post by Teresa Nielsen Hayden, To put it bluntly:
"I’m not going to call you a sucker for voting for him. I’m telling you that he thinks you’re a sucker. That’s when he thinks about you at all, which isn’t often."
Repost
Please read this again. I think it's important, but I buried it among other posts.
In case it isn't jumping out at you, here's what this means. "Target specific genotypes" means viruses that kill only people of a certain race -- or even narrower characteristics. And "politically useful tool" means the ability to threaten to kill everyone of a specific race unless they do what we want.Someone needs to find out quick if the United States is developing biological weapons that can target characteristics such as what we call "race." Most of the rest of the PNAC plan became Bush administration policy -- why not this? Keep in mind that Bush has rejected the bioweapons treaty. And people who describe biological weapons that can target specific races as a "politically useful tool" are now RUNNING OUR GOVERNMENT!
Not Important Until October, 2004
New Passport Rules Are Put Off by U.S.:
The rules, arising from the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, were intended to stop terrorists from trying to use false passports to enter the United States and make it easier for officials to gather information on people arriving here.But stopping the use of false passports isn't important until October, 2004. Gotta have them tax cuts!
The Cost Of The War
From this story:
Yes, that's inflation-adjusted costs.
And one more thing, from the story:
"With $166 billion spent or requested, Bush's war spending in 2003 and 2004 already exceeds the inflation-adjusted costs of the Revolutionary War, the War of 1812, the Mexican War, the Civil War, the Spanish American War and the Persian Gulf War combined, according to a study by Yale University economist William D. Nordhaus. The Iraq war approaches the $191 billion inflation-adjusted cost of World War I."Just to keep things in perspective.
Yes, that's inflation-adjusted costs.
And one more thing, from the story:
"In the president's speech last night, there was a glaring omission," said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.). "While he fully funded the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, he failed to talk about anything that would beef up homeland security at home, such as making our airlines, ports, nuclear power systems and the like more secure."
9/08/2003
Was Bush Behind 9/11?
I didn't write enough about this earlier when I pointed to this commentary. A former member of Britain's cabinet is dancing around making an accusation that the Bush administration was behind 9/11. That's pretty serious.
I report, you decide.
I report, you decide.
I Met Joe Trippi!
I met Joe Trippi (Gov. Dean's campaign manager) at a Dean fundraising event yesterday. He reads Seeing the Forest.
I told him I need to say this: "My mother lives a few blocks from the World Trade Center in Manhattan. Please don't let the Bush people get away with politicizing 9/11." I know that was corny, but I meant it. It's personal. My mother had to breath that cloud that rose after the buildings fell, and now we learn that Bush ordered the EPA to lie, and they told the public not to worry about what they were breathing. One day we will know the consequences of that lie, when we learn whether all the people who took no precautions -- because they were assured it was OK -- were harming their health.
I saw a few things on TV over the weekend looking back on the Trade Center attacks. It brought it back, and made me really mad to think about how Bush has used that event to push a right-wing agenda, and to attack Iraq! Then they used it to manipulate the 2002 elections. And now they've moved their convention into September in Manhattan so they can make the association with 9/11 in the public's mind. They should not get away with using that tragedy as they did. It should be exposed as blatant politicizing of a tragedy and the entire nation should react by turning every single Republican out of office.
Oh yeah, there was another guy at the Dean fundraiser yesterday -- Dean. He spoke shortly after President Bush's speech. Before he came out to speak he was giving press interviews nationally, in response to the President's speech. (Fortunately, too, because if he had come out when scheduled the sun would have been directly behind him as he spoke.) He was excellent. If you ever, ever get a chance to go see Gov. Dean speak live, do not miss it. This was the fourth time I have attended an event where he spoke. I am more convinced than ever that he is the right person at the right time.
The event was a "Garden Party" at Rep. Zoe Lofgren's house in San Jose. They had a pretty good turnout: the $100 even attracted 1,200 people. Rep. Lofgren said that was the cutoff because there wasn't more room, and upwards of 2,000 people wanted to come. That's $120,000, and it's NOT from 60 $2,000 donors. (They DID have a $1,000+ donor reception as well, before the garden event. I don't know how much was raised.)
This is being done the RIGHT way! The RIGHT way to beat Bush and the corporate money people is for lots of regular people to get involved and win with "people power."
I told him I need to say this: "My mother lives a few blocks from the World Trade Center in Manhattan. Please don't let the Bush people get away with politicizing 9/11." I know that was corny, but I meant it. It's personal. My mother had to breath that cloud that rose after the buildings fell, and now we learn that Bush ordered the EPA to lie, and they told the public not to worry about what they were breathing. One day we will know the consequences of that lie, when we learn whether all the people who took no precautions -- because they were assured it was OK -- were harming their health.
I saw a few things on TV over the weekend looking back on the Trade Center attacks. It brought it back, and made me really mad to think about how Bush has used that event to push a right-wing agenda, and to attack Iraq! Then they used it to manipulate the 2002 elections. And now they've moved their convention into September in Manhattan so they can make the association with 9/11 in the public's mind. They should not get away with using that tragedy as they did. It should be exposed as blatant politicizing of a tragedy and the entire nation should react by turning every single Republican out of office.
Oh yeah, there was another guy at the Dean fundraiser yesterday -- Dean. He spoke shortly after President Bush's speech. Before he came out to speak he was giving press interviews nationally, in response to the President's speech. (Fortunately, too, because if he had come out when scheduled the sun would have been directly behind him as he spoke.) He was excellent. If you ever, ever get a chance to go see Gov. Dean speak live, do not miss it. This was the fourth time I have attended an event where he spoke. I am more convinced than ever that he is the right person at the right time.
The event was a "Garden Party" at Rep. Zoe Lofgren's house in San Jose. They had a pretty good turnout: the $100 even attracted 1,200 people. Rep. Lofgren said that was the cutoff because there wasn't more room, and upwards of 2,000 people wanted to come. That's $120,000, and it's NOT from 60 $2,000 donors. (They DID have a $1,000+ donor reception as well, before the garden event. I don't know how much was raised.)
This is being done the RIGHT way! The RIGHT way to beat Bush and the corporate money people is for lots of regular people to get involved and win with "people power."
Who Started The Fires
In August Bush flew to Oregon to push his "Health Forests Initiative" -- cutting down the trees to stop forest fires. Just before he got there, several suspicious forest fires started, creating a prefect backdrop for the photo-op.
Significant And Particularly Terrifying
I'm reading this from The Guardian, "This war on terrorism is bogus" -- written by a former British cabinet member, the Environment Minister from May 1997 to June 2003 -- and came across this about the infamous PNAC document. (That's the think tank report, adopted as policy by the Bush administration, from before 9/11 calling for the invasion of Iraq, etc.):
Well, I looked this up (especially here), and it appears to be for real that it's in the PNAC report. This is extremely significant and particularly terrifying, especially when you consider the extent of secret research in the military budget under Bush, and the Bush administration's rejection (and here) of the biological weapons treaty.
In case it isn't jumping out at you, here's what this means. "Target specific genotypes" means viruses that kill only people of a certain race -- or even narrower characteristics. And "politically useful tool" means the ability to threaten to kill everyone of a specific race unless they do what we want.
"The document also calls for the creation of 'US space forces' to dominate space, and the total control of cyberspace to prevent 'enemies' using the internet against the US. It also hints that the US may consider developing biological weapons 'that can target specific genotypes [and] may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool'. "I missed this back when I first read about the PNAC report.
Well, I looked this up (especially here), and it appears to be for real that it's in the PNAC report. This is extremely significant and particularly terrifying, especially when you consider the extent of secret research in the military budget under Bush, and the Bush administration's rejection (and here) of the biological weapons treaty.
In case it isn't jumping out at you, here's what this means. "Target specific genotypes" means viruses that kill only people of a certain race -- or even narrower characteristics. And "politically useful tool" means the ability to threaten to kill everyone of a specific race unless they do what we want.
9/05/2003
Halliburton employee killed in Iraq
Will we see this in the mainstream news? The Agonist: Halliburton employee killed in Iraq.
The Debate
I haven't seen the Democratic candidates' debate yet. I taped it, and I'll watch it tonite or over the weekend. (From a local PBS channel at 11pm. And no one covered it live -- this is really lousy coverage of issues so important to an informed democracy by our "liberal media.")
Today I see news stories with headlines like "Democrats turn fire on Bush." So I'm thinking, a while back Bush was perceived as really popular, and the public was perceived as wanting to support war and tax cuts, so the campaign consultants were telling the manufactured candidates to act like Bush. But now Dean is really popular. So all the campaign consultants are telling their manufactured candidates to act like Dean. (Except, apparently, Lieberman's consultants, who are telling him to BE Bush.)
Today I see news stories with headlines like "Democrats turn fire on Bush." So I'm thinking, a while back Bush was perceived as really popular, and the public was perceived as wanting to support war and tax cuts, so the campaign consultants were telling the manufactured candidates to act like Bush. But now Dean is really popular. So all the campaign consultants are telling their manufactured candidates to act like Dean. (Except, apparently, Lieberman's consultants, who are telling him to BE Bush.)
Rick Makes A Good Point
In his post Momentum, Rick Klau makes a good point. We've been hearing the bad news that 2/3 of Democrats can't even name a single one of the presidential candidates. (Thanks to the lousy coverage of issues so important to an informed democracy by our "liberal media.")
Rick points out:
Rick points out:
"This presidential campaign is very, very different. We have candidates who are raising more money from more people than ever before (proving that people are interested in politics, and willing to put their money where their mouths are). We have campaigns who are redefining what it means to build grassroots organizations. And at a time when 2/3 of Democrats still can’t name a single candidate in the race, campaigns are turning out tens of thousands people to hear them speak."That's right - never before have we seen crowds of 5,000 or 15,000 people turning out to see candidates before the first primary. This time, both Dean and Kerry have been drawing crowds like that! When people start to pay attention to the campaign, it's going to be just amazing!
9/04/2003
"Chocolate Makers"
Not found in the regular US press anywhere (Washington Moonie Times doesn't count for anything), this from Hi Pakistan (also found it here):
This is really serious. This happened as part of the official State Department press briefing. Here is the actual transcript. Isn't this the kind of thing the public has a right to learn about? Isn't this the kind of information that helps us make informed decisions when we choose who our leaders will be?
Oh yeah, "chocolate makers," we're in a jam and need your help in Iraq.
In unusually blunt language that drew surprised gasps from reporters, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher scoffed at Belgium, France, Germany and Luxembourg for continuing to support the proposal that they first introduced at a mini-summit in April.I know this has been noticed in blogistan, but I was wondering if it made it into any regular press so I checked here.
He described the April meeting as one between "four countries that got together and had a little bitty summit" and then referred to them collectively as "the chocolate makers."
This is really serious. This happened as part of the official State Department press briefing. Here is the actual transcript. Isn't this the kind of thing the public has a right to learn about? Isn't this the kind of information that helps us make informed decisions when we choose who our leaders will be?
Oh yeah, "chocolate makers," we're in a jam and need your help in Iraq.
Hartmann At Common Dreams
A Thom Hartmann article, Blood, Oil, and Tears - and the 2004 Bush Campaign Strategy:
"These former oil industry executives know their priorities. When George W. Bush spoke on national television to announce the start of 'war' against Iraq, he looked into the camera and asked to speak directly to the Iraqi people. He could have appealed to their nationalism, and asked them to join our soldiers (or at least not shoot at them) in toppling Saddam. He could have appealed to their knowledge of the peaceful side of Islam and asked them to go to their mosques, which we would protect from bombing, and pray for a quick resolution of the conflict. He could have apologized in advance for the death and destruction he was about to unleash on their land, that would kill many times more innocent civilians than died in the World Trade Center, and promise that the US would do our best to make it good after the war.Good point.
But these were not the things on Bush's mind. Instead, he said, 'And all Iraqi military and civilian personnel should listen carefully to this warning. In any conflict, your fate will depend on your action. Do not destroy oil wells...' "
Your Overtime Pay
This just came in:
My name is XXX and I work in the media outreach department of the AFL-CIO. I realize that you also think it is important to save overtime for 8 million working families and I was wondering if you would be willing to put our URL on your blog as a link for people to write their representatives to vote for the Harkin amendment.
The URL is www.saveovertimepay.org
Thank you.
In Solidarity,
XXXXX
My name is XXX and I work in the media outreach department of the AFL-CIO. I realize that you also think it is important to save overtime for 8 million working families and I was wondering if you would be willing to put our URL on your blog as a link for people to write their representatives to vote for the Harkin amendment.
The URL is www.saveovertimepay.org
Thank you.
In Solidarity,
XXXXX
How Much Harm Bush Has Done
What if...
What if North Korea, observing that our forces are stretched too thin in Iraq, completed a couple of their nuclear weapons, and sold one of them to al-Queda? What if the administration learned of this, and needed to warn the public and quickly draft and mobilize civilian defense forces to watch all of our ports and borders?
What if...
What if Libya or Iran or the IRA or the Aryan Nations was about to do something terrible and Bush needed to come to the public and ask for sacrifice and preparation?
Would anyone believe Bush, if he came to us with this?
What if this happened just before the election? Would anyone believe him? SHOULD anyone believe him?
The problem is that Bush did something like this, just before the LAST election, and used it to take the Senate and solidify the House, and then got us into a war, and gave fat war contracts to campaign contributors and family friends -- and now it turns out that it was all entirely based on forged evidence and lies and distortions.
The whole adventure was entirely for political and economic gain and not for reasons of national security. So he has used up all of the good will a President has. And he has completely politicized the national security arena.
Look at a thousand potential scenarios and think about the damage Bush and the right-wingers have done to the country with their lies and their military adventures.
What if...?
What if North Korea, observing that our forces are stretched too thin in Iraq, completed a couple of their nuclear weapons, and sold one of them to al-Queda? What if the administration learned of this, and needed to warn the public and quickly draft and mobilize civilian defense forces to watch all of our ports and borders?
What if...
What if Libya or Iran or the IRA or the Aryan Nations was about to do something terrible and Bush needed to come to the public and ask for sacrifice and preparation?
Would anyone believe Bush, if he came to us with this?
What if this happened just before the election? Would anyone believe him? SHOULD anyone believe him?
The problem is that Bush did something like this, just before the LAST election, and used it to take the Senate and solidify the House, and then got us into a war, and gave fat war contracts to campaign contributors and family friends -- and now it turns out that it was all entirely based on forged evidence and lies and distortions.
The whole adventure was entirely for political and economic gain and not for reasons of national security. So he has used up all of the good will a President has. And he has completely politicized the national security arena.
Look at a thousand potential scenarios and think about the damage Bush and the right-wingers have done to the country with their lies and their military adventures.
What if...?
Pensions Again
I have occasionally (and here) written about the huge problem of underfunded corporate pensions.
There's a bit of news on this today: Underfunded Pensions Double in U.S.
There's a bit of news on this today: Underfunded Pensions Double in U.S.
Last Night's Dean Meetup
Following is an e-mail I just sent to a friend who asked about the Dean meetups:
This meetup was special. The next one will be the first Wednesday in October.
At the previous two meetups we did a special project of writing letters to voters in Iowa, then New Hampshire, because those are the states with the first primaries. Since then, and maybe partly as a result of these letters Dean has surged way out ahead in the polls in those states.
But this time we did something different. Let me tell you about it. Dean's campaign theme is "The Great American Conversation." The idea is to get Americans talking to each other again, as a community. So after finishing the usual meetup activities -- announcing campaign news, then asking people to come up and tell the crowd why they came (sort of like an AA meeting), then showing some short videos -- we took a break and then broke the group up into groups of 5-10 to just talk to each other about what is going on in America and how they feel about it, and what Dean's positions are on the issues. The idea is to get people used to talking about these things, so they will go out and start these kinds of conversations with other groups, and encourage THOSE people to do the same.
The bigger idea behind this is to change politics in America, and bring it back to being about regular people talking to each other and being involved. It went over so well that when the meetup ended, three of the tables all stayed just to keep talking. There were about 100,000 people signed up to attend meetups around the country last night, so there is a real potential for this to have an effect!
The Dean website is http://www.deanforamerica.com. Also there is a very interesting campaign weblog, which brings people into the campaign as participants, and people leave their own comments there: http://www.blogforamerica.com. To see comments, look at the bottom of each weblog entry and click where it says "Comments."
Dave
This meetup was special. The next one will be the first Wednesday in October.
At the previous two meetups we did a special project of writing letters to voters in Iowa, then New Hampshire, because those are the states with the first primaries. Since then, and maybe partly as a result of these letters Dean has surged way out ahead in the polls in those states.
But this time we did something different. Let me tell you about it. Dean's campaign theme is "The Great American Conversation." The idea is to get Americans talking to each other again, as a community. So after finishing the usual meetup activities -- announcing campaign news, then asking people to come up and tell the crowd why they came (sort of like an AA meeting), then showing some short videos -- we took a break and then broke the group up into groups of 5-10 to just talk to each other about what is going on in America and how they feel about it, and what Dean's positions are on the issues. The idea is to get people used to talking about these things, so they will go out and start these kinds of conversations with other groups, and encourage THOSE people to do the same.
The bigger idea behind this is to change politics in America, and bring it back to being about regular people talking to each other and being involved. It went over so well that when the meetup ended, three of the tables all stayed just to keep talking. There were about 100,000 people signed up to attend meetups around the country last night, so there is a real potential for this to have an effect!
The Dean website is http://www.deanforamerica.com. Also there is a very interesting campaign weblog, which brings people into the campaign as participants, and people leave their own comments there: http://www.blogforamerica.com. To see comments, look at the bottom of each weblog entry and click where it says "Comments."
Dave
F**king Deregulation
The profit incentive: Hundreds of Rule Violations Tied to Possible Blackouts. What do you f**king expect? All deregulation means is letting corporate executives do whatever they want in order to pocket the most money.
I was home a couple weeks ago with a cold, so I was watching the cable news channels a bit. I came across Dennis Kucinich talking about the East Coast power blackout. I think it was Lou Dobbs, but I'm not sure. The anchor asked Kucinich what "incentive" energy companies would have to provide electricity to the public if they were regulated. Kucinich answered something along the lines of, "They're ENERGY COMPANIES! They're SUPPOSED TO provide ENERGY to the public. That's what energy companies are supposed to f**king DO!" (Emphasis added. Actually most of the words except 'the' and 'to' were added, but it loosely expresses the nature of what he said.) (Also: Good for him!)
Duh!
What's all this crap about companies and executives needing "incentives" to do their f**cking jobs?
Oh yeah, speaking of doing their jobs, where were the FERC (That stands for F**king ENERGY REGULATION Commission) when these companies were violating these regulations?
I was home a couple weeks ago with a cold, so I was watching the cable news channels a bit. I came across Dennis Kucinich talking about the East Coast power blackout. I think it was Lou Dobbs, but I'm not sure. The anchor asked Kucinich what "incentive" energy companies would have to provide electricity to the public if they were regulated. Kucinich answered something along the lines of, "They're ENERGY COMPANIES! They're SUPPOSED TO provide ENERGY to the public. That's what energy companies are supposed to f**king DO!" (Emphasis added. Actually most of the words except 'the' and 'to' were added, but it loosely expresses the nature of what he said.) (Also: Good for him!)
Duh!
What's all this crap about companies and executives needing "incentives" to do their f**cking jobs?
Oh yeah, speaking of doing their jobs, where were the FERC (That stands for F**king ENERGY REGULATION Commission) when these companies were violating these regulations?
9/03/2003
Join A Union
New union welcomes all -- working or not
AFL-CIO President John Sweeney is expected to announce in Detroit today the formation of a newfangled national labor union that is specifically for employees who don't have union representation at work.I'm joining!
Working America will serve as a voice for nonunion -- and even unemployed -- workers on labor issues such as jobs, health care and education, Sweeney is to tell the Detroit Economic Club during a luncheon at the Cobo Conference Center.
Unlike many unions, such as the UAW, Working America will not be industry- or workplace-based and will have no bargaining power. Instead, it will recruit members through a neighborhood-based, door-to-door campaign that the AFL-CIO tested in Cleveland and Seattle.
In August, the executive council of the AFL-CIO gave Sweeney authority to issue a charter to Working America on a provisional basis and to issue bylaws for the union, including an initial dues structure. Information about fees was not available Tuesday or on the group's Web site, www.workingamerica.org
The goal of the new union, though, seems to be less about money and more about promoting a social and political agenda for working-class people. So Working America may be likened to the AARP, which collects dues to advance its platform for retired Americans.
The AFL-CIO's push for the union comes as the U.S. presidential campaign heats up, and the union federation begins more loudly challenging President George W. Bush's record on jobs, the economy and other workers' issues.
"The overwhelming majority of working Americans rejects this anti-worker, antifamily agenda and is ready to overturn it, but lacks a movement to make its voices heard," the AFL-CIO said on its Web site, referring to the new union.
9/02/2003
The Magic 400,000
400,000 is supposed to be the magic number for "new jobless claims." New Jobless Claims the number that comes out on Thursdays, telling how many people filed new unemployment claims the prior week. 400,000 is a "rule of thumb number." They say if the number is above 400,000, the jobs situation is getting worse. Under 400,000 they say it's getting better. In other words, if the economy is not gaining or shedding jobs roughly 400,000 people are expected to lose their jobs and 400,000 other people will find new jobs every week.
So it turns out the magin number is really 357,000.
So it turns out the magin number is really 357,000.
Some Math
I was reading this article, Combat wounds proving less deadly:
Update - I was right.
"American soldiers in Iraq are surviving combat-related injuries at a markedly higher rate than in past wars, according to a review of casualty figures from Iraq and other recent US conflicts."I have a math degree. That means I know this means there are many more injuries happening per death in this Iraq qWagmire than we would tend to expect.
Update - I was right.
The number of those wounded in action, which totals 1,124 since the war began in March, has grown so large, and attacks have become so commonplace, that U.S. Central Command usually issues news releases listing injuries only when the attacks kill one or more troops. The result is that many injuries go unreported.It says something that the press is less afraid to report things like this.
[. . .]
Fifty-five Americans were wounded in action last week alone, pushing the number of troops wounded in action since May 1 beyond the number wounded during peak fighting.
[. . .]
Since the war began, more than 6,000 service members have been flown back to the United States. The number includes the 1,124 wounded in action, 301 who received non-hostile injuries in vehicle accidents and other mishaps, and thousands who became physically or mentally ill.
This Is Heavy
"This Is Heavy" - That's 60's talk. Sorry. Anyway, this is worth reading. And look who wrote it! AVRAHAM BURG: A Failed Israeli Society Collapses While Its Leaders Remain Silent
This Will Be Interesting To See
Exit Polls From '02 Election to Be Released (washingtonpost.com).
I'll be especially interested to see the results from states like Georgia that were using electronic voting machines with no way to verify whether the machines recorded what the voter wanted, and where the election results did not reflect the polls just before the election.
I'll be especially interested to see the results from states like Georgia that were using electronic voting machines with no way to verify whether the machines recorded what the voter wanted, and where the election results did not reflect the polls just before the election.
Kerry Makes It Official
CBS News | Kerry Makes It Official:
Update - Just to be clear, what Dean wants to do is repeal the Bush tax cuts. He doesn't want to get rid of "all" tax cuts, as Kerry said. And the Bush tax cuts didn't go to "the middle class' and certainly not to "working families." Kerry should pretend they did, just to get votes.
"'In challenging times we need leadership that knows how to make America safer, that knows how to put America back to work,' Kerry told the crowd. 'The president has misled America and he has made our path more difficult as a result.'And then the oops:
[. . .]
"I reject George Bush's radical new vision of a government that comforts the comfortable at the expense of ordinary Americans," Kerry said. "George Bush's vision does not live up to the America I enlisted in the Navy to defend."
[. . .]
Kerry was joined by crew members of a Navy gunboat he commanded in Vietnam, where he won a Silver Star, Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts. Introducing Kerry was former Sen. Max Cleland of Georgia, who lost both legs and an arm in Vietnam combat. It is all part of Kerry's core argument that his military experience gives him unique credibility among the Democratic contenders to confront Mr. Bush on national security issues.
"I am running so we can keep America's promise -- to reward the hard work of middle class Americans and pull down the barriers that stand in their way and in the way of those struggling to join them," Kerry said.
[. . .]
"Americans have always had the extraordinary courage to do what's right for the country," said Kerry. "He (Bush) has turned it into a game for the privileged."
"Some in my party want to get rid of all tax cuts -- including those for working families," he said. "That's wrong. We need to be on the side of America's middle class and I've proposed a tax cut for them because it's the right way to strengthen our economy."My plan was to blog Kerry's announcement, let him speak for himself, and congratulate him. I was so READY to give him a good day as he announces. And if the wins the nomination, to enthusiastically support him. And then he does that, and the nature of this blog post has to change because he slams other Democrats for doing the right thing. It's like the guy REALLY just doesn't get it. Dean was slamming other Democrats for NOT doing the right thing, for supporting the right's agenda of tax cuts and causing massive deficits and getting rid of the government so corporations could take over. But Kerry tries to distort Dean's position as a trick to get votes. The POINT of Dean's campaign is no more tricks to get votes, no more kowtowing to the right, adult responsibility with money, restore the soul of the Democratic Party... Kerry indicates here that he sees politics as posturing and playing to what he thinks the public wants to hear.
Update - Just to be clear, what Dean wants to do is repeal the Bush tax cuts. He doesn't want to get rid of "all" tax cuts, as Kerry said. And the Bush tax cuts didn't go to "the middle class' and certainly not to "working families." Kerry should pretend they did, just to get votes.
9/01/2003
Photo-Op Uh-Oh
I love this headline: Bush Visiting Union Workers for Labor Day. Especially when you remember that every time Bush shows up for a photo-op like this, something bad happens to whoever or whatever he posed with. If it's a special program for kids, they gut the program the next week. If it's a special forest program, we find out that the forest is going to be cut down.
And considering what Bush has ALREADY done to the labor movement, you really gotta worry about what's about to happen to the International Union of Operating Engineers.
You'd think that people would be figuring this out and not letting the guy come anywhere near them.
And considering what Bush has ALREADY done to the labor movement, you really gotta worry about what's about to happen to the International Union of Operating Engineers.
You'd think that people would be figuring this out and not letting the guy come anywhere near them.
8/30/2003
Theory Of Everything
In July I pointed to The Right Christians' Theory Of Everything, and their idea of "worldview politics." They look at George Lakoff's work describing how people form their political opinions:
Lakoff's research has led him to conclude that most of us use a metaphor of our nation as a family. The government at the federal, state and local level is thought of as the "parent" and the citizens stand in the role of "children." Those who understand politics in this way do not all have the same family model, however. People that we usually think of as conservatives hold a Strict Father worldview of the nation and politics. Liberals have a Nurturant Parent worldview.I think it is essential to become familiar with George Lakoff's work, to help understand what is happening with politics in America. I recommend his book Moral Politics : How Liberals and Conservatives Think.
The beauty of Lakoff's conceptual systems is that they do a far better job of describing American politics than the old ideological models. "Strict Fatherites" see the world as a dangerous place filled with evil, and believe that survival is dependent on self-discipline and moral strength. Their "common sense" tells them that self-discipline is only created by strict enforcement of a system of rewards and punishments that teach everyone, especially children, that they must work hard, obey authority and keep morally pure if they are to succeed. Moral strength is threatened by non-conformists and those who are so morally weak that they give in to the temptations of "evil." It then is not surprising that Strict Fatherites would object to governmental interference with the system of rewards and punishments established by an unregulated free market system no matter how harsh its effects. Government policies that try to ameliorate the impact of the market only serve to undermine self-discipline and make citizens less able to survive this harsh world. The government's job instead is to punish those who do not conform to the moral standards of the majority because otherwise, the impurity of their behavior will spread like a disease throughout the society. The woman with an unwanted pregnancy should be forced to carry the fetus to term so that she learns from her "mistake." Homosexuals should be punished to prevent their "perversion" from spreading. When the government is doing its job properly, the natural and moral order is maintained in which God is superior to men, men to women, adults to children, rich to poor and human beings to nature.
"Nurturant Parents" see the world very differently. Their picture of the family places empathy, communication and respect above discipline, strength and purity. At the heart of the moral system is what Lakoff calls a "strong" Golden Rule:Do unto others as they would have you do unto them.This requires not only that we desire to help others but that we endeavor to understand their values and desires so that we can provide the help that they want to receive, not the help we want to give. Providing this kind of nurturance is benefical both to the recipient and the giver. Recipients who are respected, nurtured and communicated with become people who respect, nurture and communicate with others. Givers gain moral strength and happiness from giving.
Nurturant Parents think the nation as family has an obligation to help those "children" who are poorly fed or housed or educated. Both those who are helped and those who help with benefit. Women with unwanted pregnancies should receive our understanding and assistance. Homosexuals should be respected and accepted.
Highly Recommend
If you live in the SF Bay area, I highly recommend Bay Area ComputerMan for laptop repair. They did a great job and the price was very, very reasonable. They also repair and build regular computers.
8/28/2003
Unite
From Common Dreams, A Case Against the Case Against the Case For Howard Dean: Can We All Stop This Madness?
"Whether it's Newsweek or Guerrilla News, the message is clear: "Once the progressives learn who Howard Dean really is they will run from him faster than Dick Cheney fleeing to his 'undisclosed location.'"Well, I'm not voting for anyone whose middle name is not Courtney. Period.
Truth be told, I'm still waiting for a minority radical feminist who puts renewable energy above everything else and guts the military budget to invest in renewable state-of-the-art public schools (including free college education). But you know what? I'll be waiting a little while longer. While I could write articles saying Dennis Kucinich isn't my dream candidate - "After all, one need not point out that our candidate of hope is not EVEN a minority radical feminist." - while I could do this, I don't. And why? Because today there is a bigger fight to be fought. "
Rumor
There's a rumor that my laptop might be fixed today. They had it powering up. I don't know if they have to replace the keyboard.
8/27/2003
Birkenstock Liberals
I'm reading this NY Times story about Dean. I come across this line:
And then there's this:
I have already completely stopped watching MSNBC. I don't even turn to that channel anymore. Ever. Of course I never watched FOX. I'm seriously considering taking the NY Times off of my daily reading list, except for Paul Krugman.
Birkenstock liberals?????!!!!!
Update - Oh, Holy Shit! Later in the article is says Dean supporters are "mostly aging flower children."
mostly aging flower children!!
But the presidential-style trip could increase the risk of Dr. Dean peaking too earlyWhat the hell does that even mean? "Peaking too early?" Huh? Somehow more than 10,000 people coming out to see him just in Seattle is a bad thing? It shows that he is in touble?
And then there's this:
The feisty crowds were filled with Birkenstock liberals...Birkenstock liberals??!! What respectable newspaper would even print something like that? Did it get FAXed straight from the Republican National Committee? Birkenstock liberals?????!!!!!
I have already completely stopped watching MSNBC. I don't even turn to that channel anymore. Ever. Of course I never watched FOX. I'm seriously considering taking the NY Times off of my daily reading list, except for Paul Krugman.
Birkenstock liberals?????!!!!!
Update - Oh, Holy Shit! Later in the article is says Dean supporters are "mostly aging flower children."
mostly aging flower children!!
Still Out
I set up an old e-Machines we had at home, and then IT died! I have no idea what happened to it, but it seems to have had its directory corrupted... It won't start up into Windows anymore. So I'm still not able to post regularly. I'll try to get a few posts in today.
8/23/2003
8/22/2003
The Friday Announcements
The Bush administration makes announcements late on Fridays when they want to "bury" the story. Fewer people pay attention to news over the weekend. Today's story is here.
Who's Daniel Pipes? He's the guy I wrote about here in response to this and this. That's right, Bush is so radical that he appoints the guy who writes far-right nonsense like "Why Do So Many Professors Hate America?" THAT is the kind of person Bush is appointing to important posts.
Who's Daniel Pipes? He's the guy I wrote about here in response to this and this. That's right, Bush is so radical that he appoints the guy who writes far-right nonsense like "Why Do So Many Professors Hate America?" THAT is the kind of person Bush is appointing to important posts.
Sinister?
Thinking It Through wants to know: INCOMPETENCE OR CONSPIRACY?
I report, you decide.
You can decide about this, too. And this.
I report, you decide.
You can decide about this, too. And this.
It's Flood The Zone Friday
Head over to Not Geniuses and learn how to "Flood the Zone" on Fridays. Use the Republican's own web tools for spamming letters-to-the-editors against them!
Voting Machines Story
About Bev Harris! The Seattle Times: She's at center of high-tech voting debate:
Update - Bev has a book coming out soon!
Bev Harris, a middle-aged woman who operates a small public-relations business out of her Renton home, would seem an unlikely person to be at the center of a national battle over electronic voting.Go Bev!
Yet in recent months her muckraking, Web-based journalism has helped energize a growing movement of citizens and computer scientists concerned about the potential for fraud in America's increasingly high-tech elections.
Harris has been vilified as a conspiracy theorist and lauded as "the Erin Brockovich of elections."
Update - Bev has a book coming out soon!
Free Trade - A Comment I Left
Here's a comment I left in this discussion at Brad DeLong's blog:No Free Traders in Import-Competing Industries
"Dailey" left a comment beginning: "You simply can't have one country that has created a moral component in economics--minimum wages, the right to associate, anti-discrimination laws, anti-child labor laws and environmental standards competing with countries that don't have such standards and justify it under the banner of comparative advantage.
We saw what happened during the Industrial Revolution when the economic sector was given free rein. We are creating the same milieu internationally. As tariffs are removed industries can and do seek out low wage labor which is really just another name for powerless labor. "
My comment:
Dailey nails what is wrong with "free trade." WE have minimum wages, worker safety regulations, etc. "They" don't. And, suspiciously, the very same crowd that in the US is pushing to get rid of those protections here is pushing "free trade."
Science is supposed to measure what happens. It is supposed to be DEscriptive not PREscriptive. Free trade economists are telling us what would happen "if only" people would act a certain way. But it looks to most people like a downward spiral - we lose jobs to Mexico and get poorer. Mexico loses jobs to Thailand and gets poorer. Thailand loses jobs to China and gets poorer. China might be getting richer but that isn't going to benefit ANY of us in our lifetimes. And if China isn't playing the game by the same rules as all the free traders, it's not only never going to benefit the rest of us, we're going to be REALLY sorry for handing the world's prosperity to a communist dictatorship.
Here's the deal -- we can see with our own eyes that people are losing health insurance and pensions, and working longer hours, and getting deeper into debt while a very few rich people get vastly richer. It LOOKS like part of this is because jobs are being sent offshore. But it might be that the benefits of that free trade aren't being shared, and wealth is being concentrated. Anyway, free trade is going to be blamed.
I'm NOT advocating protectionism. I think most people who currently oppose free trade want to see minimum wages, workers rights and unions for our trading partners so they BENEFIT and can afford to buy things from us, instead of the obvious downward spiral to the bottom that is OBVIOUSLY occurring now.
"Dailey" left a comment beginning: "You simply can't have one country that has created a moral component in economics--minimum wages, the right to associate, anti-discrimination laws, anti-child labor laws and environmental standards competing with countries that don't have such standards and justify it under the banner of comparative advantage.
We saw what happened during the Industrial Revolution when the economic sector was given free rein. We are creating the same milieu internationally. As tariffs are removed industries can and do seek out low wage labor which is really just another name for powerless labor. "
My comment:
Dailey nails what is wrong with "free trade." WE have minimum wages, worker safety regulations, etc. "They" don't. And, suspiciously, the very same crowd that in the US is pushing to get rid of those protections here is pushing "free trade."
Science is supposed to measure what happens. It is supposed to be DEscriptive not PREscriptive. Free trade economists are telling us what would happen "if only" people would act a certain way. But it looks to most people like a downward spiral - we lose jobs to Mexico and get poorer. Mexico loses jobs to Thailand and gets poorer. Thailand loses jobs to China and gets poorer. China might be getting richer but that isn't going to benefit ANY of us in our lifetimes. And if China isn't playing the game by the same rules as all the free traders, it's not only never going to benefit the rest of us, we're going to be REALLY sorry for handing the world's prosperity to a communist dictatorship.
Here's the deal -- we can see with our own eyes that people are losing health insurance and pensions, and working longer hours, and getting deeper into debt while a very few rich people get vastly richer. It LOOKS like part of this is because jobs are being sent offshore. But it might be that the benefits of that free trade aren't being shared, and wealth is being concentrated. Anyway, free trade is going to be blamed.
I'm NOT advocating protectionism. I think most people who currently oppose free trade want to see minimum wages, workers rights and unions for our trading partners so they BENEFIT and can afford to buy things from us, instead of the obvious downward spiral to the bottom that is OBVIOUSLY occurring now.
In December I wrote about President Carter's famous "Malaise" speech.
(Also here.) A good writeup on the context and background of the speech is available here.
I wrote,
Here's some of Carter's speech:
PLEASE read his whole speech. And keep in mind what we know today -- the right had been cranking up its "message amplification" infrastructure, spreading their anti-government, anti-community, pro-corporate messages, working to set us against each other and discourage us from voting and participating in democracy.
(Also here.) A good writeup on the context and background of the speech is available here.
I wrote,
Carter was being attacked in a new way, by the newly-formed web of right-wing organizations funded by a few extremely wealthy individuals, corporations and foundations, and employing many of the CIA's covert-government-destabilization experts that Carter had fired following the Church committee hearings that exposed so much CIA wrongdoing. On top of the turmoil of the previous years the country was being subjected for the first time to a well-funded campaign of well-crafted anti-government and extremely partisan anti-Carter messaging. This kind of mean-spirited, harsh, extreme, cruel, mocking, ridiculing partisan attack that we're so familiar with today was not something that the public had been exposed to on such a scale in the 1970's. Until this time the country held together and worked with their leadership - you can feel so much of that attitude in Carter's speech.That whole piece is worth reading again.
Here's some of Carter's speech:
As you know, there is a growing disrespect for government and for churches and for schools, the news media, and other institutions. This is not a message of happiness or reassurance, but it is the truth and it is a warning.He goes on to talk about our dependence on oil from the Middle East and the consequences.
These changes did not happen overnight. They've come upon us gradually over the last generation, years that were filled with shocks and tragedy.
We were sure that ours was a nation of the ballot, not the bullet, until the murders of John Kennedy and Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr. We were taught that our armies were always invincible and our causes were always just, only to suffer the agony of Vietnam. We respected the Presidency as a place of honor until the shock of Watergate.
...
We are at a turning point in our history. There are two paths to choose. One is a path I've warned about tonight, the path that leads to fragmentation and self-interest. Down that road lies a mistaken idea of freedom, the right to grasp for ourselves some advantage over others. That path would be one of constant conflict between narrow interests ending in chaos and immobility. It is a certain route to failure.
All the traditions of our past, all the lessons of our heritage, all the promises of our future point to another path, the path of common purpose and the restoration of American values. That path leads to true freedom for our Nation and ourselves. We can take the first steps down that path as we begin to solve our energy problem.
PLEASE read his whole speech. And keep in mind what we know today -- the right had been cranking up its "message amplification" infrastructure, spreading their anti-government, anti-community, pro-corporate messages, working to set us against each other and discourage us from voting and participating in democracy.
Eve of Destruction
Eve of Destruction by P.F. Sloan. How many readers remember the 1965 Barry McGuire version?
Googling: Listen online to a version by Mudcatt. Here's a version by Lemmy & The Royal Philharmonic Orchestra. (?)
The Eastern World
It is explodin'
Violence flarin'
Bullets loadin'
You're old enough to kill
But not for votin'
You don't believe in war
But what's that gun you're totin'
And even the Jordan River has bodies floatin'
But you tell me over, and over, and over again my friend
Ah, you don't believe we're on the eve of destruction
Don't you understand what I'm tryin' to say
And can't you feel the fears I'm feelin' today
If the button is pushed, there's no runnin' away
There'll be no one to save
With the whole world in a grave
Take a look around you boy,
It's bound to scare you boy
And you tell me over, and over, and over again my friend
Ah, you don't believe we're on the eve of destruction
Yeah, my blood's so mad
Feels like coagulatin'
I'm sittin' here, just contemplatin'
I can't twist the truth
It knows no regulation
Handful of senators don't pass legislation
And marches alone can't bring integration
When human respect is disintegratin'
This whole crazy world
Is just too frustratin'
And you tell me over, and over, and over again my friend
Ah, you don't believe we're on the eve of destruction
And think of all the hate there is in Red China
Then take a look around to Selma, Alabama
Ah you may leave here for four days in space
But when you return it's the same old place
The poundin' of the drums
The pride and disgrace
You can bury your dead, but don't leave a trace
Hate your next door neighbor, but don't forget to say grace
But you tell me over, and over, and over, and over again my friend
You don't believe we're on the eve of destruction
No, no, you don't believe we're on the eve of destruction
Googling: Listen online to a version by Mudcatt. Here's a version by Lemmy & The Royal Philharmonic Orchestra. (?)
The Eastern World
It is explodin'
Violence flarin'
Bullets loadin'
You're old enough to kill
But not for votin'
You don't believe in war
But what's that gun you're totin'
And even the Jordan River has bodies floatin'
But you tell me over, and over, and over again my friend
Ah, you don't believe we're on the eve of destruction
Don't you understand what I'm tryin' to say
And can't you feel the fears I'm feelin' today
If the button is pushed, there's no runnin' away
There'll be no one to save
With the whole world in a grave
Take a look around you boy,
It's bound to scare you boy
And you tell me over, and over, and over again my friend
Ah, you don't believe we're on the eve of destruction
Yeah, my blood's so mad
Feels like coagulatin'
I'm sittin' here, just contemplatin'
I can't twist the truth
It knows no regulation
Handful of senators don't pass legislation
And marches alone can't bring integration
When human respect is disintegratin'
This whole crazy world
Is just too frustratin'
And you tell me over, and over, and over again my friend
Ah, you don't believe we're on the eve of destruction
And think of all the hate there is in Red China
Then take a look around to Selma, Alabama
Ah you may leave here for four days in space
But when you return it's the same old place
The poundin' of the drums
The pride and disgrace
You can bury your dead, but don't leave a trace
Hate your next door neighbor, but don't forget to say grace
But you tell me over, and over, and over, and over again my friend
You don't believe we're on the eve of destruction
No, no, you don't believe we're on the eve of destruction
8/21/2003
Jobless Claims
Jobless Claims Fall.:
"Initial claims fell to 386,000 in the week ended Aug. 16, down 17,000 from an upwardly revised 403,000 in the prior week and below analysts' expectations for 395,000 claims.Good news. At least, until they are revised upward above 400,000 next week. Even so, we'll still hear that next week is the 4th week in a row below 400,000.
...
The running four-week average, which is viewed as a better gauge of the labor market because it smoothes volatility, was below the key 400,000 mark for the third week in a row. "
8/20/2003
Who Is Our Economy For?
Brad DeLong has a post about productivity growth in Europe and America. What it comes down to is America builds lots of "big box" retail stores and Europe doesn't. From the Financial Times piece he refers to:
Yes, "big box" stores "bolster the average productivity." What that means is more work gets done by fewer workers who are paid less. Increased productivity is supposed to be "good" for the economy. And it can be, if the economy is structured in ways that productivity increases and other economic gains flow to the public. If our economy is working for us, that would happen. It's what happens when regular working people have a say in what happens, like when unions are strong, and when more regular people are voting.
It comes down to whether we want to be greeters at Wal-Mart, and look at Wal-Marts, and have our downtowns be all Starbucks and Gap stores -- or live in nice, pleasant communities with small bakeries and neighborhood stores owned locally... We (those few in America who get to make these decisions) are choosing the former. France chooses the latter.
Economically the Wal-Mart scenario doesn't help the average person one bit - we're going to be the greeters. The products on the shelves will be produced by people making 15 cents an hour somewhere. Fewer and fewer people getting the benefits.
Am I exaggerating? The answer lies in the statistics for concentration of wealth. If concentration of wealth is accelerating, then no, I am not exaggerating. More and more of the benefits of our economy flowing to fewer and fewer people. How long are we going to put up with this?
"The new stores are the "big boxes" such as Wal-Mart, Home Depot and Best Buy, large new buildings set up on greenfield sites at interstate highway junctions, in suburbs and, increasingly, in inner cities. As these new stores reap the rewards of their size, openness and accessibility and drive smaller stores out of business, they bolster the average productivity of the US retail sector as a whole.So my question, a usual, is, "Who is our economy FOR?"
While countries differ, Europe has many ways of stifling modern retailing, from green belts and land-use restrictions to laws that prevent companies from lowering their prices. These make life difficult for new, more efficient retailers in order to protect small, traditional merchants."
Yes, "big box" stores "bolster the average productivity." What that means is more work gets done by fewer workers who are paid less. Increased productivity is supposed to be "good" for the economy. And it can be, if the economy is structured in ways that productivity increases and other economic gains flow to the public. If our economy is working for us, that would happen. It's what happens when regular working people have a say in what happens, like when unions are strong, and when more regular people are voting.
It comes down to whether we want to be greeters at Wal-Mart, and look at Wal-Marts, and have our downtowns be all Starbucks and Gap stores -- or live in nice, pleasant communities with small bakeries and neighborhood stores owned locally... We (those few in America who get to make these decisions) are choosing the former. France chooses the latter.
Economically the Wal-Mart scenario doesn't help the average person one bit - we're going to be the greeters. The products on the shelves will be produced by people making 15 cents an hour somewhere. Fewer and fewer people getting the benefits.
Am I exaggerating? The answer lies in the statistics for concentration of wealth. If concentration of wealth is accelerating, then no, I am not exaggerating. More and more of the benefits of our economy flowing to fewer and fewer people. How long are we going to put up with this?
Liberal Media Bias
From Joe Conason, "Big Lies – the Right Wing Propaganda Machine and How It Distorts the Truth." Pages 35-36.
From something I'm working on, about fighting the right:
Hey, money people, if you fund a redwood grove, maybe hiring a biologist and paying a lawyer... for $500,000 a year for 10 years, and then the President declares that the best way to fight forest fires is to cut down the trees, or a Federalist Society judge rules that the best use of our resources is for corporations, those trees are GONE and your $5 million investment is GONE.
The right IS coming, they ARE working to destroy the things you care about. They are working to change the public's thinking and get their politicians elected. THAT is how they are getting their way. You can't just fund narrow-issue programs anymore and expect them to be effective. You have to also start funding an infrastructure that works to change basic public attitudes, just like the right is doing.
"Even more important than the inherent media bias in favor of conservatives is the huge financial advantage lavished on right-wing propaganda over the past twenty years by major funders. The largest and most notable, which work closely together, are the Smith Richardson, John Olin, Sarah Scaife, and Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundations. Coordinating their expenditure of hundreds of millions of dollars, the directors of those four foundations (along with many others) have underwritten a formidable infrastructure of think tanks, magazines, publishing grants, media programming, and academic research, all of which promote conservative ideas. The imbalance has been exacerbated by the reluctance of liberal foundation executives to match the ideological zeal and singular focus of conservative philanthropy. The result is that there are currently three national organizations producing media criticism on the right – and only one performing a similar function on the left."Told You So.
From something I'm working on, about fighting the right:
The people who write the books are funded. The people who write the op-ed pieces are funded. The people speaking on any given radio or cable TV show are funded. The people speaking to public interest organizations are funded. Even the people who initially write many of the templates for letters to the editor are funded.Everyone we're up against is well paid. They have resources. They have influence. And they're fighting a war. On our side, there's very little. It's like the money people on our side aren't in the game, and don't understand that you can't sit this one out - war is war and you can't call a "time out."
Hey, money people, if you fund a redwood grove, maybe hiring a biologist and paying a lawyer... for $500,000 a year for 10 years, and then the President declares that the best way to fight forest fires is to cut down the trees, or a Federalist Society judge rules that the best use of our resources is for corporations, those trees are GONE and your $5 million investment is GONE.
The right IS coming, they ARE working to destroy the things you care about. They are working to change the public's thinking and get their politicians elected. THAT is how they are getting their way. You can't just fund narrow-issue programs anymore and expect them to be effective. You have to also start funding an infrastructure that works to change basic public attitudes, just like the right is doing.
8/19/2003
This Is The Right
Eachaton is pointing to this site celebrating the bombing of the UN headquarters that killed 17 and injured more than 100 people. I recommend reading it and the comments that follow.
This isn't an isolated example of the kind of cruelty that is routine from this crowd. Remember when Ann Coulter said she regretted that al-Queda didn't attack the NY Times building instead? Remember Bush mocking the woman he was preparing to execute? According to the story, "Please," Bush whimpers, his lips pursed in mock desperation, "don't kill me."
It reminds me very much of a right-winger who commented in a CompuServe political discussion I was engaged in, after the bombing of the Federal building in Oklahoma, "The government finally got a little bit smaller today."
Compassionate conservatives, my ass!
"I heard this on the news this morning and had almost popped the cork off of a bottle of sparkly when I heard that it was the U.N. HQ in Baghdad." [Instead of New York. - DJ]I wrote about the right and the UN a few days ago.
This isn't an isolated example of the kind of cruelty that is routine from this crowd. Remember when Ann Coulter said she regretted that al-Queda didn't attack the NY Times building instead? Remember Bush mocking the woman he was preparing to execute? According to the story, "Please," Bush whimpers, his lips pursed in mock desperation, "don't kill me."
It reminds me very much of a right-winger who commented in a CompuServe political discussion I was engaged in, after the bombing of the Federal building in Oklahoma, "The government finally got a little bit smaller today."
Compassionate conservatives, my ass!
A Comment I Left
Here's a comment I left (editted just slightly) to this post at Eschaton, talking about General Clark and whether he should have opposed the Iraq war:
I respect Clark's position - and, to a lesser extent, Kerry's.
When the President of the United States tells you that there is a serious and imminent threat you don't really have a choice. You just have to go along. Our LIVES depend on believing him. Even if you can't see the threat it's the President's JOB to be looking out for it. This is especially true if you are in the military or have a military background. (That was my only edit.) Maybe he knows something he can't tell you. You don't have a choice. And, most important, no president has ever betrayed that trust before and it is hard to imagine one so corrupt that he would.
Now it's done, and we can look back, and it's really looking a lot like Bush lied, and betrayed that trust that protects all of our lives, and used it for political and financial gain for his cronies. This may be the worst thing that any President has ever done - the worst political crime ever committed in the U.S.
But BEFORE, we had no choice, really, because we HAVE TO trust that when the President says there is a threat to our lives, he is telling the truth!
Now Kerry, I think has less of an excuse. He had access to the intelligence. I was in the room when he was asked if there was something going on that the public does not know about, and he said, "No." That was his entire answer. So he has less of an excuse than most of us. He should have done much more to expose that.
But Clark is NOT "in the loop" and, like I said, when the President of the United States says we have to do something because there is a threat to our lives, we don't really have any choice if we want to stay alive. Now that it's over and we can look back and see what Bush did, it is absolutely essential for our own protection that we get Bush out of there. We can't trust and believe him next time, and next time there might actually BE a threat!
I respect Clark's position - and, to a lesser extent, Kerry's.
When the President of the United States tells you that there is a serious and imminent threat you don't really have a choice. You just have to go along. Our LIVES depend on believing him. Even if you can't see the threat it's the President's JOB to be looking out for it. This is especially true if you are in the military or have a military background. (That was my only edit.) Maybe he knows something he can't tell you. You don't have a choice. And, most important, no president has ever betrayed that trust before and it is hard to imagine one so corrupt that he would.
Now it's done, and we can look back, and it's really looking a lot like Bush lied, and betrayed that trust that protects all of our lives, and used it for political and financial gain for his cronies. This may be the worst thing that any President has ever done - the worst political crime ever committed in the U.S.
But BEFORE, we had no choice, really, because we HAVE TO trust that when the President says there is a threat to our lives, he is telling the truth!
Now Kerry, I think has less of an excuse. He had access to the intelligence. I was in the room when he was asked if there was something going on that the public does not know about, and he said, "No." That was his entire answer. So he has less of an excuse than most of us. He should have done much more to expose that.
But Clark is NOT "in the loop" and, like I said, when the President of the United States says we have to do something because there is a threat to our lives, we don't really have any choice if we want to stay alive. Now that it's over and we can look back and see what Bush did, it is absolutely essential for our own protection that we get Bush out of there. We can't trust and believe him next time, and next time there might actually BE a threat!
8/18/2003
8/15/2003
Switch and Bait
A physician I know received a call from Tom Delay's fundraisers, asking if she wants to be "an advisor." This is a well-known scam (and here) -- what they're really doing is tricking people into giving campaign contributions.
I'm writing because one of the things they mentioned is that the Republicans want to increase Medicare reimbursement to physicians! But in fact, the Republicans have been CUTTING (more here) Medicare reimbursements!
ANYway, what got me thinking about this is I just read this at RuminateThis:
I'm writing because one of the things they mentioned is that the Republicans want to increase Medicare reimbursement to physicians! But in fact, the Republicans have been CUTTING (more here) Medicare reimbursements!
ANYway, what got me thinking about this is I just read this at RuminateThis:
BUSH CLAIM: "We'll have time to look at it and determine whether or not our grid needs to be modernized. I happen to think it does, and have said so all along."They just lie. Get used to it. Go read the rest, and then the BuzzFlash analysis.
BUSH FACT: In June of 2001, Bush opposed and the congressional GOP voted down legislation to provide $350 million worth of loans to modernize the nation's power grid because of known weaknesses in reliability and capacity.
OUCH! Kerry WAY Out Of Touch With Base!
Back when I was a Kerry supporter, and before Dean had set up his weblog (or even a campaign office with more than 2 people) I was concerned that the Kerry campaign was not really in touch with the thinking of most of the regular Democrats I was hearing from, and reading, here on the Internet. This was back when you and I were reading GREAT pieces like this (so good -- read it again! "When I want to vote for a warmongering corporate slave, I always vote Republican."), and wondering where the Democrat leadership was, and why they were so damned out of touch with the rest of us.
So I called the Kerry campaign office, said I had an online weblog that lots of people read, and asked if there was anyone there who was regularly reading weblogs or sites like BuzzFlash. Their reaction is part of why I am now a Dean supporter. The person who answered sort of scoffed, didn't really know what a weblog was, said they would ask around if anyone had heard of BuzzFlash, and no one never called back. I tried a second time, same reaction. (My decision to support Dean happened later, when I went to a Kerry fundraiser and met him. The evening confirmed that he was not the guy we needed leading the fight against the Bush machine at this time.)
Anyway, this from an Iowa union event yesterday:
This might seem like a little thing, but to people like me who have lived with the online evolution of people's thinking since the 2000 election, this is utterly inexcusable. This demonstrates why we need someone like Howard Dean who is IN touch, and not someone who, unfortunately, appears to have become a Washington-insulated, out-of-touch insider.
(I was already supporting Dean, but he REALLY grabbed me when he said, "What I want to know is, why are so many Democrats supporting a $350 billion tax cut when we have a huge deficit?")
So I called the Kerry campaign office, said I had an online weblog that lots of people read, and asked if there was anyone there who was regularly reading weblogs or sites like BuzzFlash. Their reaction is part of why I am now a Dean supporter. The person who answered sort of scoffed, didn't really know what a weblog was, said they would ask around if anyone had heard of BuzzFlash, and no one never called back. I tried a second time, same reaction. (My decision to support Dean happened later, when I went to a Kerry fundraiser and met him. The evening confirmed that he was not the guy we needed leading the fight against the Bush machine at this time.)
Anyway, this from an Iowa union event yesterday:
DesMoinesRegister.com | News: 'The Dean campaign is saying you're kind of stealing their thunder on this on-line petition,' Dave Price, a reporter for Des Moines-based WHO-TV 13, to which Kerry responded with a smirk: 'Well, the last person I heard who claimed he had invented the Internet didn't do so well.'OK, Kerry is repeating the lie that Gore said he invented the Internet, AND saying that Gore "didn't do so well." How far out of touch with regular Democrats, and everything happening on the Internet, do you have to be to repeat THAT tired old widely-refuted smear, or to talk as if Gore lost? And what the hell is Kerry - a Democrat - doing repeating the "invented the Internet" line at all, even if it were actually true?
The response earned restrained yucks from the gaggle of reporters. But Dean's staff hadn't said they invented on-line petition drives, and Kerry didn't refute that Dean's drive started first."
This might seem like a little thing, but to people like me who have lived with the online evolution of people's thinking since the 2000 election, this is utterly inexcusable. This demonstrates why we need someone like Howard Dean who is IN touch, and not someone who, unfortunately, appears to have become a Washington-insulated, out-of-touch insider.
(I was already supporting Dean, but he REALLY grabbed me when he said, "What I want to know is, why are so many Democrats supporting a $350 billion tax cut when we have a huge deficit?")
Who's Calling The Shots?
In case you are wondering why the U.S. would do something as stupid as this, maybe it has something to do with this. A lot of the people behind the right's network of think tanks and advocacy organizations were associated with this.
More later.
More later.
8/14/2003
Breaking New Ground
The California Governor recall breaks new ground in Republican tactics. Before this recall, Republicans depended on the public forgetting something that happened in the past. For example, when thinking about how to deal with President Bush's lies we're supposed to forget that the Republicans impeached President Clinton because "he lied." We're supposed to forget the impassioned speeches about violating the public trust, and the necessity that a President always be honest and truthful, etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum.
In these kind of situations, the Republicans depend on one thing protecting them from the public mind making an association between what was done then and what is done now -- they depend on time separation to cause people to forget what happened when the shoe was on the other foot. And, obviously, they get away with it.
But now they are breaking new ground. Now they're trying to recall Governor Davis, because the state has a large budget deficit, at the same time as Bush has caused massive, massive budget deficits. They are demonizing, vilifying and ridiculing Governor Davis AT THE SAME TIME as they are holding up Bush as a great leader.
To take this even further - Davis isn't the one responsible for the deficits! Republicans are! Much of the situation was caused by energy companies -- companies associated with the Bush administration and protected in their actions by Bush appointees -- illegally manipulating energy markets. And the rest of the situation is cause by Bush's handling of the economy, and state Republicans refusing to allow revenue to be raised.
In these kind of situations, the Republicans depend on one thing protecting them from the public mind making an association between what was done then and what is done now -- they depend on time separation to cause people to forget what happened when the shoe was on the other foot. And, obviously, they get away with it.
But now they are breaking new ground. Now they're trying to recall Governor Davis, because the state has a large budget deficit, at the same time as Bush has caused massive, massive budget deficits. They are demonizing, vilifying and ridiculing Governor Davis AT THE SAME TIME as they are holding up Bush as a great leader.
To take this even further - Davis isn't the one responsible for the deficits! Republicans are! Much of the situation was caused by energy companies -- companies associated with the Bush administration and protected in their actions by Bush appointees -- illegally manipulating energy markets. And the rest of the situation is cause by Bush's handling of the economy, and state Republicans refusing to allow revenue to be raised.
Microsoft Abandons Outlook Express
Microsoft is going to stop giving away an e-mail client.
Let's see if I have this right. There was a market for e-mail clients. (In fact, there once was a thriving software industry.) Then Microsoft started giving theirs away with their operating system. The other competitors are gone and Eudora is free, so now Microsoft is moving to PAID e-mail, with HotMail, MSN and the paid full version of Outlook.
A profitable business model, if you can get away with it.
Let's see if I have this right. There was a market for e-mail clients. (In fact, there once was a thriving software industry.) Then Microsoft started giving theirs away with their operating system. The other competitors are gone and Eudora is free, so now Microsoft is moving to PAID e-mail, with HotMail, MSN and the paid full version of Outlook.
A profitable business model, if you can get away with it.
8/13/2003
ExxonMobil Money - What It Funds
Doing some research... Came across this. (Warning: PDF file.)
I got there after finding this.
Fair and balanced -- I report, You decide.
I got there after finding this.
Fair and balanced -- I report, You decide.
Suddenly Lots of Terrorism Stories and Fears
Is it just me, or are there suddenly, like in the last two weeks, lots of stories about potenital terrorism?
$20,000 bonus to official who agreed on nuke claim
A comment at Atrios led me to this story, WorldNetDaily: $20,000 bonus to official who agreed on nuke claim.
Thomas Rider, as acting director of Energy's intelligence office, overruled senior intelligence officers on his staff in voting for the position at a National Foreign Intelligence Board meeting at CIA headquarters last September.The White House bribed an intelligence chief to agree that there were nukes in Iraq. This should be the biggest story in the news. But, of course, it won't be.
His officers argued at a pre-briefing at Energy headquarters that there was no hard evidence to support the alarming Iraq nuclear charge, and asked to join State Department's dissenting opinion, Energy officials say.
Rider ordered them to "shut up and sit down," according to sources familiar with the meeting.
8/12/2003
Today We Face Another 'Watergate'
Yesterday I wrote about the new Iran Contra,
Listen, I know that most of the people reading this are too young to understand what Watergate was, and how serious it was, and what it exposed about the Repubican Party. Well, it WAS serious. People rightly saw what Nixon and the Republicans did as threatening democracy itself.
And then, Reagan just picked up where Nixon left off, as if nothing ever happened. Later, Iran/Contra was vastly more serious than Watergate because it involved making war on other countries. And the things going on today are vastly more serious than that. In fact, Bush has HIRED (scroll to "Since") the people who committed the Iran/Contra crimes! Think about what that MEANS!
The crimes routinely committed by the White House - and ignored by the Congress and the press - today are much, much worse than those that utterly shocked the nation in the 70's.
Update - More here:
Update - Link fixed.
There is no branch of government that will investigate these, and other, obviously illegal activities. There is no branch of government interested in enforcing the law. It is all about the interests of The Party now.Today I read Sam Dash's piece Today We Face Another 'Watergate':
"Each of the branches must have the leadership and the courage to do its job. For, if the Congress and the courts are passive in the face of a president's assertion of excessive power, and the people are uninformed of the danger, the country can once again face the loss of precious constitutional freedoms."He must be brilliant! (He agrees with me.)
Listen, I know that most of the people reading this are too young to understand what Watergate was, and how serious it was, and what it exposed about the Repubican Party. Well, it WAS serious. People rightly saw what Nixon and the Republicans did as threatening democracy itself.
And then, Reagan just picked up where Nixon left off, as if nothing ever happened. Later, Iran/Contra was vastly more serious than Watergate because it involved making war on other countries. And the things going on today are vastly more serious than that. In fact, Bush has HIRED (scroll to "Since") the people who committed the Iran/Contra crimes! Think about what that MEANS!
The crimes routinely committed by the White House - and ignored by the Congress and the press - today are much, much worse than those that utterly shocked the nation in the 70's.
Update - More here:
Poindexter was appointed National Security Adviser in 1985 under President Reagan. He was forced to resign less than a year later and was convicted of conspiracy, lying to Congress, obstructing a congressional inquiry, defrauding the government and destroying evidence in the Iran-Contra scandal. A federal appeals court overturned the convictions because Poindexter had been granted immunity in his testimony before Congress.That the Bush administration hires this man says all you really need to know about the Bush administration's intentions.
Although Poindexter is not a convicted felon, it remains true that he lied to Congress, the American people and falsified and destroyed evidence. Yet the Bush administration chose this man to run DARPA.
Update - Link fixed.
The Thom Hartmann Radio Program
I'm listening to The Thom Hartmann Radio Program, and I just have to recommend that people listen. You can listen over the Internet, even with a dial-up connection. He's talking about energy right now, but he covers a variety of issues. I have friends that listen to ieAmericaRadio on the Internet all day.
8/11/2003
Voting Machines Petition
BlackBoxVoting.org has a petition to Jimmy Carter to become an advocate for voting machines with a voter-verified paper trail.
Voting Machines
Jolted Over Electronic Voting (washingtonpost.com)
Here's an idea. Let's just make it known that in any district that holds an election without voter-verified paper backups, we'll sue, and claim that the election was fixed, and require them to prove it wasn't. And since they can't prove it without paper backups, they will have to hold the elections over again, and over again, until they put in systems with paper backups so we can all rest assured that OUR votes were counted and not The Party's votes.
I mean, it's really so simple. Without a voter-verified paper backup there is no way to know if the votes are recorded correctly. Period. And if we don't have any way to be sure our votes are correctly recorded, why should we trust the results? Someone ALWAYS tries to rig elections! Is this a difficult concept to understand?
And the voting machine companies would make more money if they sold add-ons that print voter-verifiable paper trails. So why are they fighting this so hard? That certainly makes me suspicious! And one suspicious voter is too many. So it's settled. Right?
The report has brought square into the mainstream an obscure but increasingly nasty debate between about 900 computer scientists, who warn that these machines are untrustworthy, and state and local election officials and machine manufacturers, who insist that they are reliable.Right. The election officials know more than the computer scientists about the computers. Right.
Here's an idea. Let's just make it known that in any district that holds an election without voter-verified paper backups, we'll sue, and claim that the election was fixed, and require them to prove it wasn't. And since they can't prove it without paper backups, they will have to hold the elections over again, and over again, until they put in systems with paper backups so we can all rest assured that OUR votes were counted and not The Party's votes.
I mean, it's really so simple. Without a voter-verified paper backup there is no way to know if the votes are recorded correctly. Period. And if we don't have any way to be sure our votes are correctly recorded, why should we trust the results? Someone ALWAYS tries to rig elections! Is this a difficult concept to understand?
And the voting machine companies would make more money if they sold add-ons that print voter-verifiable paper trails. So why are they fighting this so hard? That certainly makes me suspicious! And one suspicious voter is too many. So it's settled. Right?
But How Would It Work In Theory?
An article in Minnesota Law & Politics, The Conscience of an (ex-)Conservative, A blow-by-blow report of a dissolution of a political, is very interesting. Philip Gold has been in the "conservative movement" since the days of Goldwater, and has left. He writes,
Thanks to Media Transparency.
"The proximate cause of my recent departure from Discovery Institute, Seattle's main conservative think tank, was my opposition to President Bush's Iraq war. But I also left because I could no longer abide the purposes of the movement. Over the last several years, I've become sadly convinced that American conservatism has grown, for lack of a better word, malign."and
"And there was always a darker side to this particular force -- segregationists, Birchers, militias, homophobes and male supremacists (words I do not use lightly), plus the 'Christ died so we could tell you what to do' brigades."and my favorite,
...libertarians, a pert little faction composed mostly of people who, when told about something going on in the world, reply, "Yes, but how would it work in theory?"This is an absolutely wonderful piece, and brings to mind why I refuse to call the current right wingnuts "conservatives." Please read it, there is much more.
Thanks to Media Transparency.
Thanks, Ralph
What did you expect, Ralph? You broke the coalition, Ralph. You divided and they conqured, Ralph. There's a reason Solidarity is such a widely used word among those fighting the moneyed interests, Ralph. There's a reason pepole say we need to "band together" to fight the power, Ralph.
Now we know what happens when we don't stick together, Ralph.
Now we know what happens when we don't stick together, Ralph.
Iran-Contra, Amplified
Story here.
There is no branch of government that will investigate these, and other, obviously illegal activities. There is no branch of government interested in enforcing the law. It is all about the interests of The Party now.
There is no branch of government that will investigate these, and other, obviously illegal activities. There is no branch of government interested in enforcing the law. It is all about the interests of The Party now.
8/10/2003
Stimulate This
Does cutting interest or tax rates actually stimulate the economy? They're supposed to make it more favorable for businesses and investors to borrow and invest, which then "stimulates investment."
Let me offer an alternative viewpoint -- I think that having something worth investing in "stimulates investment" and it DOESN'T MATTER what the tax and interest situation is!
My experience from business is that if you have a hot product or service that people want, you won't have any trouble finding investment capital NO MATTER WHAT the tax or interest rates might be. And if you don't have a product or service that people want, people are not going to invest NO MATTER WHAT the tax or interest rates might be.
What cutting tax rates for certain kinds of investment accomplishes is that it moves money into that kind of investment AND OUT OF other kinds of investment. It upsets the balance of a marketplace. For example, if you cut tax rates for capital gains, it changes the ROI calculation -- so you might want to move money out of interest-bearing or rent-producing investments, and into equities. Cutting interest rates makes it cheaper to borrow money, thereby increasing your debt. Neither affects the value or wisdom of the investment.
I think the effect of cutting interest and certain tax rates might be worse than just ineffective -- I think the current housing price bubble is about to demonstrate that cutting interest rates too low encourages people to pay too much, and get themselves in a lot of trouble. I think we also learned in the 80's that tax favoritism can cause similar trouble, when Reagan's accelerated depreciation tax deduction encouraged the investments that led to the S&L bailout.
One place where cutting interest rates has an effect is by reducing the incomes of retired people trying to live off of their savings, and lowering the growth rate in savings accounts of people trying to save for their retirement. Reducing consumer demand, certainly hurts the economy.
Cutting taxes for the rich does nothing to stimulate consumer demand. The idea that cutting taxes "creates jobs" or "stimulates the economy" is a trick. It is a lie. It is false. It is the result of decades of messaging blasted at us from the right's think tanks, repeated endlessly until people just accept it as "conventional wisdom" without thinking about it.
The resulting reduction in government revenue forces spending cuts -- which means laying people off or cutting back what is spent on goods which results in laying people off. And the tax cuts cause government borrowing, which increases our debt, which means we all must pay higher taxes to cover the interest on that debt forever or pay extra taxes to pay down that debt. And THAT spending does NOT increase jobs in any way. Worse, what we're doing is borrowing money to give money to rich people, who use the money to buy government bonds -- loaning the money back to the government! Think about the circular logic of this. We're borrowing money from rich people to GIVE THE MONEY WE BORROW FROM THE RICH BACK TO THE RICH! And forever after paying them interest on the money we borrowed from them! It's like giving your house to someone, then borrowing the money from them to pay for the house you gave them! Since Reagan this tax cut process has shifted our economy to an economy where most of us work harder and harder just to pay taxes that go out as interest payments to the rich! (And don't forget that the money we're giving to the rich is OUR SOCIAL SECURITY MONEY! Jeeze, don't even get me started on that!)
It seems to me that this idea that cutting tax and interest rates is good for investment comes from an "investor class" viewpoint. "I'm an investor, and I'm certainly a wiser and better type of person than my stupid employees, so it is certainly better to give me breaks for what I do for a living, and not the stupid workers." And look how it plays out -- more and more money flowing from the people who work to the people who collect interest.
I Got Yer Stimulation Right Here - I Been Keepin' It Wam Fa Ya
Well here's a "consumer class" viewpoint: If you have customers breaking down your door, trying to give you their money because they want to purchase what you offer, only an idiot is going to pass up the opportunity to get a piece of your business. If they have to borrow at 20%, and they're going to make 50% by owning a piece of your business, they're going to borrow at 20%. If they're going to have to pay 40% taxes on the profits they make from owning a piece of your business, they're going to jump at the chance! And if they don't think they're going to make money by owning a piece of your business they're not going to do it, even if the tax rate is 0%, and they're not going to borrow money to put into your business, even at 1% interest.
This investor class way of thinking is ideologically driven, not based on scientific analysis. Science says that theories should be DEscriptive rather than PREscriptive. They're supposed to explain what happens instead of say "great things would happen if only people would do so-and-so like they are supposed to."
History demonstrates that regular people having more money to spend stimulates the economy, and concentrating income at the top hurts the economy. Policies that reduce the share of the wealth held by people at the top, and distribute that money among the people at the bottom and in the middle boosts the economy. Times of higher tax rates at the top have been more prosperous. Times when unions are stronger, resulting in wages being higher are better economic times. Periods after minimum wage increases have been better economically than periods when the minimum wage is lower. And all the crap you have been told over and over about lower wages being better for businesses, and giving tax cuts to the rich being better for the economy, and giving special breaks to investors helping the economy -- it's crap, and just crap, and they're telling you to believe them rather than what you can see in front of your face.
---
Previously in Voodo Economics I wrote about how tax cuts for the rich "take money out of the economy." In Stimulation I wrote about how giving money to the rich does not create jobs - customers with money to spend creates jobs. In Taxing Businesses I pointed out that taxes are not a cost. Profits are taxed, so businesses can not pass taxes on to their customers.
Later let's talk about whether increasing the minimum wage "costs jobs" or actually increases demand -- more customers with money to spend -- which INCREASES jobs?
Let me offer an alternative viewpoint -- I think that having something worth investing in "stimulates investment" and it DOESN'T MATTER what the tax and interest situation is!
My experience from business is that if you have a hot product or service that people want, you won't have any trouble finding investment capital NO MATTER WHAT the tax or interest rates might be. And if you don't have a product or service that people want, people are not going to invest NO MATTER WHAT the tax or interest rates might be.
What cutting tax rates for certain kinds of investment accomplishes is that it moves money into that kind of investment AND OUT OF other kinds of investment. It upsets the balance of a marketplace. For example, if you cut tax rates for capital gains, it changes the ROI calculation -- so you might want to move money out of interest-bearing or rent-producing investments, and into equities. Cutting interest rates makes it cheaper to borrow money, thereby increasing your debt. Neither affects the value or wisdom of the investment.
I think the effect of cutting interest and certain tax rates might be worse than just ineffective -- I think the current housing price bubble is about to demonstrate that cutting interest rates too low encourages people to pay too much, and get themselves in a lot of trouble. I think we also learned in the 80's that tax favoritism can cause similar trouble, when Reagan's accelerated depreciation tax deduction encouraged the investments that led to the S&L bailout.
One place where cutting interest rates has an effect is by reducing the incomes of retired people trying to live off of their savings, and lowering the growth rate in savings accounts of people trying to save for their retirement. Reducing consumer demand, certainly hurts the economy.
Cutting taxes for the rich does nothing to stimulate consumer demand. The idea that cutting taxes "creates jobs" or "stimulates the economy" is a trick. It is a lie. It is false. It is the result of decades of messaging blasted at us from the right's think tanks, repeated endlessly until people just accept it as "conventional wisdom" without thinking about it.
The resulting reduction in government revenue forces spending cuts -- which means laying people off or cutting back what is spent on goods which results in laying people off. And the tax cuts cause government borrowing, which increases our debt, which means we all must pay higher taxes to cover the interest on that debt forever or pay extra taxes to pay down that debt. And THAT spending does NOT increase jobs in any way. Worse, what we're doing is borrowing money to give money to rich people, who use the money to buy government bonds -- loaning the money back to the government! Think about the circular logic of this. We're borrowing money from rich people to GIVE THE MONEY WE BORROW FROM THE RICH BACK TO THE RICH! And forever after paying them interest on the money we borrowed from them! It's like giving your house to someone, then borrowing the money from them to pay for the house you gave them! Since Reagan this tax cut process has shifted our economy to an economy where most of us work harder and harder just to pay taxes that go out as interest payments to the rich! (And don't forget that the money we're giving to the rich is OUR SOCIAL SECURITY MONEY! Jeeze, don't even get me started on that!)
It seems to me that this idea that cutting tax and interest rates is good for investment comes from an "investor class" viewpoint. "I'm an investor, and I'm certainly a wiser and better type of person than my stupid employees, so it is certainly better to give me breaks for what I do for a living, and not the stupid workers." And look how it plays out -- more and more money flowing from the people who work to the people who collect interest.
I Got Yer Stimulation Right Here - I Been Keepin' It Wam Fa Ya
Well here's a "consumer class" viewpoint: If you have customers breaking down your door, trying to give you their money because they want to purchase what you offer, only an idiot is going to pass up the opportunity to get a piece of your business. If they have to borrow at 20%, and they're going to make 50% by owning a piece of your business, they're going to borrow at 20%. If they're going to have to pay 40% taxes on the profits they make from owning a piece of your business, they're going to jump at the chance! And if they don't think they're going to make money by owning a piece of your business they're not going to do it, even if the tax rate is 0%, and they're not going to borrow money to put into your business, even at 1% interest.
This investor class way of thinking is ideologically driven, not based on scientific analysis. Science says that theories should be DEscriptive rather than PREscriptive. They're supposed to explain what happens instead of say "great things would happen if only people would do so-and-so like they are supposed to."
History demonstrates that regular people having more money to spend stimulates the economy, and concentrating income at the top hurts the economy. Policies that reduce the share of the wealth held by people at the top, and distribute that money among the people at the bottom and in the middle boosts the economy. Times of higher tax rates at the top have been more prosperous. Times when unions are stronger, resulting in wages being higher are better economic times. Periods after minimum wage increases have been better economically than periods when the minimum wage is lower. And all the crap you have been told over and over about lower wages being better for businesses, and giving tax cuts to the rich being better for the economy, and giving special breaks to investors helping the economy -- it's crap, and just crap, and they're telling you to believe them rather than what you can see in front of your face.
---
Previously in Voodo Economics I wrote about how tax cuts for the rich "take money out of the economy." In Stimulation I wrote about how giving money to the rich does not create jobs - customers with money to spend creates jobs. In Taxing Businesses I pointed out that taxes are not a cost. Profits are taxed, so businesses can not pass taxes on to their customers.
Later let's talk about whether increasing the minimum wage "costs jobs" or actually increases demand -- more customers with money to spend -- which INCREASES jobs?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)