Random notes of a wandering mind

Why America's Financial Future is Still at Stake

2012-01-23T00:43:00.000-10:00

Glass-Steagall served as the basic financial "rules" of the American economic system from 1933 and is 36 pages long. By comparison, the "repair" after the 2008-2009 "financial collapse" (known as "Dodd-Frank") is around 850 pages. What's the difference? Oh, grasshopper, you must understand that it takes a LOT more pages to build in all the lucrative loopholes for your buddies!

In 1999 (see "The Long Demise of Glass-Steagall") after "12 attempts in 25 years, Congress finally repeals Glass-Steagall, rewarding financial companies for more than 20 years and $300 million worth of lobbying efforts. Supporters hail the change as the long-overdue demise of a Depression-era relic."

Simply put (remember "k-i-s-s"? keep it simply stupid principle?), Glass-Steagall clearly separated "banking" from "financial speculation" with a simple set of rules that effectively said "if you want federal deposit protection" (the F.D.I.C) then you must operate within a prescribed set of financial boundaries. Conversely, if you want to engage in speculative on financial instruments, then there are a different set of rules and you are "playing with your own money" (in other words, the "worth" of the corporation engaging in those riskier endeavors).

Whereas purely financial transactions had previously represented 6- to 10-percent of America's gross domestic product ("G.D.P") the demise of Glass-Steagall and the creation of all of the "financial instruments" (betting against each other with guarantees from the U.S. Government, essentially) rose to approximately 40% of the GDP by 2008. This should have been a clarion call that instead of factories and enterprises producing REAL things (cars, TVs, furniture, groceries) the financial contagion (and all of the attendant motivation to move real manufacturing off to cheaper off-shore producers) was truly upon us. I recall going through fairly "up-scale" clothiers in nice shopping malls in 2000 and 2001 and looking carefully at the "made in" labels on clothing and publicly lamenting "remember when the U.S. had actual clothing makers?" to surprised salespeople who typically reacted with "gee, I never really noticed those labels". Little did I know that the off-shore-ization" was in full swing.

I'm not a financial wizard, just a humble computer developer (turned composer) who tries to stay in touch with current events. My "wake up call" regarding understanding how the financial politics of America are rigged (yes, rigged!) came from a one-two punch in two interviews on the new "Moyers and Friends" PBS series (there's a direct link to program 2 here if you missed it). On it, in a relatively lengthy conversation with former Reagan Budget Director (and one-time financial whiz-kid) David Stockman followed by further examination with a long-time New York Times financial columnist (Gretchen Morgenstern), it is clear that nothing short of a Constitutional Amendment can separate the money interest from our REPRESENTATION in Washington. The revolving door of political figures and lobbyists guarantee that the 1% will continue to dominate the financial future and all the rest of us (the 99%) are just pawns in their continuing financial chess game.

Romney/Gingrich 2012!

2011-11-10T10:19:00.001-10:00

As the circular firing squad that is the current Republican group of candidates moves further down the road, it is becoming more and more clear that as much as it will take a "hold your nose" approach, the nomination of Willard "Mitt" Romney--however distasteful it might be for those folks who just don't trust members of the Church of Latter Day Saints--is probably the only viable candidate for the Presidency. Unless a "dark horse" emerges from the shadows, Romney seems to be legitimately beating Perry and the "Cain art project" (as Rachel Maddow puts it) and where are the "also-rans" who can be legitimately considered as serious candidates? Of the "five dwarves" (Santorum, Bachman, Hunstman, Paul and Gingrich) on stage at the 10th Republican "debate" from Wednesday, November 9th, only Gingrich has the credentials to not be considered a "nut job", even though he brings along the baggage of a "serial adulterer", famously moving from wife to wife with a new mistress (even, in the case of his first wife, while she was hospitalized).

Gingrich "balances the ticket" and could make voters from southern states hold their nose and vote for a "good, ole boy", perhaps hoping for a well-timed assassination that would elevate their nut-job to the Presidency before "that Mormon guy" has had much of a chance to "socialize" the country.

You read it here first! Stranger bedfellows have combined in Pres/VP partnerships before and unless someone who truly "balances the ticket" better, it sounds like a done deal to me. (Of course, there's always the chance that Romney goes the McCain route and selects a relatively unknown female candidate from obscurity ...--oh, wait! clearly that's INSANE!).

Relax! According to Lichtman, Obama Wins!

2011-09-06T13:27:00.001-10:00

Allan Lichtman, a professor at the American University, recently published his book "The Keys to the White House" (Amazon book). Lichtman also recently appeared on Lawrence O'Donnell's "The Last Word" on MSNBC where O'Donnell was so taken by Lichtman's logic that he admitted "Okay, that's it, we're done!".

Here's the interview:

Lichtman's criteria cover thirteen points and the general formula has correctly called every presidential election since Reagan's 1984 re-election. Here are the thirteen points:

So Obama clearly wins 9 out of the 13, leaving one tie and conceding 3 points to the challenger.

Does this mean we don't need the undoubtedly fractious campaigning of the next 14 months? Gee, wouldn't that be nice.

Buyer's Remorse? A Wisconsin Test ...

2011-08-03T18:54:00.000-10:00

There has been a lot of talk in recent months among Democratic Party strategists about "buyer's remorse" pertaining as it pertains to the folks who handed Republicans majority control of the U.S. House of Representatives" in the 2010 mid-term election. Next Tuesday (August 9th) is a special election in several state Senate districts in Wisconsin. According to several political pundits, the Republican "pre-spin" on this recall (and substitute) election is that "oh, it really doesn't matter" (or words to that effect from the Chairman of the Republican National Committee). What's at stake in this special election is taking control of the Wisconsin Senate from the rubber-stamp "do anything you want" Republicans and potentially putting the brakes on several union-busting issues that seem to be test cases for other union-busting that the national Republicans would like to float through the rest of the country.

While I am obviously not a Wisconsin resident, I am tuned into a great national effort called "BoldProgressives.org" and they are organizing a "Call out the Vote" campaign in these final six days before this special election. I have signed up to use some of my "free" cell time on this coming Saturday and Sunday (August 6-7) and call voters to get them to the polls (or send in their absentee ballots if they haven't already).

I've participated in political "call out the vote" operations before--starting with the 2006 mid-term that got Democrats in the majority of the House of Representative and our first woman Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi. Also, for candidate Barack Obama in the 2008 Presidential election and (to a lesser degree) the 2010 mid-term. As many of your may know, Hawaii is fortunate to have two Senators and two Representatives and all are long-time Democratic Party folks.

This Wisconsin special election is about stopping the union-busting effort that has been going on since Republican Scott Walker became governor and found himself with both houses of the Wisconsin state legislature under Republican control and set out to give millions in tax breaks to his big business cronies and pay for it by busting unions in Wisconsin and take away years of fair negotiation in contract and compensation matters. It's time to take back Wisconsin where many of our unions got their initial start. (Side note: There are at least FIVE towns or cities in Wisconsin named "Union"!)

If you are inclined to take a shot at progressive political activity, I encourage you to sign up with Bold Progressives for some calling this coming Saturday, Sunday, Monday or Tuesday as your time and telephone availability permits. Here's the link. Do what your conscience tells you to do, but BE PART OF THE ACTION!

Cynicism and Wrong-Headedness

2011-07-29T12:44:00.000-10:00

Okay, they’re doing it. At a time when the economic realities in the U.S. scream for STIMULUS, the wrong-headed Teabaggers are wagging the tail of the Republican party and aiming the economic ship of state straight towards Niagra Falls.

Now it’s up to the Senate to de-fang the House Resolution (containing the “poison pill” of the mandatory passage of an unnecessary “balanced Budget Amendment”) and get past this normally pro-forma “debt ceiling” authorization. However, true to form, the wrong-headed Speaker of the House is not concentrating on the “Jobs! Jobs! Jobs!” war cry that was utilized as their “platform” for the 2010 midterm elections but totally succumbing to the demands of a minority of his party elected in the same 2010 election that “gave” him his Majority in the House.

Be careful what you wish for, Mister Speaker! For the price of selling your soul to a splinter wing of conservative extremists to gain your oversized gavel, you’ve successfully brought the economic stability of the United States into question vis-à-vis the world money markets. Many distinguished economists have pointed out (repeatedly) that the pro-forma raise of our national debt—which has NEVER not passed—is absolutely necessary. Further, most have also wisely pointed out that this is NOT a time for belt-tightening, but a period when contracting national spending is totally contraindicated.

So. Standby for the blood and guts that comes from a totally wrong-headed move on the part of the Republican House majority.

It won’t be pretty.

Of two minds ...

2011-04-21T12:20:00.000-10:00

I'm wondering if the American public is slipping into a sort of Alzheimer's that lets them forget the past almost completely while railing against "big government". "What do you mean?", you ask.

Are the folks who are almost rabidly shouting for "cutting the deficit" and a balanced budget aware that a largely Republican-controlled Congress passed FIVE (count 'em!) separate bills raising the national debt during the George W. Bush administrations for about 4 TRILLIAN dollars total. Can we have already forgotten that the Bush administration inherited the largest surplus passed from one president to another in history and Bush passed on the largest deficit in the history of the country?

And now the party that pushed the theme "jobs! jobs! jobs!" in the 2010 elections is suddenly so deficit-conscious that they are eying severe reductions in Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security? (Oh, and by the way -- essentially little or no attention has been meaningfully paid to job creation in the U.S. House of Representations until this group of "job! job! jobs!" screamers. No. They've mostly looked at ways to cut funding to Planned Parenthood, PBS and NPR. Ever heard of "bait and switch"? We're getting it, fellow citizens.

In a time of economic uncertain, most economists warn against traditional belt-tightening. If we follow the Tea Partyers and Rethuglicans on this one, we're lemmings.

"a bitter man now"

2010-12-21T12:34:00.001-10:00

Excellent article this past Sunday in TIME online on the "John McCain I used to know" by Joe Klein.

Some rather insightful remarks sprinkled through the piece:

Klein cites the passage of the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" as "another step toward the perfection of our democracy " (a feeling with which I heartily agree, given that the United States is finally joining 38 other "civilized" and [not always] "progressive" nations around the world. Some of the Comments on the piece note that McCain has carried on a consistently hateful and duplicitous diatribe against the DADT legislation that he first said he would support if the military supported it (and then switched his position in a rather bald-faced dance giving a variety of nonsensical reasons about why he was now consistenly against passage). Nevertheless, repeal passed.
However, in citing the difficulties of trying to pass the "Dream Act", Klein cites that two "of the original sponsors, John McCain and Orrin Hatch, voted against the bill...and one wonders why".
Klein's final conclusion mirrors my own appraisal: "He's a bitter man now, who can barely tolerate the fact that he lost to Barack Obama. But he lost for an obvious reason: his campaign proved him to be puerile and feckless, a politician who panicked when the heat was on during the financial collapse, a trigger-happy gambler who chose an incompetent for his vice president. He has made quite a show ever since of demonstrating his petulance and lack of grace."

I heartily recommend browsing the full article. ALSO, some of the Comments are jewels!

Win One, Lose One (Two? Three? Four?)

2010-12-18T13:06:00.001-10:00

After knuckling under to the ridiculous demands of the Republican minority on extending the Bush tax cuts to the ultra-rich ($250K+) filers -- tax cuts which are proven to have not added ONE single job to the working poor (or non-poor) in this country -- the Senate finally passed the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell".

While I am very pleased that DADT is on the way to being gone (America finally joins 38 other countries around the world which do not discriminate!), I fear for my country when procedural bottlenecks like a minority in the U.S. Senate can hand the minority this huge tax-savings windfall. Let us be clear here: this fight was mostly about the difference in the upper tax rate reverting to 39% as opposed to staying at the 35% rate. Of course, that rate difference results in about $700 billion being added to the deficit at a time when the Republicans and their Tea Party "new blood" are haranguing against the deficit. It's interesting to see how the moneyed folks at the top can hold disparate ideas. Of course, the writing on the wall will be that these same folks will now come attacking Medicare and Social Security insisting that the deficit they have added to be reduced by cuts in these programs. Our "great society" gets a little less great.

Other pending issues (passed by the House and awaiting action in the Senate) will likely see NO progress before the lame duck Congress goes home for their holiday break. Those issues include confirming the latest START treaty, the adoption of the DREAM act (a good start to approaching immigration reform), and passage of the medical coverage for 9/11 First Responders.

The Senate has ONE opportunity to modify the rules under which they operate. In particular, there is a relatively grass-roots movement afoot to address the rule which allows a minority (in the case of 100 Senators, 41) to block any vote. This used to be called "the nuclear option" (during the Bush years) and was rarely used by the Democratic minority in the years 2001 to 2006 but has become the means by which the "party of no" can stop ANY legislation from proceeding. This MUST be changed. (Of course, the footnote here is that some Democrats are concerned that should they become the minority then this blocking method is no longer available for them.) Senate rules can be changed ONLY on the first day of the new Senate class (every two years) and it would reasonable that this rule be revisited, if necessary, in each new session. The Senate, by and large, operates as the world's most elite "boys club", steeped in tradition and antiquated rules and procedures that have more to do with a time when the Senator commuted to and from Washington by horseback than by air. It's time to let a little modernization in folks!

Presidential Atrophy

2010-12-08T01:27:00.000-10:00

Rachel Maddow today brought up a kernal of wisdom from Mahatma Ghandi of the four steps of a struggle: "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win". She used these four steps in reverse to make a rather succinct observation on the Presidency of Barack Obama: "First you win, then they fight you, then they laugh at you, then they ignore you". A cautionary prediction, certainly, but one which is quite sadly possible when our presumed strong "change you can believe in" President capitulates to a Republican minority during the current lame duck congressional session and gives away the store, caving into the Republican demands to add $900 billion dollars to the national deficit by extending all of the Bush tax cuts for an additional 2 years. And who really believes that a Republican-controlled House will let a bill pass in 2011 that eliminates this gift to the super wealthy?

And why? The assumption here is that this concession was politically required in order to get a 13-month extension of unemployment benefits during the greatest economic downturn in our history since the Great Depression.

Some of the wiser economists have pointed out that the President has bargained away $900 billion (for a paltry $40 billion--which is approximately what the unemployment extensions will cost--at a time when many Republicans are terrified about voting now against unemployment benefits and would eventually let that measure pass by itself, not linked to any other proposals. In other words, to get "a deal" the President has "punted on third down" (forgive the sports metaphor repeated by Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown on Maddow's 12/7 program). Who knows whether it was 3rd down and 1 yard or 3rd down and 20 yards, but "the team" went for the punt prematurely and yielded the playing field.

This is not the "change we can believe in" that progressive, independent and Democratic voters campaigned for in the fall of 2008. This is not the strength that we assumed a congressional majority could deliver. This is more than disappointing, it's almost criminal.

It's Time!

2010-12-02T10:06:00.001-10:00

Today (Thursday, December 2, 2010) the U.S. Senate Armed Services committee is holding hearings to gather information prior to voting on the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"--the flawed policy which has (so far) resulted in almost 14,000 men and women being cashiered out of various military branches of service.

In the HuffingtonPost coverage, one of the most significant items to come out of the live blog of the hearings (so far) was the "split" by Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman whose passionate argument was simple, yet eloquent:

"In our time, one of the great transitions occurring is the growing readiness and understanding among the American people that you simply -- it's just wrong and un-American to discriminate against people based on their sexual orientation."

Although I've certainly had my differences with Senator Lieberman in the past (particularly over his decision to support fellow Senator John McCain during the 2008 presidential election), I've got to say that the statement (above) redeems him in my eyes--and not just because he agrees with my position.

On Rachel Maddow's MSNBC program yesterday she ran down the parallels between President Harry S Truman's executive order ending segregation of the races in post WW2 1945. In so many ways, integrating the U.S. military services racially is equivalent to finally integrating the services as far as sexual orientation. In the days immediately following the attacks of 9/11/2001, there was an urgent need for Arabic-speaking translators )to scan the growing flood of message traffic about possible future attack plans). Yet almost 60 Arabic speakers (along with 9 gay Farsi speakers) have been discharged from the military (through June 2009) despite a dire shortage of translators for those languages. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot! A policy which values adherence more to policy than to realistic need (not to mention being in step with other major militaries of the world who have "advanced" to include lesbian and gay member in their ranks) is a flawed policy and it's time for that to end!

Finally, I would cite the 38 countries that (so far) have removed restrictions from gay and lesbian citizens from serving in their ranks: Albania, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Colombia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, United Kingdom, Bermuda and Uruguay. LOOK AT THIS LIST! Does the United States count itself among the civilized nations of the world? Can the Russian and South African militaries be more advanced than ours in their thinking!?

It's time--NOW!!--for this flawed policy to end.

Unapologetic Bastard Rethuglicans!

2010-12-01T15:57:00.000-10:00

So it has come down to this: Give the ultra-rich the continuing tax breaks or NOTHING will happen in government. No extension of needed unemployment benefits, no continuation of the tax breaks for those earning $250,000 and under, no action on "dont' ask, don't tell" (despite the urgency that the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs have urged). JUST NOTHING!

Everything is hostage to the fat cats getting tax breaks which are unfunded and (no matter how many times the Rethuglican parrots repeat the "talking points") do nothing other than line the pockets of the already rich while adding between $4 and $7 billion to the deficit that Rethuglicans say MUST be brought under control. It's quite amazing that this bunch can hold these two disparate ideas in their political heads while at the same time just shutting the government down, all the while pointing to a "mandate" which really changed the make-up of the two houses of Congress very little.

It's time for Democratic legislators with some semblance of backbone to call their bluff! The American public is not truly stupid enough to believe that this intransigent, bullying behavior is in any way honest or fair.

Right-On Reich!

2010-10-25T13:00:00.000-10:00

Former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich has recently been quoted that the "original sin of the Obama administration was to make the stimulus too small while giving out too much of it as tax breaks to businesses." The error of that early strategy and decision (just about the time that Republican De Mint was taking his "Obama's Waterloo" stance) is coming back to haunt this valiant President (yeah, I'm still in his camp!) and the price for that "sin" may be losing the majority in the House of Representatives.

Some look on that possible outcome of the 2010 mid-term elections (or worse: with the Republicans also regaining a majority--though not filibuster-proof--in the Senate) as a "good thing", talking about the hidden silver lining that governing more on a bipartisan basis would promote more compromise and legislation that at least moves forward. I wonder. Does the party that just screamed "no!" over and over deserve to hold the reins of power again after the disastrous George W. Bush years? Remember, this is the party that has trumpeted how important continued tax cuts for the ultra-rich are ( no matter about adding billions to the deficit!), while simultaneously trying cleverly to move the ownership of the U.S. deficit from the creator (Bush and his buddies) to the inheritor. This just isn't fair!

I'll be working my tooshie off between now and the mid-term election with two "get out the vote" efforts: Democracy for America and MoveOn. It's the right thing to do. We need to motivate like-minded progressive folks to get to the polls and rebuff the right-wing attempt to drive our country back into the ditch. Rhetoric from know-nothings who toss around irresponsible threats of "Second Amendment remedies") and "I want my country back" (from what or whom?) aside, it's time for the grownups to renew their vows and truly get the nation back on the road to a real recovery.

Footnote: I once had the opportunity to chat with Reich in a popular San Francisco drinking establishment--through a mutual friend who knew of my interest in his writings--but I'm sure both of us found the meeting lacking in any meaningful real content due to the extreme level of the grunge/punk/rock music.)

"T" is for "thugs"

2010-10-19T09:22:00.001-10:00

As we approach the critical 2010 midterm election on November 2 it is increasingly apparent that the "Tea Party" is more akin to the "brownshirts" of 1930s/40s Nazis than anything resembling the founding fathers' resistance activities. Aside from being an out-of-control ultra-conservative wing of the Republican party, these folks assume they have the right to silence a diligent reporter (see "Alaska Dispatch editor detained at Miller event"). They are typified by candidates who have little to offer the electorate beyond a vague (but intense) outrage and fed-up-ness of "big government" and a desire to reduce the deficit (which ballooned up to the largest size EVER during the Bush presidency). Couple this with a willingness to silence any form of variance from their "message" and you've got modern-day American brownshirt thugs.

This is a "movement" that deserves to be tossed upon the slag heap of history along with Karl Rove's "permanent Republican majority" and other serious politically divisive mistakes of our American evolution. (It also seems to be a sad/ironic commentary on the overall state of American education when a movement based primarily on "outrage" linked with a bit of racism and based on inherently false assumptions that historic legislative milestones--such as the Healthcare Reform Act--are misunderstood and twisted into negatives.) These folks just don't realize that they are ginned-up and "working for the man" (i.e., big business and the ultra-wealthy) and their movement is one step away from the American equivalent of the totalitarianism of the ultra-wealthy where the middle class gets more and more marginalized and sqeezed into poverty while their overlords grow into a twenty-first century equivalent to the oligarchy of pre-revolutionary Russia.

I, for one, still believe in the power of hope and the pursuit of a more perfect union through progressive populism.

Jumping (way too fast) to conclusions!

2010-07-21T16:14:00.000-10:00

If you've seen the flap about USDA staffer Shirley Sherrod in the news lately, you owe it to yourself to see (on video) or read Keith Olbermann's EXCELLENT "Special Comment" on lessons to be learned from this "instant-insanity" moment here .

We're all "fracked"

2010-06-24T18:39:00.000-10:00

I just viewed the excellent (and scary!) “Gasland” from HBO’s Documentary Films (in some collaboration with Sundance). For those of you wondering just what went on with all of those secret meetings with Vice President Dick Cheney leading the largest U.S. energy producers, the results are a ticking time bomb the likes of which have never been foisted on the American public before.

There simply isn’t enough outrage (after seeing this film) to contain the anger one feels after viewing this film. Cheney and his Halliburton and energy company buds literally have sold huge portions of the “lower 48” down the river while enabling the relatively cheap exploitation of natural gas reserves at the expense of totally compromising water supplies. And they did all this while cleverly writing into the ironically named “Clean Water Act of 2005” an exemption of the very technique that produces polluted ground water into the act! The Republican-controlled Congress dutifully passed it into law and apparently no whistleblowers were anywhere in the neighborhood that raised any concerns that were seriously addressed at the time.

Only when Josh Fox undertakes his own modest investigation into the growing chorus of horror stories coming out of regions where “hydraulic fracturing” exploration has been taking place and finds not only ground water supplies which have been criminally polluted (a “cocktail” of some 560-plus chemicals is used in the process) to the point that small farmers and residents in areas where “fracking” has been used to develop natural gas wells should not be drinking their previously fine water—let alone be using it for livestock and/or agricultural purposes. Fox further details that drilling one of these gas wells involves some 1000-plus trips of large-haul semis, hauling the equipment, the chemicals, gravel, sand and water required. When the well is completed, the process leaves behind a toxic pond of “production water” so toxic that they fly used-car log streamers over the pond to ward off wildlife.

SEE THIS IMPORTANT FILM now on HBO (or rent it when it hit Netflix). If you live in one of the areas shown in the map that sprawls through the entire lower 48 states, be aware that “fracking” will be coming to an area near you. And be afraid. Very afraid.

(See the IMDB entry and comments for "Gasland" here.)

Obstructionist Republicans—Time for a Real Filibuster!

2010-04-16T11:16:00.000-10:00

Well, I guess this is “Round 2”. On the same day that the Security and Exchange Commission announced formal charges of fraud against Goldman Sachs, Senator Mitch McConnell (R, Kentucky) announced that he has a “unified GOP” ready to put the brakes on debating Wall Street Reform. Could it possibly be any more OBVIOUS who is “in the pay” of whom? Short of finding ONE rational Republican (Snowe or Collins of Maine come to mind, as well as retiring Voinovich of Ohio) we are heading towards yet another collision course where legislation that seems so obviously required (and urgent!) becomes blocked by the minority totally beholden to their financial masters.

Bear in mind that the Republican stance now is “no, we just don’t want to discuss it.” This isn’t an up-down vote on the Bill itself, but whether to bring the legislation to the floor of the Senate so that debate and amendment can begin to the goal of passing a Bill that the House has already passed (H. R. 4173). Ready yourself for another round of “this Bill is too big!” (The House PDF file is 1705 pages). No doubt they will also sing the outright lie that the Bill somehow encourages continuing bailouts for “too big to fail” institutions, along with other coordinated "talking points" that these virtual parrots are just so good at singing. The proper legislation to pass along with this reform would be a Bill authorizing clear tests for when institutions ARE “too big to fail.” We need to put in place orderly, step-wise procedures for selling off various sections so that the one large “too big to fail” company is broken up into pieces that cannot endanger the U.S. (and/or global) economy. It's time to listen to the qualified "voices of reason" in this debate: a consensus of economists who can bring wise, academic counsel to an industry that has shown its willingness to "bet the farm". Especially, then the consequences seem to bear so little connection to the reality. (Witness the round of exorbitant "bonuses" to the higher echelons of Wall Streeters even following the worst year of financial disasters since the 1930s.) These lemmings are shameless. They'll take the dough even while ushering the general populace off the cliff.

Consolidation (and its cousin “monopoly”) has brought the financial companies to their “too big to fail” state. After bring the U.S. (and global) economies to the precipice of the largest financial melt-down since the Great Depression, it should be clear to everyone that reforms and safeguards are urgently needed so as to avoid simply repeating past mistakes. Only a legislator who is “in the pay” of the vested interests that seek to preserve could possibly be against such reform. But—remember!—these are the folks who worked against Health Care Reform and whose lies and distortions in blocking passage of that legislation should now be seen as the clear distortions and obstructions that they were.

No more! You want to block this (or other) legislation from moving forward? Bring in the cots, Senators. It’s time for a good, old-fashioned filibuster! Do you want to add your voice to those that say "enough, already--get this passed now"? Click here.

The 411 on “311”

2010-04-04T16:18:00.000-10:00

I’ve just seen a very intriguing segment on Fareed Zakaria’s excellent “GPS” Sunday morning program on CNN. ASIDE: If you’ve not added this to your stable of Sunday news and information programs, you should definitely give it a try. Zakaria has a knack for looking at things both as an American and as a world citizen and brings insightful questioning to a distinguished list of newsmakers from around the world—ranging from Prime Ministers of Israel, Indian film stars, the leading American political and environmental thinkers (Thomas Friedman being the foremost) and opinion makers of all types. He consistently moderates in measured, lowered-voice style, bringing a civility and clarity to the discussion at all times.)

Anyway … his closing segment on today’s program was a very short report on how a group of active US Air Force strategists have “made a stunning recommendation: that the US unilaterally reduce its nuclear arsenal to 311 weapons.” Here’s the proposal in a nutshell: With 100 land-based missiles, 192 sea=based missiles and 19 missiles aboard aircraft. That’s it. Brilliant!

If you want to look at this notion a little closer, here are a couple links which may be illuminating: “International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War” ) and the coverage (with copious numbers of embedded source links) on FiredogLake.

FINALLY, here’s the kicker: Many of these esteemed proponents of the “311” number say that getting the US to this number need not take a decade of strategic arms limitation talks across the international community. Most experts state that the US could unilaterally reduce the number of nuclear weapon to 311 and still serve as a total deterrent to any Russian “sneak attack” as even if the 100 land-based missiles were taken out, there would be ample mutually assured destruction (“MAD”) capability remaining in the 211 sub-based and bomber missiles.

Plainly, an all-out nuclear Armageddon would cleanse our planet of most life as we know it. The planet, of course, survives and in whatever millennia it takes for the half-life of all that nuclear mess to deteriorate into harmless powder, the planet will regenerate and start all over again. Let’s hope it doesn’t come to that. (I'm with Sting--I hope the Russians love their children, too.)

In Defeat, the Rethuglicans are still just MAKING THINGS UP!

2010-03-28T13:21:00.000-10:00

On "Meet the Press" for Sunday March 28, Lindsay Graham (R) minority leader in the Senate said of the recently passed Health Care Reform: "It is a Ponzi scheme of the first order. It's gonna blow up the deficit. It's gonna affect every business, every family in this country. It was done by one-party rule. And it was-- it was a shame we had to go down this road."

These Rethuglicans never cease to amaze for their sheer level of chutzpah! I've not yet seen the MTP segment but if David Gregory didn't retort with "well how about all the times you said the Congressional Budget Office numbers were just fine? Isn't that the case now?" then Gregory should be fired. (Frankly, he's the weakest "journalist" in the NBC/MSNBC roster and the number of fall-down-laughing crap that he's allowed out of the chorus of choir-Rethuglicans really should be a sign that he's the wrong guy for the job. On one hand it's admirable that they are all signing out of the same choir book; the pity is that it's full of the wrong songs for the times!)

They're just making stuff up now. They REALLY, REALLY deserve a complete TROUNCING in November. Let's put 'em outta their misery and let them come back as something NEW. Obviously their ideas and alignment with their paymasters has brought them to their logical denouement. (It must be the sign of the Rethuglican Apocalypse when they enlist an Uncle Tom like Michael Steele as the mouthpiece of the RNC. He's been whistling "Dixie" for the last almost two years and has little to show for it.)

Reflections on Health Care Reform Accomplishments

2010-03-22T11:53:00.000-10:00

It’s the day after the truly HISTORIC vote in the U. S. House of Representatives, setting the Health Care Reform bill (HW 3590) on its way to the Senate, Reconciliation and final signature. Is it any doubt that this omnibus and historic bill will be named in honor of the late Edward M. Kennedy? I think it is entirely fitting and perhaps the best genuine memorial for his long and distinguished service in the Senate and for our country in general.

Meanwhile, even the Republican pundits (such as former Bush speechwriter David Frum) are fessing up to the colossal defeat that it is. The part of “No!” told their lies in their talking points to the end (indeed, included in tan-man’s final summation) but the independent Frum calls it for what it is: “Disaster”. Along the way, he points out some of the major PLUSES of the Bill and why these features will contribute to failure of any repeal attempted: “how many votes could we muster to re-open the ‘doughnut hole’ and charge seniors more for prescription drugs? How many votes to re-allow insurers to rescind policies when they discover a pre-existing condition? How many votes to banish 25-year olds from their parents’ insurance coverage?” I just love his assessment that “we followed the most radical voices in the party and the movement, and they led us to abject and irreversible defeat”

Of course, the “conservative entertainment industry” will have a field day. Although it’s hard to understand why ANYONE with a gross income of less than $500,000 could possibly be in favor of the Republican positions on this bill (which basically says “let’s just live with the status quo of things are they are – oh, except, of course that we need to throttle in those evil lawyers and their opportunistic malpractice lawsuits”). They took all the anti-reform big business lobbying money and lined their coffers for their 2010 campaign. It’s a pity that they really have no record to campaign on except “No!”. All the campaign money in the world won’t change the Waterloo they have brought on themselves. Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch!

Handing the Republicans the Defeat They Deserve

2010-03-18T18:00:00.000-10:00

It looks like the House of Representatives is headed towards an historic vote sometime Sunday to finally pass the initial Healthcare Reform that will accomplish four major objectives: [1] ensure coverage for an additional 30- to 35-million Americans who are currently without the ability to get insurance, [2] contribute to reducing the government deficit by over $130 billion in the first 10 years, [3] reduce Medicare waste and [4] is fully paid for. Almost as a side-benefit to the supreme success of this accomplishment is handing the intransigent, insincere and totally disingenuous Republicans a sound DEFEAT of their tactics to put their goal of dealing a blow to the presidency of Barack Obama ahead of their duties to their constituents.

In doing this, I believe that they have perhaps unwittingly “bet the farm” of the 2010 mid-term elections on these tactics and I couldn’t be happier if this stupid strategy totally blows up in their faces. They have doggedly stuck to their “talking points” (even when provisions that they were addressing were long removed or corrected). They’ve flat-out invented “death panels” and other horrors based only on their desire to kill this legislation no matter what. They’ve said “we need to start over” yet when confronted with the obvious question of “what did you guys do in the name of Healthcare Reform” for the eight years you were in power (the answer, of course, is nothing) and they’ve made believe that some of their suggestions for elements of the overall legislation were not included in the Bill when they were. Frankly, I have little patience of sympathy for the “party of no”. They’ve dug their own grave with their fidelity to the fat donors and they’ve lost touch with the needs of common middleclass citizens. It’s no secret that I’m a left-leaning “progressive” and I relish the marginalization of the right. In my mind, they deserve to become the increasing minority as long as they put tactics and politics ahead of what is good for the country. Rather than become part of a sincere effort to reform Healthcare in America, they’ve sided with the big business interests of their healthcare contributors.

How Can Health Care Reform NOT PASS!?

2010-03-01T14:05:00.000-10:00

The ONLY way you could NOT be for passing Health Care Reform:

HAVE insurance paid for you and just don't care
are a member of the Republican party and vote according to what Rush Limbaugh or Karl Rove tells you to
easily duped by disinformation and fear mongering
HAVE never been sick and just don't care or think about it
don't believe the mound of truth in statistics that the system is broken
don't care that YOU pay 1000 dollars for everybody that uses emergency rooms without insurance
don't care if people suffer with the worry of paying health bills or that they lose everything they have along with their families( inclusive of innocent children )
don't care that 62% of personal bankruptcies are related to medical bills
don't care that single payer is the best and most efficient system implemented in most other western
democracies
don't care that people may die as a result from one or all of the above.

[Adopted from a posting on HuffingtonPost online ]

REPUBLICANS: Disingenuous, Inc.

2010-02-26T15:09:00.001-10:00

Last August 21 (2009) I wrote the following on my WhereTheGuysAre.com web site: “Plainly, the Health Care Reform act of 2009 will NOT be passed with ANY Republican participation. It's time to give up on any illusions of bi-partisan support from the party of 'No!’ and move on.” If it hadn’t become clear to the Democratic majority, it certainly was clear yesterday when the Republicans participating in the historic “Health Care Reform Summit” at Blair House went around the table stupidly parroting the same 3 or 4 “talking points” that mostly amounted to “scrap this bill and start over”, “a better approach is to go step-by-step” and “starting with a clean sheet of paper”. (Matthew’s production staff put together a sound-bite montage that frankly scary in revealing the obvious collusion between the various Republicans. I hope you’ve had a chance to catch it on YouTube or MSNBC.) What these same Republicans fail to mention is that they, for the most part, totally abdicated on input to the bill as it was developing, steadfastly taking the position that "all this health care reform stuff really isn't what the country needs". Well, perhaps not YOUR millionaire friends, Senator McConnell or Congressman Boehner, but I daily see ordinary American citizens who are struggling with the "realities" of their health care (or lack of it, or the threat of it being about to disappear) and that seems like a pretty apparent NEED to me.

The day before on “The Rachel Maddow Show” (also on MSNBC) guest Barney Frank (congressman from Massachussetts) made the plain and simple statement that the “dominant Republicans today do not want Barack Obama to succeed either in job creation or in deficit reduction and that’s why you get this intellectual inconsistency. It’s not intellectually inconsistent—it’s dishonest.” To me this combination of the collusion of the talking points to kill health care reform and in plainly WISHING FOR the worst outcome for the country as far as jobs and the deficit/economy removes ANY bit of credibility from 95% or more of those who have ‘R’ by their name as their party designation.

How can these folks consider themselves patriotic Americans if what they hope for is the “failure” of an administration and majority party that is working so hard to put thing right for common working folk? It was the departing Bush administration that left the country with the biggest deficit in history (following on the heels of inheriting the largest SURPLUS in history on Bill Clinton's departure). A country and world financial system literally teetering on the edge of collapse and a pending (and mostly in-place) TRILLION dollar bail-out package put together by Bush's departing Treasury Secretary Hank ("take good care of my buddies at GoldmanSachs") Paulson.

It’s obvious who the masters of these Republicans are because of their constant emphasis of pushing for tax “relief” for the top 1% of the population while at the same time having complete and total disregard for those who are daily losing their health care whether through collusion on the part of the insurers, rising and crippling insurance costs or other unregulated measures designed to maximize profit and the nice big bonuses for upper management.

Health care reform MUST be passed and RECONCILIATION is the way to do it. It simply galls me that the Republicans now are trying to re-sell reconciliation as “the nuclear option”. (It never was. The “nuclear option” was something the Repubs threatened the Democrats with when some judicial appointments were being held up procedurally by Democrats. And while we’re at it, it’s important to put some facts on the table: Republicans in the Senate used “reconciliation” 16 out of the past 22 times it was used.)

It’s time to bypass these nay-sayers and get ‘er done!

As Chris Matthews said today on MSNBC’s “Hardball”: “No more yelling ‘No!’ from the belfry.”

Time for put-up or SHUDDUP!

2010-02-12T15:29:00.001-10:00

We've now had a solid YEAR of the "party of NO" and it's time to get the business of the national government seriously back on track. The notorious filibuster has been used TWICE AS MUCH since the Democratic party (not "Democrat party" you ignoramus insulting Rethuglicans!) gained control of the U. S. Senate in November 2006. And it's really not "the filibuster" but the threat to block a vote on a particular bill or a single up-down vote.

It's time to squash this and get back to simple majority rule. I've done my first Twitter poll here, so join in the fun and make your choice visible (though anonymous) and public.

Democracy is about coming to grips with our problems--NOT just slamming on the brakes (except for the pork barrel projects that you are holding the rest of the Senate hostage for -- YES: that means your Senator Shelby and your pork-barrel demand that the Senate overturn a successful Boeing bid in favor or AirBus Instrusies just because they have an assembly facility in Alabama!)

Time for a new WAR!

2010-02-09T17:58:00.001-10:00

It’s not Iran, but right here in the United States SENATE. Today it’s the warfare of the minority Republicans holding anything but pork-barrel bills hostage to the “filibuster”. Senator Sherod Brown’s speech on the topic of confirming the latest “hostage” (Greg Becker, nominated in April 2009 to head the National Labor Relations Board) was a riveting plea for some common sense among the Rethuglicans to do something besides just saying “no!” and attempting to hand the President a political defeat that they hope will bring them benefits in the November elections. This is politics of the most revolting and cynical design and it’s time to draw a firm line in the sand and say “put up or shut up!” At a time when the financial health of the country (and to no lesser degree the global economy is at peril) it’s just not very bipartisan to say “let’s start over on a Health Care reform bill that can’t pass Congress”.

Uh, wake, up, folks! It HAS passed—including the 60-vote filibuster override. The polls the Rethuglicans cite reflect the confusion that they have introduced, along with their co-conspirators, the for-profit healthcare industry. Only in a delusionary-induced could “death panels” and other fictional horrors of “socialized medicine” creep into what purports to be a serious discussion about how to improve our lot.

ENOUGH! Every Democratic Representative and Senator needs to pick up whatever gumption got them there and RESIST this tomfoolery. To expect anything less at this time borders on national insanity. Get past Health Care Reform, throw in some legitimate and rational tort reform (limitations), put some true competition in place (removing the authorization for the health care monopoly that has stood for so many decades) and expose those congresspersons who are in the PAY of big Pharma, the health care cartel and those who really don’t have the true “public interest” in mind.

Make a clear comparison between government that is legitimate and working for the “common man” and the party that brought us the financially irresponsible tax cuts for the super-wealthy. It’s time!

Oh, goody! Corporations are "People"! Fascism in America?

2010-01-21T13:54:00.002-10:00

I'm not usually an alarmist, but the 5-4 decision of the Supreme Court yesterday (January 20) may well be the mark of our eventual slide into a corporate dominated fascism the likes of which has never before been seen. If you like (or even know of) the amount of "astroturf" funding of supposedly not-for-profit "public interest" groups (which really AREN'T) then you're going to love the degree to which corporate interests can now pour advertising dollars into campaigns for just about anything or anyone under the sun.

At a time when we should be revising out campaign finance rules to shed more sunlight on who is supporting whom, this decision will obfuscate and allow massive campaigns to put forth the agenda of whatever corporation or alliance--OPEC, the American Petroleum Institute for two examples--wants to get their message out. All while not being required to clearly announce where the funding is coming from. (Remember "Harry and Louise" during the Clinton Health Care reform?) Campaigns which obfuscate and have the largesse of enormous corporate and trade-association funds can totally stream-roller any effort that truly grass-roots donors fund. Could MoveOn match the $50 million that big oil might spend on defeating clean air or carbon tax measures?

And that's just issues. This decision also opens the way for corporations to "flood federal elections and buy government influence:. (Fred Wertheimer, an advocate of campaign finance reform in a Huffington Post article on the Supremes decision. In that same article, Melanie Sloan (director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington) stated :"We are moving to an age where we won't have the senator from Arkansas or the congressman from North Carolina, but the senator from Wal-Mart and the congressman from Bank of America."

Big business is well-represented in our government processes now and this decision tips the balance. This lawsuit carries the title "Citizens United v. FEC". Do you KNOW any of the "citizens" who participated in pushing this case? What do you think the chances are that ANY of them are folks like you and I? Yeah, that's what I thought. What right-thinking person would open the doors to the sort of money-dominated influence that is likely to come from this decision? I'm guessing you don't know any that support this view. I know I don't.

Stay plugged-in. Watch Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow on MSNBC. Expose yourselves to the truths and dangers that this death spiral into fascism will lead. Be an antidote to the KoolAid-drinking "tea baggers" and use your own brain and speak out.

Move Your Money

2010-01-07T21:34:00.000-10:00

It's a simple proposition, really: If the "too big to fail banks" won't get back into the business of making necessary small business loans to main street America then let's ALL help them get smaller by moving our money OUT of the BofA's, Wells, Citi, etc., and into main street Credit Unions and Community Banks. They're just as safe as the big boys because they are insured by the same folks (FDIC, CUIF) up to $250,000 for each account holder. (IF you have more than a quarter mill laying around, then spread it through multiple Credit Unions or Community banks. This is now news -- but it's grassroots action that YOU can take to help solve the financial malaise in the gold old USA. Move your money away from the "too big to fail" enterprises that have had to come to the government bail-out trough and yet are doing little or nothing to REALLY effect the financial recovery of main street America. Check out MoveYourMoney.info -- it's easy to find a list of institutions right in your own Zip code (or nearby).

Krugman: "America can’t get control of its budget without controlling health care costs"

2009-12-04T09:00:00.000-10:00

In so many ways, the ongoing debate about health care "reform" isn't a debate at all, but a life-and-death struggle between the new administration (and Democratic party majority) and the Party of No. For the Republicans, health care reform is now about whether President Obama is "defeated" or not and it has become a priority for them to deal him a defeat as their (presumed) first step at taking back political control. They are joined by the so-called "blue dog Democrats" (Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln) who are wittingly and unwittingly casting doubt as to the final passage of health care reform while dealing for their own perks and more than slightly un-Democratic Party interests (restrict abortion and such).

I tend to agree that ANY legislative measure that seems to require 1,000 or 2,000 pages (depending on who is decrying its size) may be too complex for ordinary humans to understand. In general, it sure would be nice to have a nice simple bill or 6 or 7 pages that does it, wouldn't it?

HOWABOUT THIS?: The public option permits ordinary citizens to "opt in" to the same plan that covers Senators and Representatives OR the equivalent Medicare/Medicaid plan.

As for the emotionally charged issues like abortion, what's wrong with staying with the status quo? Current law under the Hyde Amendment (long in force) is straightforward and simple and we've learned to live with it. There's no change needed here. Neither offer nor implement ANY changes in this area. Period.

It's time to get on with finalizing this Bill and getting other important matters some attention in the legislative process. (Like turning the economy around. Oh, yeah. Health Care reform IS a big part of that, but there are other factors--like re-establishing some safeguards and oversight on Wall Street and banking, stimulating the economy through infrastructure investments that need to be made eventually anyway AND getting the American worked back to work.)

See the complete Krugman NY Times article which inspired today's diatribe here.

2009-12-02T12:47:00.004-10:00

While I'm ordinarily a peace-nik and strive to believe that rational men and women can address their differences and resolve them peacefully, the attacks of 9/11/2001 did change the scenario worldwide -- whether we like it or not. The fools in the Bush administration not only took on a knee-jerk reaction and started the "excise Al Qaeda" campaign in Afghanistan, then they parlayed that into a needless war in Iraq. Now with Iraq supposedly "winding down" the military (which can never be wrong in always asking for "more, more!") has convinced our new President to up the stakes.

Wars have consequences. Especially wars funded with no-bid contracts that enrich friends of Cheney and company. The national balance sheet was never in better shape when Clinton left office and it was never worse than when Obama took the oath of office. We may yet see a history of the world in which the slow decline of the entire world economy can be marked from financial and war decisions made between 2001 and 2009. (I am not, by nature, a doom-sayer, but you've got to wonder.)

You've also got to wonder about the legitimacy of the current military advice about Afghanistan when Der Spiegel opines "Never before has a speech by President Barack Obama felt as false as his Tuesday address announcing America's new strategy for Afghanistan. It seemed like a campaign speech combined with Bush rhetoric -- and left both dreamers and realists feeling distraught." (See the full piece here.)

So goes the blog ...

2009-11-30T13:07:00.002-10:00

I guess it's time. Time to have a public "me" that folks who choose to can look in on. It's free and relatively easy, so here it is.

The big news of the day (Nov 30/2008) is that I've been accepted as a preview user of Google's new WAVE -- also known as "the way email would have worked if it had been invented in 2010" (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Wave ).

More later ...