You've got to hand it to the Republicans, they know how to train liberals.
They've done it so well, in fact, that they don't need to even blow the whistle any more. Liberals, especially Democrats, will throw each other under the bus at the slightest umbrage taken by Fox So-Called-News. Our President is the champion at this. Most recently, he fired EPA official Al Armandariz for some benign statement about "crucifying" law-breakers. It was an analogy, in context and perfectly reasonable. Still, Republican outrage meant that poor Al had to fall on his sword for the raft of cowards that are the White House these days.
But in the case of May Day protests, liberals didn't even wait.
May Day protests were held in something like 100 cities around the country. Tens of thousands of Americans who are tired of being screwed by the corporate oligarchy took part. And in a few cites, punks calling themselves anarchists did some vandalism.
Can I pause and say: anarchists? What the fuck is this, 1908? I'm sorry, but I picture swarthy, mustachioed eastern European types with hats and black overcoats, holding one of those round, black bombs with a fuse sticking out of the top. Now, I don't have CNN playing 24-7, but I follow the news. I have not heard of anarchists until the newspaper stories the day before May first of the police gearing up to stop the anarchist threat. Seems to me, that when working people are focusing on the real threat, the one percent that are robbing us blind, out pops the boogie man - in this case anarchists.
So anyway, "anarchists," broke some windows, did some graffiti, and lit of a few smoke bombs. Wow, are we going to be alright? Will the country be able to heal after this brutal attack on the homeland? And the people who were the most pissed seemed to be the the 99% - the peaceful protesters. And I suppose they should have been. A few assholes came in and disrupted their protest, and riled up the police. But man oh man, have they been trained. The anarchist outrage message was totally captured by the establishment. The message of economic and political injustice was wiped off the lips of both protesters and news reporters.
Now, here's how the outrage/apology machine works. Usually, a journalist has to confront a liberal about someone's behavior. This works to derail said liberal's message. This is because there is a conservative on Fox demanding an apology from everybody not in their ideological bunker. They have to express outrage, and then demand that the liberal renounce the person for their statement or action (almost always, a person that the liberal doesn't even know, nor is associated with except maybe, distantly or tangentially). In the case of the May Day vandalism, liberals were self-flagellating instantly. The didn't wait for Fox, or CNN, or anyone.
Callers to liberal talk radio were all chiming in about how they needed to DO something about these anarchists. Liberal hosts were saying how peaceful protesters had to identify anarchists and point them out to the police. Really? Do the police's job instead of protest?
Fuck that.
Which Republicans do we remember apologizing for the killing of doctors, or the bombing of abortion clinics? They don't, they stay on message. They say "well, of course these actions were horrible, but what do you expect when this socialist blah, blah, blah..." You get the point.
I say, do like the Republicans do - keep the message up front. When asked about anarchists, say "although I don't condone the actions of a few radicals, I fully understand their frustration with the corruption in our government and our financial system." Now, this is bullshit, because we don't know precisely why some punk smashed the window downtown, because it's YOUR MESSAGE! Take the attention from the smoke, the pepper sprayings and the broken glass, and use it to drive the message home.
By the way, the pavlovian media will come back with outrage, implying that you condone the smashing of windows. Don't retreat! Here's the response:
"Add up the cost of all of the windows broken in every protest today, combine that with the clean-up costs of any other vandalism in the area of the protests, and I'm sure it will not be more than a tiny fraction of the cost to working Americans for the fraud committed by the 1% in the last few years."
And when they press you, say:
"Until they start arresting rich criminals, I have no interest in arresting poor criminals."
In the past few years, the SEC and the justice department have found numerous cases of fraud, bribery and money laundering. In only a small handful of cases have I heard of executives actually being prosecuted. Most often, by far, the corporations pay a fine, and admit no wrong-doing. The Obama Administration will call these fines "historic" and "unprecedented," but they are almost always a fraction of the actual amount taken in by the criminal act.
Think about that...you commit a criminal act of fraud that makes you billions, and you get fined in the hundreds of millions. Who's not taking that deal every day? But that's how it works, and that's why people are so pissed.
Let's say I rob a bank, and take the bank for 20 grand. When the police show up, I hand them five grand and we shake hands, and everyone goes to lunch. Who's not robbing banks every day under those circumstances? This is what you say to reporters, to everyone - there's two sets of rules, and were pissed!
Rich people pay a fine, working people go to jail. It is fundamentally un-American, and a violation of the principles of justice and of the rule of law. People aren't all civics geniuses, but they know when their core values are being violated. This message will win - stay the fuck on it!
As for the OWS/May Day message of economic justice, that's harder, but not impossible. Americans all think they will be rich some day. That's why the unfairness of the tax code eludes most people. Everyone thinks they pay too much tax, and they sympathize with the rich in that regard too. But the message is the closing off of opportunity. Americans feel that every day. They know wages have stagnated, they know college is virtually unaffordable, they know they get reamed every time they fill up at the pump. This happens because the corporate elite buy our political leaders like they were cheap whores. They buy those whores, but we get the dick. We get the jiz of corporate greed blown all over us, and we're pissed.
We're not pissed because they are rich and we are not. We are pissed off because the system is not fair. It is corrupted by money in our political system, and our system now works mostly for the benefit of the source of that money. That is why the money in our economy flows up, and stays there.
So, when the question is asked, "what about those anarchists?", blow the question off. Change the question to one of economic unfairness and political corruption. Pound the message home.
Again, and again...and again.
Saturday, May 05, 2012
Sunday, April 29, 2012
Why Do Banks Behave So Badly?
And, to follow up on the title of this post, why does government abet the banks bad behavior?
It is, IMHO, a crucial piece of the understanding the politics-today puzzle.
A senator recently said of the Wall St. banks, "they own the place." He was speaking of Congress. Congress, we know by now, is bought and sold by special interests. Banks, who lobby hard, are second only to the health care industry as lobbyists who bring buckets full of money to the whores who we elect to make our laws.
But if they're number two, how are they so much powerful than any other lobby?
Because they make money.
No, I don't mean they EARN money, they literally MAKE it. Banks literally conjure the money we use into existence out of thin air. Or, to be more accurate, out of YOUR commitment to pay back a loan.
Banks create money from your debt.
Let's say that you want to buy a house. You could save up say, $300,000, and purchase the house outright. For most of us, that means we would buy our first houses when we were around 75 years old. So instead, we go to a bank to borrow the money for the house. The bank does some due diligence, like checking our credit, and agrees to loan us the money for the house.
Now, does the banker shake our hand and go to the vault, and pull out $300,000 in bills and but it in a sack with dollar signs printed on the sides? No!
Does he issue us a check? No, not any more. He simply types some numbers into his/her computer and the 300 grand goes to the home-seller's bank. Now, here's a key part of this puzzle - does the banker even have $300,000 in his vault? NO! When he typed in his computer, he created that $300,000, simply by you agreeing to pay it back over time.
But wait, you say...the US Mint prints all that money. Surely this is the actual money that backs up all of those loans? Nope, those fives, tens and twenties are merely symbols, physical representations of this debt. There is no pile of gold, or silver, or jewels or pearls in any vault that represents the value of all the debt, or even of all of the added up coins and bills produced by the US Mint.
Am I simplifying this? Hell yes, I'm not an economist. But I think that this points to why banks are so effective at holding our government hostage, while robbing us with impunity.
And, I also am not saying that this alchemist system of finance is all bad. Without this system, I would have not owned the several lovely homes I have lived in, and still live in. I'm not with Ron Paul and his desire to return to the gold standard. I believe that the ability to issue credit is important. It is just that we need to regulate, and regulate hard upon those who have the ability to create debt. Creating money at will is a tremendous power - and power corrupts. And when power corrupts the government, we get screwed.
Such as, when the Fed issues TRILLIONS of dollars at near zero interest to the banks, they are simply allowing the banks to issue trillions in new debt to consumers, and take a profit at the margins (interest). One thing they have done is to loan the money right back to the government by purchasing bonds. Once they do that, WE THE TAXPAYER now owe the banks the same money that we "lent" them (although we really just gave them permission to issue the debt - they just turned around and stuck us with some of it - thanks big banks!). I'm not sure this makes sense - for the banks to be able to conjure into existence money that I suddenly owe them via the government.
Another problem with banks is leverage. That is, just how much money should banks be able to create through the magic of debt? We saw in 2008 that the banks created too much debt, and when houses went under water (an estimated one third of ALL US homes are "under water," that is, worth less on the current market than what is owed on them), the debt exceeded the value of the actual property. Further, the banks created yet more debt (and collected fees and bonuses) by packaging the initial debt, and selling it as an investment. When the market fell, these financial instruments, essentially bets on the debt (the "bets," of course, also debt), also fell. Bad debt on top of bad debt. The banks did not have the paper markers, the tens and twenties, on hand to cover all of the debt they had issued. Essentially, the banks are broke. This is why the renowned economist Bill Maher (snark!) calls them "zombie banks."
They are zombies because in late 2007, they were dead. All except maybe JP Morgan would not have been able to cover the debt they had issued. Not even close. They were over-leveraged. That means, they had not loaned out twice the money in their vaults, not three times, not ten times! In some cases the large banks had loaned out 30, and even 60 times what they had on hand. If you are leveraged at sixty to one, only a few percent of creditors need to ask for their money at the same time to break the bank.
Since the killing of meaningful banking regulation in 1999 and 2000 (thanks President Clinton!), the banks way over-leveraged themselves, AND grew bigger and bigger. Banking represents a huge portion of our national financial holdings (albeit "holdings" that are conjured out of consumer debt). If the banks had failed, as some conservatives suggested they should have, the 2008 crash would have been devastating - way more than it was. That's why we bailed them out. That's why we loan them money at almost 0% interest. WE the People are the hedge, the finger in the financial dike. We have raised the banks from the dead.
Now, as zombies are in the movies, bank executives stagger through the world gobbling up debt. Since they know that we HAVE to backstop them, they show no restraint. They speculate in markets all over the world. They have added almost 60 cents to the price of every gallon of gas. They have doubled, and in some countries even tripled the price of food, with no regard to the malnutrition and starvation that result. They bribe politicians, and in the case of Greece, have brought financial ruin to entire nations. They show all the care, caution and compassion of the living dead in a brain-eating frenzy.
And how are they robbing us? Well, besides creating debt with our treasury, and then charging us interest on that debt, they also committed massive fraud with mortgages. When they gave out mortgages that they shouldn't have, they took fees and then sold that mortgage to investors who were also defrauded, and many of them were institutional investors. If you have a mutual fund, pension or 401K, you have almost certainly been robbed by this fraud. If you were a mortgage holder (like I am), and suffered from this fraud-created housing bubble, you have lost equity. Now, markets go up and down, but some of the lost equity is a result of this massive fraud that inflated the market. I lost about $100,000 in this way. And how many of these criminals who, again, committed FRAUD on a massive scale have been brought to justice. One. And the statute of limitations is almost up. It has already passed on everything before 2007. And what about the justice department? What about the President and his historic financial reform?
The "historic" financial reform brought to you by President Obama and congressional Dems was a joke. Banks are still largely unregulated. I don't mean to say that there are no rules, just that the rules don't come close to restraining the brain-hunger like lust that these zombie bankers have for creating money out of debt - and taking fees and bonuses on the margins. Our own politicians are bribed legally and in the open, not like in Greece. They simply contribute to candidates themselves, or to PACs (or super PACs). Then, after a well-paid career in government, these politicians and their staffers go on to lavishly paid stints at the same banks. Or, more often, as fee-based consultants to the banks.
But, you say, ALL industry groups engage in this type of bribery! And you are right. The banks have an extra hold on our government. The real Sword of Damocles that the banks wield is the true nature of how dead they are. Through corruption (and honestly, some good intent by our leaders to offer homes to the average American, and of late, to keep America from financial Armageddon), we have become the creditor of last resort. The zombies know that we will bail them out again, so they continue to take risk. I think that our government leaders are terrified of the bankers opening the vaults, and showing the public a bunch of moths and cobwebs. This would bring about a financial collapse, and end all of their political careers. The zombies tell our leaders: "cross us, and we will fuck you. Now here's some money, go do what we say!" It's like a scene out of a gangster movie, only with zombies.
It is also unsustainable. Goldman Sachs has a hand in 40 TRILLION dollars worth of derivative bets currently. 40 TRILLION! And they are only one of the large banks. (BTW - for comparison's sake, the GDP of the US last year was 16 trillion). Were the treasury to print 40 trillion dollars to actually cover Goldman's bets, our money would be worthless, not that we could actually PRINT that much money anyway. And there is no "if" involved, only "when." The system is too badly corrupted to last. When it crashes again, we won't have the ability to create enough debt to get out of it.
Without courage in our political leadership, the arbitrary symbols of debt our nation uses will become worthless. Nobody will let us trade real stuff that we need for our debt. Regulation of the banking system is desperately needed. Leverage must be brought down to reasonable levels. There's a fair argument to be had on leverage - should it be five to one, ten to one? But it sure as shit should not be 30 or 60 to one. And much stronger regulation of the derivatives markets are needed immediately. Look, in the previous example, Goldman's 40 trillion in derivatives bets, they aren't going to lose all of it in a day, or even a month (we hope!). And they say that much of it is their client's debt, and that they are on both sides of these bets. Hooray, they are such smart zombies. But if their calculations go wrong, even slightly, on 40 TRILLION dollars, then they're fucked. A fraction of a percent of 40 trillion is in the hundreds of billions. Can the zombie bankers come up with hundreds of billions at the end of a day of trading? I doubt it. Then, not only are they fucked, but so are we, and fucked hard.
So why do bankers behave so badly? Because they are zombies, of course. They have risen from the dead with the power they've always had, go create money through debt alchemy, and the recently consolidated power to bend governments to their will by bribery and intimidation.
How do we stop them? Like in the zombie movies, with a (FIGURATIVE) head-shot. We need a president who will use the justice department and the bully pulpit to defend the financial interests of the American people. It is unfortunate that we don't have that president. If we did, he'd order the Attorney General to perp-walk the bank executives who engaged in mortgage fraud, and investor fraud leading up to the mortgage crisis, and then prosecute them. He'd do it before the statute of limitations runs out. He'd order the SEC to enforce regulations agressively, and then press Congress for sensible caps on leverage. By the way, he'd do this while running against mister Wall Street Mitt Romney, and the people would love him for it.
Again, it is unfortunate that we don't have that president.
It is, IMHO, a crucial piece of the understanding the politics-today puzzle.
A senator recently said of the Wall St. banks, "they own the place." He was speaking of Congress. Congress, we know by now, is bought and sold by special interests. Banks, who lobby hard, are second only to the health care industry as lobbyists who bring buckets full of money to the whores who we elect to make our laws.
But if they're number two, how are they so much powerful than any other lobby?
Because they make money.
No, I don't mean they EARN money, they literally MAKE it. Banks literally conjure the money we use into existence out of thin air. Or, to be more accurate, out of YOUR commitment to pay back a loan.
Banks create money from your debt.
Let's say that you want to buy a house. You could save up say, $300,000, and purchase the house outright. For most of us, that means we would buy our first houses when we were around 75 years old. So instead, we go to a bank to borrow the money for the house. The bank does some due diligence, like checking our credit, and agrees to loan us the money for the house.
Now, does the banker shake our hand and go to the vault, and pull out $300,000 in bills and but it in a sack with dollar signs printed on the sides? No!
Does he issue us a check? No, not any more. He simply types some numbers into his/her computer and the 300 grand goes to the home-seller's bank. Now, here's a key part of this puzzle - does the banker even have $300,000 in his vault? NO! When he typed in his computer, he created that $300,000, simply by you agreeing to pay it back over time.
But wait, you say...the US Mint prints all that money. Surely this is the actual money that backs up all of those loans? Nope, those fives, tens and twenties are merely symbols, physical representations of this debt. There is no pile of gold, or silver, or jewels or pearls in any vault that represents the value of all the debt, or even of all of the added up coins and bills produced by the US Mint.
Am I simplifying this? Hell yes, I'm not an economist. But I think that this points to why banks are so effective at holding our government hostage, while robbing us with impunity.
And, I also am not saying that this alchemist system of finance is all bad. Without this system, I would have not owned the several lovely homes I have lived in, and still live in. I'm not with Ron Paul and his desire to return to the gold standard. I believe that the ability to issue credit is important. It is just that we need to regulate, and regulate hard upon those who have the ability to create debt. Creating money at will is a tremendous power - and power corrupts. And when power corrupts the government, we get screwed.
Such as, when the Fed issues TRILLIONS of dollars at near zero interest to the banks, they are simply allowing the banks to issue trillions in new debt to consumers, and take a profit at the margins (interest). One thing they have done is to loan the money right back to the government by purchasing bonds. Once they do that, WE THE TAXPAYER now owe the banks the same money that we "lent" them (although we really just gave them permission to issue the debt - they just turned around and stuck us with some of it - thanks big banks!). I'm not sure this makes sense - for the banks to be able to conjure into existence money that I suddenly owe them via the government.
Another problem with banks is leverage. That is, just how much money should banks be able to create through the magic of debt? We saw in 2008 that the banks created too much debt, and when houses went under water (an estimated one third of ALL US homes are "under water," that is, worth less on the current market than what is owed on them), the debt exceeded the value of the actual property. Further, the banks created yet more debt (and collected fees and bonuses) by packaging the initial debt, and selling it as an investment. When the market fell, these financial instruments, essentially bets on the debt (the "bets," of course, also debt), also fell. Bad debt on top of bad debt. The banks did not have the paper markers, the tens and twenties, on hand to cover all of the debt they had issued. Essentially, the banks are broke. This is why the renowned economist Bill Maher (snark!) calls them "zombie banks."
They are zombies because in late 2007, they were dead. All except maybe JP Morgan would not have been able to cover the debt they had issued. Not even close. They were over-leveraged. That means, they had not loaned out twice the money in their vaults, not three times, not ten times! In some cases the large banks had loaned out 30, and even 60 times what they had on hand. If you are leveraged at sixty to one, only a few percent of creditors need to ask for their money at the same time to break the bank.
Since the killing of meaningful banking regulation in 1999 and 2000 (thanks President Clinton!), the banks way over-leveraged themselves, AND grew bigger and bigger. Banking represents a huge portion of our national financial holdings (albeit "holdings" that are conjured out of consumer debt). If the banks had failed, as some conservatives suggested they should have, the 2008 crash would have been devastating - way more than it was. That's why we bailed them out. That's why we loan them money at almost 0% interest. WE the People are the hedge, the finger in the financial dike. We have raised the banks from the dead.
Now, as zombies are in the movies, bank executives stagger through the world gobbling up debt. Since they know that we HAVE to backstop them, they show no restraint. They speculate in markets all over the world. They have added almost 60 cents to the price of every gallon of gas. They have doubled, and in some countries even tripled the price of food, with no regard to the malnutrition and starvation that result. They bribe politicians, and in the case of Greece, have brought financial ruin to entire nations. They show all the care, caution and compassion of the living dead in a brain-eating frenzy.
And how are they robbing us? Well, besides creating debt with our treasury, and then charging us interest on that debt, they also committed massive fraud with mortgages. When they gave out mortgages that they shouldn't have, they took fees and then sold that mortgage to investors who were also defrauded, and many of them were institutional investors. If you have a mutual fund, pension or 401K, you have almost certainly been robbed by this fraud. If you were a mortgage holder (like I am), and suffered from this fraud-created housing bubble, you have lost equity. Now, markets go up and down, but some of the lost equity is a result of this massive fraud that inflated the market. I lost about $100,000 in this way. And how many of these criminals who, again, committed FRAUD on a massive scale have been brought to justice. One. And the statute of limitations is almost up. It has already passed on everything before 2007. And what about the justice department? What about the President and his historic financial reform?
The "historic" financial reform brought to you by President Obama and congressional Dems was a joke. Banks are still largely unregulated. I don't mean to say that there are no rules, just that the rules don't come close to restraining the brain-hunger like lust that these zombie bankers have for creating money out of debt - and taking fees and bonuses on the margins. Our own politicians are bribed legally and in the open, not like in Greece. They simply contribute to candidates themselves, or to PACs (or super PACs). Then, after a well-paid career in government, these politicians and their staffers go on to lavishly paid stints at the same banks. Or, more often, as fee-based consultants to the banks.
But, you say, ALL industry groups engage in this type of bribery! And you are right. The banks have an extra hold on our government. The real Sword of Damocles that the banks wield is the true nature of how dead they are. Through corruption (and honestly, some good intent by our leaders to offer homes to the average American, and of late, to keep America from financial Armageddon), we have become the creditor of last resort. The zombies know that we will bail them out again, so they continue to take risk. I think that our government leaders are terrified of the bankers opening the vaults, and showing the public a bunch of moths and cobwebs. This would bring about a financial collapse, and end all of their political careers. The zombies tell our leaders: "cross us, and we will fuck you. Now here's some money, go do what we say!" It's like a scene out of a gangster movie, only with zombies.
It is also unsustainable. Goldman Sachs has a hand in 40 TRILLION dollars worth of derivative bets currently. 40 TRILLION! And they are only one of the large banks. (BTW - for comparison's sake, the GDP of the US last year was 16 trillion). Were the treasury to print 40 trillion dollars to actually cover Goldman's bets, our money would be worthless, not that we could actually PRINT that much money anyway. And there is no "if" involved, only "when." The system is too badly corrupted to last. When it crashes again, we won't have the ability to create enough debt to get out of it.
Without courage in our political leadership, the arbitrary symbols of debt our nation uses will become worthless. Nobody will let us trade real stuff that we need for our debt. Regulation of the banking system is desperately needed. Leverage must be brought down to reasonable levels. There's a fair argument to be had on leverage - should it be five to one, ten to one? But it sure as shit should not be 30 or 60 to one. And much stronger regulation of the derivatives markets are needed immediately. Look, in the previous example, Goldman's 40 trillion in derivatives bets, they aren't going to lose all of it in a day, or even a month (we hope!). And they say that much of it is their client's debt, and that they are on both sides of these bets. Hooray, they are such smart zombies. But if their calculations go wrong, even slightly, on 40 TRILLION dollars, then they're fucked. A fraction of a percent of 40 trillion is in the hundreds of billions. Can the zombie bankers come up with hundreds of billions at the end of a day of trading? I doubt it. Then, not only are they fucked, but so are we, and fucked hard.
So why do bankers behave so badly? Because they are zombies, of course. They have risen from the dead with the power they've always had, go create money through debt alchemy, and the recently consolidated power to bend governments to their will by bribery and intimidation.
How do we stop them? Like in the zombie movies, with a (FIGURATIVE) head-shot. We need a president who will use the justice department and the bully pulpit to defend the financial interests of the American people. It is unfortunate that we don't have that president. If we did, he'd order the Attorney General to perp-walk the bank executives who engaged in mortgage fraud, and investor fraud leading up to the mortgage crisis, and then prosecute them. He'd do it before the statute of limitations runs out. He'd order the SEC to enforce regulations agressively, and then press Congress for sensible caps on leverage. By the way, he'd do this while running against mister Wall Street Mitt Romney, and the people would love him for it.
Again, it is unfortunate that we don't have that president.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
Politics in the Time of the Old Testament
Okay, This post is very dated. My outrage has been on full tilt for months. But as I've made clear, I'm an amateur crank, with a day job. I'm busy, I've got hobbies...I rarely have time to rant apart from the hours I spend shouting at my windshield. Anyway...
Why am I cranky? Why am I taking valuable drinking time to sit at a laptop and spill?
Because the Republicans have declared a war on birth control. Their leading presidential candidates are on board with this war.
No...seriously...in the 21st Century, the Republican Party is running their 2012 campaign, and is legislating in government, on an anti-birth control platform.
In case you've been living under a rock, the President was ready to put into place regulations that would require religious affiliated organizations, like a Catholic hospital or a Methodist school, to include birth control as part of their health coverage. Well, the Catholic church, and others, lost their shit. How DARE this (black, and probably Muslim) President infringe upon their religious freedom?!?!
The President (get ready to NOT be shocked in the least) came to a compromise. He changed the regulations so that these religious organizations need not pay, insurance companies will. And, they are happy to because the birth control costs so much less than a bunch of births. And I get why this President did this - women get the preventative care, and he gets to avoid a fight with conservatives, which is his proclivity.
But the Republicans doubled-down. They put forth the Blunt Amendment in the Senate. The Blunt Amendment would allow ANY employer to deny benefits on ANY religious or moral grounds.
But I don't get the politics. Republicans use this kind of issue to motivate their shrinking base to show up in the elections. But this is over the cliff. They will turn off almost ALL independent voters if the Democrats fight on this. And, this is an issue that Democrats could use to beat the shit out of Republicans with. They should bring it up every chance they get: "did you know that John Boehner is against birth control?" "Did you know that Mitch McConnell wants to keep women from getting birth control?" Make those fuckers answer this question over, and over again.
(Actually, Harry Reid finally did do this. After some Republicans realized what a disaster this issue could become, they tabled the Blunt Amendment. But Reid brought it back, and forced a vote on it. This was nicely done - all but one Republican voted for it, and now have to explain the vote to women.)
But not the White House, and not many other Democratic politicians. The President's people will say that they want no part of this because the Republicans have framed this as a religious freedom issue. Really? You Democrats are the biggest bunch of fucking pussies I have ever seen! (How's that for a sexist reference in a rant that rails against the sexism and misogyny in current legislation and politics?) You know, you all have access to microphones too! I know, a shock. You Dem lawmakers can also frame an issue. Taking birth control away from millions of women versus a much more muddled argument over religious freedom. C'mon, how BADLY would the Republicans lose?
Besides, Dems have just as strong of an argument in the First Amendment. Government is not supposed to get into the business of the churches, but it can regulate things like health care (Article One, Section Eight). Furthermore, institutions, government or otherwise, may not infringe upon the religious liberties of the people. How can a Catholic hospital be allowed to enforce Catholicism upon a Jewish janitor on the night shift via their health care plan? No, no, no...the First Amendment is there to protect the rights of the people, not the large, wealthy institutions. It is the antithesis of religious freedom for a large institution to be allowed to dictate religious doctrine to employees of many, or even no faiths.
In several states, including mine, Democrats have allowed pharmacists to refuse to fill certain prescriptions based on their particular religious beliefs. These beliefs are all against the freedom of women to make choices about their own bodies, and their own family planning. In other states, like Kansas and Texas, it gets a hell of a lot worse.
Here is possibly the worst yet. According to a bill proposed in the great state of Virginia (or, is it a commonwealth?), women seeking an abortion in the first trimester will be required to have a trans-vaginal probe. This probe is a device that is inserted into the vagina to take an ultrasound picture of what's inside. This is mandatory - not by consent. And, this penetration and probing is NOT IN THE LEAST BIT MEDICALLY NECESSARY.
What's the legal term for penetration without consent? Oh yeah...rape! The state of Virginia wants to rape women with a probe if they choose to seek a 100% legal medical procedure!
(UPDATE - This bill has been tabled, and the Virginia Republicans have issued a statement: "Oops!")
Now, there has been blowback. But I still say that Dems are letting the Medieval Republicans frame these issues, and then reacting to the framing. Every Democratic lawmaker of the Venus gender should be blocking all business until these draconian bills are done away with. From now on, every bill in the Virginia legislature should contain a Democratic amendment to anally probe every man who asks for a viagra prescription. I mean, it's not medically necessary, but neither was the other rape law.
Over 90% of American women use some form of birth control. Over 90% of Catholic women use birth control. I know that up to 20% of Americans are religious zealots, who will act upon whatever their rabid pastors tell them to do. And that includes women. But that means 80% of the country's women, at least, will be on your side if you fight these anti-women laws and regulations.
And ladies - I haven't heard your voices at nearly the volume required. The White House compromised because it is sure that the issue will quietly fade away. But it will not. Conservatives are passing more and more egregious laws in the states to force a lawsuit that will make it to this right-wing Supreme Court, and overturn Roe V Wade.
Get loud! Get ultra-angry! Get ultra-angry at the Democrats.
Why? Because the Republicans don't care about you. The Dems do, at least about your votes, but they won't fight for average folk unless we make them. And I know what you will say - "men should get angry too." And we are. But we follow your lead on these issues. If we are pounding our fists, you need to be burning your bras (70s reference).
Why am I cranky? Why am I taking valuable drinking time to sit at a laptop and spill?
Because the Republicans have declared a war on birth control. Their leading presidential candidates are on board with this war.
No...seriously...in the 21st Century, the Republican Party is running their 2012 campaign, and is legislating in government, on an anti-birth control platform.
In case you've been living under a rock, the President was ready to put into place regulations that would require religious affiliated organizations, like a Catholic hospital or a Methodist school, to include birth control as part of their health coverage. Well, the Catholic church, and others, lost their shit. How DARE this (black, and probably Muslim) President infringe upon their religious freedom?!?!
The President (get ready to NOT be shocked in the least) came to a compromise. He changed the regulations so that these religious organizations need not pay, insurance companies will. And, they are happy to because the birth control costs so much less than a bunch of births. And I get why this President did this - women get the preventative care, and he gets to avoid a fight with conservatives, which is his proclivity.
But the Republicans doubled-down. They put forth the Blunt Amendment in the Senate. The Blunt Amendment would allow ANY employer to deny benefits on ANY religious or moral grounds.
But I don't get the politics. Republicans use this kind of issue to motivate their shrinking base to show up in the elections. But this is over the cliff. They will turn off almost ALL independent voters if the Democrats fight on this. And, this is an issue that Democrats could use to beat the shit out of Republicans with. They should bring it up every chance they get: "did you know that John Boehner is against birth control?" "Did you know that Mitch McConnell wants to keep women from getting birth control?" Make those fuckers answer this question over, and over again.
(Actually, Harry Reid finally did do this. After some Republicans realized what a disaster this issue could become, they tabled the Blunt Amendment. But Reid brought it back, and forced a vote on it. This was nicely done - all but one Republican voted for it, and now have to explain the vote to women.)
But not the White House, and not many other Democratic politicians. The President's people will say that they want no part of this because the Republicans have framed this as a religious freedom issue. Really? You Democrats are the biggest bunch of fucking pussies I have ever seen! (How's that for a sexist reference in a rant that rails against the sexism and misogyny in current legislation and politics?) You know, you all have access to microphones too! I know, a shock. You Dem lawmakers can also frame an issue. Taking birth control away from millions of women versus a much more muddled argument over religious freedom. C'mon, how BADLY would the Republicans lose?
Besides, Dems have just as strong of an argument in the First Amendment. Government is not supposed to get into the business of the churches, but it can regulate things like health care (Article One, Section Eight). Furthermore, institutions, government or otherwise, may not infringe upon the religious liberties of the people. How can a Catholic hospital be allowed to enforce Catholicism upon a Jewish janitor on the night shift via their health care plan? No, no, no...the First Amendment is there to protect the rights of the people, not the large, wealthy institutions. It is the antithesis of religious freedom for a large institution to be allowed to dictate religious doctrine to employees of many, or even no faiths.
In several states, including mine, Democrats have allowed pharmacists to refuse to fill certain prescriptions based on their particular religious beliefs. These beliefs are all against the freedom of women to make choices about their own bodies, and their own family planning. In other states, like Kansas and Texas, it gets a hell of a lot worse.
Here is possibly the worst yet. According to a bill proposed in the great state of Virginia (or, is it a commonwealth?), women seeking an abortion in the first trimester will be required to have a trans-vaginal probe. This probe is a device that is inserted into the vagina to take an ultrasound picture of what's inside. This is mandatory - not by consent. And, this penetration and probing is NOT IN THE LEAST BIT MEDICALLY NECESSARY.
What's the legal term for penetration without consent? Oh yeah...rape! The state of Virginia wants to rape women with a probe if they choose to seek a 100% legal medical procedure!
(UPDATE - This bill has been tabled, and the Virginia Republicans have issued a statement: "Oops!")
Now, there has been blowback. But I still say that Dems are letting the Medieval Republicans frame these issues, and then reacting to the framing. Every Democratic lawmaker of the Venus gender should be blocking all business until these draconian bills are done away with. From now on, every bill in the Virginia legislature should contain a Democratic amendment to anally probe every man who asks for a viagra prescription. I mean, it's not medically necessary, but neither was the other rape law.
Over 90% of American women use some form of birth control. Over 90% of Catholic women use birth control. I know that up to 20% of Americans are religious zealots, who will act upon whatever their rabid pastors tell them to do. And that includes women. But that means 80% of the country's women, at least, will be on your side if you fight these anti-women laws and regulations.
And ladies - I haven't heard your voices at nearly the volume required. The White House compromised because it is sure that the issue will quietly fade away. But it will not. Conservatives are passing more and more egregious laws in the states to force a lawsuit that will make it to this right-wing Supreme Court, and overturn Roe V Wade.
Get loud! Get ultra-angry! Get ultra-angry at the Democrats.
Why? Because the Republicans don't care about you. The Dems do, at least about your votes, but they won't fight for average folk unless we make them. And I know what you will say - "men should get angry too." And we are. But we follow your lead on these issues. If we are pounding our fists, you need to be burning your bras (70s reference).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)