May Day Rant - The Outrage Machine

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.

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.

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).

So, lets ring in the Christmas holiday week with some grim news about or great nation.

Republican primaries 
This week finds a new leader in the polls in Iowa: Dr. Ron Paul. What the hell happened to Gingritch? Well, thanks to serious negative ads, people realized just what an asshole he is. He did surprisingly well in the eyes of Iowa Republicans, for a while, but has always polled low nationally, including against Obama.

So, what's the deal with Republican voters? The deal is they have a clown posse to deal with. In some cases, an insane clown posse (not the proper noun, rap group ICP, but a group of mentally challenged clowns).

Take Michelle Bachman - she's deeply religious, and nuts. She'll say just about anything. What she says shows that she's dumber than a sack of doorknobs, and oblivious to just how dumb she is.

Then there's "man-on-dog" Rick Santorum, who is so full of hate for everyone not like him, AND as stupid as Bachman that, well, he's up to 10 points in the polls in Iowa.

Mittens Romney - sleazy, corrupt, plastic Wall Street hypocrite, which means Republicans would love him if he wasn't a Mormon. Seriously, around 30% of Iowa's likely caucus goers said that his Mormonism is a non-starter - they simply will not vote for a Mormon. And that's 30% who were asked by a real person, and essentially said "yeah, I'm a bigot." Think of how many more feel the same way and aren't saying it publicly.

Herman Cain - took his campaign slogans and policies from the SIMs game, and the Pokemon movie. That was what he considered "two layers deep." That and shoving women's heads down into his crotch when he had the opportunity. He led the field for a month!

Rick Perry - maybe dumber than the others combined. Seriously, this fucker shouldn't be allowed to eat with a fork. How is he the governor of Texas? Oh yeah, they elected Bush as governor there too. But Perry makes Bush look like a Rhodes Scholar.

There's a few others who are in the low single digits. They're no fun.

Which brings us to Ron Paul. Paul is now leading in Iowa, two weeks ahead of the caucus. He is now likely to win - although two weeks may be too long. Attack ads may chop him down the way they did Gingritch. What's funny, as Cenk Uygur points out on TYT, is that the pundits and the MSM are apoplectic about a likely Paul victory in Iowa. Conservative pundits are saying that if Paul wins in Iowa, that it just won't count. Wait a minute - didn't Obama set the world on fire, and fuel his eventual victory by winning the Iowa caucuses? C'mon conservatives...Paul only has a chance because your field is pathetic. Don't get me wrong, Paul's crazy too. But he is somewhat principled, and that is what almost NO POLITICIAN is anymore. People like that.

Suffer the Children
1.6 million children in the US are homeless. Children make up a majority of Americans who live below the poverty line. But don't worry, we still have the Bush tax cuts, and are cutting education and social services.

Defense Reauthorization Act
So, with overwhelming support from Democrats, the Defense Reauthorization Act was passed. The final version passed with over 80 votes in the Senate. This legislation allows for the indefinite detention of terror suspects, including American Citizens. Now, there was a provision that says American Citizens get processed by civilian criminal justice systems, so some pundits are saying this means it's no big deal. But the legislation also contains language that says NO MONEY CAN BE PUT TOWARD CIVILIAN TRIALS. Get it? That is the poison pill clause that undoes the protective language.

So, habius corpus, gone. The Fifth Amendment, and the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of due process, gone. No bail? The Eighth Amendment, gone. All someone has to do is say "terrorist" and point the finger, and you could be disappeared. If you support this, you hate America. If you are in Congress and voted for this, you hate America and work to change it into corporate/military oligarchy. Here's my question though: why?

I don't see how a corporation gets rich from this in the short term. It's true that prison is a big for-profit business now, but why this? It is so egregious! In my now paranoid state, I think it is a reaction to Occupy Wall Street. I think this is the anti-dissent clause of the Defense Reauthorization Act. People who criticize the corporate takeover of our government will be considered economic terrorists and just simply grabbed up by the police, or some agency having to do with homeland security.

Now, do you remember how Obama said he would veto this? (In truth, he said he would "oppose" it.) Well, he has now given it the nod. This is not what I expected when I voted for "change" in 2008. But why would Obama want this? He loves Wall Street. They were and still are his number one donors. And if you buy into my paranoid assessment, then this part of the Act is the Wall Street protection clause.

Obama defenders, including WH press secretaries, say that "this legislation doesn't put into legislation things that the President couldn't already do." Well I say "that's the fucking problem!" This NORMALIZES HORRIBLE BEHAVIOR BY THE GOVERNMENT! Obama was supposed to, was in fact elected to reverse the awful direction of the Bush White House. Instead he's taken things further in the horrible direction.

Obama has normalized the wiretapping and indefinite detention of American Citizens. Worse, he has assassinated American Citizens without trial. This is now NORMAL behavior for an American President. Now, how bad do you think it could get with a President Gingritch exercising these same executive powers?

Obama in 2012?
No, no no...the above rant tells you how horrible the choice is in 2012. The absolute clownish abomination that is the Republican field, or the so-called Democrat Obama who is allowing huge portions of the Bill of Rights to be shredded, and left for naught. The laughably called progressive Obama who has Goldman Sachs bitch Tim Geithner as our Treasury Secretary, and Jeff Immelt (GE CEO) as his top financial advisor. To put it in brief, we can elect a Republican who will openly serve the corporate oligarchs, and make us pay for it, or a Democrat who will barely hide the fact that he serves the corporate oligarchy and is making us pay for it.

So what do you do? Well,  here's where we come full-circle to Ron Paul. Now, I'm not over the edge yet. I am not ready to vote for a Republican. But Paul seems to be the most principled candidate in the election. Still, he's crazy. He want's to get rid of five cabinet departments. He wants to cut a trillion dollars from the budget. This would cripple the nation. It would be a disaster.

But, could he do it? The cabinet departments...maybe. After all, he would be the executive. But there would be pressure to keep them. And cutting a trillion? That's up to Congress, and he would probably not get all of his cuts.

The upside? He'd end the wars. He'd cut defense. Again, there would be tremendous pressure from the oligarchs and the Pentagon, but he'd probably be able to use public sentiment to end the war in Afghanistan. That's a huge win. Also, he'd work to restore civil liberties. That's another HUGE win, and way more than Obama has done. What is clear at this point is that Ron Paul is NOT for the oligarchy. He's not a Wall Street bitch, like the majority of BOTH parties, and like EVERY other candidate for president, including Obama.

Maybe he's just fooling us, like Obama did in 2008. But is it worth a shot? Again, I'm not there yet, but I'm considering it. I see the Paul acolytes on the freeway overpasses, waving their signs. I used to roll my eyes and snicker, but now I wonder.

What would Paul do when a Supreme Court justice needs to be replaced? That would be a key question. My gut tells me that could be a disaster. Obama did a decent job...twice (maybe - I'm still not sure about Kagen). But do we make the choice based on a potential Supreme Court nomination? While the Constitution burns and the President fiddles?

Uhg. What a choice. Happy Holidays.

To the Casino, With Our Money!

So, the news is full of the foibles and follies of the drunken clown-car that is the Republican candidates to face President Obama in 2012. Bachman's a lunatic, Perry's as dumb as a stump, Cain may be dumber and Romney - the eventual candidate - is loathed by the base. So much drama, so much distraction.

Meanwhile, in Gotham City, Bank of America (playing the role of the evil mastermind) moved their depositor's accounts to the part of their bank that gambles in derivatives. Holy horse shit, Batman! This means a crime is happening!

Yes, a crime, and one that should be punished. And, the cops were on the beat. Part of our government, the FDIC (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation) swooped in and said "stop!" They realized that this move by B of A put US taxpayers in a terrible position. Then, their good works were foiled by the evil villain's best friend - the rest of the US government.

The Fed told the FDIC to stand down. Told them to shut up, and let B of A move their depositor's money to the risky, casino side of their banking operations. 

What does this mean? It means that if you are a B of A customer, YOUR money is now being used to gamble in the derivatives market. What this means for B of A is that they have lots more money to gamble with, and to cover losses with. You see, they get to gamble way, way more than they have on deposit. This is also part of the reason why banks are not loaning out all that money they got from the Fed in the first place - our money - which was what they were supposed to do. Loaning money to you at usurious rates still pays less than if they score gambling on derivatives. In this way, your money is used as leverage for huge bets that pay huge bonuses for the gamblers.

Now, if they don't score while gambling, well, they get to go to the government's Federal Insurance Deposit Corporation and say "shit - we lost all of those depositor's money." Then, the FDIC, backed up by OUR TAX DOLLARS, replaces the lost money - depositor's money. Then, B of A has leverage again and goes right back to the casino.

How fucking awesome would it be, if you could go to your local B of A branch and pull out other people's money? Wait, wait...then, go to the casino (I know of three near where I live) and gamble like a  high roller? If you win, you keep all the winnings. But if you lose, go to the government and have them cover your losses, then gamble again. How fucking awesome? Or, how fucking stupid?

No, no, no...this is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. Even if B of A employees are really, really good gamblers in the derivatives market, they are going to lose sometimes. The derivatives market is largely unregulated, and it's huge - easily in the tens of trillions of dollars. Being off by just a percent of trillions could wipe out billions of depositors' money. 

So, check this: B of A, who pays you virtually NO INTEREST on your savings, is going to use YOUR MONEY to profit mightily in the short term, and then use YOUR TAX DOLLARS to cover their losses when they LOSE ALL OF YOUR MONEY. Wow. 

But I'm sure Tim Geithner is on this. (Where is my snark font?)

The Tipping Point?

We are coming to a tipping point in America. We are coming to the time, as we have before, where one national meme gives way to another. The meme that we have been following since 1981 is "what is good for corporate America is good for us all." The sub-meme is "government is a hinderance to corporate America, and therefore bad for Americans."

We, the unwashed masses, are waking up to some realities.

• Reality #1: There is no corporate "America," just multinational corporations that have headquarters in America.
• Reality #2: The distribution of money in our economy has become unjust.
• Reality #3: Government itself isn't necessarily bad, but our elected leaders are mostly corrupt.
• Reality #4: Because of this corruption, we don't have a political spectrum representing the people, just government by and for narrow corporate interests.

Reality #1

Corporations are not evil, nor are they good. They are amoral entities that exist to help the corporation's bottom line. They do not sit in mahogany-paneled rooms and plot to destroy America. But if, say, environmental regulations  get in the way of profits, then they will fight those regulations - especially if fighting is cheaper than compliance. Likewise, they do not sit in a circle asking how they can benefit the nation - that is not their responsibility. Their fiduciary duty is to their shareholders, and to the company's bottom line.

Unfortunately, things that are good for a corporation's bottom line that are bad for us are polluting, paying less (or in many cases NO) taxes, trimming their work force, outsourcing American jobs, and avoiding compliance with health, safety and labor regulations. All of these things impoverish or endanger American citizens, and lower our quality of life. But I would again point out that this does not make corporations evil - it is what they do. It is the role of government to regulate the behavior of corporations, so they don't shit all over the commons, and the citizens of America. 

And people see this now. It is common knowledge, for instance, that in 2010 GE paid NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX, and in fact, got a rebait. Joe lunchpail, who paid his taxes in 2010 gave part of that to GE. Same for some banks, same for big oil. And yet, Democrats rush to defend Wall Street's tax shelters. BP not only fouled the gulf, but killed 12 people in that infamous rig explosion. Yet you had a Republican Congressman apologizing to them for the harsh words that some in DC were using at them. Our government is supposed to protect the average guy from the powerful's abuse. But that is not happening, so corporations continue to suck all the nation's money right up to the top, which brings us to...

Reality #2

We have the worst inequity of income distribution since they have been keeping track. Our disparity between rich and poor puts us on par, according to recent economic studies, with Mexico and the Philippines. The top 400 richest people in American have more money than the bottom 50%. The bottom half is over 150 million people. The six Walmart heirs have more money than the bottom 30%! No, no...six people have more money than the poorest 100 million Americans. That is insane. Also, since the mid 1970s, the American middle class has barely held steady with inflation as far as income. That is, except the last five years. In that span, we have lost seven percent. We are getting crushed. Why are we getting crushed?...

Reality #3

Our government is the longest-lasting system of constitutional government in the world. Our framework works to, more of less, serve the people. We don't always like it, it's not always fair, but it has worked for about 230 years. 

Now, however, our government works to serve the top 2% almost to the exclusion of all else. Those that govern haven't completed the transformation, but they are working hard to get rid of entitlements (that we are, by the way, entitled to), and to shape the tax structure to insure a permanent upper/ruling class in the United States. Shit like this has gone on since the founding - like Hamilton and Washington and their buddies swindling Revolutionary War vets out of their bonds. But it feels like this is a tipping point. 

American has been raided. Corporate raiders have cleaned the safes and cupboards, and now they're shorting the United States. The credit downgrade was just the first move. Once Social Security is scooped up into bags marked "swag," and state education budgets are transferred to a few corporations, and all the prisons privatized, we will cease to educate ourselves, have no cushion for our elderly and handicapped, and fall into third world status. We are getting crushed, squeezed as it were, because the ruling elite want to suck the last juice out of us before moving on, like fat locusts. And why is this happening?

Because our government leaders are in the employ of these locusts. Their campaign money, and their future wealth comes from the corporate oligarchy. This is true for their staffers, and for cabinet officials, and for generals and colonels in the military. Serve the master, get your reward. Not just in campaign funds (bribes), but in future jobs, speech fees and consulting fees. And, this is legal. But it is wholly and utterly corrupt. Our elected leaders are, by and large, whores who we pay six figure salaries, get great benefits and pensions, but only blow the oligarchs. We are left with empty pockets holding our dicks. 

So, does anyone represent us?

Reality #4

Basically, no. If you are lucky enough to have Bernie Sanders as a Senator, you have maybe the last principled senator in America. Now, some conservatives do go to bat for their voters on social issues, and swing hard. And a few so-called liberals do the same. But they both cater first and foremost to the top 2%. Republicans do this openly, having claimed the mantle of "pro-business" for a long time they have no trouble voting to erase regulations that save children's lives or keep the nation from becoming a toxic waste dump. Democrats, however, are having a much harder time doing this. As the final looting of America begins, the votes they must take are more egregious, and harder to defend. 

So, you get Senators like Patty Murray, who has liberal cred for voting against Bush on the Iraq War, put in place to shepherd the corporate agenda through the Super Committee. Barney Frank and Chris Dodd who rail against Wall Street, and yet wink and nod as their bill gets watered down, especially where the horribly dangerous derivatives gambling is concerned. And, oh my god, President Obama, who often executes his office to the RIGHT of how Bush Jr. did - with Democrats like this, who needs Republicans? 

Seriously though, as voters who care about our own economic plight, we have NO CHOICES to make between Democrats and Republicans. We don't have a "left" and a "right" any more. We have a far, far right corporatist party, and a right wing corporatist party. The right wing corporatist party dallies on a few social issues, but does not waver from ANY legislation that protects the bonus of a CEO.

So, where does that leave the 98% of American voters? Well, if you are super right wing, you can go with either party, as they will speak to your economic and foreign policy mythology, or vote Republican and have them cater to your draconian, Old Testement-based social agenda. If, however, you are an American who does not want to be economically fucked hard, while bent over the meat-counter of corporate America, you have no choice. The question really becomes: do I bother getting off the couch. Many potential Democratic voters in 2010 answered "no."

Soon, it will be 2012, and the answer will be "hell no!" The Democratic Party, and its de-facto leader President Obama have not done the job for the 98%. Sure, he has scolded us, and told us we are unreasonable, and backed down from just about EVERY fight from the so-called opposition, but some how...that's just not enough. We now see that losing those fights is his job. He is supposed to lose, so that the corporate oligarchy wins. We see this, and have lost hope. We see this, and know that the Democratic party is a dead end. The 98%, economically, have no representation in our national government (with very few exceptions).

The next burst of energy from the average working American will come as a protest, and as organized action to change the rules. Perhaps a Constitutional amendment to change how campaigns are financed. Perhaps as a third party, one that does damage to both of our established parties. Perhaps all of the above. But it's coming soon. 

Let's hope so, anyway.

Credit Where Credit is Due

My last post was a blasting of the Jobs speech by President Obama. Of my many concerns, my most damning one was over the math. When he proposed paying for it by letting the "Super Congress" find the money, that meant that it would be paid for by cuts that would affect all of us, because you know that "Stupor Congress" will not raise a nickel in new revenue. And with over half of the bill in the form of tax cuts, that would mean we would ultimately pay for another 300 billion in tax cuts for big business.

Then, this last Monday, the President changed his tune. Usually, this means he is weakening his position in order to agree full-throatedly with Republicans. But, credit where credit is due, he stood strong. In fact, he turned up the heat. He insisted that the undertaxed rich could pony up a few more coppers each to pay for this legislation.

I like it.

I like that he had specifics. He proposed taxing hedge fund managers like normal people. He proposed limiting deductions on families making over a quarter million a year. He proposed canceling taxpayer  subsidies for the large uber-profitable oil companies. These are things that a liberal president should be for.

They will also make Republicans turn green.

But that is good politics. Now, Fox news and the Republican talking-point machine have made powerful imprints on the national psyche. But their imprint does not poll well, and will be very hard for most Republicans to defend over and over and over. If the Dems run ads in all the Republican districts that show a Wall Street hedge fund villain lighting a cigar with a fan of hundreds, and then split the screen with that district's closed factory or food bank with empty shelves - damn, that will be pressure. Republicans are already having awful times at their town meetings, with people asking them about jobs, and telling them to tax the rich. And there is, unfortunately, no liberal equivalent of the Tea Party. These are their constituents who are pissed about being poor and jobless while the money flows upward.

And it heartens the base. When the President says "pass this bill, right away," and goes after a Republican party that openly despises the average working American, we feel glad that someone with power is finally fighting for us. If he keeps at it, he will change the message away from "deficits" and "spending" to "jobs." And "jobs" will become synonymous with the kind of government stimulus that he is proposing. The idea, that Obama has endorsed at times, that cutting taxes and spending is the way to economic recovery will give way to the idea that the government needs to take action to pull its people out of the economic morass.

Look, I still strongly disagree with the proposed bill. Over half tax cuts will not get it done. The trade agreements will not result in job one, and are largely tax shelters for the fortune 500. But if hedge fund managers pay for it, then I'll take it, along with the 200 billion in infrastructure and teachers hired. Unlike the claims of the Obama cultists, liberals like me who criticize the President don't want the perfect over the good. We just want some of the good.

Here's what I will watch for - as one who has been disappointed over and over again by this White House. I will watch for a back-track. I will listen carefully for a White House spokesperson to come out and say that "what the President meant was that maybe hedge fund managers could chip in a little, but that ultimately the Super Congress will decide..." or something like that. That means here we go again. I will also watch and see if the President quickly agrees to sign the tax cut parts of this bill now, and say he will fight for the other parts going forward. If that happens, we've been fucked. And I say we've been fucked because this President just doesn't fight (unless it's to kill a progressive proposal), and this was all a sham to slip through another 300 billion in tax cuts for big business.

I would rather he got none of this bill, than just the Republican-approved parts. If he uses the bill as a blunt instrument, it may not even save his presidency, but it could flip a lot of seats in the House. There are over 60 Republicans in districts that voted for Obama in 2008. These are not massively red districts, and could go blue with a strong, populist message centered around jobs, and how the Republicans have done nothing to create them, after running on jobs in 2010. I'd rather, in this case, to have the good be the enemy of the lame.

I want a fight. I want my President to fight. He's sounding like he finally wants to fight the opposition, and I like the sound. "No tax cuts of ANY KIND without stimulus!" should be the rallying cry. If the Republicans kill it, then beat them senseless for a year with it, and watch them lose. In reality, beat them senseless for a couple of months, and watch them start to flip. Watch as the pressure mounts at those town halls, on the forums, and maybe even on cable news. Watch those fuckers fold when someone finally hits them in the face.

I want good policy, and I think the President's proposal is luke-warm policy, at best, but has good parts. But I am partisan, and I want good politics too. As a liberal, I want a strong liberal counter-punch to conservative devastation to the nation. Fighting on jobs is great politics - IF the Dems, led by Obama, stay strong. Jobs is the issue that Americans care most about, and the Republicans are on the wrong side of the issue.

Stay strong!


****Late update to this post****
The Huffington Post has an article that says, uhg, that says the President will sign what the Republicans agree with, and fight for the rest after. God dammit.