History and Reality at the end of 2010

I talk a lot of shit.  I talk shit about football and politics, having been professionally involved in neither.  I guess this makes me, well...an asshole where these fields are concerned.  Or at least a blowhard.

But people listen sometimes, and they ask me about the future of the country.  Jesus, what poor sons O' bitches.  But I tell 'em.  I am short-term very pessimistic.

I also have a grasp of history, a bit of a geek for it, and some concern professionally with the substance of it.  I call to mind a saying, and I can't even place the source (Voltaire?): history is full of the sound of silk slippers going down stairs, and wooden shoes going up.

If you haven't figured it out yet, we Americans are wearing the silk slippers, and we're heading down.  We are heading down economically, and politically.  Culturally?  That's harder to gauge, as it is very subjective.  But politically and economically, the stairs have turned into an escalator, and it is on a high-speed plunge.

I am reminded of Republican Rome, and the strife of that ancient time.  A very corrupt Senate, tied closely to the interests of the most powerful land owners, screwed the small farmers, merchant class and finally the troops. Roman troops, swindled out of their land in their absence, off fighting imperial wars for more land and slaves for the same landowners who swindled them. Sound familiar? This led to political unrest, including the Tea Party-type political insurgencies of the time. People started showing up to rallies with weapons (like the town halls of the summer of health care), and this soon led to violence in the streets as skilled demagogues fueled the political fire of economic unfairness.  We have seen a little of that already, stay tuned for the real action to come as the Beck and Limbaugh acolytes seek the Second Amendment solution to their frustrations.

If 2010 has taught us anything, it is that like later Republican Rome, wealthy elites control our government, for the most part.  We're allowed an Elizabeth Warren here and there, but our senators and presidents are bought lock, stock and barrel.  We have also realized, to increasing dismay, that there is no accountability for the powerful, just for us.  Fraud, treason, murder, eavesdropping, torture, kidnapping, more torture...total pass.  Smoke some weed? Read your wife's email? Jail for you mother fucker! Sure, Tom Delay was convicted, and may go to jail barring appeal.  But how about all the Senators who are retiring to cash in with the corporations they have been shilling for these past decades? They gave the banks our money, and we lose our houses. They paid defense contractors on a lie, and our nephews, sons and daughters go off to die.  And when they get back, they are in debt, have PTSD, and no job prospects.

We realize in 2010 that we have an ultra-right pro-corporate party, and a moderate-right pro-corporate party.  There is no people's party on either side. We are feeling the frustration of limited prospects, opportunity and fairness. We feel the sting of our votes being meaningless, as both parties work against us. We fear for our kids' futures, that they will be less than ours.  And to a degree they will be.  My children will not have the same opportunities as I did. That is in part the swing of history, and part laziness on behalf of the American public - allowing our representatives to sell us out without a response from us.  It's hard to kick a lot of ass in silk slippers, I guess.

Who's wearing the wooden shoes?  China and India, to a large degree.  These economic juggernauts will necessarily affect our standard of living as they flex their economic muscles in the global cage match for resources.  When they happily are paying $10 per gallon for gas for 80 MPG cars that they build, and we can't for our 30 MPG cars that will soon be worthless, we will know how far down stairs we have fallen. Then, we'll probably put on some wooden shoes of our own.

In 2010, our life expectancy lowered for the first time in a long time.  It was already behind other industrial nations', but that is still depressing.  And our disparity between rich and poor is the highest it has been since right before the Great Depression.  Our banks are insolvent, and propped up by made-up asset values, and over a trillion bucks from the Fed's printing press.  We're heading for a disaster when the house of cards, which is our national banking system, collapses.

Yes, pessimistic in the short term.  Long term?  I think we've got it in us for at least a few more generations.  Not, perhaps, as the world's sole super-power, but as a great and powerful country none the less.  We, the people, still have a chance to take our government back.  And, we have the chance to change our economy, although that will be a slower process, and require a government that is not under the boot-heel of the currently vested economic interests.  It may be time for some constitutional conventions - started in the states - to address money in politics.  We can do this if we don't despair, but put steel toes on those wooden shoes and begin the ass kicking.

And we must always step back and consider the scope of history, and where we are.  Today, we live like emperors.  We, the average schlep in the United States, live like only the most pampered kings and princes in history have.  Even better.  Think of how technological advances enhanced our lives.  Clean water, that we can actually drink, that doesn't give us diarrhea, comes out of our taps.  When we do shit, it's in a toilet, and we flush it away.  These are mere dreams for most people, for most of human history.  A grocery store?  People coming to America from Russia in the 1980s would break down in tears when they would enter a Safeway.*  Imagine what a Medieval peasant would do, or a Roman farmer for that matter.

*[By the way, Reagan ended the cold war?  Fuck no, it was the realization that in America there were many kinds of sausage available at ANY grocery store, as opposed to waiting in line for hours in hope of getting A sausage.  Communism couldn't deliver a sausage, that's why the Berlin wall fell.]

Most people in history were lucky to own two shirts.  Most people in America, if asked how many they owned, couldn't answer.  Most people in history had to work all day, every day, just to get enough calories to keep alive.  Most people in America get way more calories than needed every day.  Throughout history only the elite could read.  Notwithstanding our standardized testing results, we are a broadly literate society.  Add transportation and communication technologies, and we live lives that would make sultans green with envy.

We've got problems, and I'll continue to bitch about them ad nauseum.  We have yet to see if the people will rise up and effect necessary change to keep our republic from going completely off the rails, and hold the powerful accountable; or if the powerful will move to crush the people, which is what largely happened in Republican Rome.  But some year-end reflection on just how well the average American lives, compared to 99.9 percent of human history helps me swallow the disaster that was 2010.

Now, let's get out there and start the change. Primary the shit out of Obama.  Primary NOW!

Now, I'm Gonna' Be a Dick About This...

Credit where credit is due, right?  Don't Ask Don't Tell was ended by a vote in the Senate Saturday.  For all the criticism I have lately dished out to Obama and the Democratic leadership, here they come and dunk from the foul line on a progressive issue.

Well, they make a foul shot, anyway.

Before you click away because of my irrational hate, I understand what a groundbreaking move this was.  Decades, if not centuries of officially sanctioned bigotry and oppression by our armed forces will be done away with when the President signs this into law.  Allowing gay men and women to serve openly in the military is an historic step forward in American civil rights.  Kudos to all involved!  This includes the much maligned (by me) President Obama - way to go, big guy!

It was inevitable, though, as is gay marriage.  The path of history is clear in America.  We make you wait, then eventually you get your rights.  African Americans, women, gays - discrimination is not over, but legal recognition of your rights is now codified in at least our military.  And when the right gay marriage case gets to the Supreme Court, it will also be allowed.  It is a 14th Amendment no-brainer.  And still you give credit to Democrats, and eight Republican senators.

But to continue the basketball analogy, this was an uncontested lay-up.  There was no real fight against this, apart from the omnibus hostage-taking by Republicans over tax cuts for the rich.  No CEOs bonus was threatened by giving gay people a little more rights.  This was low-hanging legislative fruit.  After the monumental cave-in by Democratic leadership on the tax bill, they could reach this one from their prone position, on their backs.

Here's what they couldn't even get to their knees to reach: the Child Marriage Act.  This would redirect foreign aid resources to fight the practice of child marriage, which in some cases is a form of child sexual slavery.  But Republicans blocked it.

Now, to the Obamapolagists, I get it - the REPUBLICANS blocked it.  And yes, they are mean, bad, nasty and evil men and women.  They obstruct, and they call the President bad names, and they give poor Senator Reid wedgies.

That is why you FIGHT them.

You mean the President couldn't be bothered to make several speeches about how Republicans want to continue forms of child sexual slavery when it doesn't cost any new money to fight it?  Nope, just cave in to it.  Fuck those kids, I guess.  Literally for some, I guess.

911 responders?  The heroes of 911?  They need medical help.  Republicans have been blocking that, too.  John Stewart of the Daily Show embarrassed them mightily, and THEY may finally cave, but it will be the doings of Comedy Central, not the Democratic leadership.

And, if you are the Democratic leadership, how do you not win on this issue?  Can you imagine ANY Republican sponsored bill having to do with 911 being blocked by Democrats?  Can you not imagine the political carnage that would be the result?  This is where Obama needs to walk onto the floor of the Senate with a pool cue, break in over his knee, wield the thicker end and dare those benefit-blocking Republicans to say "911" just one more time.  Harry Reid should change the number on the bill being blocked, bring it up for vote again, and do this every day until is passes.  And when it is blocked again use that opportunity to say how much all Republicans hate America, how they are with the terrorists, and how they work to harm the heroes of 911.  Three days, tops, and they're begging to vote for the 911 responders.

God damn it is sad to watch.

And the final of many final straws?  The end of net neutrality.  Yup, in spite of all of Obama's pretty speeches in favor of net neutrality, he will allow his appointed chair of the FCC to give the store away to AT&T.  This is the first foot in the door of tollbooth internet.  Not just your access to the open web, but your ability to access or produce particular content.  You don't believe me, ask Netflix, who is already being affected by bandwidth cuts because they compete with the ISPs.

Now this would have taken guts.  Obama would have had to stand up to not just Republicans, but to large corporations.  He would have had to stand up for free speech against moneyed interests, and powerful members of his own party who take big sacks of cash from those same interests.  Which in my opinion, is his fucking job!

But apparently, our President sees his job differently.  He sees himself as a facilitator.  He's going to ease us into corporate serfdom.  Or, he's just weak.  Either way, he can't fight this one from his back, or his knees.  He needs to stand up, and he just can't do it.

Yay for ending DADT, but it is a fig leaf.  Just like unemployment extension - a good thing - masked a huge sellout to the rich and the undermining of social security, this bill takes attention away from selling our free speech and internet access rights, 911 responders, and little girls around the world down the river.  Jesus, we have got to primary this guy hard!  We need to find someone who knows how to fight as hard as the Republicans for their policy goals, and hope that those end up being our policy goals too.

Okay okay...you want me to admit more "progressive" victories by the Democratic leadership?  START is likely to pass now, with over 60 votes in the Senate (don't get me fucking started on 60 again), and a food safety bill passed and will be signed into law.  And these are good things.  But I can't stand how we jump up and down when a few "good things" get done.

Would a John McCain administration have passed DADT, START or food safety?  Probably START only, so I get it, there's a difference.  But not enough of one.  It's like saying "well, we got punched in the gut, but if it was McCain, we'd have been kicked in the nuts!"  I don't want to be punched OR kicked.  I don't want to have to choose between donkey shit or elephant shit.  I want to elect a president who runs on a marginally progressive platform, and have him achieve marginally progressive policy goals.  Not one who gives corporate interests everything, and then negotiates with Republicans for what's left over. I want a president who gets on a ladder to harvest the fruit, not one who lays on his back and picks what he can grab.  Same for Democratic leaders in the House and Senate.  So yeah, thanks a lot for DADT, now hows about getting to work for a "change."

It's not too much to ask.  Don't listen to the Obamabots or Democratic fanboys who demand fealty or accuse you of helping Republicans.  Fuck that.  Primary the shit out of these corporate lackeys who are sticking it dry to you and your family.  Primary hard.

Primary NOW!

Stephanie Miller - Wrong Again

I commute, and I flip channels.  I love politics, and football news.  But listening to Stephanie Miller has been painful these last few days.  I disagree so, so much.

She, along with Randi Rhodes are backing Obama with full throats.  I don't get why they don't get it.  He will never be reelected.  He's done.  He has moved his economic position way, way to the right of Ronald Reagan.  Jesus, Bush would have been embarrassed to have ASKED for a deal like this.  He is  now campaigning for the Republican position, and this does tremendous harm to our nation.

Obama has just taken the political center, already way, way to the right of where Bill Clinton left it, and now has pushed it even further right.  We have had to fight our own president these last two years, and he has dragged us right every time.  Now, he has leaped to the right with this deal.  Combine it with the cat food commission, and he has facilitated the destruction of the American middle class.

We have been holding at about our own 20 yard line, and Obama has just moved it back to the 10.  Now we have 90 yards to go, instead of 80.  That payroll deduction he is giving everyone - for one year - will be all but impossible for this president to remove.  It assures the demise of Social Security - again, the evil will of the Republicans made manifest by Obama.  This deal is 900 Billion dollars that my kids, and grandkids will have to pay, and will leave my retirement in tatters, and the Democratic party - once the only hope against the conservative destruction of America - holding the line well to the right of Reagan, to the right of Bush in some regards.

Obama is not a genius chess master.  He is a Republican at heart and we were fooled.  Either that or he is the weakest, most inept President in the last 80 or more years.  He is dooming this country to economic disaster, and my children to a sub-European standard of living.  We are all hostages of the multinational CEOs because Obama negotiated our future away.  The corporations are draining us dry, then they will abandon us and move on to China and India.

Obama has taken on so much of the Republican position that it will be too hard for him to run against it in 2012.  He is terrified of Citizens United money pouring in from multinational corporations, so he lurches towards their cornucopia of cash (which he will never get).  But he leaves the American people behind.  His messaging is so fouled, he has no hope.  Even if independents rediscover him (which I don't think will happen), a big chunk of the Democratic Party is lost to him.

Look, Democrats spent almost 10 years fighting the Bush tax reductions for the rich.  The base of that argument is that supply-side economics DOES NOT trickle down, therefore all but the rich get fucked.  There is plenty of data to back that up.  Obama has flipped on that principle in an instant, for this one deal that didn't need to be made.  With the economy likely to still be the number one issue in 2012, how does he differentiate himself?  As the guy who ruined America for a year of unemployment benefits?

Besides, here is a president who has majorities in both houses, and can't get anything done without the permission of the Republicans.  He oozes weakness.  60 was NEVER the standard in the Senate until Obama became president.  It was the exception, not the rule.  And I am so, so sick of apologists saying "what can he do?  It's those damn Republicans obstructing everything!"  Bullshit!  Would George W. Bush have stood for that?  Hell no!  He, dumb as he was, would have taken out a baseball bat and swung away.  Remember 2006?  When he lost the House and the Senate, on the Iraq War issue?  He said "so you don't like my war, huh?  Well you're gonna love my surge."  He doubled down, and the entire Democratic Party folded.

Bush was an idiot who led this country in a terrible direction.  But he was a leader.

This leads me to the other argument of the Obama apologists: that the Democratic Party is too diverse, and the blue dogs screw him every time.  Well, Bush had dissenters in his party too.  He kept them in line.  Many of these are the Tea Party now, to whom Obama and the Democrats ceded the populist mantle. No, Obama gets pushed around by the blue dogs because he's easy to push.  He throws up a wish list of legislation, and says "now you boys fight this out" to Congress.  Then when he sees where the fight is, he rushes in to make a deal.  Worse, he rushes in before his own party has a chance to make deals among the various caucuses.  He doesn't lead.  He should be leading us in the opposite direction of Bush. Instead he's following that same path economically, militarily and in the Justice Department.

You know, one more thing I hear in liberal talk media that drives me crazy is the argument that Monday morning quarterbacking does no good, and we have to get in line behind Obama because he is better than the Republican alternative.  Look, I don't expect to agree with anyone all the time.  But when you get screwed over and over again, at some point you have to say "no mas!" We are Americans - we are supposed to criticize our leaders when they do wrong!

He's not the guy we voted for.  At least, not the President I thought I voted for.  And in 2012 he will face an electorate suffering from four years of near 10% unemployment, high health insurance premiums (or, no health insurance at all), continued and even more unpopular wars, further economic inequity between rich and poor and, even bigger deficits because his friends the bankers have sucked all of the money out of the system.  He will have been investigated about 750,000 times by House Republicans, because they will NOT look forward only, they will look back with a microscope (by the way, how did that strategy work out for us). The first thing they plan to do is dig out the details of all the back-room deals that the Obama Administration made with Big Pharma and the hospital groups.  This will taint the one thing that Obama could claim as a big accomplishment - as "change," his health care legislation. This, plus all the corporate cash in the universe stacked against him.  He has no chance.

Obama loses the swing states in 2012.  His base will be demoralized, and independents will see him as weak and corrupt, and blame him for the economic pain they still feel.  And they should blame him, because he has signed on for the policies that have brought that pain.

A primary candidate, with a strong populist message from the left, is the only Democratic hope.  It is the hope in two ways.  One, that the message is clear and consistent enough to pierce the veil of corporate cash that will rain on the 2012 election, thus allowing a slim hope of victory.  Two, that the pressure of a groundswell from the left becomes too much for Obama to bear, and he switches course and begins to lurch towards that position. It will have to be a ton of pressure, because Obama is so used to running right.

Ah, god...just look at Boehner and McConnell, two ghouls with little or no personality or appeal.  And these guys are mopping the floor with our side.  How thin is the thread holding the sword of Damocles over us in 2012?

Primary NOW!

It's Time for Change 2.0...2.0

Introducing your new Republican president: Barack Obama.

No, it's way worse than my last post.  Obama caved on the tax cuts for the rich.  Not only that, he also gave a huge tax cut on the inheritance tax, tax cuts for payroll, and...failed to get anything but SOME unemployment relief.  No DADT, no START treaty, no dignity for himself, or any of us.

$70,000 EACH to the top 1%.  A few crumbs for you.  This is what your seemingly Republican President is now fighting to defend.

Obama said that because the Republicans were holding the unemployed hostage, he HAD to give in.  No SWAT team, no posturing, just cave.  He says wait for another two years, then he's ready to fight the economic terrorists who take Americans hostage.  Now, he negotiates with terrorists.  Great, the plan that killed Jimmy Carter.

What is the worst, though, the absolute WORST...is his sudden and total validation and support of supply-side economics.  Obama now says that tax cuts for the rich are CRUCIAL for the economy.

No, no...this is the Republican position!  The fucking position of your, well - supposed opposition.  Dude, you are campaigning against your own party, and your own base.  In a big way.

NO!  You are fucking done.  Who do I need to support?  Feingold? How about Howard Dean?  Dean knows how to play the game.  Jesus, he's a big reason Obama was elected in the first place.

Primary NOW!  Change 2.0 NOW!  Obama is done, he will not win in 2012.  And even if he did, whoopie!  A Democrat who defends just about every Republican position against his own base.  Obama, who assumes that he will lose before the cards are dealt, who only fights his own supporters.  He sucks in the worst way.

And for the apologists, you are wrong.  Yes, Obama DID say that he wanted to push the tax cut issue before the primary.  Yes, Senate Democrats DID wimp out.  This is all documented.  But at the same time, Obama's WH leaked that he was ready to deal.  He has always done this, and the Senate has learned.  Obama is ready to throw Democratic House and Senate members under the Republican bus with the knowledge that he will compromise NO MATTER WHAT THE OUTCOME OF THE FIGHT IN GOVERNMENT.   I'm amazed the House still fights at all.  Obama's the worst, and at the worst time for our great country.

Aaahh, who do we run?  I don't agree with all of Howard Dean's positions, but he knows how to win.

Run somebody who will fight for a moderately liberal position.

Run somebody who will fight for working families.

Run somebody who will FIGHT.

Obama won't.  Change 2.0.  PRIMARY NOW!

Time for Change 2.0

It’s over.  O-V-E-R over.  From what we’ve heard from the President over the last two days, there is no other way I can call it.  Obama will never deliver for Democratic voters.

And I don’t even mean “progressive” voters, I mean anyone who is not rich, and not a rabid social conservative.  He is not on our side, period.

Yesterday, he called for a freeze on the pay of all federal employees.  Now, keep in mind that the average full-time federal employee earns between 40 and 50k per year, not the 100 thousand + per annum salaries that Republicans lie about.  And, keep in mind that many are union workers.  They get hammered.

And today, he emerged from a meeting with Republican leaders talking about “shared pain” for everyone – as he hinted his agreement to give millionaires and billionaires an unneeded bailout, borrowing over 600 billion dollars from China in our children’s names for their tax cuts.  “Shared pain,” unless you are a CEO.  

No no no, I can’t stand it any more.  It’s over – this man will not fight for us, ever.  It is not in his nature, or his philosophy, or whatever.  We have had two years to judge by his behavior.  He chooses the rich and powerful over working Americans every time.  We will not get what we want from Obama.  If we want something different, we have to start now.  If the Republicans have taught us anything over the last two years, it is that the next campaign began three weeks ago.  And we are getting our asses handed to us.

Progressives, liberals, hell – working people making less than 150k per year, we have to choose NOW, Obama or not in 2012.  It’s an ugly choice.

For the party to throw out an incumbent president in a primary is drastic.  Honestly, I don’t know if it has happened.  And there are strong arguments against doing so.  Thom Hartman says we must support Obama, because of the Supreme Court vacancies coming up in the next term.  That is a powerful argument, especially considering the disaster we have as a court now.

But I would respectfully disagree with Hartman, and all the others who rationalize the actions of the President.  I jumped off the Obama wagon following the health care episode, for reasons I have ranted about.  I hate what I perceive as his lack of principles, his stance on the wars, his continuation of Guantanemo, rights violations and even arbitrary executions of American citizens.  I hate his stance on education, his assault on organized labor, and his deep and abiding love for Wall Street bankers.  I hate his commission that wants to rob me of my social security, and take care away from the old so that corporations can get a tax cut.  And most of all, I hate how he lets us get hurt by the powerful without holding them accountable.  And still, I could be persuaded to accept ALL of that for a more liberal Supreme Court, because I do see the long game argument.

But as of now, I don’t think he’ll win in 2012.  Backing Obama at this point is backing a loser.  It is backing a leader that can’t get his own agenda through Congress.  It is backing a leader that has the dirt stick, but won’t throw it back.  It is backing a leader that has validated almost all of the opposition’s positions.  I don’t think he could beat Palin at this point.  Think about it…

…Palin’s an idiot.  If you listen to Stephanie Miller and the like, they are begging for a Palin candidacy because they think it is a guaranteed Obama win.  But don’t count your chickens. 

First, we elected, and then REELECTED an idiot to be president.  And that was just recently, the last guy, in fact.  If you don’t think an idiot can be elected President of the United States, then you haven’t been living here long.

Second, Obama’s brand is tarnished.  He has been severely vilified by the right wing noise machine, and has done very little to fight back.  He is not Teflon, like Reagan was, and the shit sticks.  His unwillingness to fight Fox news, and the lies of Republican leaders – in fact, to validate them in many cases – leaves him damaged, and leaves his base uninspired to defend him.

Third, the economy will not be much better, if at all.  Americans are realizing that it doesn’t matter how the Dow is doing – they still need a job, or a raise.  Obama will still be there for Republicans to blame, and again, he doesn’t fight, so it will stick.

Fourth, “change” is done.  Obama was co-opted by the corrupt system (or was always part of it and took us for suckers), and we suffer for it.  He can’t claim he brought it, or that he will still bring it.  (Well, he can, but not nearly as many will buy it.)  You know who took change seriously?  The Tea Party.  It was a monstrosity for the most part, but they did some house-cleaning, and at least rode those corporate sponsored busses to the rallies.  And Palin is their maven.

Does anyone think Obama will win Florida in 2012?  Hows about Ohio?  Pennsylvania?  Virginia?  Wisconsin?   Indiana?  Please!  Colorado and Minnesota will be in play too.  The electoral math for this guy looks terrible.  No, no, no…

…Saving 2012 means moving NOW.  It is time for Change 2.0.  Drafting Feingold/Greyson would be a good start.  Or perhaps there are better candidates.  Bloomberg is interesting, although he has been rumored to be pairing with Scarborough, which makes me heave my toast.  No, a progressive primary ticket to start NOW makes sense. 

It makes sense because it will take time to pound the message home.  It will take time to get the MSM to take them seriously, although much of TV never will, for at least a year, anyway.  It will take time to distribute the tens of millions of “Feingold/Greyson 2012” bumper stickers, which need to start appearing on cars in the next month, at the latest.

The best case…our team wins, and we get a progressive fighter in the White House.  I won’t hold my breath, but I think the mantle of populist “change,” change 2.0, can be wrested from the Tea Baggers.  Progressive messaging has been killed by the Democratic leadership, as well as the right wing media machine.  Giving a pro-working-family message a chance might make a huge difference.  The talking points are there for the taking, and I believe slogans like “take it back from the bankers” will do wonders for a presidential candidate.

The worst case…an upstart, grass roots progressive candidacy splits the Democratic Party, and Obama limps into 2012 with a disheveled base, and wins or loses a close one against a hideous Republican.  Worse even, he loses and Republicans finish the job of burying working families in America.  This is a horrible outcome, but I predict he loses without the challenge.

The other possibility…is that the intense pressure of a challenge NOW pushes Obama into doing something he hasn’t done since the campaign of 2008 – fight.  The seriously open question is: would he fight the Republicans to win back working Americans, or would he fight the Progressive challengers with Republican ideals, to show how “moderate” he is by comparison.  An Obama that feels the populist center of a country that is being screwed is what we all hoped for, but didn’t get.  Could a REAL challenge now awaken that in him for the next two years?

I dunno.  I just know that what we have now is officially a disaster.  Change is dead.  It died along with federal pay and  my Social Security.  It is time for Change 2.0, for hope that some president, someday, can muster a progressive fight for working families in America.  And maybe even for a Democratic Party that can find its base again. 

Feingold/Greyson 2012.

Two More Years Report Card

So, what is the verdict on President Obama at near the midterm point?

If you follow my rantings, You know I am a skeptic.   I probably don’t give the President enough credit.  I fell, hook, line and sinker for the sales pitch of “change,” and haven’t gotten over it yet.

A rational assessment is that Obama is a blue dog for the most part.  He does not want to trample on convention.  He does not want to mess with the powerful people who are already in place.  He is definitely NOT progressive.  He is very timid where what I define as “change” is concerned.

To me, “change” meant actually changing the way things got done.  And maybe it was not possible for Obama to make these changes.  The forces marshaled against change are very strong and entrenched.  Too strong, perhaps, and too deeply entrenched for one president and his administration. 

But what I didn’t see was even an attempt.  I saw capitulation to the other side, immediately.

I didn’t see any fight.

Upon reflection, I wanted to see some fight.  I wanted to see principled stands by the powerful on behalf of average Americans.  And I didn’t. I saw deal-making on an epic scale, validation of right-wing talking points…I saw a Democratic president pay much more attention to Fox “News” than to polling, the base of the Democratic party, or the needs of the American people. 

The LAST administration paid attention to Faux News.  The last administration made sweetheart deals with corporate America.  Jesus, the last Administration let Billy Tauzin write their pharmaceutical legislation.  The last administration propagated uneccessary wars, spied on people, tortured people and allowed fraud at the highest levels of our nation’s financial institutions.  This is not my definition of “change.”

You could argue that the President DID changes some things, and that politics is a long game, and that you can’t change everything…  And I would say that what you say is true – to a degree.  But I would argue strongly that President Obama did not make the fundamental changes that are necessary.  I would further argue that he favored the rich and powerful over the poor and hard-working in almost every action he had his administration take.  He did not act based on principle, nor did he fight for the principles he DID articulate.

My midterm grade for President Obama, honestly, is a D+.  He did take on some tough issues, and was left a mess.  He took on health care, and he did some stimulus spending.  And, Lilly Leadbetter.  But he came up short is so many areas.  Here are my report card comments for improvement for the next two years:

1. Stop governing like a senator, and start acting like a President – Your deferral to the legislative process is admirable, from a civics standpoint, but they’re running all over you.  Use the bully pulpit to put pressure on Congress.  An idiot like Bush did this masterfully.  Was that the “change” you meant, to be less effective than Bush?
2. Hold the powerful accountable – I have ranted on this many times before, so I’ll keep it short.  You bowed to the bankers, they took our money, and then spit in your face.  Some of them, according to expert after expert, should be in jail for fraud.  The last administration broke serious laws, yet you won’t look “backward.”  The message is, that there’s no accountability for the powerful.  We lead the world in prison population, but the rich and well-connected are free to rampage over the land.  Have some weed?  Prison for you.  Ruin the pension funds of millions of workers through fraud?  Trillions in government cash, record bonuses, and the freedom to use our cash to buy the House for the Republicans.  How has looking forward worked out for us?
3. Stop reaching across the aisle! – When we voted for change, we didn’t vote for more “bipartisanship.”  We voted the Republicans out in ’06 and ’08 because they were a disaster, not because we wanted their ideas included in everything.  Fuck them!  Fight for us!
4. Fight! – I don’t mean picking petty arguments with the horrid personalities of Republicans, I mean take principled stands, based on Democratic values, and fight for them.  Call those fucking conservatives out.  Use your advantage: the largest microphone in the world!  When those assholes filibuster, call them out.  Point out how they always side with the rich, and with FOREIGN corporations against working Americans.  It’s not that hard.  And now, after the banks and the Chamber of Commerce have shown you the backs of their hands, what have you got to lose?  And yes, on some issues, I’d rather we go down fighting than get a few crumbs for capitulating. 

Jesus man, you had both housed in huge majorities, and you acted like you needed Republican permission for everything!  You created new math in American politics, and a new meme: that you can’t do anything without 60 votes.  That is so absurd that I lose it every time I hear it.  I am a goddam civics teacher.  NEVER before in American politics has 60 been the rule instead of the exception in the Senate.  It is only through weakness and political ineptitude that a president with vast majorities in both houses gets his ass handed to him so regularly.   Fight for your principles, and fight for us!

You, Mr. President, had your own party’s senators threaten to filibuster the most important legislation of your term – health care.  That they went unscathed, that you even threw union support and progressives under the bus to back one of them, Blanche Lincoln, in the primaries shows how out of touch with your own voters you have become in such a short time.  Lincoln and Nelson should have been called to the White House in good health, and left unable to sit down for a week.  By the way, what was the result of your Blanche Lincoln strategy?  She got hammered, you lost a seat, and look weaker and more inept.  You spent political capital against your own base, and lost.

I have accepted that President Obama is way, way to the right of me politically.  What I can’t yet figure out is if 2008 was a fluke, and he is truly inept at politics, or is he wholly corrupt, and bought lock, stock and barrel by corporate America the way so many senators are.  Since Feingold lost his seat, I’m not sure there’s one member of the US Senate that I would let care for my dogs, let alone spend the nation’s money.  And this sewer was the President’s political womb.

I fear it’s going to be a long two years.  I can only hope that the President can learn, and really does care at least a little for the plight of the average working family in America. 

Does he not get it?  Or does he get it, and believe we are too stupid to get that he has sold us out to corporate CEOs.  Sold out, or a President who is in over his head?  Either way, a low grade for our President.  Let's hope he can get his grades up in the final semester.

The Pope Softens on Sex With Condoms

Two days ago the Vatican released a statement verifying the Pope’s comments to a journalist during the previous week.  Apparently, the Pope said that condom use could be perhaps, just maybe, a little, tiny bit okay in certain circumstances.

He actually was quite specific.  He said that it might be okay for a gay, male prostitute to use one to prevent the spread of AIDS.  Is he not merciful?!  No wonder he’s da’ Pope!

Most commentators I have heard or read see this as a step forward by the Catholic Church’s archaic stance on birth control.  I see it as more lunacy from this insane, ex-Nazi pontiff. 

Yes, allowing male, gay hookers to bag it is a small step forward from the Church’s draconian outright ban on any and all forms of contraception.  It is like going from 14^th Century thinking to 16^th Century thinking.  Then, rational people can momentarily get past the idea that it’s the fucking 21^st Century and measure progress with a micrometer…and give credit where credit is due.

But I can’t. 

If it was John Paul II, I’d be buying it a little more.  But not from this bat-shit crazy Ratzinger fellow.  We cannot forget that this is the guy who covered up for child molesters, and still wants to keep it an internal church matter.  And, we can’t ignore the fact that he is still dooming women to death by AIDS with this “progress.”

The Catholic Church’s largest area of growth is in Africa, which is also the place that is hurt the most by the ravages of AIDS.  He is saying, “yeah, let those fag whores use a rubber, their sperm was never going anywhere of use to us.  But those bitches, they better be getting knocked up.”  Who cares if many of them die due to lack of protection?

Now, some Christian right leaders in America would have not even gone as far as the Pope, claiming that AIDS is God’s vengeance on gays.  So, I suppose if you have to, you can give the Pope some credit for not being as vile as the “God Hates Fags” church in Kansas.  But that is damning with faint praise.  He is, once again, killing women!

And for those who would give him credit – how much of a step forward is it that the Pope would give a new privilege to a man that he would still deny a woman?  Gay male prostitutes get their lives saved, and female prostitutes don’t.  That is no step forward at all, that’s Medieval.

My God, the march of human progress is slow.  The idea that the Catholic “tribe” has to be enlarged by unrestrained procreation is a centuries old idea, and ideal.  As the Grand Wizard of Catholicism, Ratzinger looks at Africa as a fertile field for planting millions of new Catholics.  Instead of looking at the condition of the people of Africa, which struggle to feed the folks already there, and are hounded by the specter of AIDS, as it ravages the countryside.  As far as I know, he’s not calling for ALL biblical tenets to be followed.  People can still eat shrimp without condemnation, and poly-cotton blends are worn without being stoned to death.  But whether it leads to death or starvation, don’t you fucking dare waste a sperm that might find its way to a womb, potentially swelling the ranks of Catholic acolytes.

No, no, no…fuck this pope.  I cut him no slack.  The next alter-boy he allows to be raped may be saved from priest-AIDS by a condom, but that is too little progress for me.

By the way, the Vatican is walking the statement back now, saying that the Pope is in no way in favor of contraception.  Yeah, better kill those gay dudes too.

Baby steps, humans…baby steps.

**[UPDATE - The following day to writing this post, a Vatican spokesperson said that the words of the Pope were misquoted, and that he actually meant BOTH male and female prostitutes.  He said that it was a lesser evil to use a condom.  So, credit where credit is due - if Ratzinger meant what he said, then at least he is for equality where prostitutes are concerned.  And, he is truly "pro-life" as he tries to straddle the fence, being both against contraception, yet in favor of sexual protection to prevent the spread of a life-threatening disease.  If true, kudos.]

THEY ARE ROBBING US NOW!!!

The "cat food" commission has issued its report.  The wisdom of the likes of Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles has spoken: you are fucked.

Here's the gist of the commission, appointed by a DEMOCRATIC president's, recommendations for reducing the deficit:

1. Cut your Social Security
2. Cut Medicare
3. Cut corporate taxes
4. Cut the taxes of the richest 2%
5. Cut the mortgage interest deduction, and...
6. Cut cost of living raises for our troops.

Or, to put it in my terms, the rich want to strap on hobnailed boots, kick the shit out of the middle and working classes, spit on us, piss on us, and then make us clean up the mess.

Pete Peterson, with his millions, has bought his way into influence in our government, and he has purchased our future.  He and his millionaire posse have seen to it that working American families will live lives of hardship and misery in our old age, so that he can add a few more millions to his swollen off-shore bank accounts.  The rich are gutting the middle and working classes so they can swell their vaults with our national treasure.  In short, those bastards are mugging us.

How does this amount to an all-out assault on working families?  If you really have to ask...

We have a quasi-volunteer army (ask troops who've been stop-lossed if it is totally volunteer), who are involved in two wars.  And you, Alan Simpson, you wanna' freeze their pay.  It is hard to express what a vile summuma' bitch that makes you.  In case you are wondering, are the rich serving in the armed forces?  Nope, mostly the poor, rural and working classes.  So the proposal is that those who sacrifice many hardships, and even die, in the service of their country should bear a significant burden of the deficit.  This alone should make this proposal a non-starter.

There are arguments against the home mortgage deduction.  When working people who live in apartments make them from a tax-fairness standpoint, I hear them.  But when super-rich assholes argue to take away this gateway to home ownership, I lose my shit.  This deduction helps sooooo many working class people become home-owners.  And for folks like me, equity in my home will soften my retirement, or be the main asset that my children inherit.  It is the main source of wealth for most families.  This proposal is an enormous tax increase on working families.

While this proposal raises my taxes, guess whose get cut.  You'll be shocked, I'm sure, to find out that it is the richest Americans.  Yup, extend the Bush tax cuts.  Sigh...

And if that's not bad enough, the "cat food" committee proposes cutting the corporate tax rate.  Now, understand that in 2009, Exxon did not pay a dime in corporate taxes.  Their profits were approximately 3.5 gazillion dollars, but they paid no taxes to support the country that treats them so well.  In fact, they received a tax refund.  But we better cut the corporate tax rate, because, what...Exxon's rebate wasn't big enough?  Jesus, we better CUT soldier pay to make sure Exxon execs can afford to bathe twice a day in French champagne.

Health care in America is STILL a disaster.  My rates just went up, along with everyone else.  But don't worry, if you don't buy insurance from rapacious death-panel corporations, the mandate kicks in in a couple of years.  You'll be enjoying that soon enough.  But to cut Medicare?  To yank the health care rug out from under our nation's seniors and neediest citizens?  It's like we've been transported back to Medieval times.  If we are going to let citizens die, and they will if you cut Medicare, so that the rich can have more...then we are becoming a feudal society.  There's no way that a functioning democracy can let this happen.

Okay...(deep breaths, deep breaths)...cuts to Social Security.  Social Security in NOT part of the deficit.  It is a self-funded program, funded with yours' and my goddam money, for all of our working lives.  This is a government annuity program, funded by the initial recipients, with the covenant that it will be there when we hit a certain age, or are disabled.  There are trillions in surplus, and the trouble doesn't start until the 2030s.  And all we have to do to fix the trouble is raise the cap.

No, no...fuck no!  SS is not a problem with the deficit UNLESS you consider the fact that the cash was taken by politicians from both parties, and spent - largely on tax cuts and unfunded wars.  Government bonds were put in place of the actual money.  What this commission is really proposing is DEFAULTING ON BONDS HELD IN OUR NAME!!  They have taken our money, now they want to burn the IOUs.  Alan Simpson has already called these trillions of government bonds "worthless IOUs."  They are proposing the crime of the century - robbing you of your money.

Politicians say that we must have an "adult conversation" about the deficit.  This is code for "bitch, where's my money!"  Then, they say "this won't affect anyone over 60."  Well I'm glad they'll dodge the bullet.  But I'm pushing 50, and I've paid into SS and Medicare for over 30 years.  I get the statements.  I have played by the rules, and paid my hard-earned money for over 30 working years, and they are going to take a chunk and give it to the richest Americans, and corporations, and let me work until I'm 70.  Mother fuckers!

You must realize this one thing - Social Security is NOT IN TROUBLE, it is a MADE UP ISSUE!  The elite in this country have spent millions to make it an issue so they can rob us in order to continue their lavish lifestyle.  It is piracy.  Supply side economics has blown holes in our sails.  Now they want to board the ship and finish the job - to rape and pillage the working class and middle class Americans.

And why shouldn't they?  We live in an America with no accountability for the powerful.  Did Bushies go to jail for torture, murder, kidnapping, unlawful wiretapping or treason?   Nope.  Did Wall Street bankers go to jail for fraud?  Hell no, they were rewarded with over a trillion dollars of our money, and given the keys to the Fed's printing presses.  Our current, Democratic president absolves all these crimes, and claims the right to assassinate Americans citizens without so much as a habeus corpus.  Nobody is being held politically, or legally accountable for heinous acts against the American people.  [side note: score one for the Tea Party folks.  They did hold some Republicans accountable for their bail-out votes in primaries.]

You cannot, must not vote for or support ANY candidate in 2012 who supports the recommendations of the "cat food" commission.  This means Obama too.  It is soooo disappointing that he appointed this commission.  His choice of membership made the panel's hideous recommendations a foregone conclusion.  If he wants to now parrot the talking point of an "adult conversation" about spending, then we know for sure it's game over - that he is not on our side.

"Adult conversation."  That's what we've been asked to have.  So here it is: if you rob me, you're done.  No votes, no support, no nuthin'.  Converse with that.  If you proceed with the adult conversation about cat food in my dotage then you are my enemy, and my family's enemy, and I will work to make sure you have no future power over me.  Republicans don't care about this warning, so it goes out to Dems.  Don't rob us, take back from the robbers, and then raise the cap.  Don't take away health care from the most vulnerable to make billionaires richer (that I have to say that in the 21st century, in America, is so depressing), don't take away the tax deduction that lets so many Americans accrue wealth into their old age, and for Christ's sake, don't put the deficit on the backs of the troops who have enough to worry about.

[Another side note - "adult conversation" is apparently not catching on in a land where we watch Squidbillies, so the new talking point to defame SS is "ponzi scheme."]

20 years ago, even ten, politicians would have mentioned any change to SS at their great peril.  It has been the "third rail" of American politics for over half a century.  We'll see now how  much the political landscape has changed.  And, we'll see how sedentary Americans have become.  Will we take being robbed by merely raging at our TVs and computer screens (like me)?  Or, will we emulate the Tea Baggers, and show up in public with "Don't Rob Me, Bro!" T-shirts?  Or, will we go France on them and shut things down.  The French people recently shut down the country over proposed changes to their national pension program.  Streets blocked, businesses closed - general strike!


Will we realize that the politicians who supposedly represent us, don't.  Not anymore.  They've taken the money, and want to burn the IOUs and piss on the ashes.  They disdain us, as evidenced by Alan Simpson's calling us "tit-suckers" with barely a rebuke by the president who appointed him.  The same president who called his base the "professional left" and tells us to grow up for this "adult conversation."

No, no no NO!  Any representative of any kind who does not fight this with all of their being is your enemy.  They are against you, and actively work to do you and your family harm.  They are sticking it in with no vaseline, and calling you "bitch" while they do it.

Obama, every Republican, most of the Democratic reps, are not on our side.  We need to burn it down - figuratively - burn it down now.

Midterm Recap

It is a week since the debacle, and that has barely been enough time to get my head around the disaster that was the midterm elections for 2010.

It was not that the results were unexpected.  Nor were they particularly historic.  But the swing seems drastic when you consider the "mandate" the Democrats were given in 2008.  I think the main message we can take from this is...

...the American people are pissed.  

But what are they pissed about?  Why did the election play out the way it did?  Why did Americans vote for the Republicans when they gave such recent majorities to the Democrats?  Only a retarded fraction of the electorate truly believes that Obama is a Muslim from Kenya, a Marxist or Hitler.  So, what's the BFD?

One idea was that Americans have "rejected the Obama agenda."  They truly did, if you consider the swing in the election.  But I see this as a talking point.  Polling shows that Americans by and large favor the individual parts of Democratic policies.  From health care to Wall Street reform, folks approve of select parts of Democratic bills.  They also see the villains the way most of us do.  Polling shows that when it comes to the Economic disaster, Americans blame: 1. Wall Street, 2. George Bush, 3. Obama.  And though Obama comes in number three, the combo of one and two account for about two thirds of those polled.  I don't think that Americans rejected most of what Obama did.

Pollster and Hillary advisor Mark Penn has gone with the standard DC pablum: Obama and the Dems need to move more to the center.  This makes me want to heave my toast - especially because it is likely that this is the advice that the Democratic leadership will take.  If Obama reached any more to the right, his fucking arm would have fallen off.  No, "centrism" (corporate sell-outism) definitely did not work.  Half of the blue dog caucus, those champions of move-to-the-right, lost their seats.

Now, progressives like Feingold and Greyson lost too.  And they were some of the strongest progressive fighters.  This would seem to support Penn's argument.  But they also had giant targets on their backs.  money poured in to beat those two.  The progressive caucus only lost four members, and still number in the eighties.  Progressives did well enough, the conservatives in the Democratic party got hammered.

So why did Democrats lose the House?  

One reason is the success of Republican messaging.  For the last two years we've heard about rampant spending and rapacious taxes.  The message was simple and constant, and came from every candidate on that side.  It didn't matter that it was bullshit - it was effective.  And worse, many on the "left," especially our president, validated these talking points.

And even worse, there didn't seem to be much of a counter-message.  Obama touted his health care bill, and financial reform as 'epic,' but nobody was buying it.  And he only started that in the last two months before the election.  He didn't seem to realize that Republicans started this election in January of 2009.  He also came about as strong as a cat fart in an elephant house.

Obama and the Dems needed to hammer three points home, month after month, until we were ready to scream if we heard them one more time:

1. Republicans want to give your money to a CEO...
2. ...give your job to the Chinese...
3. ...and give your house to your banker.

Saying this over and over again would have been true, and would have made Americans decide that Republicans would fuck up the economy - again.

Now, it's universally agreed that the economy is the #1 issue.  And yet, Obama and the Democrats couldn't craft a message that resonated with what two thirds of the public already thought.  The bankers fucked us, and the Republicans helped them.  This always floors me - the professional politicians of the left have such a hard time crafting an effective message that 2/3 of Americans already agree with. 

Don't get me wrong, I see their problem.  When you give health care CEOs and Wall St. everything they want, it's hard to point to the other guys and say "not me!"  But that doesn't stop the Republicans, and it shouldn't stop the Democratic Party either.  Not if they want to win in this day and age.

So messaging was huge in this election.  But the other factor was the lack of fight for the average family.  Jesus, you gave the bankers all the fucking money, our money, and they paid themselves record bonuses.  That was in our face.  That was the moment to put them on a government salary.  Americans wouldn't have seen that as socialism, outside of Glenn Beck's viewership, they would have seen that as 100% fair.   GM management and labor had to crawl on their knees to get help to save manufacturing jobs.  The bankers snatched up over a trillion dollars, paid themselves record bonuses, and then complained how unfriendly the Democrats were to the business community.  Seriously, Obama...that's when you would have been cheered if you had punched Jaime Diamond in the face.  

Instead, you bowed your head.  You apologized, and then told the Fed to print the banks another trillion dollars.  And the Republicans, who want this as much as anybody, get record donations AND get to point the finger at you and the Democrats for helping bend working Americans over the meat counter.

People can reasonably disagree about the merits or failings of health care, or foreign policy, or whether there was enough change.  Those conversations have filled blogs and cable news opinion shows - all viewed by folks who already knew how they were going to vote.  But the enthusiasm gap was tied directly to the pain felt by the Average American, and that pain can be tied to the murdering of the economy, and the murderers who did it.  And you paid those murders trillions, without consequences of any kind.  You looked forward, not back.

Nobody, in the last 10 years, has been held accountable.  Not by Bush, Not by Obama, nor any leaders of their respective parties.  Not for treason, not for torture, and not for grand theft and fraud.  So, the American People decided to hold the Democratic Party accountable for letting the bankers rob them.  It was a form of mob justice - the electorate, women and white, working class men in particular - grabbed their torches and their pitchforks and chased Frankenstein out of Congress.  

Again, Obama and the Dems fucked this election up horribly, and truly deserve the drubbing they got.  It just sucks that we will suffer for it.  And what's the alternative to the Democrats?  The Republicans ghouls will cut the legs out from under the poor and middle classes, borrow more from China to give directly to the top 2%, and leave our country in ruins.  

Jesus, it's like a choice between riding on the Titanic or the Hindenburg.

How Wrong Am I?

I have said that the Democratic Party are losers because they won't fight for their progressive base.  I believed this, and still do, to a large degree.  But the polling for next Tuesday's election is giving me pause.

Again, I yelled, screamed and blogged that Obama, Rahm and the rest of the capitulators were wrong, and pissed the base off too much to get the support needed to maintain the 2008 energy.  But look at the House: most likely to lose 50 seats to the Republicans.

Think about that.  The House advanced WAY more progressive legislation than the Senate - even a public option.  The House is almost CERTAIN to go to the Republicans.  They fought for us WAY more than the Senate, and yet they will lose electorally.

The Senate, on the other hand, was the WORST kind of corrupt cluster-fuck of conservative deal-making, and will - most likely - remain in Democratic control.  Now, the House fought way more for the common man, the average working-class American family than the Senate did.  Not even close.  And yet they are going to lose their jobs.  The Senate on the other hand held court for the status quo: the bankers, the insurance execs, big pharma - and they will be, for the most part, left alone to pillage as they see fit.

"But the Senate is hopelessly corrupt" you say.  Really?  How's about Russ Feingold?  538.com has him at less than a 20% chance of retaining his seat.  Now, Russ Feingold is the most solid progressive fighter in the US government.  He is not the most partizan (in fact, he is one of the most bipartisan), he is the most sensible.  He voted AGAINST the financial reform, because it didn't make sense for the average mortgage holder.  He voted against the Patriot Act (99-1) because it took rights away from the average American.  He is honest, and principled - and he is going to lose his seat.

So, is America REALLY a center-right country after all?  I don't know - seriously.  It may be, and I may have to get used to being in the political minority.  Or, it could be that we are just too fucking stupid to know what's good for us.  I'd hate that idea, because it's just too depressing for the future.  Or, it could be because progressives (especially Obama) failed to hold ANYONE accountable.

Really?  NOBODY in the Bush Administration needed to be held accountable for SERIOUS crimes?  NO bankers, who TOOK BONUSES WITH TAXPAYER MONEY need to have their earnings clawed back?  No stock or mortgage fraud?  No violations of our constitutional rights?

Has it been the case that we are so accostomed to rich or politically connected crimninals getting away with crimes that we don't even think twice?  Then, do we just blame the party in power for the pain we feel, regardless of the criminals who take from us as a newly established routine?

The biggest mistake of the Obama Administration was "look forward, not back."  By allowing the crimes of the elite, the Democratic leadership has given its stamp of approval to the actions that did so much harm to the American working class.  People KNOW that the wars were a bad idea, and a result of profit motivated corruption  And the know that the bankers ripped them off.  But they don't know who to blame - until the Tea Party made it simple.  And they could make it simple because there was NO ACCOUNTABILITY FROM THE ADULTS IN THE ROOM.

That means you, Obama.  And you too, Reid and Pelosi.  Sure, you may have stopped us from wearing apple barrels and suspenders, but the robber barrons of this time did NOT leap from their office windows.  They have instead invited you to leap from yours.  These captains of power and industry have dared you to step up and have watched you blink.  Then, they have lit cigars while you manned the shovels, and scooped trillions of OUR dollars into their waiting pockets.  THIS is why the independents are willing to give the reins of government to the worst of the worst.  Because you opted for NO ACCOUNTABILITY!

Or maybe Sean, Rush and Glenn are right.  We are a center-right country that wants middle-ages-style banking, health care and women's rights.  Whatever the case, I am longing for accountability for the powerful, or...none for me too!

Let my reign of terror begin!

A Big Tent Needs a Platform

I get accused of being a whiney liberal, who takes his ball and goes home if I don’t get what I want.

Well…yeah. To a degree I am. And I find a perfect logic in that. But I hear the argument from the other side too. It is a particularly strong logic as we stand poised to have Republicans take back the House, and maybe even the Senate.

The House is seen by odds-makers as an 80% done deal. Republicans will control the House of Representatives after 2010. And, 30 or so of them will be Tea Party loonies. This is going to happen largely because of what pundits call the “enthusiasm gap.” That is, the gap between Democratic voters who were energized in 2008, and those who will drag themselves out to vote this time around.

Hard to believe that liberals aren’t enthusiastic. After all, Rahm did call us “fucking retards.” And if that doesn’t motivate us, both the President AND the vice President yelled at us, essentially calling us crying babies who don’t understand how politics works. The president’s spokesman, Gibbsy, insulted us, apologized, but stood by his insult in his apology. How can we not be motivated?

I’m seriously getting pissed off again just writing this. These goddam people have fucked up this election soooo badly, and want to blame the base that put them in power for their failure.

And the thing is, with some few, principled exceptions, we’re all going to vote for you fuckers anyway. Honestly, the Republicans have done you all so well, running crazy tea party activists against you. We have to vote you all back into office just to avoid the taste of bile when we even think of Congress.

And believe me, if there were Republicans who made sense, I’d seriously consider giving them my vote. But there are none, no alternatives to mostly corrupt, pro-corporate Democrats for my vote. The temptation is there to stay home – to withhold my vote as a protest. I fully understand this impulse, and the motivation of those who are claiming they will do this in November. They are using the only leverage they have. They are choosing “none of the above.”

And yes, for the millionth time, I GET IT. I know that our form of democracy is built on compromise, and that we can’t have it all our way. (Here now, I’m getting pissed again!) I understand that the Democratic party is a big tent, and that we have to see all points of view. To the President and Democratic leadership: I’M NOT FUCKING STUPID!!!

My problem, and the problem of millions of would-be Democratic voters is, that YOU don’t get it. You don’t get that we want you all to fight for something, ANYTHING that helps us. We don’t have to throw provisions, principles and the quality of life of Americans overboard to keep a Blanche Lincoln, a Ben Nelson or a Joe Fucking Lieberman on board. At some point, we have to stand for a few, well-articulated principles that voters can understand and support.

President Obama did a masterful job of outlining a few of these principles in his campaign. He said no more torture, no more Iraq, and no more lobbyists writing legislation. Then he said “change.” Now, our bad – we ran with “change” without, before we chose between him and Hillary, having him clearly articulate, over and over again, what “change” meant.

Now, for the record, we still have torture victims in Guantanamo. We still spy on Americans, and even assassinate American citizens without due process. The very same lobbyist that wrote George Bush’s Medicare legislation that enriched drug companies and added billions to our deficit (Billy Tauzin) met with Obama to write the Big Pharma monopoly provisions into the new health care law, which included a patent extension. And although the White House says that combat operations are over in Iraq, we still garrison over 50,000 troops there, and they continue to get killed.

Republicans are really good at keeping it simple for their voters. Government bad, taxes bad, gay people bad. That’s it, run with it. These things aren’t for everyone, but they tie to a consistent, recognizable platform that their voters can easily identify, and use to measure the effectiveness of their representatives. We can’t say the same thing

The Democratic health care bill, as an example, was a masterpiece of corporate welfare. It left insurance companies fully in charge. It included no cost controls (one of the main issues) and doesn’t make them cover everyone (the other main issue). It grants the pharmaceutical companies a monopoly, and mandates that Americans buy a crappy product from these private corporations, or face a fine levied by the federal government. A bunch of Democrats got off the bus at this point.

But you can argue, and the Democratic leadership, and about half of the liberal pundits do argue, that this WAS change. After all, 30 million more Americans will (by 2014, we hope) be insured. Kids can stay on parents’ plans longer, and pre-existing conditions will go away as a way to deny coverage. If loopholes don’t emerge, these are good things. But is this good enough?

I still feel screwed. Maybe because my insurance just went up 20% this month. But also because the measurement was so vague. What is “change?” What is a good, progressive piece of legislation, and how do we measure it?

I have read the Democratic Party’s platform before. The last time I did, there were about 15 planks, and they were each a multi-paragraph morass of mind-numbing non-committals to a range of issues. It is too easy to read what you want into these statements. And, too easy to weasel out of one’s commitment to fight for these established principles. Also, there are too many of them.

If you try to do too many things, you won’t do any of them well. Do a few until you get them down, and then take on a couple more as time goes on. The big tent will have to get a little smaller maybe, but that’s okay too. If you are principled, the demographics are in the Democrats favor going forward. Just keep it simple, and do what you say. Here is an example:

Six Planks for All Democrats:

1. We stand for equality for All Americans, no matter what
2. We support working Americans, and policies that further domestic industry and employment.
3. We will not agree to spending any money to make war on people who do not impose an immediate physical threat to the United States or its citizens.
4. We support a domestic energy program based in renewable resources.
5. We support strong public education
6. We will vigilantly end corruption in our ranks, and in the body politic when in power.

Now, maybe you can only get a majority of the tent to support three of these. Then, go to war with those three. And if a Blanch Lincoln, or a Ben Nelson can’t do it, then fuck ‘em. This party has been catering to their likes, and their corporate masters, and THAT is why we lack enthusiasm. By the way, how has catering to these assholes worked out?

The White House fought its own base to protect Lincoln, and laughed at the unions for spending 10 million dollars against her. It poured support, and Bill Clinton, into Arkansas and against the true progressive in that race (Bill Halter), and barely won the primary. Now Lincoln is down by 30 points and is going to lose to a Republican. Genius. And instead of having an energized base applaud you for fighting the good fight, a demoralized base wonders what the fuck happened to “change.” (BTW – during the health care debate, both Lincoln and Nelson threatened to join a Republican filibuster, with NO consequence. They should have been wood-shedded by Obama. Senators laugh at him now.)

Republicans are running on “we will bring back jobs by lowering taxes.” Democrats are running on “we gave bankers billions of your dollars to keep things from getting worse.” Republicans are running on “health care reform is a government take-over of your doctor’s office.” Democrats are running on “how are you enjoying the ‘change’?” Republicans are running on “gay people are bad.” Democrats are running on “we accept all lifestyles, and don’t really hate anyone, but see how some people are uncomfortable with non-traditional marriage, and don’t want to force the military to….”

Jesus…it’s going to be a bloodbath.

Democrats should be running on: The Republicans want to give all your money to your boss, give your job to the Chinese, and give your house to your banker. You can point to votes, and force the press to ask questions about these points from now until the elections.

But you won’t. Because you’re all so smart, and I’m a fucking retard, who better quit being a baby and get his ass out and vote.

Yeah, I’m looking so forward to that.

Cleaning House, or Jumping Ship?

I have been happy as a clam to see Rahm Emanuel tear up as he said he said his goodbyes to Obama and the White House staff. Good riddance, and don't let the door knob hit ya. Larry Summers leaving? Oh, joy of joys, although I would have liked to see him physically thrown out of government over a year ago, Obama dusting his hands as Summers sprawled unceremoniously on the White House lawn.

Hints that Geithner is also leaving? Sweet. David Axelrod? Gooooood bye you summa' bitch!

It's like a rouge's gallery of conservative, corporatist dirtbags who have pushed this president and the Democratic party to the brink of utter failure and collapse. That is, to the right.

The question is: is Obama recognizing the disaster these fools have been to his administration, and throwing them overboard? Or, are these rats, having punched so many holes in the good ship Obama, jumping ship before the 2010 midterms? These elections could be a giant shipwreck for the Democratic party.

The key, of course, will be what Obama does. Does he appoint more conservative, establishment, pro-corporate shills who continue the destruction of the middle-class? Or does he actually go for "change" (TM - Obamacorp).

Also, watch these ship-jumping rats for what they say in the press. My guess is, that within a week or two of the elections (and, assuming that Republicans pick up significant seats, and maybe the House), they say something like: "Obama went too far to the left, tried to do too much." Rahm has already leaked stuff like this through his media sycophants.

Although I'm not sure. And Rahm is the key to my uncertainty.

Axelrod will cash in as a talking head on cable, Summers will get rewarded for a job well done by his Wall Street handlers, and Rahm will...huh...maybe win the election as mayor of America's third largest city. And this is what gives me some hope.

Rahm is now, arguably, one of the most powerful people in the world. Even if he thought that the fall elections were going to be a disaster, mayor of Chicago is still a HUGE step down on the power ladder. Axelrod, Summers and even Geithner have incentives to leave now - lots of cash, and to escape the possible (even likely) taint of failure. But Rahm gives rather than gets from this transition.

My read is that Rahm is being fired. He was allowed to stay on for a few months to save face. He probably knew that Mayor Daily was quitting, and was just waiting for the announcement. And, Rahm has a shot at becoming Chicago's next mayor, not a guarantee. There are other big names running too, like Carol Mosely-Brown. If it was his choice to quit, he is giving up more power than he will likely ever get again, for a maybe chance at a mayor's job. No, no, no...his ass was shown the door.

Now, we'll see if Obama can "change" (TM - Obamacorp). Will he find other corporatist shills to continue the corrupt path that has disenfranchised so many of us that were energized during the campaign of 2008? Or will he find a cadre of Elizabeth Warrens to fill his White House, and start beating back the forces of corporate largesse. Social Security will be one policy to watch. What he does with Elizabeth Warren and financial regulation is another. These will tell us if he cleaned house to right the ship, or if the rats jumped because they saw the wreck coming.

Arne Duncan Spits on Teachers

Ah, Labor Day. The long September weekend that politicians love to use for hackneyed shticks, and for buttering up their base before an election. And that was Arne Duncan, Obama's education secretary, who came out and called teachers America's "unsung heroes."

Oh yes, he was full of praise for American educators (of which I am one), of the hard work we do, the sacrifices we make...stop, I'm getting all weepy. I feel as if he gave me a great big hug.

Wait, after the hug, what's that sticking out of my back. Yup, that's a shiv.

Arne Duncan, and his boss Obama, may be even WORSE than Bush when it comes to the destruction of public education. They are not only buying into the Republican talking points about how much American public schools suck, they are also furthering the meme that teachers' unions are responsible for ruining public education.

This is bullshit, but framing is what's important in politics, and we are getting our asses seriously framed. Teachers, via their unions, are the new "welfare queens in Cadillacs" that Reagan used so effectively against the poor, and the social programs that supported them. And now, as back then, those welfare queens' political allies, the Democrats, run from that framing as fast as they can. What teachers, and our unions need to do is change that framing, if we are to keep our standard of living, AND save public education in America.

First, some myth debunking. There are some strong memes in the media that are just false, and it's time to regulate:

1. Unions are ruining public schools - This is false. Teachers' unions are collective bargaining organizations. They bargain for wages, benefits and working conditions. They do not set education policy, choose curriculum or dictate instructional strategies. They simply work for their members to get a better deal. This is like saying that the police unions cause more crime, or the firefighters' union causes more houses to burn down.

2. Unions keep bad teachers on the job - Again, false. In my state, principals do the hiring and firing. Site-based management is the way most public schools operate. Do some principals hire and keep bad teachers? Sure, and if those bad teachers are union members, the unions will fight for their pay, benefits and rights. That is what unions are supposed to do! However, it is up to the principal, and district administrators to hire and retain qualified staff, or to remove them if they can't do the job.

But (at least in my state) there is no "tenure." Tenure is a myth. Seniority counts when there is a RIF (reduction in force - a layoff), but there are no shark skin-suited union thugs surrounding the desk of a snoozing "bad teacher" to protect their job.

3. Unions suck an inordinate amount of money out of the system - I wish! I'd get a piece of that maybe. No way, unions get what they can for their members! That's their job! They BARGAIN for the collective group, and I earn a decent wage because of the good job they do. And I earn every penny, as do the amazing, caring and talented professionals I work with.

No no no, HERE'S what sucks an inordinate chunk of public cash out of the system - private testing companies. In the case of testing; before NCLB, it was a 300 million dollar per year enterprise. After NCLB? Over one billion dollars per year. I know for sure my district could have used a chunk of the 700 million dollar difference.

Here's what my frickin' union should do - take a baseball bat to the state legislature, and the Superintendent of Public Instruction, and get me the most money, and largest benefit package they can. That's what they are supposed to do! Teachers' unions, I hate to break it to you folks, are LABOR ORGANIZATIONS, not child advocacy groups. My union is not supposed to give a shit about how kids score on a test, they are supposed to worry about ME. That's what I pay dues for.

But the reality is, my union does give a shit about our students, and their achievement. We have bargained away quite a bit so that students come first. What did we get in return? Demonization - first by Bush, now by Obama.

We have been framed as the ones responsible for destroying public education. But that is also a fraud, public education is not the disaster it is made out to be. It has problems, to be sure, but again, the framing is against us.

Again - debunking:

1. America's education system is broken - Really? How so? This is easy to say, and easy to prove as long as you are fine with a Sean Hannity talking point. But those who say that just pull random measuring sticks out of their pockets, find a fail, and yell "teachers suck!" into the microphone. America's education system does more, for more people as a percentage of population, than any other system in the world.

Point out any enterprise, and I will find plenty of failures for you. How are those wars going? How's the banking industry these days? Geez, hows about the US Senate? Certainly we can't criticize there, eh?

2. American students continually come up short against other nation's students in standardized tests - Apples and Oranges. The test scores from China? Their honor students! India? Maybe 30% of the wealthiest kids get to go to school at all. Compare them to our top 30% in wealth, and we'll at least be at par, and mop the floor with them in some measures. No no no, when WE test kids, we test everybody - the poor, the migrant, the disabled. And we put them on a university track. Our system takes to poor and puts them on a track to wealth. Not even most European school systems are as egalitarian as ours. I challenge anyone to find a population as large, as diverse and as mobile as ours, then test EVERY school-age kid, and then compare. I guarantee American students will kick ass.

3. Standardized testing shows that our schools are failing - Bullshit! They show a slice in time, not the failure of a school, or worse, a kid. Here's the thing, testing is valuable to a teacher. We need data to show achievement, to show what comes next. Or, to tell us what needs to be retaught, and to whom. This is standard practice in education. An all or nothing, make or break test as part of a student's continuing education makes no sense. It should be a data point that allows learners and teachers to chart progress - to tell if a particular student is ready to move on, or go back for more instruction and practice.

The idea that test scores show failing schools is a POLITICAL idea, not a valid statement based in pedagogy. A politician contracts with a private corporation to provide an assessment, and states publicly that EVERY student of a certain age needs to pass this test on a certain date, or teachers and their unions suck. There is NO research to validate this action, and volumes of research to show that the results will be bad. The incentive is now in place to get kids to pass a particular test by a certain date, instead of becoming literate, college-bound critical thinkers.

Our system of standardized testing, encouraged by the Bush administration, is designed to show failure, not success. It is supposed to show that public education is bad, because conservatives want to privatize it. They want cheap labor, not economic mobility, so ruining public education doesn't bother them. And, they want that huge pool of state money, the education budgets, to flow to their corporate overlords.

So, we get why Republicans want to destroy public education. But that begs the question, why do supposed liberals (the Democrats) like Duncan and Obama want to stick the shiv in the backs of teachers and their unions?

One reason is, that we're a pain in their ass. Unions represent many workers. We are a large constituency, with opinions and demands beyond just a few more coppers in our paychecks. Dealing with us is nowhere near as easy as just taking a check from that CEO, and then a seven-figure job from him later when you are done doing his bidding in government.

Another reason is, at the state level, education spending is usually the highest item in a state's budget. Unions DO put upward pressure on wages, and that does not help governors in tight economic times. And when the conservative talking points on teachers and unions win the day, it is easy to throw us under the bus. After all, what self-respecting Democratic governor is going to let Maoist, Stalinist, Nazi, teachers' unions bring down the state government? And as for the federal government...well, Obama never met a Republican talking point that he didn't fall over himself to validate.

Besides, where else are teachers and their unions going to go? Since the Democrats have adopted most of the Republican views on public schools, we have no option in a two-party system. We either vote for a Republican who says up front that we are scum, or for a Democrat who sends Arne Duncan to play kissy-face as the bus rolls over us. No no no, Arne Duncan insults us because he is disingenuous. He and his boss want to continue to pound on teachers to build conservative "cred." The further shame is that Obama still hasn't realized that no matter how bad he treats his base, Republicans still won't like him.

And the real shame is, that for a fraction of the money spent in Afghanistan, hell, a fraction of the money that Obama is about to cave in and give to the ultra-rich in continued Bush tax breaks, American schools could be a utopia. Or at least a hell of a lot better funded than they are currently.

So, Arne Duncan - keep your praise. Change your bosses mind, and then change your actions to really benefit America's students, and I will praise you. Until then, you are a Republican stooge with a "D" on your lapel who works to destroy teachers, and public education.