Saturday, December 31, 2011
Is the Thought of "American Exceptionalism" A Trap?
American Exceptionalism
By now I am sure that everyone has heard the epression "American exceptionalism" and I am equally sure that ir sounds beautiful rolling off the tip of your tongue. But does the term really carry the meaning you think it does? Well, let's examine it. First, just the core word "exception" should give us pause to think about the meaning of this well sounding phrase. To be an exception means to be outside the regular rules of order. It suggest that those who apply this phrase to themselves feel that they are an "exception" to the rules. So for America to be exceptional means that we have the right to violate the laws we expect the rest of the civilized world to follow. We can do whatever we want, without impunity. If you think I've got it wrong, just look at the interview of one of those who believe in "American exceptionalism". On Meet the Press, New year's Day, this past Sunday former senator Rick Santorum's rantings tells you that if by any stretch of the imagination he becomes president, we will be in perpetual war from now until eternity because any country that we feel the least bit threatened by, we have the right to bomb them, as is the case with Iraq and Iran, Syria, and Libya. Is that what we think of our country? They try to fill us with fear saying that if Iran is successful in obtaining the bomb that they would be foolish enough to use it. Do you really believe that? I would make the case that throughout the GWB and Cheney administration this was definitely the mindset when you look at how they tried to bully the U. N. to go along with them to war in Iraq. Remember 'freedom fries' and Americans should no longer buy French wines? When they couldn't coerce any other nations to go along with them they began to call the U. N. obsolete. But it was just they who felt that way about the U. N. The majority of the American public still believed in the U. N.'s role in the world and still do today. So they put together a small group of almost nonexistent nations and went to war even though the whole world was against it. Now that's excetionalism with a capital "E". With America doing 99% of the heavylifting in this so-called "coalition of the willing", we spent nearly ten years in that country with no visible results except destablizing what little stability they had.
And now under President Obama this same thing is beginning to happen in Syria and Libya (destabilization) now that khadaffy is gone and they are pushing for the removal of Mr. Bashir in Syria. The leaders of Pakistan are beginning to distance themselves from the U. S. because of the problems our drone attacks have caused between them and their citizens. Even Russia is becoming destabilized because of our covert efforts in that country. It almost seems that only the countries who have refused any assistance from us are still relatively at peace. Is that what we want from our American "exceptionalism"? When you look it from this standpoint it seems like "American arrogance", "Nationalism".
Uh Oh! I know, I really did it now!! I'm unpatriotic!! Well that is not my intention. I'm just pointing what seems to be right in front of our faces. Here's a good example. In Germany during the Nazi years, Hitler raised the German people to fever pitch with his talk about "German superiorty". Remember how they were humbled when a lone black man, a man that he considered less than a man, won four gold Medals at the Munich Olympics in 1936 and Joe Lewis defeated Max Smelling for the World Heavyweight Boxing Title? Hitler deceived the German people into thinking they were so (exceptional)superior to everybody else, much like many in this country are doing today. Telling them that they could conquer the world and that the "Third Reich" would last for a thousand years. Kinda sounds like former republican representative Tom Delay who claimed to be securing a permanent republican majority in congress before he was expelled for ehtics violations. Remember that?!
You probably noticed I used quite a few synonyms for the word exceptionalism; arrogance, nationalism, superiority. That's because those words could be inserted in place of that word if we in America are not careful. Thinking that we are exempt from the rules that everyone else has to follow, can and will, over time cause us to become arrogant just like those example of the past. There are many more such examples throughout history, and if we don't heed history we will repeat the same mistakes.
Empires come and go and it will be true of our too, someday. The the question is how will America's greatness be remembered? Will our siciety be remembered as a rennaisance society or a war mongering nation that went the way of all the other unjust, arrogant nations that fell violently. Remember, China is growing at an incredible pace and her population is aout four times the size of ours. Will we try and bully that country until we have provoked her into a war that we surely won't win?!! I sure as hell hope not!!
Friday, December 30, 2011
Marginalizing Ron Paul
Robert ScheerTruthdig / Truthdig Op-EdPublished: Thursday 29 December 2011
“It is hypocritical that Paul is now depicted as the archenemy of non-white minorities when it was his nemesis, the Federal Reserve, that enabled the banking swindle that wiped out 53 percent of the median wealth of African-Americans and 66 percent for Latinos, according to the Pew Research Center.”
SHARE Email It is official now. The Ron Paul campaign, despite surging in the Iowa polls, is not worthy of serious consideration, according to a New York Times editorial; “Ron Paul long ago disqualified himself for the presidency by peddling claptrap proposals like abolishing the Federal Reserve, returning to the gold standard, cutting a third of the federal budget and all foreign aid and opposing the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”
That last item, along with the decade-old racist comments in the newsletters Paul published, is certainly worthy of criticism. But not as an alternative to seriously engaging the substance of Paul’s current campaign—his devastating critique of crony capitalism and his equally trenchant challenge to imperial wars and the assault on our civil liberties that they engender.
Paul is being denigrated as a presidential contender even though on the vital issues of the economy, war and peace, and civil liberties, he has made the most sense of the Republican candidates. And by what standard of logic is it “claptrap” for Paul to attempt to hold the Fed accountable for its destructive policies? That’s the giveaway reference to the raw nerve that his favorable prospects in the Iowa caucuses have exposed. Too much anti-Wall Street populism in the heartland can be a truly scary thing to the intellectual parasites residing in the belly of the beast that controls American capitalism.
It is hypocritical that Paul is now depicted as the archenemy of non-white minorities when it was his nemesis, the Federal Reserve, that enabled the banking swindle that wiped out 53 percent of the median wealth of African-Americans and 66 percent for Latinos, according to the Pew Research Center.
Most news sources are funded by corporations and investors. Their goal is to drive people to advertisers while pushing the corporate agenda. NationofChange is a 501(c)3 organization funded almost 100% from its readers–you! Our only accountability is to the public. Click here to make a generous donation.
The Fed sits at the center of the rot and bears the major responsibility for tolerating the runaway mortgage-backed securities scam that is at the core of our economic crisis. After the meltdown it was the Fed that led ultra-secret machinations to bail out the banks while ignoring the plight of their exploited customers.
To his credit, Paul marshaled bipartisan support to pass a bill requiring the first-ever public audit of the Federal Reserve. That audit is how readers of the Times first learned of the Fed’s trillions of dollars in secret loans and aid given to the banks as a reward for screwing over the public.
As for the Times’ complaint that Paul seeks to unreasonably cut the federal budget by one-third, it should be noted that his is a rare voice in challenging irrationally high military spending. At a time when the president has signed off on a Cold War-level defense budget and his potential opponents in the Republican field want to waste even more on high-tech weapons to fight a sophisticated enemy that doesn’t exist, Paul has emerged as the only serious peace candidate. As The Wall Street Journal reported, Paul last week warned an Iowa audience, “Watch out for the military-industrial complex—they always have an enemy. Nobody is going to invade us. We don’t need any more [weapons systems].”
As another recent example of Paul’s sanity on the national security issues that have led to a flight from reason on the part of politicians since the 9/11 attacks, I offer the Texan’s criticism this week of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The act would allow the president to order indeterminate military imprisonment without trial of those accused of supporting terrorism, a policy that Obama signed into law and Paul opposes, as the congressman did George W. Bush’s Patriot Act. Paul said:
“Little by little, in the name of fighting terrorism, our Bill of Rights is being repealed. ... The Patriot Act, as bad as its violation of the 4th Amendment, was just one step down the slippery slope. The recently passed (NDAA) continues that slip toward tyranny and in fact accelerates it significantly ... The Bill of Rights has no exemption for ‘really bad people’ or terrorists or even non-citizens. It is a key check on government power against any person. This is not a weakness in our legal system; it is the very strength of our legal system.”
That was exactly the objection raised by The New York Times in its own excellent editorial challenging the constitutionality of the NDAA. It should not be difficult for those same editorial writers to treat Ron Paul as a profound and principled contributor to a much-needed national debate on the limits of federal power instead of attempting to marginalize his views beyond recognition.
“It is hypocritical that Paul is now depicted as the archenemy of non-white minorities when it was his nemesis, the Federal Reserve, that enabled the banking swindle that wiped out 53 percent of the median wealth of African-Americans and 66 percent for Latinos, according to the Pew Research Center.”
SHARE Email It is official now. The Ron Paul campaign, despite surging in the Iowa polls, is not worthy of serious consideration, according to a New York Times editorial; “Ron Paul long ago disqualified himself for the presidency by peddling claptrap proposals like abolishing the Federal Reserve, returning to the gold standard, cutting a third of the federal budget and all foreign aid and opposing the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”
That last item, along with the decade-old racist comments in the newsletters Paul published, is certainly worthy of criticism. But not as an alternative to seriously engaging the substance of Paul’s current campaign—his devastating critique of crony capitalism and his equally trenchant challenge to imperial wars and the assault on our civil liberties that they engender.
Paul is being denigrated as a presidential contender even though on the vital issues of the economy, war and peace, and civil liberties, he has made the most sense of the Republican candidates. And by what standard of logic is it “claptrap” for Paul to attempt to hold the Fed accountable for its destructive policies? That’s the giveaway reference to the raw nerve that his favorable prospects in the Iowa caucuses have exposed. Too much anti-Wall Street populism in the heartland can be a truly scary thing to the intellectual parasites residing in the belly of the beast that controls American capitalism.
It is hypocritical that Paul is now depicted as the archenemy of non-white minorities when it was his nemesis, the Federal Reserve, that enabled the banking swindle that wiped out 53 percent of the median wealth of African-Americans and 66 percent for Latinos, according to the Pew Research Center.
Most news sources are funded by corporations and investors. Their goal is to drive people to advertisers while pushing the corporate agenda. NationofChange is a 501(c)3 organization funded almost 100% from its readers–you! Our only accountability is to the public. Click here to make a generous donation.
The Fed sits at the center of the rot and bears the major responsibility for tolerating the runaway mortgage-backed securities scam that is at the core of our economic crisis. After the meltdown it was the Fed that led ultra-secret machinations to bail out the banks while ignoring the plight of their exploited customers.
To his credit, Paul marshaled bipartisan support to pass a bill requiring the first-ever public audit of the Federal Reserve. That audit is how readers of the Times first learned of the Fed’s trillions of dollars in secret loans and aid given to the banks as a reward for screwing over the public.
As for the Times’ complaint that Paul seeks to unreasonably cut the federal budget by one-third, it should be noted that his is a rare voice in challenging irrationally high military spending. At a time when the president has signed off on a Cold War-level defense budget and his potential opponents in the Republican field want to waste even more on high-tech weapons to fight a sophisticated enemy that doesn’t exist, Paul has emerged as the only serious peace candidate. As The Wall Street Journal reported, Paul last week warned an Iowa audience, “Watch out for the military-industrial complex—they always have an enemy. Nobody is going to invade us. We don’t need any more [weapons systems].”
As another recent example of Paul’s sanity on the national security issues that have led to a flight from reason on the part of politicians since the 9/11 attacks, I offer the Texan’s criticism this week of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The act would allow the president to order indeterminate military imprisonment without trial of those accused of supporting terrorism, a policy that Obama signed into law and Paul opposes, as the congressman did George W. Bush’s Patriot Act. Paul said:
“Little by little, in the name of fighting terrorism, our Bill of Rights is being repealed. ... The Patriot Act, as bad as its violation of the 4th Amendment, was just one step down the slippery slope. The recently passed (NDAA) continues that slip toward tyranny and in fact accelerates it significantly ... The Bill of Rights has no exemption for ‘really bad people’ or terrorists or even non-citizens. It is a key check on government power against any person. This is not a weakness in our legal system; it is the very strength of our legal system.”
That was exactly the objection raised by The New York Times in its own excellent editorial challenging the constitutionality of the NDAA. It should not be difficult for those same editorial writers to treat Ron Paul as a profound and principled contributor to a much-needed national debate on the limits of federal power instead of attempting to marginalize his views beyond recognition.
Jesse Jackson, Progressive
Friday, Dec 30th
Last update10:24:34 AM GMT
Add this to your websiteWASHINGTON--(ENEWSPF)--December 29 - Political legend Rev. Jesse Jackson will be joining Jean Ross, co-president of National Nurses United, which is leading the fight for Medicare for all and the financial transaction tax, and Steve Cobble, from the Institute for Policy Studies, for a conversation on progressive theory turned to action. Reverend Jackson has for decades campaigned for open and inclusive politics--outlined a quarter century ago by his "Rainbow Coalition" campaigns of 1984 and 1988.
In 1988, Jackson showed the possibility of this new politics with his bold decision to campaign in the Iowa caucuses. It was a redefining moment in American politics, and it laid the groundwork for progress that would eventually see Iowans provide Barack Obama with the 2008 caucus win that led to his presidency. Now, Reverend Jackson is returning to Iowa to argue for open caucuses, open politics, and democracy.
Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) is sponsoring "Building the Progressive Movement Inside and Outside the Democratic Party," a forum being held on the eve of the Iowa caucuses in Des Moines, Iowa. The event is on Friday, Dec. 30 from 1:30 to 5:30 p.m. at the First Unitarian Church, 1800 Bell Ave., in Des Moines.
Progressive activists, writers, and speakers from Iowa and beyond are participating in sessions moderated by John Nichols, author and writer for The Nation magazine. Panelists include Iowa activists Ed Fallon, radio host/Former Iowa State legislator; Jeff Cox, from Iowa Healthcare NOT Warfare; and Jay Howe, with Iowa People's Alliance.
PDA National Director Tim Carpenter and Deputy Field Coordinator Andrea Miller contribute their experience as progressive activists inside the halls of Congress and outside, creating "street heat."
A reception for the panelists and audience will follow the forum at 4:30 p.m. This free event is open to the public. Sponsors for the forum are Progressive Democrats of America, National Nurses United, and The Nation, with endorsement from the Progressive Coalition of Central Iowa, The Prairie Progressive, the Iowa Healthcare NOT Warfare Caucus Campaign, and the Fallon Forum. For further information, visit http://tinyurl.com/ProgressiveMovementForum or PDA's Website at pdamerica.org.
Progressive Democrats of America is a grassroots PAC that works both inside the Democratic Party and outside in movements for peace and justice. Our goal: Elect a permanent, progressive majority in 2008. PDA's advisory board includes seven members of Congress and activist leaders such as Tom Hayden, Medea Benjamin, Thom Hartmann and Rev. Lennox Yearwood. More info:http://pdamerica.org
Last update10:24:34 AM GMT
Add this to your websiteWASHINGTON--(ENEWSPF)--December 29 - Political legend Rev. Jesse Jackson will be joining Jean Ross, co-president of National Nurses United, which is leading the fight for Medicare for all and the financial transaction tax, and Steve Cobble, from the Institute for Policy Studies, for a conversation on progressive theory turned to action. Reverend Jackson has for decades campaigned for open and inclusive politics--outlined a quarter century ago by his "Rainbow Coalition" campaigns of 1984 and 1988.
In 1988, Jackson showed the possibility of this new politics with his bold decision to campaign in the Iowa caucuses. It was a redefining moment in American politics, and it laid the groundwork for progress that would eventually see Iowans provide Barack Obama with the 2008 caucus win that led to his presidency. Now, Reverend Jackson is returning to Iowa to argue for open caucuses, open politics, and democracy.
Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) is sponsoring "Building the Progressive Movement Inside and Outside the Democratic Party," a forum being held on the eve of the Iowa caucuses in Des Moines, Iowa. The event is on Friday, Dec. 30 from 1:30 to 5:30 p.m. at the First Unitarian Church, 1800 Bell Ave., in Des Moines.
Progressive activists, writers, and speakers from Iowa and beyond are participating in sessions moderated by John Nichols, author and writer for The Nation magazine. Panelists include Iowa activists Ed Fallon, radio host/Former Iowa State legislator; Jeff Cox, from Iowa Healthcare NOT Warfare; and Jay Howe, with Iowa People's Alliance.
PDA National Director Tim Carpenter and Deputy Field Coordinator Andrea Miller contribute their experience as progressive activists inside the halls of Congress and outside, creating "street heat."
A reception for the panelists and audience will follow the forum at 4:30 p.m. This free event is open to the public. Sponsors for the forum are Progressive Democrats of America, National Nurses United, and The Nation, with endorsement from the Progressive Coalition of Central Iowa, The Prairie Progressive, the Iowa Healthcare NOT Warfare Caucus Campaign, and the Fallon Forum. For further information, visit http://tinyurl.com/ProgressiveMovementForum or PDA's Website at pdamerica.org.
Progressive Democrats of America is a grassroots PAC that works both inside the Democratic Party and outside in movements for peace and justice. Our goal: Elect a permanent, progressive majority in 2008. PDA's advisory board includes seven members of Congress and activist leaders such as Tom Hayden, Medea Benjamin, Thom Hartmann and Rev. Lennox Yearwood. More info:http://pdamerica.org
Thursday, December 29, 2011
DOD In Control Of Media And Government?
The official line of the pentagon is that Iran is attempting to block the Straits of Hormuz in order to disrupt oil shipping lanes. I, for one have to question this declaration. For one, how would it help Iran to TRY and block the straits? Mr. Ahmedinejad already knows that would cause a confrontation with the U. S. in which the outcome would not be good for him. It would be easier for him to just withdraw Iranian oil from the oil market. That would disrupt the world economy in and of itself. The cause of course, would be the heavyhanded U. S. sanctions against that country. I know many say that those sanction were put in place by the U. N., but it was the U. S. that instigated those actions.
If you look closely at economic sanctions in the past, they have not served our interests well. Contrary to what the news media would have you believe, there is evidence that the people of N. Korea, not just it's leaders, would rather starve that to give in to the demands of the U. S. The same is true of Cuba. Sanctions against that tiny island nation haven't worked for over fifty years. Instead of befriending our neighbor to the south and importing oil from them, we have to import oil from the opposite end of the earth while China reaps the benefits from oil in the Cuban territorial waters. And the same is true of Venezuela. We need a change in attitude towards these two countrise. Instead of trying to force them to do things our way, let's reach out to them and allow them to choose their own destinies. We can gently encourage them rather than impose harsh sanction that don't work. It seems that it would be better to use a carrot than a big stick. Why does our foreign policy have to antagonize just about all countries that export oil unless they allow western oil companies to control their oil? There's a one word answer ,"profits"! Will anyone in government ever admit that the reason for all this turmoil is the desire for oil company profits? I challenge each of you to call your senators and representatives and tell them "NO MORE WARS" for the sake of oil, or any other reason, for that matter
I believe that the State Department has advised against the position that the pentagon has taken, but the Secretary of State, Mrs Clinton has yet to speak out in public. It seems that she is unwilling to speak in opposition to the DOD. That's why the impression persists that the DOD controls the State Department and the rest of government and the media.
Just as in the leading up to the Iraq war, the news medis are trumpeting the claims of the Pentagon even after their claims leading up to the Iraq war proved to be untrue. Now they trumpet unproven allegations again of nuclear bomb construction and blockading waters in order to provoke Iran into war. While I disagree with just about everything Senator Ron Paul ever has to say, I agree with him on this subject and I applaud his courage to stand and say the truth about these wars and the causes for them. Though I definitely won't be voting for you, Senator Paul, my hat's of to you. President Obama I heard you say that you have achieved more at this time in your presidency than all but a few. I challenge you to fight to make a clean break with the recent past in every area of government, especially the Department of Defense. In that way you will ensure one of the greatest presidentail legacies in history.
If you look closely at economic sanctions in the past, they have not served our interests well. Contrary to what the news media would have you believe, there is evidence that the people of N. Korea, not just it's leaders, would rather starve that to give in to the demands of the U. S. The same is true of Cuba. Sanctions against that tiny island nation haven't worked for over fifty years. Instead of befriending our neighbor to the south and importing oil from them, we have to import oil from the opposite end of the earth while China reaps the benefits from oil in the Cuban territorial waters. And the same is true of Venezuela. We need a change in attitude towards these two countrise. Instead of trying to force them to do things our way, let's reach out to them and allow them to choose their own destinies. We can gently encourage them rather than impose harsh sanction that don't work. It seems that it would be better to use a carrot than a big stick. Why does our foreign policy have to antagonize just about all countries that export oil unless they allow western oil companies to control their oil? There's a one word answer ,"profits"! Will anyone in government ever admit that the reason for all this turmoil is the desire for oil company profits? I challenge each of you to call your senators and representatives and tell them "NO MORE WARS" for the sake of oil, or any other reason, for that matter
I believe that the State Department has advised against the position that the pentagon has taken, but the Secretary of State, Mrs Clinton has yet to speak out in public. It seems that she is unwilling to speak in opposition to the DOD. That's why the impression persists that the DOD controls the State Department and the rest of government and the media.
Just as in the leading up to the Iraq war, the news medis are trumpeting the claims of the Pentagon even after their claims leading up to the Iraq war proved to be untrue. Now they trumpet unproven allegations again of nuclear bomb construction and blockading waters in order to provoke Iran into war. While I disagree with just about everything Senator Ron Paul ever has to say, I agree with him on this subject and I applaud his courage to stand and say the truth about these wars and the causes for them. Though I definitely won't be voting for you, Senator Paul, my hat's of to you. President Obama I heard you say that you have achieved more at this time in your presidency than all but a few. I challenge you to fight to make a clean break with the recent past in every area of government, especially the Department of Defense. In that way you will ensure one of the greatest presidentail legacies in history.
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
Propaganda Campaign Against China And Iran
On MSNBC this morning I saw where the poeple in control of the media are now changing tactics in the propaganda war First it was that China was manipulating it's currency in order to ruin our currency. That does not make sense. If that happened China would be the big loser. They are the main debt holders ou the U. S.deficit. Now they admit that this was a lie.
So now they have turned their attention to invading Iran. First it was that Iran is on the verge of having "the bomb". Now they are claiming that Iran wants to blockade oil shipments from the persian gulf. How silly a statement! Mr. Ahmedinejad is not suicidal. There are two objectives to this claim; (1) to keep oil prices propped up and (2) to take control of Iran's oil like they did in Iraq. Make no mistake about it, that is exactly what happened. Now they'll keep putting out charge after charge until they have convinced enough people in goivernment to start a war with Iran even though "we the people" don't want another war. So they keep encouraging Israel to take on the mission of bombing a certain place in Iran, knowing that Iran will respond and that Israel will be helpless if Iran does respond. For one, their aircraft will not be able to return home for lack of fuel. Because this, they say, the U. S. will have to step in and fight on behalf of Israel.
Mr. President, I implore you to fire those around you who counsel this advice to you. We don't need to be involved in yet another war.
So now they have turned their attention to invading Iran. First it was that Iran is on the verge of having "the bomb". Now they are claiming that Iran wants to blockade oil shipments from the persian gulf. How silly a statement! Mr. Ahmedinejad is not suicidal. There are two objectives to this claim; (1) to keep oil prices propped up and (2) to take control of Iran's oil like they did in Iraq. Make no mistake about it, that is exactly what happened. Now they'll keep putting out charge after charge until they have convinced enough people in goivernment to start a war with Iran even though "we the people" don't want another war. So they keep encouraging Israel to take on the mission of bombing a certain place in Iran, knowing that Iran will respond and that Israel will be helpless if Iran does respond. For one, their aircraft will not be able to return home for lack of fuel. Because this, they say, the U. S. will have to step in and fight on behalf of Israel.
Mr. President, I implore you to fire those around you who counsel this advice to you. We don't need to be involved in yet another war.
The Cost Of Bush Tax Cuts For The Richest 5 Percent: $11.6 Million Per Hour
The Cost Of Bush Tax Cuts For The Richest 5 Percent: $11.6 Million Per Hour: pThe National Priorities Project, in partnership with Citizens for Tax Justice, has released a new site tracking the ever-growing cost of the Bush tax cuts. They found that the tax cuts for only the richest 5 percent of Americans “cost the U.S. Treasury $11.6 million every hour of every day.”/p
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
The president's Poll Ratings
The president's poll numbers are beginning to rise again and I am quite sure that you hnow the reason. It's because he finally decided to fight for us with everything in him. We voted for him as president because we believed he would do just that. During the majority of fights with congressional repubs in the past he has let many of us down immensely. I realize that he can't win all of the fights and even that he has to choose the right battles to undertake, but he just seemed to cave on battle after battle.
Mr President let me remind you of an old saying; "it's not whether you win or not but it's whether you put up your best fight". We never expected you to win them all, but we did expect you to fight to the very end. On the occasion of the health care debate, you easily stopped fighting for universal healthcare. Then in the debate over the public option just when you seemed to have victory in hand, you deflated the whole democratic party when you decided to give up the fight. They were predicting they would have the votes they needed by the next day. It made me so furious! I feel that is the main reason the repubs took control of the house. We have all been demoralized since then. The Tea Party won all those seats because we felt things were hopeless. You then began to cave on issue after issue with barely any fight. They didn't have any mandate! The one we had put our hopes and dreams had sold us out.
They also won the majority because we were stunned by what the dems were doing in congress. They had a super majority but couldn't get anything done. They, along with you, failed us miserably! But now with just one worthwhile fight on your part we stand ready to forgive your past transgressions if you just promise no repeat performances. If you let us down again the way you did in the past, it would probably irreparably damage the democratic party.
So, Mr. President I'm looking forward to fighting many good fights alongside you. I and the the great majority, stand ready to advocate for everything you undertake. But Mr. president if you are only trying to get re-elected,and then just filibuster away the next four years, I can assure you that your legacy nor reputation, won't be AT ALL GOOD. As one of your once most ardent supporters, I am not at all convinced that is not your intentions. I am really skeptical!
Mr President let me remind you of an old saying; "it's not whether you win or not but it's whether you put up your best fight". We never expected you to win them all, but we did expect you to fight to the very end. On the occasion of the health care debate, you easily stopped fighting for universal healthcare. Then in the debate over the public option just when you seemed to have victory in hand, you deflated the whole democratic party when you decided to give up the fight. They were predicting they would have the votes they needed by the next day. It made me so furious! I feel that is the main reason the repubs took control of the house. We have all been demoralized since then. The Tea Party won all those seats because we felt things were hopeless. You then began to cave on issue after issue with barely any fight. They didn't have any mandate! The one we had put our hopes and dreams had sold us out.
They also won the majority because we were stunned by what the dems were doing in congress. They had a super majority but couldn't get anything done. They, along with you, failed us miserably! But now with just one worthwhile fight on your part we stand ready to forgive your past transgressions if you just promise no repeat performances. If you let us down again the way you did in the past, it would probably irreparably damage the democratic party.
So, Mr. President I'm looking forward to fighting many good fights alongside you. I and the the great majority, stand ready to advocate for everything you undertake. But Mr. president if you are only trying to get re-elected,and then just filibuster away the next four years, I can assure you that your legacy nor reputation, won't be AT ALL GOOD. As one of your once most ardent supporters, I am not at all convinced that is not your intentions. I am really skeptical!
Slow Business Is The Job-Killer, Not Government Regulations
Slow Business Is The Job-Killer, Not Government Regulations: pEconomists have debunked the myth that environment regulations stall job growth again and again. Even as Mitt Romney calls to “tear down the vast edifice of regulations the Obama administration has imposed,” data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show regulations haven’t hurt the economy. In 2010, only 0.3 percent of layoffs were due to [...]/p
Monday, December 26, 2011
Friday, December 23, 2011
Banks In Control Of Europe
Privatizing Money Newsletters | 12/22/11 From: Alan Grayson (alangrayson@graysonforcongress.com) Sent: Thu 12/22/11 6:09 PM To: jnluv50@hotmail.com WHAT THE EUROPEAN BANKS GOT FOR CHRISTMAS. Dear James: Yesterday, the European Central Bank (ECB) announced that it will hand out $645,000,000,000 in three-year loans to European banks. Which the ECB printed out of thin air, like Monopoly money! The interest rate will be one percent per year. The ECB will not be lending this money to the Government of Greece, even though that government is running a budget deficit of just under 10% of GDP – and the Greek GDP dropped by 5% this year. The Government of Greece is now paying 37% per year on its ten-year bonds, when it can borrow anything at all. The ECB will not be lending this money to the people of Spain, even though official unemployment in Spain is now at 23%. Spain’s Economy Minister said recently that “Spain faces its deepest recession in half a century.” Tough luck; their Christmas tree has nothing under it. And when the European banks get this $645 billion, to whom will the banks be lending? Anybody, or nobody. No strings attached. They can borrow from the ECB at 1%, lend it back to the German Government at 2%, lock in that profit, and take the next three years off. I just have one question. Why? The world continues to face the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. Unemployment throughout Europe is over ten percent. Entire national governments are on the verge of going broke. Why would anyone think that THE THING THAT WE HAVE TO DO RIGHT NOW is to hand out $645 billion in more funny money to the banks? In Europe or anywhere else? The ECB is a public institution. How can it possibly justify yet another bailout for selfish private interests, while the public is sent straight to hell? If a Martian were to land in Paris today, and just read the headlines of the newspapers today, he could reach only one conclusion. That there has been a coup in Europe, the banks are now in charge, and they’re grabbing everything that they can get their hands on. Mark my words: at some point, people are just not going to take it anymore. Courage, Alan Grayson
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Monday, December 19, 2011
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Saturday, December 17, 2011
The Sacred Cow
This week the congress passed the Defense Department budget on a stand alone bill at a time when any other bill has some kind of (so called) poison pill attached to it. This leads me to believe that the DOD is able to freely acquire anything it wants, no strings attached. At a time when repubs in congress are intent in cutting Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, the DOD can just demand anything it wants from congress and it will be given to them. When will the dems get up the courage to attach the bills they want to pass to the DOD bill? We all know that it’s always the repubs driving the DOD bills and they won’t hesitate to attach a poison pill to any and every bill the dems want to pass. So let them cry unpatriotic if they desire to, at least the repubs will be confronted with their own actions. If they want stand alone bills, they need to provide the other side with the same opportunity. The dems need to stop caving to repub demands. If a dumb, uneducated person such as myself is able to figure this out why can’t those who are supposed to be the brightest that the dems have to offer do so? Or is there something going on behind the scenes, such as the dems are part of the conspiracy.
Is it better to create jobs making war and killing our fellow human beings or would the money be better used rebuilding our country? It’s a no-brainer, but you can’t tell!! The unemployment rate is close to nine percent and yet those with government jobs claim that government can not create jobs. As a matter of fact, as I write this article they are happily going about eliminating every else’s job in government, EXCEPT THEIR OWN. They have already given tax breaks to corporations to allow them to ship American manufacturing jobs overseas, now they are intent on destroying all other jobs. They want to starve government of funds to do anything for it’s citizens and in the process secretly erode our constitutional rights. We are in a struggle right now to keep our right to assembly and the right to due process of the law. They want us to fend for ourselves while they themselves live high on the government. If you are a soldier or in congress, you are in the only occupations they want the government to help, and if the soldiers weren’t fighting and dying they also would fall outside of this category. Mr. President, it’s time to not only PROVIDE FOR THE COMMON DEFENSE, but to also PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE (they seem to conveniently forget that part) of the citizens of this country. Put the sacred cow into the fire!!
Is it better to create jobs making war and killing our fellow human beings or would the money be better used rebuilding our country? It’s a no-brainer, but you can’t tell!! The unemployment rate is close to nine percent and yet those with government jobs claim that government can not create jobs. As a matter of fact, as I write this article they are happily going about eliminating every else’s job in government, EXCEPT THEIR OWN. They have already given tax breaks to corporations to allow them to ship American manufacturing jobs overseas, now they are intent on destroying all other jobs. They want to starve government of funds to do anything for it’s citizens and in the process secretly erode our constitutional rights. We are in a struggle right now to keep our right to assembly and the right to due process of the law. They want us to fend for ourselves while they themselves live high on the government. If you are a soldier or in congress, you are in the only occupations they want the government to help, and if the soldiers weren’t fighting and dying they also would fall outside of this category. Mr. President, it’s time to not only PROVIDE FOR THE COMMON DEFENSE, but to also PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE (they seem to conveniently forget that part) of the citizens of this country. Put the sacred cow into the fire!!
Friday, December 16, 2011
Huge Profits, No Taxes
Public Campaign Donate NowFollow us On:YouTubeTwitterFacebook HomeFair FactsGet InvolvedVoter BlogPress RoomAbout UsSearch this site:
For Hire: Lobbyists or the 99%?
How Corporations Pay More for Lobbyists Than in Taxes
December 2011
(Download the full report)
Executive Summary
Amidst a growing federal deficit and widespread economic insecurity for most Americans, some of the largest corporations in the country have avoided paying their fair share in taxes while spending millions to lobby Congress and influence elections. This report builds on a recent report on corporate tax dodging by Citizens for Tax Justice by examining lobbying expenditure data provided by the Center for Responsive Politics. We also look at publicly available data on job creation, federal campaign contributions, and executive compensation, to understand how these corporations have been spending their cash.
Key Findings
•The thirty big corporations analyzed in this report paid more to lobby federal policymakers than they paid in federal income taxes for the three years between 2008 and 2010, despite being profitable.
•Despite making combined profits totally $164 billion in that three-year period, the 30 companies combined received tax rebates totaling nearly $11 billion.
•Altogether, these companies spent nearly half a billion dollars ($476 million) over three years to lobby Congress—that’s about $400,000 each day, including weekends.
•In the three-year period beginning in 2009 through most of 2011, these large firms spent over $22 million altogether on federal campaigns.
•These corporations have also spent lavishly on compensation for their top executives ($706 million altogether in 2010).
(Download the full report)
.
For Hire: Lobbyists or the 99%?
How Corporations Pay More for Lobbyists Than in Taxes
December 2011
(Download the full report)
Executive Summary
Amidst a growing federal deficit and widespread economic insecurity for most Americans, some of the largest corporations in the country have avoided paying their fair share in taxes while spending millions to lobby Congress and influence elections. This report builds on a recent report on corporate tax dodging by Citizens for Tax Justice by examining lobbying expenditure data provided by the Center for Responsive Politics. We also look at publicly available data on job creation, federal campaign contributions, and executive compensation, to understand how these corporations have been spending their cash.
Key Findings
•The thirty big corporations analyzed in this report paid more to lobby federal policymakers than they paid in federal income taxes for the three years between 2008 and 2010, despite being profitable.
•Despite making combined profits totally $164 billion in that three-year period, the 30 companies combined received tax rebates totaling nearly $11 billion.
•Altogether, these companies spent nearly half a billion dollars ($476 million) over three years to lobby Congress—that’s about $400,000 each day, including weekends.
•In the three-year period beginning in 2009 through most of 2011, these large firms spent over $22 million altogether on federal campaigns.
•These corporations have also spent lavishly on compensation for their top executives ($706 million altogether in 2010).
(Download the full report)
.
The Non-Threat From Iran!
Once again those in government are trying to sell us, the citizens a bill of goods They want to goad us to war in Iran the way they did in Iraq. In Iraq it was WMD and none ware found. Now they claim that Iran is close to a nuclear bomb. How can we possibly trust those intelligence claims after they have caused the country to go bankrupt fighting for a lie. They claimed no nation building, but what did they do; nation building! We built up Iraq’s infrastructure even while the infrastructure of our own country was falling apart and they refuse to do anything to repair it to this very day . They claimed that the entire war would cost only $50 to $80 billion. The cost was close to $1 trillion. They claimed that Iraq’s own oil money would pay for the war. Did it? No! They claimed that the war would be over in only a few months. How long did we stay there? Very nearly ten years! They claim that Iraq was hiding aircraft under the desert sands. Never found. They claimed that Iraq was trying to purchase something called yellowcake uranium from some country in Africa. Proven untrue! And these are only a few of many, many lies told to us by the intelligence community under the Bush administration. So why should we believe anything they say?
But now the Obama administration seems almost ready to go along with the right wing in starting up a groundswell of accusations against Iran in order to have an excuse to go to war with Iran. I pray that Mr. Obama would not give in to the intellectual coercion that is being perpetrated upon him. Mr. President, Mr. Ahmedinajad was a witness to what happened to Saddam Huessein and Osama Bin Laden and I’d be willing to bet $10,000 that even if he does possess nuclear weapons, he wouldn’t dare use them. Mr President the American people are tired of these wars! If you want to be elected for another I would advise you to concentrate on the economy. Let those who are not in power worry about going to war. That’s the very reason they are not there now.
But now the Obama administration seems almost ready to go along with the right wing in starting up a groundswell of accusations against Iran in order to have an excuse to go to war with Iran. I pray that Mr. Obama would not give in to the intellectual coercion that is being perpetrated upon him. Mr. President, Mr. Ahmedinajad was a witness to what happened to Saddam Huessein and Osama Bin Laden and I’d be willing to bet $10,000 that even if he does possess nuclear weapons, he wouldn’t dare use them. Mr President the American people are tired of these wars! If you want to be elected for another I would advise you to concentrate on the economy. Let those who are not in power worry about going to war. That’s the very reason they are not there now.
Thursday, December 15, 2011
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Monday, December 12, 2011
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Thursday, December 8, 2011
PETITION: Tell Boehner the Payroll Tax Cut is not 'chicken sh--.' SIGN NOW:
PETITION: Tell Boehner the Payroll Tax Cut is not 'chicken sh--.' SIGN NOW:: PETITION: Tell Boehner the Payroll Tax Cut is not 'chicken sh--.' SIGN NOW: https://www.dccc.org/pages/chicken
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Repubs Have A Good Point On This One!!
Republican Senators Push False Argument That Payroll Tax Cut Will Undermine Social Security: pAs some Republicans, including Majority Leader Eric Cantor (VA), are growing worried that opposing a payroll tax cut extension will undercut their message as anti-tax zealots, other Republicans have opposed the extension at every turn. Despite their staunch opposition to raising taxes on millionaires, these Republicans have cycled through the reasons to avoid providing a [...]/p
Monday, December 5, 2011
Sunday, December 4, 2011
Thursday, December 1, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)