Lessons from the Progressive Midwest

 I strongly recommend Jon Walker's series of Firedoglake posts about the Nonpartisan[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/OpenLeft-FrontPage/~3/L4dth_AXljk/lessons-from-the
-progressive-midwest

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

Some More Summertime, Old Gray Lady Wankery

I was actually going to cut Sheryl Gay Stolberg of the New York Times some slack for the following (from here, in which she tries to make the case that Obama is not getting credit for his successes supposedly like Obama?s predecessor, which is a stretch to say the least)?

It is an argument that sounds eerily similar to the one Mr. Obama?s predecessor, George W. Bush, made to justify an unpopular war in Iraq as he watched his own poll numbers sink lower. Mr. Bush and his aides often felt they could not catch a break; when the economy was humming along ? or at least seemed to be humming along ? the Bush White House never got credit for it, because the public was so upset about the war.

I can never recall the economy ?humming along? under Former President Highest Disapproval Rating In Gallup Poll History (here), but there you are.

However, what really cheesed me off was when Stolberg came back with the following today (here)?

Every president?s calculus is different. Mr. Bush quit playing golf after the August 2003 bombing of the United Nations headquarters in Baghdad; he later said, ?Playing golf during a war just sends the wrong signal.?

As K.O. tells us here from a Media Matters link, Dubya lied even about that; CBS News has records of Bush playing golf as late as Oct. 13 of that year, nearly two months later.

Next time, try reporting.

Read The Full Article:
http://liberaldoomsayer.blogspot.com/2010/07/some-more-summertime-old-gray-lady.h
tml

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

The Collapse of the Middle Class

The Elizabeth Warren "Collapse of the Middle Class" video from 2007 has shown up in several diaries lately, as the debate over who will head the new Consumer Protection Agency begins.  I have no intention of re-litigating her case here, but would like to address some of the substance of her remarks, in light of economic developments since she made them.

She outlines the increased pressures on families in the past thirty years.  Income for adult males has actually decreased in inflation-adjusted dollars, and though she doesn't give the reason, I'd be willing to bet the loss of union jobs, and offshoring of manufacturing has resulted in reduced earning opportunities.  She also notes that thirty years ago, it was possible to enter the middle class with only a high school diploma (my note: via union jobs, again) but now it requires a college education, the costs of which are borne by the individual, not the taxpayers as a whole.
Noting that these burdens fall disproportionately on families with children makes me wonder about the future of our country.  If families with children are more likely to live in poverty, if it is increasingly more difficult to afford the education necessary to gain access to jobs which provide economic stability, what does this mean for our future?  For Social Security?  

She talks about how the United States of the future will have an upper class and a lower class, with those in the middle being squeezed into one of the other categories.  She says the upper class will expand, taking in people who haven't suffered a family breakup, medical crisis or job loss-the three major causes of bankruptcy.  Those of us unfortunate enough to experience one or more of these events will perforce become part of the lower class.  The great unwashed.    

The job losses since 2008 have put many of us into the high-risk category, and even if we aren't poor now, our savings have been decimated between the stock market crash and raiding them to pay for day-to-day expenses.  Our economy is 70% fueled by consumers.  We cannot and will not consume if we are afraid for our future.  This behavior, even among those who still have their jobs, is slowing, perhaps stalling economic recovery

Warren also notes that the increased pressures on those currently in the middle class make them more worried about their own problems, and less sympathetic to those of the people below them on the economic ladder.  Can you say "teabagger?"  I knew you could.

If we continue down this economic path--the one Warren says will lead to the collapse of the middle class-there will be no economic recovery for most of us.  The fortunate will rise upward into the new upper class, while the majority of us will, in the words of Henry David Thoreau:

Lead lives of quiet desperation and go to the grave with the song still in them.

What a waste of human potential we are fostering through these policies.  Will the United States be the latest empire to die in the mountains of Afghanistan?  

What could change the future?

1.  Moving back to defined benefit pensions, or at the very least strengthening Social Security.  When retirement programs moved from defined benefit to defined contribution, the risk shifted from corporations to individuals, and exposed them to the vagaries of the market, offering no guaranteed pension.  In periods of increased market volatility, this makes a secure retirement less likely than at any time since Medicare was enacted in 1965.

2.  Real healthcare reform.  Removing the link between employment and health insurance.  As we have seen, periods of high unemployment correlate with many people losing their employer-based health insurance, and even with the COBRA subsidies, it is prohibitively expensive to maintain coverage on unemployment.  Tying health insurance to jobs also acts as a disincentive for people to become entrepreneurs.  Starting a small business is a risky enough proposition without the added costs of buying individual health insurance in the marketplace.

3.  Removing the income cap on Social Security.  Making all income and bonuses subject to Social Security taxes would secure its future in perpetuity.

4.  Reinstate Glass-Steagall.  By separating commercial banking from investment banking, the "too big to fail" problem would take care of itself, as banks would be forced to split their business into separate entities.  Small banks are failing at an even faster rate this year than last-2.6 per week in 2009, 3.4 per week to date in 2010.   Instead of absorbing these banks into larger entities, they need to be supported, and the government needs to step in and help the consumers with underwater loans directly, which would not only help the consumers, but also the small banks which made the loans.  No more privatizing gains and socializing losses.  If the banks screw up, let them fail.  They need to suffer the consequences of their risky behavior, not the taxpayers.

5.  Re-think the wisdom of spending as much on our military as the rest of the world combined.  Our defense budget is  $1750 per person, per year-higher than any other country in the world.  Is it really being used to defend us?  

What will happen?  None of the above.  But as critical as I am of the Obama administration's run to the middle, I am confident that our slide to the bottom would be greased if the Republicans were in charge.  Their obstructionism, blatant corporatism and anti-regulation brand of free-market disaster capitalism would exacerbate our problems exponentially.

video details and more



Read The Full Article:
http://www.myleftwing.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=26582

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

What If The Tea Party Was Black

video details and more

I've often asked myself this question too. Every single time a teabagger says they're not racist, I wonder what would happen if the black community rose up in anger this way and screamed that they want THEIR country back, and slyly suggested that white Republicans were stealing the country away from them.

No, if minorities rose up and were the Tea Party, they'd likely be accused of everything from sedition to terrorism. I thought these lyrics were powerful, insightful, and just chock full of awesome.

Kudos to Pittsburgh artist Jasiri X. Also highly recommended: Tim Wise's inspirational essay "Imagine if the tea party were black."

(Lyrics after the jump)

What if the tea party was black
Holding guns like the Black Panther Party was back
If Al was Rush Limbaugh and Jesse was Sean Hannity
And Tavis was Glenn Beck would they harm they families
If Sarah Palin was suddenly Sistah Soaljah
Would they leave it with the votes or go and get the soldiers
Yall know if the tea party was black
The government would have been had the army attack

What if Michael Baisden was on ya FM dial
For 3 hours every day calling the president foul
Would they say free speech or find evidence how
To charge him with treason like see he's unamerican now
What if Minister Farrakhan prayed for the death
Of the commander in chief that he be laid to rest
Would they treat it as the gravest threat or never make an arrest
Even today he's still hated for less
What if President Obama would have lost the election
Quit his job so he could go talk to the left and
Bash the government for being off of direction
Fraught with deception
And told black people they want all of our weapons
And we want our own country and called for secession
Would he be arrested and tossed in corrections
For trying to foster aggression
Against the people's lawful selection
Our questions

What if the tea party was black
Holding guns like the Black Panther Party was back
If Al was Rush Limbaugh and Jesse was Sean Hannity
And Tavis was Glenn Beck would they harm they families
If Sarah Palin was suddenly Sistah Soaljah
Would they leave it with the votes or go and get the soldiers
Yall know if the tea party was black
The government would have been had the army attack

What If black people went on Facebook and made a page
That for the death if the president elect we prayed
Would the creators be tazed and thrown in a cage
We know the page wouldn't have been displayed all these days
What if Jeremiah Wright said that everybody white
Wasn't a real America would you feel scared of him
If he had a militia with pictures that depict the president as Hitler
They would kill and bury that
Wait
What if Cynthia McKinney lamented the winning of the new president
And hinted he wasn't really a true resident
With no proof or evidence
Would the media treat it like a huge press event
They would have attacked whatever group she represents
They would have called her a kook on precedent
And any network that gave her due preference
Would be the laughing stock of the news so our question is

What if the tea party was black
Holding guns like the Black Panther Party was back
If Al was Rush Limbaugh and Jesse was Sean Hannity
And Tavis was Glenn Beck would they harm they families
If Sarah Palin was suddenly Sistah Soaljah
Would they leave it with the votes or go and get the soldiers
Yall know if the tea party was black
The government would have been had the army attack

(h/t Joan Walsh)

Read The Full Article:
http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/what-if-tea-party-was-black

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

Analysis of Latest Obama Administration Small
Business Contracting Data Released

The American Small Business League (ASBL) has released the first analysis of the government?s fiscal year (FY) 2009 small business contracting data, and found 61 percent actually going to corporate giants.[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/60275

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

What happens when you give money to the rich

They keep it and you never get it back. These charts tell the tale, from Paul Krugman recently. The first chart shows lost revenue from the Bush tax cuts:

[A]s for revenue: we have a growing economy, which means that revenue tends, other things equal, to rise over time. But here?s what real federal revenue looked like since 1992:


Rapid, steady growth in the Clinton years; much less thereafter, even if you stop the clock just before the housing bubble burst [i.e., at the peak in 2008].

The first eight years are Clinton's revenue. The next eight are Bush's. Measure Bush to the second peak ? the start of the economic crisis. Heck of a job, George.

The second chart is even worse ? for the argument that tax cuts pay for themselves. It shows the effect of the Reagan tax cut.

The blue line is real federal revenue. The red line is the revenue trend starting at the first Reagan tax cut. Notice that the blue line never again catches up to the red one ? contrary to conservative promises that it would. That's lost revenue for every year after.

Here?s real federal revenue, in 2005 dollars, from 1970 to 1990. I?ve plotted the log, because it?s easier to look at trends:

First, the Carter years, contrary to legend, were not a period of economic stagnation and falling revenue . . . [O]verall growth was respectable and revenue growth reasonably high.

Second, the revenue track under Reagan looks a lot like the track under Bush: a drop in revenues, then a resumption of growth, but no return to the previous trend.

This is exactly what you would expect to see if supply-side economics were just plain wrong[.]

This is just for fun, of course, an exercise on a mint-julip day. They're lying, those conservatives, when they talk about the goodness of tax cuts, and they know it. It's our job to also know they're lying ? and to act like it.

When you give money to the rich, they keep it and never give it back. It's one way you get to be rich.

GP

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Americablog/~3/tZfuMGkmtvY/what-happens-when-you-g
ive-money-to.html

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

Ben Nelson and Judd Gregg ignore their
constituents

Senator Ben Nelson doesn’t understand climate change, and is going to harm the very industries he seeks to protect. But at least he’s not Senator Judd Gregg, who refuses to think for himself - and that should drive even tea partiers nuts.[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/mydd/~3/JdXs9veecSk/ben-nelson-and-judd-gregg-igno
re-their-constituents

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

Saturday Hate Mail-a-palooza

Unlike the first quarter, when opinion was sharply divided on the best hate mail of the quarter, the winner of the Q2 competition was pretty clear cut:

I loathe you. I'm gonna go eat a steak. And fuck my wife. And pray to GOD.

Congrats expert multi-tasker dude!

Fresh hate below the fold!

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.dailykos.com/~r/dailykos/index/~3/K7YlOqNhjJ0/-Saturday-Hate-Mail-a-
palooza

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

Reich On The "Molehill Of Reform"

Another day, another highly touted piece of "reform" legislation being touted as relief for the weary working class.  And it's following the pattern of every other "reform" bill of any kind during the last 18 months... what you see is not necessarily what you get.

Robert Reich On The New Finance Bill: A Mountain of Legislative Paper, a Molehill of Reform  

Thursday the President pronounced that "because of this [financial reform] bill the American people will never again be asked to foot the bill for Wall Street's mistakes."

As if to prove him wrong, Goldman Sachs simultaneously announced it had struck a deal with federal prosecutors to pay $550 million to settle federal claims it misled investor - a sum representing a mere 15 days profit for the firm based on its 2009 earnings. Goldman's share price immediately jumped 4.3 percent, and the Street proclaimed its chair and CEO, Lloyd ("Goldman is doing God's work") Blankfein, a winner. Financial analysts rushed to affirm a glowing outlook for Goldman stock.

A little over half a billion bucks.  This is a drop in the bucket compared to what Goldman managed to steal from the American people and the American people... you and I... will never see a penny's worth of benefit from it anyway.  How does a company that has openly helped to wreck... not only our economy but economies all over the world... get off with a slap on the wrist "assessment" like $550 million?

Although the financial reform bill may have clipped some of Goldman's wings - its lucrative derivative business may require Goldman to jettison its status as a bank holding company, and the access to the Fed discount window that comes with it - the main point is that the Goldman settlement reveals everything that's weakest about the financial reform bill.

The American people will continue to have to foot the bill for the mistakes of Wall Street's biggest banks because the legislation does nothing to diminish the economic and political power of these giants. It does not cap their size. It does not resurrect the Glass-Steagall Act that once separated commercial (normal) banking from investment (casino) banking. It does not even link the pay of their traders and top executives to long-term performance. In other words, it does nothing to change their basic structure. And for this reason, it gives them an implicit federal insurance policy against failure unavailable to smaller banks - thereby adding to their economic and political power in the future.

The bill contains hortatory language but is precariously weak in the details. The so-called Volcker Rule has been watered down and delayed. Blanche Lincoln's important proposal that derivatives be traded in separate entities which aren't subsidized by commercial deposits has been shrunk and compromised. Customized derivates can remain underground. The consumer protection agency has been lodged in the Fed, whose own consumer division failed miserably to protect consumers last time around.

On every important issue the legislation merely passes on to regulators decisions about how to oversee the big banks and treat them if they're behaving badly. But if history proves one lesson it's that regulators won't and can't. They don't have the resources. They don't have the knowledge. They are staffed by people in their 30s and 40s who are paid a small fraction of what the lawyers working for the banks are paid. Many want and expect better-paying jobs on Wall Street after they leave government, and so are shrink-wrapped in a basic conflict of interest. And the big banks' lawyers and accountants can run circles around them by threatening protracted litigation.

More at the link.  Mr Reich exposes the inadequacies of this reform bill as perhaps nobody else has  and it's a damned good read.  But why do we keep being taken in by little more than another round of silver tongued oratory about "once and for all" on every one of these issues when the only thing that really happens once and for all is the tightening of Wall Street's grip on the country?

Is Barack Obama a "Centrist Corporatist" politician as many... including me... think he might be?  If not, he's certainly surrounded himself with a lot of cabinet secretaries, staff members and bureaucrats who appear to ... let's just say lean more towards protecting the profits of the big corporations than the livelihoods of the common people and the maintenace of the middle class.

At the very least, his "reform campaign" has been little more than a long series of attempts to compromise with people who are not interested in compromise and have no incentive to be and I'm not sure we're operating in a "very least" scenario.  But it really doesn't matter anyway who or what Mr. Obama is or isn't.  The beat goes on.  

It should be getting pretty obvious by now that no matter which political party is currently "in power" the Banksters and the Corporatists are the ones running the country.  And as long as you have the Boner Gang and their blathering band of propagandists whipping up the ignorant and ill informed with promises to take back the country "for the people" nobody even realizes that "the people" are whoever the Supreme Court... a group just as steeped in present day Conservative (Corporatist) ideology as the bought and paid for worms in congress... say they are and as we've seen, "the people" are NOT you and me.  

Bottom Line:

Make no mistake: As long as there's no fundamental change in the structure of Wall Street - as long as the big banks stay as big and are allowed to grow bigger, and have every incentive to invent new financial gimmicks with which to bet other peoples' money - they will remain too big to fail, and too politically powerful to control.

And as long as there is no real effort being made to secure those changes, we continue to kid ourselves that we actually have a choice.  Our choice is between Corporatist Republicans and Corporatist Republicans masquerading as Democrats and an ever dwindling number of true liberals and progressives who can't accomplish anything for being blindsided by their own party.    
 


Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheyGaveUsARepublic-FrontPage/~3/WKVv9-TB5Gc/reich
-on-the-molehill-of-reform

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

Georgetown GOP begins recruting, where are Dems

The Waccamaw Neck Republican Club is sponsoring a campaign volunteer recruitment meeting this Monday. My first thought when I saw this is was where are the Georgetown Dems?

The Waccamaw area is going to be crucial to keeping State Rep. Vida Miller in her seat this November. In 2008, Miller only won one Pawleys Island precinct.

So, here I am waiting on news from the local Dems to publish so that we can see an active Party in the county, get information out in full and do our best to bring people in to volunteer.

Read The Full Article:
http://thepoliticsofjamiesanderson.blogspot.com/2010/07/georgetown-gop-begins-rec
ruting-where.html

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!