"Obamacare is a classic example of how a really good idea is perverted by The Corporate State. Universal Health Care in a Modern Industrial State should be a Civil Right.
Obama, who is not a Liberal but a Center/Right Corporatist, faithfully promised a Public Option throughout the entire election, yet dropped it within months of getting elected. That was via the Insurance Industry because they knew that most folks would take the PO over their bullshit polices.
Said industry also help fund the Astroturf organizations that took over the early tea Party movement, switching them from a TARP related focus to an anti-Obamacare focus, giving Obama 'political cover' to dump the Public Option.
But this also had the effect of bringing all the loons in that movement to the fore, creating the most gridlocked Congress since the 1850's.
As I have said, "I believe The Corporate State has learned The Hitler Lesson, that once a political radical grasps the levers of power, you can no longer control him with money. [It'll be a 'him' every time] That is why they ran all of the loons the GOP base favored off the road with cash early on. Mittens was always a sacrificial candidate. The Corporate State is perfectly happy with that smart accommodating black chap.""
I retrospect it seems that the real Hitler Lesson is that when y'all use Racism as a political tool to divide and suppresses the interests of The People some manner of despot will inevitable arise.
Side Note: this was tagged with "most humans are servile ignorant scum"
Today: The set of GOP candidates amazingly enough is even worse than three years ago. They don't even have a Huntsman.
The largest audience cheers in the Republican presidential debate came when Wolf Blitzer asked Ron Paul whether he wanted an uninsured 30 year old with a treatable disease to die because he didn't have health insurance. You can hear the crowd shout, "let him die."
http://elections.americablog.com/2011/09/tea-party-crowd-about-sick-man-without.html
It's based upon the delusional mythology of Rugged [White] Individualism building America. It makes a lot of noise about The Pioneers 'doing it themselves' and ignores any facts that run counter to that notion, like the railroads being both Corporate Entities and Federally funded. Or the need for the US Army in dealing with the Plains Indians, the finest light cavalry in the world. Without the former most of those Rugged [White] Individualists would have wound up as bones bleaching upon The Great Grass Plain. Plus it's traditional heroes tend to be violent, alcoholic, gambling addicted, whore mongering sociopaths.
And this is not even getting into how much of American's economic foundations were built upon the scarred black back of slavery.
So fuck that Libertarian bullshit...and you can quote me on that shit, baby!" *raises clenched fist*
Reason TV has been looking into some very strange and heavy handed tactics being used to drive people off desert land in the Antelope Valley, LA County.
For people who prefer to read, LA Weekly has an article on the situation.
Mark Frauenfelder over at Boing Boing is as puzzled by this piece as I am. Why would the local government be trying to drive people off their land when there is nobody else living in the area. More important, why won't the county supervisor, Michael Antonovich answer any questions on the matter?
The local residents being bullied think that there is some kind of development plan behind the moves. If I was in that situation I would probably come to the same conclusion.
From a political perspective, Republican Antonovich has to go. Whatever his motives, whatever his reasons, there should be no place in public office for officials who won't explain or be accountable for their actions.
Steal This Icon
Aug. 27th, 2011 09:15 amI have be saying for a while that no matter how badly Obama fucks up, whomever emerges from the GOP primaries will be so fucking batshit they'll terrify the electorate into re-electing him.
This rant is getting a lot of play, and it deserves to. This is the long version. Note that the Dem and Repub spokes-folks both illustrate his point that the party focus muddies the waters — by muddying the waters.
By the way, Dylan Ratigan has a background as a business-press reporter and analyst for Bloomberg News and CNBC. This stuff, he knows cold.
Whatever else you think of the non-partisan Ratigan and the rest of his ideas, there are three important take-ways here, three themes and phrases to hold firmly in memory:
■ "Extraction" — "Tens of trillions of dollars are being extracted from the U.S.A." Memorize that word; it's excellent framing. "Extraction" = looting. And it nicely mirrors what oil and gas companies do; they're properly described as the "energy extraction" industry.
■ "Bought Congress" — That should be the branding, first, last, and always. "Bought Congress" is exactly right, and again, it's perfect framing.
■ Mindless party focus as distraction — Ratigan says Republicans want to "burn the place to the ground" to get power, and Obama / Dems want to kick the can down the road to protect their 2012 power-maintenance opportunity. In other words, both parties are corrupted by power; neither wants to solve the nation's problems. And the inter-party fight obscures the problem — in my view, on purpose.
Think about it. If we the peasants are made to care if the 2nd son of the duke, or the 4th son, is the one to inherit the reins of our servitude, and we get hooked into rooting for one against the other — what are we not noticing? (Hint: Our servitude.)
This doesn't mean that party activity is meaningless; but it's best to understand what we're dealing with. Obama's not about Hope; Republicans aren't about Freedom; and the Tea Party is just populist enough to make them tempting coalition partners, in my opinion. (For what its worth, my own thoughts on political parties in America are summarized here. )
Whatever your thoughts, it's great to see this stuff. Ratigan here is not much different from Ed Schultz, as Schultz calls out Barack Obama for lack of involvement in the war raging in the states, Wisconsin and Ohio in particular.
It's the start of the next phase, I think, as thinking people react to their losses in the last one.
GP
The goal, methods and passions of the Tea Party in the House are all characteristic of the radical Southern right

The Tea Party movement takes its name from the Boston Tea Party of 1773, when American patriots dumped British tea into Boston Harbor to protest British imperial power. But while New England was the center of resistance to the British empire, there are few New Englanders to be found in today's Tea Party movement. It should be called the Fort Sumter movement, after the Southern attack on the federal garrison in Fort Sumter in South Carolina on April 12-13, 1861, that began the Civil War. Today's Tea Party movement is merely the latest of a series of attacks on American democracy by the white Southern minority, which for more than two centuries has not hesitated to paralyze, sabotage or, in the case of the Civil War, destroy American democracy in order to get their way.
The mainstream media have completely missed the story, by portraying the Tea Party movement in ideological rather than regional terms. Whether by accident or design, the public faces of the Tea Party in the House are Midwesterners -- Minnesota's Michele Bachmann and Joe Walsh of Illinois. But while there may be Tea Party sympathizers throughout the country, in the House of Representatives the Tea Party faction that has used the debt ceiling issue to plunge the nation into crisis is overwhelmingly Southern in its origins:
The four states with the most Tea Party representatives in Congress are all former members of the Confederate States of America. The states with the greatest number of members of the House Tea Party caucus are Texas (12), Florida (7), Louisiana (5) and Georgia (5). While California is in fifth place with four House Tea Party members, the sixth, seventh and eighth places on the list are taken by two former Southern slave states, South Carolina and Tennessee, and a border state, Missouri, each with three members of the congressional Tea Party caucus.
If states with significant white Southern diasporas were included, the Southern proportion of the House Tea Party caucus would be even bigger. Many of the other states with Tea Party representatives are border states with significant Southern populations and Southern ties. One is Maryland, a state with Confederate sympathies during the Civil War, which, because the Census Bureau defines it as "Northeastern," is responsible for the only Northeastern member of the Tea Party caucus, Roscoe Bartlett. The four Californian representatives come from the Orange County area or inland California, both regions whose political culture was shaped by Southern political culture, in the form of the "Okie" diaspora that settled there during the Depression.
In the entire House Tea Party Caucus, there is not a single representative from New England.
The fact that Tea Party conservatism speaks with a pronounced Southern drawl may have escaped the attention of the mainstream media, but it is obvious to members of Congress who have to try to work with these disproportionately-Southern fanatics. One is Rep. Loretta Sanchez of California. As a guest on a radio show, she mocked the Southern accent of the typical congressional Tea Party caucus member:
The congresswoman, who represents Anaheim and other parts of Orange County, laughed and said she knows how to get along with people. Then she used a mock Southern accent to describe how conversations with them play out.
"Hey what's your name? 'My name is M-o-e,'" Sanchez said, feigning a Southern drawl that drew howls of laughter from Miller and her co-host. "Ok Moe. Moe-ster, how you doing baby? What are we going to do today? What's your interest? What can we work on together?"
"'Well, it's unconstitutional," she said, using her faux Southern accent.
Contradicting the mainstream media narrative that the Tea Party is a new populist movement that formed spontaneously in reaction to government bailouts or the Obama administration, the facts show that the Tea Party in Congress is merely the familiar old neo-Confederate Southern right under a new label. The threat of Southern Tea Party representatives and their sidekicks from the Midwest and elsewhere to destroy America's credit rating unless the federal government agrees to enact Dixie's economic agenda of preserving defense spending while slashing entitlements is simply the latest act of aggression by the Solid South.
Here is how the League of the South, a neo-Confederate organization that favors Southern secession from what it describes alternately as "the yankee empire" and "the South-busting American regime," describes the South's pattern of voting in Congress in recent years (note the author's British spelling of "favour" -- Noah Webster, who tried to Americanize spelling, was a Yankee):
Another stark Southern – US split occurred when the Senate voted on President Clinton's impeachment verdict. The whole Senate voted to acquit Clinton on both impeachment charges while Southern Senators voted two-thirds in favour [sic] of convicting Clinton of obstruction of justice (18 to 8). If the South had been in charge, President Bill "the Lecher" Clinton would have been the first president in U.S. history to have been removed from office by impeachment.
Election
If the South had had its way, however, Clinton would not even have been elected in the first place. In both 1992 and 1996 the South voted for the Republican nominee for President, i.e., the candidate generally perceived to be more conservative (regardless of the reality).
Taxes
On tax policy, the South almost always votes for lower taxes, and is sometimes overridden by the US congress. In 1998 the thirteen State South voted by the required two-thirds margin for a constitutional amendment to require a two-thirds vote of both houses of congress to raise taxes. Southerners voted in favour [sic] of this constitutional amendment 90 to 41. In the full House the amendment failed by 238 to 186 opposed, far short of the constitutionally required two-thirds margin.
Religious Freedom
Also in 1998, Southern Representatives voted by the requisite two-thirds "super majority" to submit to the States the Religious Freedom Constitutional Amendment. It would have guaranteed an individual's right to pray and recognize his religious beliefs on public property, including schools. The house of representatives [sic] as a whole rejected this amendment by a vote of 224 in favour to 203 opposed, falling miserably short of the necessary two-thirds margin.
States' Rights
In 1997 Senator Hutchinson of Arkansas offered an amendment to abolish the National Endowment for the Arts and transfer its fiscal 1998 funding directly to the States. The South voted for this State Rights proposal by the ample margin of 17 to 9, whereas the full Senate rejected this affirmation of the rights and duties of the States by the almost equally strong margin of 63 against to only 36 for.
In light of this recent history, it is clear that the origins of the debt ceiling crisis are to be sought, not in generic American conservatism, but in idiosyncratic Southern conservatism. The goal, the methods and the passion of the Tea Party in the House are all characteristic of the radical Southern right.
From the earliest years of the American republic, white Southern conservatives when they have lost elections and found themselves in the political minority have sought to extort concession from national majorities by paralyzing or threatening to destroy the United States.
The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798 and 1799 asserted the alleged right of states to "nullify" any federal law that state lawmakers considered unconstitutional. This obstructionist mentality led to the Nullification Crisis of 1832, when South Carolina refused to enforce federal tariffs. Civil War was averted only when President Andrew Jackson, a Southerner himself, forced the nullifiers to back down.
In 1820 and 1850 the South used the threat of secession to force the rest of the United States to appease it on the slavery issue. In 1861, the South tried to destroy the United States, rather than accept a legitimately elected president, Abraham Lincoln, whom it did not control.
Following defeat in the Civil War, the former Confederate states regrouped as "the Solid South," a one-party region, first Democratic and now Republican, that has tended to vote as a bloc in national affairs. The South sought to block the federal civil rights revolution by a policy of "massive resistance" to court orders ordering racial integration. Some Southern states went so far as to try to abolish their public school systems rather than integrate them. It is hard to avoid seeing a link between this racist rationale for privatization and modern conservative plans to scale back Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, relied on disproportionately by black and brown Americans and low-income whites, while increasing taxpayer subsidies to private retirement and healthcare accounts enjoyed mostly by affluent whites.
As white Southerners, upset with the Democratic Party's racial and social liberalism, migrated into the post-Goldwater GOP, they brought their Dixiecrat attitudes into the party of Lincoln. The Kemp-Roth tax bill of 1981, which inaugurated the policy of creating permanent deficits by slashing taxes without cutting spending, had its strongest support among Southern and Western members of Congress and the least support in the fiscally conservative Northeast.
The Republican Party's attempted government shutdown of 1995 marked the new domination of the Republican Party by Southerners like Newt Gingrich, Dick Armey and Tom DeLay. The impeachment of their fellow Southerner Bill Clinton was an attempted coup d'état by the Southern white minority in the United States, which, as in 1860, was frustrated because its candidate lost the presidential election.
The debt ceiling crisis is the latest case in which the radical right in the South has held America hostage until its demands are met. Presidents Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln refused to appease the Southern fanatics. Unfortunately, President Obama and the Democrats in Congress chose not to follow their example and instead gave in. In doing so, they have encouraged the neo-Confederate minority in Congress to find yet another opportunity in the near future to extort concessions from America's majority by sabotaging America's government.
Ransom Paid
Aug. 1st, 2011 02:08 pmMonday, August 1, 2011
Anyone who characterizes the deal between the President, Democratic, and Republican leaders as a victory for the American people over partisanship understands neither economics nor politics.
The deal does not raise taxes on America’s wealthy and most fortunate — who are now taking home a larger share of total income and wealth, and whose tax rates are already lower than they have been, in eighty years. Yet it puts the nation’s most important safety nets and public investments on the chopping block.
It also hobbles the capacity of the government to respond to the jobs and growth crisis. Added to the cuts already underway by state and local governments, the deal’s spending cuts increase the odds of a double-dip recession. And the deal strengthens the political hand of the radical right.
Yes, the deal is preferable to the unfolding economic catastrophe of a default on the debt of the U.S. government. The outrage and the shame is it has come to this choice.
More than a year ago, the President could have conditioned his agreement to extend the Bush tax cuts beyond 2010 on Republicans’ agreement not to link a vote on the debt ceiling to the budget deficit. But he did not.
Many months ago, when Republicans first demanded spending cuts and no tax increases as a condition for raising the debt ceiling, the President could have blown their cover. He could have shown the American people why this demand had nothing to do with deficit reduction but everything to do with the GOP’s ideological fixation on shrinking the size of the government — thereby imperiling Medicare, Social Security, education, infrastructure, and everything else Americans depend on. But he did not.
And through it all the President could have explained to Americans that the biggest economic challenge we face is restoring jobs and wages and economic growth, that spending cuts in the next few years will slow the economy even further, and therefore that the Republicans’ demands threaten us all. Again, he did not.
The radical right has now won a huge tactical and strategic victory. Democrats and the White House have proven they have little by way of tactics or strategy.
By putting Medicare and Social Security on the block, they have made it more difficult for Democrats in the upcoming 2012 election cycle to blame Republicans for doing so.
By embracing deficit reduction as their apparent goal – claiming only that they’d seek to do it differently than the GOP – Democrats and the White House now seemingly agree with the GOP that the budget deficit is the biggest obstacle to the nation’s future prosperity.
The budget deficit is not the biggest obstacle to our prosperity. Lack of jobs and growth is. And the largest threat to our democracy is the emergence of a radical right capable of getting most of the ransom it demands.
Miserable Fucking Cocksucker
Jul. 31st, 2011 07:31 amIt's criminal the way politicians in Washington are ignoring the very real possibility that this budget deal could plunge us into another recession (just in time for Obama to lose re-election and Democrats to lose the Senate). From Bloomberg:
Congressional agreement on budget cuts could cause troubles of its own. Less spending by the Federal government would be “a real problem” for the economy, Guy LeBas, chief fixed income strategist at Janney Montgomery Scott LLC in Philadelphia, said in a July 29 interview on Bloomberg Television.Here's some pretty direct evidence that the stimulus did help the economy grow, and cut backs in federal spending helped the economy shrink (or at least grow at a smaller rate).
“We could see a growing risk of recession in the fourth quarter, early 2012, if in fact the federal government gets it together and makes aggressive budget cuts,” LeBas said.
No one, and I mean no one, on the Hill, at the White House, anywhere is talking about what these grand bargains are going to do to the economy next year. I don't mean this as a personal shot, but it's easy to tell people to eat their spinach when you make a government guaranteed salary of $400,000 a year, or even a congressman's guaranteed salary of $174,000 a year. It doesn't mean you don't care, but it does mean that the concern isn't personal, like it is for the rest of us.
If you're actually worried about how you're going to pay your mortgage, or feed your family, or stop your car from being repossessed, all this hysteria about cutting the deficit - and not just ignoring the economy, but actually proposing policies that may send us into another recession (a direction we're already heading) - doesn't sound all that grand at all.
Mark my words: No one, not Reid, McConnell, Boehner, Pelosi or Obama is willing to answer the simple question of what these grand bargains are going to do to the economy next year, and in the years to come. And sadly, the media doesn't seem terribly interested either.
Truth Out Debt Theater Up Date
Jul. 30th, 2011 11:47 amhttp://www.truth-out.org/senate-quickly-kills-boehner-debt-bill/1312030751
Carl Hulse and Robert Pear, The New York Times News Service: "After a 24-hour delay and concessions to conservatives, the House on Friday narrowly approved a Republican fiscal plan that the Senate quickly rejected in a standoff over the federal debt ceiling that was keeping the government on a path to potential default. Despite a day of frenzied legislative maneuvering... the two parties made no visible progress in finding common ground, leaving Washington, Wall Street and much of the nation watching the clock toward a deadline of midnight Tuesday."
Mainstream Reporters: Too Close to the Field and Teams to Get the Debt Story
http://www.truth-out.org/mainstream-reporters-too-close-field-and-teams-get-debt-story/1312033901
Jeff Cohen, Truthout: "If you were a spectator in a sky box seat looking directly down on the Washington debt debate, you’d be seeing a contest both narrow and off to one edge of the field - like watching a football game being played entirely between the 10-yard line and the goal line. The big items that added trillions to the debt are not even on the field of debate. Because the two teams are not contesting them."
World Reacts to Debt Ceiling Debacle: "Irresponsible," "Worst Kind of Absurd Theatrics"
http://www.truth-out.org/world-reacts-debt-ceiling-debacle-irresponsible-worst-kind-absurd-theatrics/1312035874
Ken Sofer, ThinkProgress: "From France and Germany to China and India, countries around the world are angry that American politicians play with the possibility of a U.S. default like a yo-yo with little regard for the international economic system that depends on American solvency... Even if Congress manages to forge a deal against the wishes of the Tea Party and deliver a bill to President Obama's desk raising the debt ceiling before default, the damage to our international standing has already been done."
Economists: Now is Wrong Time for Congress to Cut Spending
http://www.truth-out.org/economists-now-wrong-time-congress-cut-spending/1312039103
Kevin G. Hall, McClatchy Newspapers: "Despite the weak growth, politicians aren't arguing about stimulating the economy; rather they're debating how quickly and how much to cut spending, thus shaving economic growth in the process... The U.S. economy grew at an anemic 1.3 percent rate from April to June, the Commerce Department reported Friday. It also revised downward the growth rate over the first three months of 2011 to just 0.4 percent."
Large Mortgage Service Filed False Documents in Foreclosure Bid
http://www.truth-out.org/large-mortgage-service-filed-false-documents-foreclosure-bid/1312042309
Paul Kiel, ProPublica: "GMAC, one of the nation's largest mortgage servicers... wanted to foreclose on a New York City homeowner but lacked the crucial paperwork needed to seize the property... Three months later, GMAC had an answer. Itfiled a document with New York City authorities that said the delinquent Ameriquest loan had been assigned to it 'effective of' August 2005. The documentwas dated July 7, 2010, three years after Ameriquest had ceased to exist... In New York, it's a felony to file a public record with 'intent to deceive.'"
LJ Friend: “Where's the panic?”
Jul. 30th, 2011 10:29 amI like to think that such will get them murdered at the polls next year, but the American Electorate can be pretty fucking stupid.”