Musings of Big T

Levees are critical, and a good deal.....

2005-12-11T18:13:00.000-06:00

This Op Ed in the New York Times contains a few relative cost statistics which truly offer some perspective.

"The price tag for protection against a Category 5 hurricane, which would involve not just stronger and higher levees but also new drainage canals and environmental restoration, would very likely run to well over $32 billion. That is a lot of money. But that starting point represents just 1.2 percent of this year's estimated $2.6 trillion in federal spending, which actually overstates the case, since the cost would be spread over many years. And it is barely one-third the cost of the $95 billion in tax cuts passed just last week by the House of Representatives.
Total allocations for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the war on terror have topped $300 billion."

It makes the delay in the Federal commitment necessary to give confidence to the private market seem far more eggregious.

Bush's Marie Antoinette response.....

2005-11-26T17:45:00.000-06:00

From NOLA.com: "Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, said that her legislation, co-sponsored by Vitter and Landrieu, for bridge loans to help small businesses reopen after the hurricane was stymied because of opposition from the White House, which indicated the program would be too expensive. Such loans, Snowe said, are critical to New Orleans' recovery. "

Liquidity, in the form of bridge loans, grants, loan restructuring, tax credits or whatever, is one of the most valuable contributions the Federal Govt. could make to help New Orleans' recovery. The City and State have little or reduced revenues and little savings; business owners have to survive for 6-12 months with no income just to return to their shops. Liquidity provides the avenues to recovery; the details of the long-term financial solution can be worked out later.

As usual, this "business-friendly" administration doesn't understand rudimentary business principles and the "compassionate" conservatives don't trust the small business-person enough to want to rebuild their lives, to make the loan.

resistance

2005-01-17T21:05:00.000-06:00

i believe that i shall begin to resist ideological kleptocracies.

BigT

censorship: one thing we need to avoid...

2005-01-17T19:04:00.000-06:00

This article on the BBC NEWS site about the death of Zhao Ziyang (Tienanmen Square incident) includes the quote

"China's government has issued just a brief statement, confirming Zhao's death. But the official Xinhua news agency instructed domestic radio and television not to carry the item.

There have been many grieving postings on internet bulletin boards. 'Time will vindicate him,' said one. 'We will miss you forever,' said another.

All were deleted speedily by chatroom monitors, our Beijing correspondent says. "

I had to wonder how different, really, our own situation is. The censorship is, perhaps, less overt government censorship than economic/plutocratic control of state.

I do worry.

Definition of an Ideologue, by David Brooks

2004-10-23T11:42:00.000-05:00

If you read this rubbish in The New York Times from David Brooks he does actually define the choice in this election:

Modern Head of State or Ideologue

Here are Brooks' closing comments:

"Republicans and Democrats have different conceptions of the presidency. Republicans admire a president who is elevated above his executive branch colleagues. It is impossible to imagine George W. Bush or Reagan as a cabinet secretary. Instead, they are set apart by virtue of exceptional moral qualities. Relying on their core values, they set broad goals and remain resolute in times of crisis.

Democrats see the presidency as a much more ministerial job. They admire presidents who engage in constant deliberative conversations. Democrats from Carter through Mondale, Dukakis, Clinton, Gore and Kerry have all been well versed in the inner workings of government. "

To claim exceptional morality for the Republicans is idiotic, just ask Jimmy Carter. As is their claim to broad vision or resolution in crises. The truth, really, is that in addition to those qualities of strength, Democrats improve their lot with a thoughtful understanding of our place in the Global theater and a vision of the entire planet that extends far into the future.

The difference is whether your strength and resolve are guided by blindness and ignorance or informed thought.

Do Not Despair

2004-09-08T15:17:00.000-05:00

As Bush's "Bounce" magically disappears, The Kerry surge has begun already.

2004: Referendum on Democracy

2004-09-02T11:49:00.000-05:00

BigT thinks Bush and the GOP are dangerously undermining our democratic institutions with the goal of the U.S. becoming a one-party state. As a cat, BigT can't always articulate his thoughts that well, but he thinks Will Saletan of Slate has done a pretty good job:

But the important thing isn't the falsity of the charges, which Republicans continue to repeat despite press reports debunking them. The important thing is that the GOP is trying to quash criticism of the president simply because it's criticism of the president. The election is becoming a referendum on democracy.

In a democracy, the commander in chief works for you. You hire him when you elect him. You watch him do the job. If he makes good decisions and serves your interests, you rehire him. If he doesn't, you fire him by voting for his opponent in the next election.

Not every country works this way. In some countries, the commander in chief builds a propaganda apparatus that equates him with the military and the nation. If you object that he's making bad decisions and disserving the national interest, you're accused of weakening the nation, undermining its security, sabotaging the commander in chief, and serving a foreign power—the very charges Miller leveled tonight against Bush's critics.

Are you prepared to become one of those countries?

Are you?

NEOCONS OUT OF CONTROL

2004-08-29T21:10:00.000-05:00

I think BigT would want you to read this post by Juan Cole. It provides the context for understanding the recent stories about someone in the pentagon spying for Israel. It is complicated but a must read, showing how out-of-control foreign policy has become under this administration.

good graphics of important stuff

2004-08-08T09:34:00.000-05:00

Thanks to Chris Dykstra for this link and graphic which is awesome to view. It must resemble the path of the Titanic viewed from the side; now we see the path of the neocons, sinking...seen from our perch, solid, high on the coast of the massive land of opportunity, home of freedom, fairness and truth that should, and can be, America.

.....what cheese.

but the point, the POINT people.

now, go look at the chart again

things they say......

2004-08-08T08:50:00.000-05:00

Statements by prospective attendees to the 2004 GOP Convention, taken from this article in the New York Times The comments are about the cost of the event which this year for the first time will be passed on to its attendees.

About the cost of the event:

"'A lot of us looked at that thing and said, whoa!''

"A lot of people just can't afford that.''

"We want to use our hard money resources in the smartest way possible,''

"The price of playing the game has risen dramatically,''

"I don't think anybody is happy about writing the check. But it's a cost of doing business.''

About the Bush Campaign:

"These are about the stingiest bunch of guys I've ever seen.''

"I don't blame them," ..... "They didn't have a choice. They are not trying to stick it to us, there are costs to these things."

Abouth ambitions:

"I really wanted to be a Pioneer or a Ranger; that's what I worked my butt off to do,'' ...... "I don't have an endless pot of money to commit to political events. But I didn't want to go there and not participate in the Pioneer and Ranger stuff. That felt horrible.''

Can you hear Will Farrell saying that last line?

Read the article, it's great.

The 35% of "republicans" that are living not quite as far over the median income line as they think are, are about to realize they're getting screwed in this deal too. Then we will have common cause that they understand.

Best Thing I've Read Today

2004-08-02T11:42:00.000-05:00

In a follow up to the post below, Bob Herbert's column today points out that, to a certain extent, it is our laziness and desire to be told what we want to hear, instead of hard truths, that have driven politics to their current sorry state:

These are incredibly difficult issues and an honest search for solutions can only come from a sustained effort by the broadest array of America's brightest and wisest men and women. What the U.S. really needs is leadership that could marshal that effort.

Unfortunately, we've become a society addicted to the fantasy of a quick fix. We want our solutions encompassed in a sound bite. We want our leaders to manipulate reality to our liking.

[snip]

The voters may deserve better, but there's a real question about whether they want better. It may well be that candidates can't tell voters the truth and still win. If that's so, then democracy American-style may be a lot more dysfunctional than even the last four years has indicated.

Important thoughts to keep in mind as we search for ways to reclaim our democracy from the looming corporate oligarchy. However if you read Herbert's column in the actual print version of the NYT, read past the end of the column, below his email address, you see the following words:

William Safire is on vacation.

Music to my ears.

how we don't learn....

2004-07-30T10:14:00.000-05:00

This editorial by Krugman is a must read. As tough as he is, his comments still fail to describe the hideous and despicable way the mainstream media is covering this presidential race:

"The failure of TV news to inform the public about the policy proposals of this year's presidential candidates is, in its own way, as serious a journalistic betrayal as the failure to raise questions about the rush to invade Iraq."

If you watched CNN's coverage last night of Kerry's acceptance speech, you would have witnessed one of the most biased, poorly executed and trivial coverage of a nominating speech in history. They crossed audio feeds, broadcasting the Dem. event director ordering the balloons to drop...and when they didn't, CNN didn't turn off the guy's mike, cut to another scene, or anything..they just let it play, and then the anchors got on to talk about the balloons.

WHO GIVES A FLYING F*** ABOUT BALLOONS. THIS IS A PRESIDENTIAL RACE.

Please boycott CNN. In fact, don't do that. Write them a letter and tell them just how surprised you are to find out that they hang out with the editorial staff of the National Enquirer. That's about the level they are performing on.

Democracy broken.....

2004-07-25T09:29:00.000-05:00

The New York Times has an article today discussing the many ways in which the 9/11 Commission report sets the record straight about the terrorist attacks, saying, in part:

"...in its most contentious effort to set the record straight about the origins of the plot, the bipartisan commission's final report found no evidence of close collaboration between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, appearing to undermine a justification for the Iraq war."

I don't think anyone would have been able to prevent some sort of attack; the attackers were well planned, and we are not willing to give up our open society to the degree necessary fully to prevent such an attack.

What this article does very well is expose the Bush Administration for what it is: a self-centered, self-righteous group of people who think they know everything. Even when they've been proven NOT to know everything, they continue to claim that they do (Dick Cheney, Condi Rice to name two in the article). This cannot be excused as situational ignorance, "resoluteness" or anything of the sort. These people are lying to the American public to protect their ability to tighten their grip on power. This behavior is nothing short of that which we have seen in any fledgling dictatorship.

In a democracy, freedom of information and truth should underlie our freedom to choose our leaders.

This is the choice we face in this election: do we want to restore a democracy here? or do we feel more safe in a dictatorship? The latter choice could be one we live with for a very long time.

Oddly, Safire said it best....

2004-07-21T08:59:00.000-05:00

In his study of the Republican mind (his own) Safire today described exactly the fundamental value of Republicanism today that makes it vile and abhorrent:

"My values include self-reliance over community dependence, intervention over isolation, self-discipline over society's regulation, finding pleasure in work rather than working to find pleasure."

Me.

Me, Me, Me.

Not you, not us, except for exclusion.

Me, Me, Me.

That's it.

ME.

Fiscal Sanity at Bay

2004-07-20T11:05:00.000-05:00

This is a NYTimes editorial in its entirety (but it's short). It is important to read. After you read it, write a letter or email to any one or all four of the mentioned sitting Senators. They represent a reasonable voice on a potentially disastrous event on the horizon. Let's try to get in front of it. The link to the editorial is here:

"For all the late-blooming talk of fiscal responsibility from Republican moderates, an election year cave-in is shaping up in the Senate as the White House pushes for a fast renewal of some of the 'temporary' tax breaks set to expire this year. Unlike the administration's giveaways to the wealthy, these cuts are among the more worthy and politically risky to oppose: extending tax relief for married couples, for families with children and for taxpayers in the lowest bracket, 10 percent.

But the issue is not the virtue of the cuts but whether Congress should be forced to make up the cost with spending reductions or - great idea - by increasing taxes on the wealthy and closing loopholes for corporate taxes. Until now, four Senate Republicans have been standing with the Democrats, demanding an end to the administration's binge of record budget deficits and detaxation. Two of the Republicans, John McCain of Arizona and Susan Collins of Maine, have indicated support for the tax-cut extensions without their usual stipulation that the money to pay for them be found elsewhere first. This is unfortunate.

The White House obviously feels it cannot lose by pushing the tax-cut extensions right before the political conventions. Either Mr. Bush will be able to brag about still more tax cuts, or he can demonize Democrats and others who dare to defeat the package on budgetary grounds. We urge the Republican moderates, including Olympia Snowe of Maine and Lincoln Chaffee of Rhode Island, not to abandon their fight for fiscal responsibility."

The Arabian Candidate: Trojan Horse

2004-07-20T10:57:00.000-05:00

Ok, after you've read the post below (which I created this morning PRIOR to reading this editorial by Paul Krugman), then read this editorial by Paul Krugman, from which this quote comes:

"In the original version of 'The Manchurian Candidate,' Senator John Iselin, whom Chinese agents are plotting to put in the White House, is a right-wing demagogue modeled on Senator Joseph McCarthy. As Roger Ebert wrote, the plan is to 'use anticommunist hysteria as a cover for a communist takeover.'

The movie doesn't say what Iselin would have done if the plot had succeeded. Presumably, however, he wouldn't have openly turned traitor. Instead, he would have used his position to undermine national security, while posing as America's staunchest defender against communist evil."

Hello?

worker shortage and low wages????

2004-07-20T10:25:00.000-05:00

Check out this article from the New York Times, which starts with the following quote:

"With tens of thousands of their citizen soldiers now deployed in Iraq, many of the nation's governors complained on Sunday to senior Pentagon officials that they were facing severe manpower shortages in guarding prisoners, fighting wildfires, preparing for hurricanes and floods and policing the streets."

There are two points to be made here:

1. in juxtaposition with our other posts below regarding wages, what we seem to have is high unemployment contributing to low wages in new job creation, yet we have a shortage of labor for crucial government services;

2. is the terrorist threat, the distraction we've been tempted into by Chalabi in attacking Iraq and the potential for problems in Iran a huge distraction to our security at home? are we about to get snuck?

I personally think that the answer to number 2 is NOT more war. It is constructive, inclusive, benevolent global citizenship. This is a long-run strategy. In the short run, I suppose there are reasons to be concerned.

But, what about the labor picture? (I'm not going to adderss the appropriateness of having lightly trained N.G. folks in Iraq....different question.) Seems to me that we DO have plenty of idle hands around (since wages are falling and people are working in no-skills jobs at WalMart) and that the training of these folks in the skills we need while the N.G. folks are in Iraq would be skills that would serve them well in future employment. They could also probably demand higher wages for these skills in re-employment after the war is over. AND, if in the short run there is a labor shortage for these jobs, let's take advantage of that and pay a decent wage to folks that are struggling to get by.

The New Deal was a fantastically successful attempt to leverage the State in the development of both skills, jobs and the infrastructure which has underpinned this country's dominance over the last 50 years. Why would we ignore this empirical evidence, particularly when the circumstances so strongly promote this strategy???

Call your governor. They clearly need some suggestions.

Schwarzenegger Calls Budget Opponents 'Girlie Men'

2004-07-19T18:09:00.000-05:00

This quote is beautiful....read the whole article:

"Mr. Schwarzenegger has compared lawmakers to kindergartners who need a timeout and threatened to seek a constitutional amendment making the Legislature a part-time body. He is also appearing in the districts of vulnerable Democrats and promising to 'terminate' those who stand in his way."

We had Jesse the Body here in Minnesota hoping to be reincarnated as a 38DD bra, or something close. He also reportedly gave out "Jackal" passes to the media at his annual fishing opener.

Obviously these statements and actions are amusing in a number of ways, but they just do too much damage to the quality of political discourse.

I DO think that Jesse did a good job at speaking directly and simply (but not a'la GWB; I do think he had an informed opinion) and demanding of the legislature to cease & desist with the most eggregious of game-playing and partisanship. I think Ahh-nold's frustration is similar. But it is the pot calling the kettle black for a name-caller to liken the legislators to kindergardners. And, to threaten "termination" is very much playing the political game that Jesse at least seemed to try and avoid. Ahh-nold is undermining what little credibility he has.

In any event, what we need to do is continue to push information, find ways to access folks that have not participated in politics in the past, and do everything we can to make us all feel validated in our practice of democracy. Eventually we should demand dialogue at the high level to which we are entitled. But we have to start talking that way ourselves first.

Vote with your checkbook

2004-07-18T11:00:00.000-05:00

From the New York Times:

"On Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that hourly earnings of production workers - nonmanagement workers ranging from nurses and teachers to hamburger flippers and assembly-line workers - fell 1.1 percent in June, after accounting for inflation. The June drop, the steepest decline since the depths of recession in mid-1991, came after a 0.8 percent fall in real hourly earnings in May"

This is particularly relevant to me with respect to work I'm doing on tax policy for a Minnesota think tank. Because our mission is to try and better marry the concepts of economic justice (read, people) and growth (read, business) (hence the name of the group Growth & Justice) we are very interested in WHERE tax policy might best be adjusted, i.e. at the business level or at the individual level.

Much of the history of business incentives has seen tax breaks aimed at capital (mostly machines, real estate, and other business inputs EXCEPT labor). It can probably be shown that reducing the cost of business helps business create jobs...this has been the rationale for business tax cuts. It is notable, however (confirmed by this article), that business won't necessarily create GOOD jobs, or ones that pay a living wage (one that is sufficient, at minimum, to pay basic healthcare costs in addition to housing and food). WalMart is in the news recently for creating lots of really BAD jobs. Not only do they not pay a living wage, but to avoid requirements to pay healthcare as part of the employment package, WalMart hires people on a part-time basis.

There seems ample evidence that business will continue to act like business...maximizing the bottom line. (I'm not sure if I mean this in a factual way, or with a harsh judgement about business' failure to take up their share of the social contract that everyone should have a basic lifestyle, including healthcare....Paul Krugman, in an editorial I noted previously, exonerated business from any responsibility beyond making profits because, in his words, "they are business". An editorial letter writer objected to the idea that business should be so-relieved of its responsibility to this social issue)...but, I digress.

Whether you believe that business should take up part of this social contract or not, clearly today they are not incented to, either through law or social mandate. Couple this with the statements recently by Alan Greenspan which recognize, as does this article, that retail spending is the ONLY thing that is keeping this economy afloat right now and you are faced with a very obvious policy platform: business will not create jobs unless someone is there to buy their stuff; therefore, rather than making business rich by "reducing" their cost of business, put public tax incentives into the hands of consumers, and business will be along for the ride BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY DO....they make money.

On the ground, this smacks of liberal tax and spend mentality. BUT, even the conservatives will admit that consumer spending is driving the economy. I would argue strongly that conservative and liberal interests are actually aligned. Targeting tax relief and tax law changes to put more incremental dollars in the hands of average and low-income consumers will create the demand business needs to invest in new jobs and new capital. This sort of tax policy (reflecting a more generous social policy) IS consistent with business goals and, implicitly, with the long-term goals of those that own business, overwhelmingly conservative.

I would argue that the marginal propensity to spend, i.e. that portion of each additional dollar that gets spent rather than saved, is substantially higher among the middle and low-income population, because they MUST spend that money on necessities. Wealthy people put it in their savings account or stock portfolio and maybe, just maybe, a few years from now that better capitalized business MIGHT create a few more jobs which MIGHT pay a living wage.....it MIGHT.

If somebody is banging on their door, trying to purchase their "stuff", they WILL.....I guarantee it. That's what business does.

Undermining Democracy

2004-07-16T09:52:00.000-05:00

Along the same lines as the post below, Joanathan Chait at TNR has an article detailing at length how the Bush Administration and the GOP in congress has gone about systematically undermining our democracy:

Bush and his allies have been described as partisan or bear-knuckled, but the problem is more fundamental than that. They have routinely violated norms of political conduct, smothered information necessary for informed public debate, and illegitimately exploited government power to perpetuate their rule. These habits are not just mean and nasty. They're undemocratic.

Read the entire article, it will scare you. Send it to anyone you know who may be on the fence. More evidence why this election could be the most important in out history. We stand at the precipice looking into the abyss of one-party rule, the first step on the slippery slope to fascism. This is one we cannot lose.

Demand Verifiable Election Results

2004-07-15T19:19:00.000-05:00

From Verified Voting - Campaign To Demand Verifiable Election Results:

"'I clearly believe that there are certain people within the election process who don't want that scrutiny on how elections are run,' Heller said. 'Why elections directors so fight this process is just incredible to me.'" -- Nevada Secretary of State Dean Heller

The "scrutiny" is that which is necessary to prove what people's votes really were. Paper proof. (The manfacturers make cash machines for god's sake.) (Big T recognizes that proof doesn't seem to be required for this presidential administration to, say, go to war......nonetheless, we aim to promote a higher standard)

The counties fight new systems because of all of the friction, territorialism and bureaucratic red tape inevitably involved in change, particularly of public systems. But read the rest of the article....

The real problem here is that this friction serves to enforce the status quo which in itself is costing us dearly in our practice of democracy. Add to that a deliberate program of confusion, contradiction, and rule ambiguity and you have the power of the Secretary of State to control the outcome of a close election.

Voter Registration, accurate records and access on the voting day are all necessary to have a fair election.

Registration forms must be integrated, information must be cross-checked for accuracy, voting machines must be installed, people must be trained, systems must be tested and their reliability absolutely confirmed before the system can be relied upon to measure the will of the people.

Our current registration and vote tally system (VEMS), though imperfect, has a known tolerance for error. A new system won't. A new system could be tested against the current one, run side by side, both in full operation. Relying on a new system that is untested in THIS election is ludicrous.

We are up to this task, but the Secretary of State has made our job ever more challenging. In Minnesota we, like all other states, were given a few years to develop a totally reliable system. Our secretary of state along with about 8 others, waived most of that time, and intends to rely on a system that will be unproven in an actual election.

New metropolitan airport systems, for example, are tested and retested for years to work out the bugs. The Secretary's lieutenant described the process of developing a way to integrate the various data sources as their department's "summer project". Do we really think we can rely on an untested system in the most important election of a generation?

Do not be deceived. The status quo favors the group in power. Regardless of your feelings on that, democracy really demands full and encouraged access to the voting polls.

Voter participation is another matter altogether.

Corporate ownership of Politics, behind the scenes

2004-07-13T10:34:00.000-05:00

I only have a minute this morning, but I have been making the case for the imminent power grab which the ideological right has an option make. In this editorial from Paul Krugman he makes the point well. This is a must read if you have any doubts that the political playing field is far from fair. The conclusion:

"Mr. DeLay and his fellow hard-liners, whose values are far from the American mainstream, have forged an immensely effective alliance with corporate interests. And they may be just one election away from achieving a long-term lock on power. "

how to be a global power.....

2004-07-12T09:09:00.000-05:00

This quote from the New York Times is part of an article discussing the strategy of pre-emptive war as a core principle of our foreign policy:

"The Democratic Party platform is expected to include a sentence declaring that the 'doctrine of unilateral pre-emption has driven away our allies,' and Mr. Kerry argued in the interview that while he would reserve the right to act pre-emptively, he would never make it a core doctrine of American foreign policy."

So far, largely as a result of the intelligence failures now documented by the 911 Commission, the strategy of pre-emption has been a dismal failure. Not only have we waged a pre-emptive war, costing thousands of lives; not only have we alienated our allies with our egotism; not only have we dramatically increased the appeal of terror as an acceptable retaliatory answer among disaffected muslims;....we have also given our global competitors, namely China, (not to mention actual enemies) all the traction they need to oppose us on issues like North Korea and Iran (points also made in this article).

On a non-military note, China already has substantial power over the U.S. in the form of its foreign exchange reserves held in dollars. China represents an enormous challenge to us in global diplomacy and in international economic dynamics. We are concerned about offshoring jobs, yet we are squandering any leverage we have with China through our foreign policy failures.

Certainly the nature of terror in today's world is different than conventional war. The adequacy of our intelligence community needs to be addressed if we are to be successful against terror and rogue states, whether we adopt pre-emption as our primary policy or not. BUT, particularly where we can't rely solely on our own intelligence community, we have to be able to rely on our global partners as we address international security together.

It goes even further...beyond the technical and logistical issues of intelligence cooperation we have said to the world (in no uncertain terms shortly after 9/11) that we know better (and clearly we do not); and, furthermore we will act on that supposed knowledge even if the consequence is high casualty numbers.

A pre-emptive strategy will promote a quick end to our global influence. John Kerry appears to understand that we can't be alone in this regard and that our future as a global power depends it. It's one of many reasons we should support him.

informed electorate? i think not!

2004-07-11T14:34:00.000-05:00

Another post related to the perception that our electorate is either informed or involved. I am not familiar with the credentials of Jack Germond, but found this quote in the Star Tribune (it was in the print edition):

"Today, after 50 years of exposure to thousands of politicians, I am convinced that we get about what we deserve at all levels of government, up to and including the White House. These days, because so many Americans -- almost half -- don't bother to vote even in presidential elections, they deserve choices like the one they were offered in 2000, between Al Gore and George W. Bush. Beause so few Americans understand the political process or bother to follow it with even a modicum of attention, we elect presidents as empty as George H.W. Bush or as self-absorbed as Bill Clinton -- only to be followed by a choice between a Republican obviously over his head and a Democrat too unsure of his own persona to be convincing."

Whom to blame for this? Individuals for not realizing the power they truly hold, politicians for allowing our media culture to define politics in overly simplistic terms and the mainstream media for being interested only in sound bytes, controversy and skin. Of course, the issue is far more complex than this. Institutional barriers to adequte information abound: poverty, multiple jobs and a mainstream media owned by the corporate (read conservative political) establishment, to name just a few.

I'd suggest that these three substantial institutional barriers are a direct result of neocon policies. The continued consolidation of power between the conservative political establishment and their media partners is having the insidious (and perhaps intended) effect of precluding the exercise and validity of citizen participation in our democracy; these barriers thoroughly disenfranchise an enormous portion of the American citizenry. Sure, the neocons are part of representative government...but do they represent America? Emphatically NO.

In whose interest?

2004-07-11T12:19:00.000-05:00

Thanks to Chris Dykstra on his blog for reference to this article in The New Republic

The article discusses the explicit pressure by the U.S. Administration on the Pakistani government to locate Osama bin Laden and other high level terrorist targets. What it also clearly shows is that the interest in catching Osama bin Laden is NOT in the interests of protecting the American people, as Bush would have you believe; rather, the interest is in protecting this junta's political power. One more successful election for this group and their consolidation of power will be almost complete.

Fair comparisons can now be made to other "dictators" who would do most anything to hold onto power, even things contrary to the interests and safety of their people. We all hope these terrorists can be captured, and as quickly as possible. Given the apparent motives of the administration, consider a case where the election was farther off; would the Administration delay aggressive tactics to capture these terrorists in order better to leverage the issue for their own political gain?

While our election should be on issues that affect us as Americans and issues that define us as global citizens, the most important issue upon which we should vote this election is TRUST. How much more evidence do we need that this Administration has no interests in common with the rest of the American people?

I've seen it on bumper-stickers: regime change begins at home.

Young people are our future.....we need to engage them

2004-07-11T11:33:00.000-05:00

This quote from the Panetta Institute for Public Policy illustrates a disturbing trend among the youth of our country:

"Both major-party presidential candidates have a lot of work to do on U.S. college campuses this year, according to a new Panetta Institute survey. The Hart Research Associates poll found a major decline in student's perceptions that voting really matters. The number of students who say they volunteer to help in their local communities is down also. "

If you scan the headlines of prior polls, a very fickle sense of our youth is revealed. I certainly remember being very unsure of my convictions as I went through college, and many things seemed more important than political activism or community service. I can not criticize young people for being unsure of their convictions to issues, but I am disheartened that their confidence in the system by which they express their views is deteriorating.

It is hard for me to avoid the conclusion that the waning interest of our youth, and the frequent sentiment among them that their vote does not matter, is a fuction of the irrelevancy of most mainstream political discourse. Politicians of both parties are to be criticized in this regard, but the blame is not theirs alone.

I received a comment recently on a post involving war profiteering (see prior posts, right column) in which the commenter expressed the view that the American electorate is reasonably well informed. What they are informed about is the agenda of the status quo, as repeated ad nauseum through the major media establishment. I'd hardly call this informed on the true issues facing our nation. Quite the contrary, our electorate is informed on intentionally divisive and distractionary issues with little or no true bearing on their daily lives.

Individuals have the responsibility to do their own investigation of a candidate's positions. It is reasonable to expect to be able to rely on our "independent" media. It is the responsibility of the media, therefore, not to be a pawn of narrow interests. Here we find one significant failure of our current system.

On the runway: politics not planes

2004-07-09T00:30:00.000-05:00

Bob Herbert has it right in his editorial today in the New York Times:

"One of the more disturbing things about our presidential elections is the extent to which they can turn on criteria more suitable to high school campaigns. He's cute. Would you look at the way she dresses?"

I can't say this is new news; what I can say is that it is the arguement that makes it most difficult to conclude that we are not a nation of shallow, self-interested folks. This may seem like a non-sequitor, but I have recently been to China, the presumptive next global economic powerhouse. Admittedly I have a hard time imagining how they will be ready for "ling-ba", the 2008 olympics. What I can tell you is that they are hungry. We are fat and lazy and asleep. This needs to be changed and hording capital among a very few elite is not the right approach. As I saw it today on a bumper sticker: Regime change starts at home.

Health Versus Wealth...vintage Krugman

2004-07-09T00:05:00.000-05:00

Big T strongly believes that you should read this here entire Paul Krugman editorial concerning John Kerry's healthcare plan. Here is one specific poing which I wholeheartedly agree with:

"the Kerry plan would provide 'reinsurance' for private health plans, picking up 75 percent of the medical bills exceeding $50,000 a year. Although catastrophic medical expenses strike only a tiny fraction of Americans each year, they account for a sizeable fraction of health care costs.

By relieving insurance companies and H.M.O.'s of this risk, the government would drive down premiums by 10 percent or more.

This is a truly good idea. Our society tries to protect its members from the consequences of random misfortune; that's why we aid the victims of hurricanes, earthquakes and terrorist attacks. Catastrophic health expenses, which can easily drive a family into bankruptcy, fall into the same category. Yet private insurers try hard, and often successfully, to avoid covering such expenses. (That's not a moral condemnation; they are, after all, in business.)"

I spent a dozen years in finance. Providing credit enhancement is a fantastic way of massively leveraging the credit strength of the federal government. It is efficient and allows average people to pay health care premiums related to the average level of care that they demand. This is smart stuff.

The best comment, though, is that, basically, business is business and can't be relied upon to do anything good for anyone else. This we have to deal with.

Saving the good stuff for later.....after the election.

2004-07-08T16:48:00.000-05:00

The quote below is from the New York Times, but courtesy of Talking Points Memo:

"A bipartisan Senate report to be issued Friday that is highly critical of prewar intelligence on Iraq will sidestep the question of how the Bush administration used that information to make the case for war, Congressional officials said Wednesday. But Democrats are maneuvering to raise the issue in separate statements. Under a deal reached this year between Republicans and Democrats, the Bush administration's role will not be addressed until the Senate Intelligence Committee completes a further stage of its inquiry, but probably not until after the November election. As a result, said the officials, both Democratic and Republican, the committee's initial, unanimous report will focus solely on misjudgments by intelligence agencies, not the White House, in the assessments about Iraq, illicit weapons and Al Qaeda that the administration used as a rationale for the war."

Marshall's response was "Convenient...."
Mine is: "are you freaking KIDDING ME???

Seriously, while the candidates compare service records, capabilities, hair-styles, tendencies toward profanity and, occasionally, an issue or two we are forgetting a crucial shortcoming of the current administration: TRUST. Congress wouldn't pass Patrick Leahey's anti-war profiteering bill, and now they've effectively delayed release of the proof that they are all morons until after the election. Talk to your friends. We HAVE to mobilize people on election day. Wouldn't you think that being lied to repeatedly would be enough?

Typical Right Wing......

2004-07-06T14:15:00.000-05:00

This quote is from InJersey; it is quite evidently a mouthpiece of the NJ right wing. In this article about the state budget situation, even this rag has to acknowledge the standard strategy of the neocons:

"The Republicans summoned the press to announce a lawsuit over McGreevey's bonding to pay for operations, saying a budget balanced with borrowing is not a balanced budget. It went well until reporters asked Senate Minority leader Leonard Lance, R-Hunterdon, what Republicans would cut from the proposed budget. Unfortunately, Lance said that was the governor's job. No specific suggestions."

They called a press conference to bitch, and then offer NOTHING.......sound familiar?

War Profiteering.....sonofabitchTWO

2004-06-23T19:23:00.000-05:00

This text, while a little long, is some great detail on the allegations against Halliburton and Cheney's continued and obvious ties. The information is from John Kerry's media corps website. Since the items are footnoted, I have posted them as written with the qualification that I haven't vetted the sources.

Last week reports confirmed, once again, that the Bush administration has not been telling us the truth about how Halliburton has spent our tax dollars. A House Committee found that Halliburton has wasted at least $1 billion in tax payer money on military contracts in Iraq, due to poor planning and oversight. [Detroit Free Press, 6/16/04]

Cheney's History of Employment at Halliburton

Vice President Dick Cheney was CEO of Halliburton from 1995-2000.

Halliburton's board of directors voted to give Cheney a $20 million retirement package when he resigned, in addition to providing him with a massive salary and a bonus for just eight months of work in 2000.

Following his departure from Halliburton, Cheney retained possession of 433,333 options of Halliburton stock.

Although Cheney insisted that he severed his financial ties to Halliburton, the Congressional Research Service recently released a report saying that federal ethics laws consider both Cheney's deferred compensation and his stock options as lingering financial interest in the company.

Halliburton's Contract with the Federal Government

The Pentagon knew it would need help after the war rebuilding Iraqi oil fields and putting out oil field fires. Rather than following normal procedure and asking companies to bid on the job, the Pentagon turned the entire project over to Cheney's former firm, Halliburton. The Army Corps of Engineers said that Halliburton's compensation for rejuvenating Iraq's oil industry could be up to $7 billion. In postwar Iraq, Halliburton is the largest private contractor, with potential deals totaling over $11 billion.

Last September, Cheney said that he did not influence the decision to award Halliburton a no-bid contract: "I have absolutely no influence of, involvement of, knowledge of in any way, shape or form of contracts led by the [Army] Corps of Engineers or anybody else in the federal government." Since then, we have learned that Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, received a Pentagon briefing in October 2002, one month prior to directing Halliburton to develop a secret plan for restoring and operating Iraq's oil infrastructure. The vice president's office was also made aware of a second contract worth up to $7 billion awarded to Halliburton four months later for implementing this plan.

Time Magazine uncovered an e-mail indicating that the $7 billion contract awarded to Halliburton was "coordinated" with Cheney's office.

Halliburton's Waste

Waste Due to Bush Administration's Lack of Oversight. David M. Walker, head of the General Accounting Office, testified that Defense Department planners had failed to adequately determine the needs of U.S. soldiers in Iraq and to effectively oversee the billions of dollars' worth of contracts issued. [Los Angeles Times, 6/16/04]
Halliburton Wasted $186 Million on Meals Never Delivered. Halliburton billed the government for 36 percent more meals than were served, overcharging $186 million. [Detroit Free Press, 6/16/04]

Lavish Hotels, Abandoned Trucks, Inflated Gas Prices. A Halliburton's subsidiary was also criticized for abandoning $85,000 trucks with flat tires, housing company officials in a five-star Kuwaiti hotel, overcharging for gas it imported into Iraq from Kuwait, and ordering empty trucks to crisscross the country. [Detroit Free Press, 6/16/04]

Halliburton Reaped Profits While Forcing Troops To Eat In Filthy Conditions. According to NBC News, "Pentagon inspections of mess halls run by KBR are finding a mess in some of them... In the main Baghdad dining facility where President Bush surprised the troops on Thanksgiving, inspectors found filthy kitchen conditions in each of the three previous months. Complaints filed in August, September and again October report problems. Blood all over the floor of the refrigerators, dirty pans, dirty grills, dirty salad bars, rotting meats and vegetables. In October, the inspector writes that Halliburton's previous promises to fix the problems have not been followed through and warns the company serious repercussions may result, due to improper handling and serving of food." [NBC News, 12/12/03]

Now I mean come ON, how long are we going to stand for this? Stockholders in any other company, and citizens of the USA, should be outraged at the crass, in our face robbery that is being perpetrated here.

Corporate Greed: Personal and Institutional

2004-06-23T08:57:00.000-05:00

Corporate greed...as if we weren't being robbed already by our politicians through the federal tax system on behalf of their business buddies, in the recent double week New Yorker James Surowiecki talks about corporate perks:

"At most large American companies, rank still has its privileges; the big shots need not trouble themselves with paying for the things that their immense salaries are supposed to enable them to afford."

While that seems to me to speak for itself, Surowiecki goes on to review economic literature showing how firms that still offer perks substantially underperform their peers... (duh!!) He closes with the following:

"Why do perks endure?....it's largely beause most C.E.O's will take whatever they can get. It is hard for them to say no when their boards of directors keep saying yes."

SO, once you have the CEOs, their board, AND the political establishment all getting together on their own greedy behalf, is it any surprise that the rest of us are working our tails off just trying to keep afloat.

You are likely a shareholder....you are surely a voter. YOU MUST TAKE ACTION NOW!!!! Soon, there will be nothing left for us.

War Profiteering......sonofabitch

2004-06-21T17:13:00.000-05:00

This text is at the top of Sen. Leahy's fact page on his War Profiteering Amendment:

"[The Leahy Amendment, now pending to the Defense Authorization bill on the Senate Floor, is similar to the Leahy anti-war profiteering legislation approved last year by the Senate as a provision of the $87 billion Iraq war supplemental appropriations bill. The White House prevailed on House conferees to strip the Leahy amendment from the final version of the Iraq spending bill. The Leahy Amendment may come to a vote on Wednesday, June 16. Contact: David Carle, 202-224-3693.]"

This amendment DID come to a vote and was defeated 52-46 along partisan lines. Norm Coleman (you can contact him here to tell him what you think) voted against the amendment.

Check out the amendment page (link above.) In addition to the fact that the Senate defeated it this time, it was PASSED by the Senate last time but was stripped under intense pressure from the WHITE HOUSE.

Just because they're not stepping out of an alley with a gun in your face DOESN'T MEAN THEY AREN'T CROOKS.....THEY ARE STEALING OUR MONEY and we are letting them.

Another from Teddy Roosevelt.....

2004-06-20T09:43:00.000-05:00

This quote also seemed instructive (see earlier Roosevelt quote below):

"'Men with the muckrake are often indispensable to the well-being of society, but only if they know when to stop raking the muck.' 'An epidemic in indiscriminate assault upon character does not good, but very great harm.' 'There should be relentless exposure of and attack upon every evil practice, whether in politics, in business, or in social life. I hail as a benefactor every writer or speaker, every man who, on the platform, or in book, magazine or newspaper, with merciless severity makes such attack, provided always that he in his turn remembers that the attack is of use only if it is absolutely truthful.'
Washington, DC, April 14, 1906"

So, the truthful part seems to have been missed by the Bush administration AND re-election campaign completely. However, I do note that the internet, 24 hour news cycle and similar tools of information velocity make knowing what is true and what is SPIN more and more difficult. One either ducks it all and remains uninformed, or one must commit oneself to digging for the truth. Unfortunately, I expect most people are caught in the flooded torrent of this river of information, holding for dear life onto a branch or stump of personal principle with which to pull themselves from the water. We have to help.

Patriotism: to criticize the President

2004-06-20T09:33:00.000-05:00

From Theodore Roosevelt :

"'The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else.'
'Roosevelt in the Kansas City Star', 149
May 7, 1918"

Of course, he also said things that can loosely be translated as "stay the course" so one has to be careful, but I certainly liked this sentiment. Without going on at length here today (it is a beautiful Sunday after all and I have to talk with my FATHER), between being PC and being a patriot, one might as well have just worn a muzzle for the last 15 years. This is not how to run a democracy. Hope you are all talking straight to someone.

Church and State: what?.......separation?!

2004-06-18T11:06:00.000-05:00

This article from the New York Times is very disturbing:

"President Bush's re-election campaign took its effort to enlist churches in turning out conservative voters to the annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention this week, urging pastors to do everything short of risking their churches' tax-exempt status to support the president's re-election."

You'll see an earlier post from me on this page discussing Dennis Hastert's attempts to broaden the rhetorical space in which the clergy can participate in overtly partisan politics without risking their 501(C)3 tax-exempt status (which Hastert tried to do by tacking the provision onto the end of a JOBS bill.) We have to understand how important this is.

The federal tax-exemption saves the operation over 30% (assuming an average tax bracket); this in and of itself could be considered a breach of the separation of church and state as foregone federal income can easily be seen as federal dollars supporting religious institutions. It is CRUCIAL, then, that the rules governing how and whether such entities participate in politics require non-partisanship, be strict, clear and sufficient to maintain this constitutionally guaranteed separation of church and state.

I have participated in numerous voter registration initiatives in the past few months, most sponsored by non-religiously affiliated non-profits (also benefitting from 501(C)3 status.) These organizations are bending over backward to be nonpartisan, so as not to attract the criticism of....you guessed it, the Republicans. How more duplicitous can the neocons be....I ask you.

More quotes from the same story....how can the two following this be adequately resolved in terms of separation of church and state....anybody?(my emphasis added in the following)...

Mr. [Ralph] Reed delivered his remarks at a Bush-Cheney "pastors reception," paid for by the Bush campaign. The hosts were the departing president of the Southern Baptists and three other prominent leaders, and the reception was in a conference room of a hotel adjacent to the convention. As the pastors came in, a campaign aide collected about 100 signatures and addresses from ministers pledging to endorse Mr. Bush's re-election publicly, to "host a citizenship Sunday for voter registration," to "identify someone who will help in voter registration and outreach" and to organize a " 'party for the president' with other pastors" on specific dates closer to the election.

As the pastors mingled around fountains of soft drinks and trays of cubed cheese, Mr. Reed urged, "Without advocating on behalf of any candidate or political party, you can make sure that everyone in your circle of influence is registered to vote."

a break from the madness.....

2004-06-17T20:25:00.000-05:00

I HIGHLY recommend the following radio station to anyone who has a heartbeat:

WWOZ New Orleans

Lies

2004-06-17T20:17:00.000-05:00

Lies, lies, and more fucking lies

It defies the imagination.

more corporate welfare.....THIS is the welfare to get upset about

2004-06-16T21:05:00.000-05:00

"'It stinks to high heaven,' said Representative Charles B. Rangel of New York, the ranking Democrat on the committee. 'You decided to do it the old-fashioned way - just how many votes could we buy?'"

that pretty much sums up the whole picture. and what a self-reinforceing cycle it is, more money buys more votes, which results in laws that provide more money to those buying the votes. And when it gets really big (and really blatant though we are all blind) we call it war profiteering.

Reagan Revisited....for real

2004-06-15T12:53:00.000-05:00

As my good friend put it most eloquently:

".........yet another example of selective Reagan memorializing. As the bloggers have so eloquently pointed out, Ronald "Ray Gun" Reagan presided over some of the largest tax increases in U.S. history a few years after his initial tax cut (a move that was largely necessary due to massive budget shortfalls). In addition, Reagan's policies caused massive deficits and strain on the financial markets years afterward. On side note, despite the rash of ill-advised political commentary as of late, Reagan did not, by any objective measure, "preside over the largest period of U.S. growth in history." I won't even go into the Star Wars defense system, the October surprise, his ignorance of the growing AIDS epidemic or the Iran Contra scandal. In short, Reagan was the best president in the history of the Universe...just like George Bush."

"No question: John Ashcroft is the worst attorney general in history. "

2004-06-14T22:45:00.000-05:00

....the quote is from Paul Krugman in the Times, as if we really needed to be reminded; but if you're looking for a quick synopsis of the top few reasons, this will do it for you.

"No question: John Ashcroft is the worst attorney general in history. "

Scapegoats for WMD

2004-06-13T10:36:00.000-05:00

Not that I don't think George Tenent should resign....clearly a number of things got past him, notably in this article from News Informant the issue of nuclear proliferation in India and Pakistan. However, read this quote:....

"Tenet is blamed for exaggerated claims that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction (WMD). He has been especially taken to task for a comment in the Presidents 2003 State of the Union address, vetted by the CIA, in which Bush stated, erroneously, that Saddam?s government had purchased uranium from an African country. "

and tell me how heavy the pressure was from W. himself and his war-profiteering partner Dick Cheney to find the pretense for war.

Tenent may not have been fully capable as CIA director, and not to have resigned in protest for staging an illegitimate war is an error on his part, but to exonerate the "President" and his cabinet from primary responsibility would make us all complicit in this international crime.

The New Yorker: The Talk of the Town

2004-06-13T00:01:00.000-05:00

Hendrick Hertzberg, in the The Talk of the Town, says the following:

"The President will still outspend Kerry by something in the neighborhood of two to one, which may or may not be enough. Republicans will probably always have more money than Democrats, no matter how many reforms are introduced into the system, because Republican policies (in general, broadly speaking, with exceptions and caveats) favor large agglomerations of money. Democratic policies (in general, broadly speaking, with exceptions and caveats) favor large agglomerations of people. That’s why Democrats, though they have fewer dollars, are sometimes able to get more people to vote for them, and sometimes (the last Presidential election being a conspicuous exception) getting more votes enables you to win. Dollars don’t always trump people. That’s the beauty of democracy, when it works."

This is why voter registration matters. It's like the way Clinton attacked racial equality....helping the economically disadvantaged also helps a strong majority of people of color. Getting new people registered will get democrats elected.

truth and respect.....is what this election is about

2004-06-11T18:24:00.000-05:00

This from Krugman in the Times today:

"It's a measure of how desperate the faithful are to believe in the Reagan legend that one often reads conservative commentators claiming that the Clinton-era miracle was the result of Mr. Reagan's policies, and indeed vindicated them. Think about it: Mr. Reagan passed his big tax cut right at the beginning of his presidency, and mainly raised taxes thereafter. So we're supposed to believe that a tax cut passed in 1981 was somehow responsible for an economic miracle that didn't materialize until around 1997. Apply the same timing to the good things that happened on Mr. Reagan's watch, and you'll discover that Lyndon Johnson deserves the credit for "Morning in America."

So here's my plea: let's honor Mr. Reagan for his real achievements, not dishonor him — and mislead the nation — with false claims about his economic record."

now, the nexus of marketing, spin, exaggeration, selective information etc. is not new, nor is it the blight of any one political party or group; as a nexus it is also large, nebulous and grey, subject to exploitation of our trust in and respect for one another.

This administration, with Reagan as its homepage, Clean Skies Initiatives, and claims of WMD has clearly, consistently and deliberatly crossed even this vast grey area to abuse the trust of the American people. We have also lost the trust of the world, along with their sympathy following 9/11.

Trust and respect among us. Let's at least get back into the grey area.

George on Ronald

2004-06-10T17:47:00.000-05:00

This according to NPR a few days ago:

Reagan dies; Bush is asked to comment at 5 PM, but they can't get a statement out until after midnight.

BECAUSE THE GUY CAN'T THINK!! and, with that, the gall they have to use Reagan as their homepage. I don't even like Reagan, but he had class that George can't even conceive of. The Bush campaign's tactics are so distasteful I can't believe anybody is still considering a vote for him. But they are.

a poem from george....

2004-06-10T13:30:00.000-05:00

This is a short poem made up entirely of actual quotations from George
W. Bush. These have been arranged, only for aesthetic purposes, by
Washington Post writer, Richard Thompson. A wonderful Haiku
poem like this is too good not to share.

MAKE THE PIE HIGHER

I think we all agree, the past is over.
This is still a dangerous world.
It's a world of madmen and uncertainty
And potential mental losses.

Rarely is the question asked
Is our children learning?
Will the highways of the Internet
Become more few?

How many hands have I shaked?
They misunderestimate me.
I am a pitbull on the pantleg of opportunity.

I know that the human being
And the fish can coexist.
Families is where our nation finds hope,
Where our wings take dream.

Put food on your family!
Knock down the tollbooth!
Vulcanize society!
Make the pie higher!
Make the pie higher!

(Pass this on. Help cure mad Cowboy disease in the next
election!)

Comedian Campaign Commentary

2004-06-09T17:18:00.000-05:00

From Capitol Hill Blue this quote from Jay Leno recently:

"'President Bush is back after remembering D-Day. Or, as known in his house, report card day.'"

there's more where it came from. it's easy, but amusing and we do need humor (or as one person I know might say, yumah!)

this one proves that in every joke is a little grain of truth, also from Leno:

"The Washington Post revealed that in 2002, the Justice Department sent a memo to the White House justifying the use of torture. Torture - that's our Department of 'Justice' - they say `It's OK to torture people.' What's the Department of Education doing? Burning books?"

and from Jon Stewart, some of the best stuff:

"Still, as tough as the week off will be on Kerry's campaign, the hiatus will be hardest on presidential hatchet man Karl Rove, who will be spending the week kicking puppies and tripping blind kids in order to, quote, `Stay sharp.'"

Church and State....the first

2004-06-09T15:55:00.000-05:00

I have been thinking and talking more and more about of church and state. I will have to ponder it on this page for a few days at least to get some grip, but bear with me. From Josh Marshall this quote from the washington post:

"House Republican leaders have tacked on to a major jobs bill a provision that would give religious leaders more freedom to engage in partisan politics without endangering the tax-exempt status of their churches"

now i understand better Hastert's card in the Bush House of Cards deck that I have. The ways in which the conservative right is leveraging their belief system to impose their belief system through the political system is blatant, yet insidious. I can't even get a grip on the number of things that this administration has done administratively, i.e. through rule changes, etc., to dismantle so many systemic protections, environmental for example, and to construct so many more barriers to the fair and free participation of our citizenry in a secular society. we need to be VERY concerned about this.

our last chance...

2004-06-01T01:50:00.000-05:00

from Krugman in today's NYTimes:

"...the leaked memo points us to a larger truth: whatever they may say in public, administration officials know that sustaining Mr. Bush's tax cuts will require large cuts in popular government programs. And for the vast majority of Americans, the losses from these cuts will outweigh any gains from lower taxes."

i also understand that aside from the disastrous effect on our domestic programs and social and economic justice, there is no precedent in human civilization for a tax break while at war.

and, yes, AGAIN, dishonesty as a central theme (same article):

"For most families, the losses from these cuts will far outweigh any gain from lower taxes. My back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests that 80 percent of all families will end up worse off; the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities will soon come out with a more careful, detailed analysis that arrives at a similar conclusion. And the only really big beneficiaries will be the wealthiest few percent of the population.

Does Mr. Bush understand that the end result of his policies will be to make most Americans worse off, while enriching the already affluent? Who knows? But the ideologues and political operatives behind his agenda know exactly what they're doing.

Of course, voters would never support this agenda if they understood it. That's why dishonesty — as illustrated by the administration's consistent reliance on phony accounting, and now by the business with the budget cut memo — is such a central feature of the White House political strategy."

Dishonesty is now an official political strategy. Are we all completely asleep? Do we really have that little respect for ourselves and each other?

Bush, Kerry in statistical dead heat in Minnesota...

2004-05-31T18:20:00.000-05:00

OK LET'S GO PEOPLE...THIS IS THE HOME OF HUBERT HUMPHREY, PAUL WELLSTONE AND WALTER MONDALE. THIS IS RIDICULOUS.

Bush, Kerry in statistical dead heat in Minnesota, poll finds:

"The poll conducted for the St. Paul Pioneer Press and Minnesota Public Radio shows 44 percent of Minnesota voters would vote for Kerry, while 41 percent favor Bush. That puts the race within the poll's four-point margin of error, meaning results could differ by four percentage points in either direction."

metro housing issues....

2004-05-31T18:15:00.000-05:00

concerning Brooklyn Park, MN, a nearby suburb, this quote shows a little "bush-like" marketing style, eventually:

"Dick Gunderson, a colorful 62-year-old sports bar owner, is the heart and soul of the city's new Density Reduction Task Force, a group exploring ways to possibly eliminate many of the 6,500 apartment units that house a large part of the city's rising minority population.
'I do not have any diplomatic skills, and I can't work with a group,' the always matter-of-fact Gunderson admitted recently. He remains certain of one other thing as well: 'We need to make changes.'
In a sign that the group's work is already stirring strong emotions, the task force voted Tuesday to change its name to the less incendiary-sounding Apartment Housing Enhancement and Dispersal Task Force: AHEAD"

It's a tough issue, but it seems to me the market dynamics have to be massaged to get the right compromise. Soliciting a few metro partners, requiring collectively that replacement affordable housing be included in the next X number of units built in those areas. Hopefully you achieve relatively little permanent relocation, you insert some job training and participation among any local citzens willing to organize themselves well and achieve a more moderate density neighborhood with a few amenities.

this is another good candidate target for federal seed money that is otherwise being given away in a ridiculous tax break and the federal deficit program of this administration.

From Bush, Unprecedented Negativity

2004-05-31T12:58:00.000-05:00

I saw this Washington Post article first noted on TalkingPointsMemo.com:

"Scholars and political strategists say the ferocious Bush assault on Kerry this spring has been extraordinary, both for the volume of attacks and for the liberties the president and his campaign have taken with the facts. Though stretching the truth is hardly new in a political campaign, they say the volume of negative charges is unprecedented -- both in speeches and in advertising. "

Once again, I say, those of us for change HAVE to help Kerry get out the message that TRUST and TRUTH and FAIR DEALING is what he can deliver. Not a difference in policy just to have a difference in policy, TRUST.

it's getting drafty in here...or...Time to Go!

2004-05-31T09:48:00.000-05:00

From the Guardian :

"There is pending legislation in the American House of Representatives and Senate in the form of twin bills - S89 and HR163. These measures (currently approved and sitting in the committee for armed services) project legislation for spring 2005, with the draft to become operational as early as June 15. "

buuut, nope, can't go north.....or south, unless you go a ways.

"Draft-dodging will be harder than in the 1960s. In December 2001, Canada and the US signed a "smart border declaration", which, among other things, will prevent conscientious objectors (and cowards) from finding sanctuary across the northern border. There will be no deferment on higher-education grounds. Mexico does not appeal. "

and for the media that would keep us posted on these developments:

"All this has been pushed ahead with an amazing lack of publicity. One can guess why. American newspapers are in a state of meltdown, distracted by war-reporting scandals at USA Today and the New York Times. There is an awareness in the press at large that the "embedding" system was just that - getting into bed with the military and reporting their pillow talk as "news from the frontline". The fourth estate has failed the American public and continues not to do its job."

Back to Kerry and foreign policy for second....

2004-05-31T01:07:00.000-05:00

This statement from the NYTimes:

"He [Kerry] argued that Mr. Bush had belatedly come to Mr. Kerry's position of giving authority to the United Nations to form a government, which he called 'a considerable shift from an administration that would never cede anything to any outside institution.' Mr. Bush's advisers argue that Mr. Bush was always willing to bring in the United Nations, (my emphasis) but the institution itself left Iraq after the bombing of its headquarters last summer. And, they argue, the United Nations is, in the words of one senior official, 'even less popular' than the United States in Iraq."

WHAT??? I was on the other side of the world and it was obvious the UN wasn't welcome in anything but a "yes" role. Have we all come down with amnesia?

Bob Herbert: America's Abu Ghraibs

2004-05-31T01:02:00.000-05:00

This editorial by Herbert is pretty depressing. It has to make us look at ourselves and wonder what is happening in our society. It makes me wonder if what little peace people have shared over the centuries are the exception to a rule of cruelty, greed and self-interest. Can we use these horrible facts as a mirror in which to see ourselves just a little bit more humbly.

Kerry on Foreign Policy

2004-05-30T10:11:00.000-05:00

There have been a couple of instances just recently to hear Kerry speak on and have his views on foreign policy reported in the press. This article is helpful. I'd suggest passing it on since what we lack most in trying to elect a liberal candidate is a true understanding of many of these complex issues. Granted, this is a New York Times story. more below.....

Quote of John Kerry in the Times article...: "'This administration is high on rhetoric and high on ideology and low on actual strategic thinking and truth,' he asserted. 'This administration has been almost myopic in its view on Iraq itself, to the exclusion of those things that are necessary to in fact make the world safer.'"

There's also this quote, same article,

"That could fuel one of the primary complaints about Mr. Kerry among Democrats: that his approach to major foreign policy issues is too similar in substance to Mr. Bush's, even if he promises a new style that emphasizes alliance-building."

Attempting to distinguish himself on every detail could be dangerous, and "he said she said" is too....We HAVE to help John Kerry make the point that TRUST in carrying out the assignments granted the President by the people of the United States is what is missing in this administration, and is what HE, John Kerry, will restore.

then, let 'em rip with their right wing character assasination machine...I think Kerry's up to the task. I think people are sick and tired of the mean-ness. If he can stay above it, he's in.

State of Alert

2004-05-30T09:59:00.000-05:00

according to Bob Schieffer this morning on Face the Nation, the elevated alart status and associated showing of suspect photos in the media were a complete surprise to the Department of Homeland Defense, indeed the rest of the Government, when released by Ashcroft's office....Shieffer closed the show with the point that the Dept. of Homeland Security was created to make sure we had coordinated information! The ineptitude at every level of the administration is absolutely incredible.

If Limbaugh did Fashion

2004-05-28T09:55:00.000-05:00

can't we all just live together, side by side, enjoying our differences? do I really have to listen to Limbaugh-style intolerance in the fashion section too????

for those of you who know me, i must step up here to defend the bow tie. please note that other than in the title, I can't find any references to bow ties at all.....wear a zoot if you want...just don't interfere w/ my bow tie!

The New York Times > Fashion & Style > The Call of the Zoot: Bow Tie, Be Gone

Where art Thou, o "Liberal Media"....

2004-05-28T09:07:00.000-05:00

finally, some serious media introspection, along with a lot of great issues raised in this editorial by Paul Krugman

A few notable excerpts:

"People who get their news by skimming the front page, or by watching TV, must be feeling confused by the sudden change in Mr. Bush's character. For more than two years after 9/11, he was a straight shooter, all moral clarity and righteousness.

But now those people hear about a president who won't tell a straight story about why he took us to war in Iraq or how that war is going, who can't admit to and learn from mistakes, and who won't hold himself or anyone else accountable. What happened?

The answer, of course, is that the straight shooter never existed. He was a fictitious character that the press, for various reasons, presented as reality. "

We HAVE to begin to recognize just how influential the press is in painting a picture...and how easy it is for everyone to be hoodwinked by good PR. We must remain critical, yet respectful.

Next quote:

"The Bush administration, knowing all this, played the press like a fiddle."

yes, but the press, as Krugman points out, was perfectly willing to be played like a fiddle....my concern is that only in retrospect after things have gotten SO bad does the press start to question itself. what about the longer term? what about early on in the situation?

But, finally, :

"Amazing things have been happening lately. The usual suspects have tried to silence reporting about prison abuses by accusing critics of undermining the troops — but the reports keep coming. The attorney general has called yet another terror alert — but the press raised questions about why. (At a White House morning briefing, Terry Moran of ABC News actually said what many thought during other conveniently timed alerts: "There is a disturbing possibility that you are manipulating the American public in order to get a message out.")

It may not last. In July 2002, according to Dana Milbank of The Washington Post — who has tried, at great risk to his career, to offer a realistic picture of the Bush presidency — "the White House press corps showed its teeth" for the first time since 9/11. It didn't last: the administration beat the drums of war, and most of the press relapsed into docility.

But this time may be different. And if it is, Mr. Bush — who has always depended on that docility — may be in even more trouble than the latest polls suggest."

we can only hope.

Economic Equity: Combatting the Concentration of Wealth

2004-05-27T23:42:00.000-05:00

From Al Gore.....

The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: A Speech That's No Joke: "'What makes the United States special in the history of nations is our commitment to the rule of law and our carefully constructed system of checks and balances. Our natural distrust of concentrated [bold added] power and our devotion to openness and democracy are what have led us as a people to consistently choose good over evil in our collective aspirations, more than the people of any other nation.'"

the other "concentration" we really have to worry about, particularly given the behavior of this administration, is that of wealth...which buys power and influence. this is not good.

Advancing the Cause of Benevolent Global Leadership

2004-05-27T22:22:00.000-05:00

Kerry spoke on foreign policy, according to the NYTimes, "...by accusing the president of undermining 'the legacy of generations of American leadership' with a foreign policy that has abandoned the alliance-building of the post-World War II era."

This came up (at least I brought it up this evening) in the discussion on Iraq...that is Kerry's opportunity to influence a revision of the international governance structure. We did so much for global dialogue and understanding in creating the global institutions under Roosevelt....we have that opportunity again particularly since we need to do something extraodinary to evidence trustworthiness, benevolent leadership and understanding.

Labor, Outsourcing, Our Economy

2004-05-27T15:23:00.000-05:00

I only recently found this site, a think tank affiliated with the DLC, but on which there are a couple of good articles on outsourcing. Take a look under the New Economy link.

I think this question and the question of privatization are pretty crucial to understanding how we practice democratic capitalism and how we administrate our tax system....which then brings us to the question of economic justice. i think.

Getting started

2004-05-27T14:23:00.000-05:00

ok people...just getting started here. there's a lot in that grey fuzzy brain that needs to be dumped and organized and poked at and so on....so give a hand when you have the time. poke & prod and question and support and discuss and so forth.