Don’t listen. They are all saying the same thing, so it must be wrong. There aren’t that many intelligent people in finance, politics and the media.

We are assured that the crash of the stock market is the result of our massive debt. Really? The market, whose computers are among the fastest in the world, took four days to react to the government’s failure to really address the debt.

Well, then the drop in the market was caused by Standard and Poor downgrading our government’s credit-worthiness. You haven’t been paying attention. That rating is supposed to tell you how good of a chance you have of getting your money back if you loan it to the government. It is not directly related to the equity markets.

Standard and poor are often referred to as average and below average.

When people sell their stock they usually buy another. That’s not what is happening right now. People are selling stock and . . . get ready for this . . . loaning it to the government. These capitalists actually think their money is safer with the government than with the private sector. Irony, thy name is capitalists.

Treasuries come in 3 forms. T-bills mature in 28 days to 1 year. T-notes mature in 1 to 10 years. T-bonds mature in 20 to 30 years. The 10-year note is the one usually referenced when the media quotes rates.

The Treasury holds auctions and the winner is, quite naturally, the one who makes the highest bid. The closer to 100 that one bids, the lower the effective interest. The government pays 100% of the face value. If the winning bid is $97, that is what the government gets.

So much money has been bidding up the prices that the last interest rate I heard, 2.14%, was an all-time record low. Lower rates mean that the government borrows money at lower interest rates. That’s to our advantage.

That was just a little side trip to educate those unfamiliar with the bond market. Despite what S&P may suggest, those putting their money on the line feel that the US Government is the safest bet. As T-bills are traded every day, it is also the most liquid asset one can hold.

The chart below is just a little further evidence that the size of our debt is not as critical as the debt hawks in Congress think it is. I removed some countries but left some that may make for interesting comparisons. There are other methods for calculating the relevant data, but in no case does the US rank higher than 6^th. If you are unconcerned about the futures of Japan, Germany, France and the UK, don’t lose too much sleep about the US debt.

Source: CIA World Factbook – updated 07-25-2011

.

.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

We all agree.

Everyone thinks that the government’s primary responsibility is to help us. Well, at least some of us.

The problem is that we don’t agree on who the government should help. Some say help those who need help. That’s just silly.

It’s the upstanding parasitic plutocrats who will create a few more jobs in Canada, France or Brazil when they use your gift from the federal storehouse to acquire their next private jet. Mubarak set a new standard for them with nine of these upper class necessities, these ultimate penile substitutes.

The Enemy?

If your career choice is being a moonshiner, growing marijuana or holding up Seven-Elevens, government is your enemy. Otherwise, it shouldn’t be.

People are going around shouting that the government is your enemy. Listen carefully. They aren’t saying just that the government has done or is doing something to harm them – beyond requiring them to pay taxes, of course. They are saying that the very concept of government is your enemy.

Perhaps when they grow up they will appreciate the words of Oliver Wendell Holmes, “Taxes are the price we pay for civilization.” Perhaps not. Many demonstrate an apparently unbridgeable gap they must conquer to comprehend civilization.

“A society is judged by how it treats the least among them.” That rule has been attributed to Gandhi, Churchill, Truman and many others. Whomever, it is the very basis of civilization. Although, archeological evidence shows that our “barbaric” Cro-Magnon antecedents went to great lengths to care for members of their group needing assistance. It would seem that too many of our contemporaries have regressed a few score millennia.

Confucius, 孔夫子 K’ung Fu Tzu, is credited with one that is complimentary to it, “In a country well governed poverty is something to be ashamed of. In a country badly governed wealth is something to be ashamed of.” According to the old sage, the poor in this country have no reason to hide their faces.

These political Neanderthals, these libertarians, these juvenile acolytes, or adulators, of the late comedian Ayn Rand are profoundly anti-civilization.

If you are of the persuasion that the United States is, or should be, a civilized nation, you must also write them off as anti-American, despite their propensity for wrapping themselves in the flag. Also, egocentric political ideologies that object to helping those in need are in contradiction to Christianity and other religions. Caring for those in need is, simply, the litmus test for determining whether one is truly civilized, truly a patriot and truly religious.

Most of these people are unaware of how anti-civilization, anti-American, anti-Christian they are. From either intellectual laziness or incapacity, they have partaken of the political pablum fed to them by those who are full, knowing members of those categories. They are simply fools and tools. Some of the true villains are those I address next.

The Smartest Man On Wall Street? In Washington? Anywhere?

The geniuses pictured above all played major, definitive roles in bringing about the worldwide economic meltdown that we continue to enjoy. Did you remember to send them thank you cards?

Some fight under the banner of the Democratic Party. Some fight under the banner of the Republican Party. Actually, they are on the same side. They all fight the class war against us.

Do these parasites really believe what they infect the world with? It’s difficult to know. They do formulate the themes of the propaganda. We must remember, it’s not that uncommon for people who create and purvey lies to be taken in by their own handiwork.

They agree on all major policies. They all want big business to be unfettered. Their “Golden Age” is sometimes called the Era of the Robber Barons.” They have modified their image since the turn of the last century but they are direct descendants of those that hired the Pinkerton National Detective Agency to murder people who wanted enough to feed their families and educate their children for the better life they dreamed of for them.

The Newest Wonder Boy

Now the media have a new darling. Once again we are being told how this backwoods bozo is the master of the national budget.

Of course they leave out a few details. They use the journalistic equivalent of PhotoShop to turn Miss Piggy into Helen of Troy.

Did they tell you that he received over half a million dollars from the insurance industry? Did they tell you that ranks him above all other US Representatives from Wisconsin. It also ranks him above both of that state’s Senators.

Forget that he’s a prostitute. Capitol Hill is teeming with them. My initial thoughts about him brought to mind the Scarecrow from the Wizard of Oz. It’s hard to explain why. The Scarecrow was aware he had no brain. He wanted a brain.

They have almost nothing in common. And besides, the Scarecrow was too good of a dancer to end up on a reality show. This pitiful wannabe is likely to follow the career path of Tom Delay.

The Congressional Budget Office is a nonpartisan entity of Congress. It is responsible for providing all members their analyses of bills having an economic impact. In fact, it is generally acknowledged to lean just a bit to the right.

The CBO says that Ryan’s budget will cost a minimum of 700,000 jobs. That’s no big deal because those are jobs of government employees and those of suppliers to the government.

Another party that frequently weighs in is the Republican Study Group. It is a group of self-styled financial experts from among the Republican members of the House. They announced that the loss of those 700,000 jobs was a positive development. They say that since most of those losing their jobs are highly skilled and college graduates, putting them into the job market will further depress wages. You see, this group is not too smart. They often make such public pronouncements, that tell us what their real intentions are.

Exactly what is Mr. Ryan promising from his magnum opus? He tells us it will save Medicare. Presently, Medicare has a 20% co-pay. I, as many others, cover that with a private ‘medigap’ plan. Adding in monthly premiums, the average senior will pay as much as 22-25% of his or her medical costs. Ryan’s plan is estimated by the CBO to cost seniors at least 68% once it is phased in.

This means that most seniors will do without needed care or lean on the younger members of their family. Also, the procedure will be drastically changed. He proposes giving each senior a $15,000 voucher with which to purchase an alternative to Medicare coverage. Anyone pricing such individual plans will either laugh or cry uncontrollably.

While Mr. Ryan is generous enough to index that $15,000 for inflation, he uses the index for an almost overall inflation rate that comes in around 2%. Medical cost inflation runs from 2.9% up into the double digits. Another factor is that these plans will be purchased annually. That means that each year the rate will be further increased by the factor of age.

Not only is that amount completely unrealistic, it requires, as he puts it, ever-aging seniors to negotiate coverage details each year. They must do this with an industry famous for its perfidy; famous for its ability to increase the complexity of its products beyond outsiders’ comprehension – always to their advantage.

There are other features of his budget plan that target seniors, in addition to those aimed at children, the poor, the middle class, college students and their families, hell, everyone not in the economic top 10%.

Well, all those spending cuts will reduce our deficit. Ooops. Actually, the deficit will increase for the first 10-12 years. The budget might possibly be balanced in 70 years. I can’t wait. Seriously, I can’t wait.

With all of those cuts, why will it take his plan so long to reach its putative goal? You must remember some items, defense, for instance, will increase.

The cuts are described as modest at $4.3 trillion. I bet you thought to yourself, “Myself, that’s a bunch of cutting.” Don’t forget with whom you are dealing. The plan calls for $4.2 trillion in tax cuts. Oh. That explains a lot.

The nominal corporate tax rate, at 35% is second only to Japan. Mr. Ryan wants to reduce that to 25%. Instead of just swallowing that load, let’s take a slightly closer look at corporate taxes.

That 35% in the nominal rate. That means the law says that is the rate. Reading deeper into the tax code will bring to light a forest of deductions, exemptions, subsidies and other goodies. The ‘real’ rate then seems to become about 17%. That puts the US corporate tax rate at a much more competitive level. That puts it well into the lower half of developed nations.

Look at the chart. It would show a lower percentage but it only covers 1950-2003.

But we can’t stop at 17%. When 68% of corporations pay no tax (think General Electric’s nearly $15 billion untaxed), it lowers the effective rate even further. A quick calculation puts the effective rate at less than 5.5%.

If corporations are still moving jobs, capital and profits overseas at 5.5%, I’m guessing that lowering the nominal rate to 25% will not eliminate the deficit.

Those treating the government as their enemy may be on to something. Their aim should be slightly adjusted, however. It’s their own little darlings; their own ideological “friends” that are the enemy. It is the Paul Ryans who we and the government need protection from.

Mr. Ryan named his little plan The Path to Prosperity. He failed to say whose prosperity. I don’t think he liked the stories of Robin Hood. He seems to have identified with the Sheriff and King John. Somehow, rob from the poor and give to the rich just doesn’t have the same ring to it – at least not to me.

But, what do I know? After all, he is the media’s newest fair-haired Wunderkind*.

*German: Child Prodigy

.

.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

I pay more taxes than General Electric. You pay more taxes than General Electric.

Technically, they pay more, just not to the United States Government.

For some reason, though the bulk of their business income comes from this country, they always seem to lose money here and make tremendous profits overseas. Why didn’t TurboTax do that for me?

General Electric’s slogan is “Imagination at Work.” That’s nice. It would be nicer if some of that imagination devoted to tax law was diverted to something their customers could use. A truly imaginative act would be to bring jobs and tax revenue back home.

GE is known to have the premier tax law firm in the country. It is an in-house law department consisting of about 900 lawyers. While making massive layoffs elsewhere, it appears that department is safe from cuts. This, of course doesn’t count their lobbyists giving congressmen pre-written tax law changes that some of those 900 have developed.

Where do they find these imaginative tax experts? The IRS. The Treasury. Every tax-writing committee in Congress. While they propagandize you to believe that government can’t find its rectum with both hands, they find it to be a recruiting goldmine. Is it possible our bureaucrats aren’t overpaid riders on a gravy train?

One of the services the government is supposed to render is to regulate and inspect nuclear power plants. It turns out they are very shorthanded. It has been years since some of the 104 plants in the US have been inspected. GE is the leading builder of nuclear power plants in the world. They even have them in far off exotic places, like Japan. I’m wondering if they might be shorthanded because they are insufficiently funded.

GE hasn’t forgotten its poor, bedraggled executives. It generously gives $14,000 to each one to pay the costs of having their individual returns done. This payout is deductible, of course.

How many times have you heard that lowering the taxes on corporations and the wealthy will allow them to create jobs? In 2009 GE reduced its workforce by 19,000. That is a little misleading. They actually eliminated 35,000 jobs. It doesn’t look quite as bad because they acquired 16,000 new employees when they purchased a Central American bank. I am unaware of a lot of their US employees relocating southward.

The following are some figures cribbed from Senator Sanders web site.

Over the past five years, while General Electric made $26 billion in profits in the United States, it received a $4.1 billion refund from the IRS.

Goldman Sachs in 2008 only paid 1.1 percent of its income in taxes even though it earned a profit of $2.3 billion and received an almost $800 billion bailout from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury Department.

Chevron received a $19 million refund from the IRS last year after it made $10 billion in profits in 2009.

Over the past five years, Carnival Cruise Lines made more than $11 billion in profits, but its federal income tax rate during those years was just 1.1 percent.

Those are just the tip of the iceberg. A study covering 1998 to 2005 found more than three-quarters of major corporations paid no tax. Major appears to be defined as revenue of $250 million or more. That doesn’t seem so major with so many raking in the billions.

You often hear the tools proclaiming that the US has the highest business tax in the world. Not true. Japan leads in that category. If we count what is actually paid, rather than the published rate, we would find the US at the bottom.

Companies don’t move overseas because of taxes. They move to pay lower wages, avoid health and safety rules and to employ more compliant workers. Do you like that iPad that was made in China by what the international community has called slave labor and child labor?

Apple admitted their Chinese factories used child labor. However, they did get upset when an audit showed that even the lax Chinese labor laws were being violated and the children were being poisoned by having to handle some of the components without protective gear. Is it possible that Steve Jobs would have a billion or two less if he didn’t take advantage of these kids?

The governors of Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Florida and, I feel certain, other states, quickly offered tax cuts to businesses. Then they try to compensate for the lost revenue by cutting education ($900 million in Wisconsin alone), police, firemen, unemployment compensation, parks, health and other services you might use.

Is the budget deficit a major problem? Yes. How are we going to deal with it? French fry fryers and Walmart greeters will just have to dig a little deeper. Personally, I think we can do it. I found a quarter on the sidewalk only yesterday.

In case you didn’t realize it, you are very generous to these corporations. Back in the 1950s, when our economic engine was hitting its best performance levels ever, the corporate share of the governments revenue was 30%. By 2009, their contribution had fallen to 6.6%.

Not only is a one-sided class war being waged against the people of this country, they are subsidizing the enemy.

I have never been eligible for the Alternative Minimum Tax. You may have noticed some mention of it. I was surprised to learn that there is also an AMT for businesses. It’s on the books but I find no evidence that it is being implemented. Enforcing that could go a long way towards making the deficit smaller.

How about putting our IRS ahead of tax collection entities of other countries? The law could easily be written to require a company that pays taxes to other countries to pay the full corporate tax rate on domestic income, without deductions, unless they pay the US tax, with deductions, on all income.

How could we justify taxing them on overseas revenues? How many billions do we spend defending and representing their interests around the world? How much do these other countries provide for them?

Unless the Congress makes changes of this nature that require corporations to share the burden, they should not be taken seriously, nor be considered our representatives.

President Obama is concerned about the economy. He recently appointed Jeffrey Immelt as his chief outside economic advisor. By the way, Jeff is the CEO of General Electric.

I understand GE is to be banned from Gitmo, for humanitarian reasons.

.

.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

The Democrats will learn the wrong lessons from the election. The Republicans will learn the wrong lessons from the election.

How can I say that? Because of the truth embodied in the old saw, garbage in, garbage out.

The bulk of the society has decided that what they want to be facts really are facts. People actually believe that Obama is a Muslim. They don’t believe it because it is true. They believe it because they want it to be true.

And besides, the Internet told them so.

One of the memorable moments from election night was Rand Paul, in his victory rant, saying that he had a message he was taking to Washington. Americans are going to take back their government. My question is, “from whom?”

Whatever happened to the melting pot? He gets to claim the mantle of American and brand everyone who differs as unAmerican? I grew up imbued with the sentiment behind the statement, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” That was then. People now will readily stomp your head for daring to disagree with them.

Sharron Angle speaks of 2^nd Amendment remedies if they don’t get their way. Governor Rick Perry, Congressman Zack Wamp and others talk secession if the Republicans don’t get their way. These are the real American patriots? God help us.

And what is it that tops their lists? Tax cuts for the plutocrats. Next? Repeal ObamaCare.

Yeah, I know. Somewhere in there is to impeach or otherwise rid the country of Obama. Is this where they intend the 2^nd Amendment remedy?

Anyway, what did the Republicans think they learned?

They learned that the nation gave them a mandate to implement their agenda. Wrong

What was the public’s top issue? The economy, at 42%. Where did the public rank tax cuts, the Republicans’ top issue? At 4%. They heard what they wanted to hear.

Every mention of job creation is predicated on tax cuts for the top 2%. It had ten years to create jobs but didn’t. What has changed? Nothing. Let me be emphatic. There is not one shred of evidence that those tax cuts have or will create a single job. There is concrete evidence that unemployment insurance creates jobs. I feel better about ensuring a family has food and a roof than about giving a billionaire an extra half million, or even a whole.

An exit poll showed 30% of voters had a family member who is unemployed or has been since the last election. So, do you still remember the campaigns? The 2^nd Amendment. Immigration. Birthers. Gay Rights. Abortion. A Manhattan Mosque. Sure, any wedge issue to divide a country that needs unity to work its way out of a crisis.

Mitch McConnell and John Boehner are telling every camera that the voters repudiated all of the policies of Obama. Pat Buchanan sees a bit more nuance. He says that the people did want Obama’s agenda two years ago but they no longer want what Obama wants.

In this election the Republicans gathered 5 million more votes than the Democrats. In 2008, 23 million voters in the 18 to 29 age group voted for Obama. This year. 9 million of that age group voted for Democrats. Fourteen million didn’t show up. Why? Not because of what Obama did. Because of the promises Obama failed to deliver. They sat on their hands, not because they wanted to give the Republicans a mandate. They sat it out from disappointment with the Democrats.

The overwhelming Republican turnout failed to materialize. What enthusiasm was seen resulted more from anger than love of the GOP. Polls showed higher approval for the Democrats but that didn’t translate into votes. Many of those who voted for Republicans were simply wanting to send the Democrats a message. It just wasn’t the message Rand Paul heard.

What about ObamaCare? Polls showed a little over 50% opposed it. One poll I recall but don’t have in front of me was 51% opposed, 41% favored. Well, that settles that. Just a minute.

The same poll then asked the same people their positions on six major parts of the healthcare reform that became law. You know, no more denial for preexisting conditions, coverage for kids until 26 years old, etc., etc. Surprise, surprise. Those 51% who opposed it supported every one of those six parts by from 59 to 78 percentage majorities.

Okay. Where is McConnell’s and Boehner’s claimed rejection of ObamaCare? They will not tell you that ObamaCare is almost indistinguishable from what Reagan offered Teddy Kennedy. Kennedy turned it down. He later said that was the political mistake he most regretted. Should we rename it RonnyCare? I guess St. Ronny wasn’t really a true conservative.

Do you realize that if half or two-thirds of that 14 million missing youth had voted, it would have been enough to eliminate every Republican from the House of Representatives and every one of the Republican Senators and governors up for reelection? Has anyone heard that message?

Over half of the conservative Democrats are gone from the House. One percent of the progressive Democrats lost. That makes the remaining Democratic caucus more progressive than before. Obama sees only the smaller numbers of Democrats and accepts the Republican interpretation of the results. One of his first post-election comments was that he may be willing to compromise on the tax cut.

The tax cut is a made to order Democratic battering ram. Regardless of what they say, the Republicans cannot reduce the debt by borrowing more than a trillion dollars. Well, you say, there could be spending cuts.

So, why have McConnell, Boehner and the others absolutely refused to identify a single spending cut? They know, as voters seem not to, that debt service, the military, Social Security and Medicare cannot be cut for legal and/or political reasons and total 93% of the budget. If you cut the FBI, the CIA, Homeland security, everything in that 7%, the government would essentially disappear but the deficit would remain.

The Republicans do not, under any circumstances, want to reduce the deficit. They want it increased. Really? Yes. Despite the Republican demands for tax cuts, the the resulting debt would add to the debt accumulated during Obama’s administration. He would get 100% of the blame. If he is stupid enough to concede anything on that issue, he deserves to be a one-term president, and probably will be.

The right has been louder. The left sat on their hands, with some exceptions, such as Nevada, California and a couple of other places.

The public did not make a big right turn between 2008 and 2010. The support for the progressive agenda is there. It will continue to trend that way if the progressives in Washington get their act together. More youth are coming of age. They lean heavily to the left. The older voters, who tend to be more conservative (as me) are dying off. They need leadership. They want to believe.

These are the times that try men’s souls. It will not be civil but it will be war. It will elicit howls of anger from those who claim the Flag as their own personal property. Obama may be too queasy to lead. If he understands that the Oval Office functions differently than a law school classroom, he has the other attributes to lead. Without that, he needs to step aside for the next election cycle.

One last secret from PoliSci 101. Bringing everyone together, were that even possible, can make a temporary majority. However, it is weak. It is soft. To put such a coalition together requires fuzzing the picture, fuzzing the politician’s image. It will take very little for those weak ties to disappear. The fuzziness doesn’t create enthusiasm.

Even a politician with less than majority support can win by dividing the electorate. That’s what the Republicans understand and the Democrats don’t. Making it us against them, creating strong lines of differences, whether they truly exist or not, generates enthusiasm. These people are motivated to get out and vote.

Bipartisanship is a viable option in an emergency such as WWII. It didn’t last long, even after 9/11. The rest of the time bipartisanship is the mark of the amateur, the naive.

The Republicans understand the above but, as for the results of this past election, they just don’t get it. Obama and some other Democrats seem to agree with the Republicans. Wrong.

.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

This section of the globe could be to show that we are a long way from the population center of the Earth.

Or, it could be showing those places that don’t care who wins the Stanley Cup (oops, I left out Nashville) or the NBA Championship, or whether Senator Nelson is looking out for Warren Buffet’s profits, or who the next Senator from Florida will be, or if Sarah Palin has read all of the newspapers, or if Dick Cheney has shot any friends in the face (who knew he had any).

Then again, it could be a map showing where all of our jobs have gone.

The first George Bush tried to give us NAFTA. Bill Clinton succeeded. Do you remember the promises, the promised benefits? There were too many to remember them all. Have you been enjoying them? Free trade has its benefits. It’s just that we don’t get them.

The promises made on behalf of “Free Trade” sounded nice. But, what are the results? China ships us $50 billion worth of computers and associated equipment. We ship them $8 billion worth of waste paper and scrap metal. Okay, who’s ahead, so far?

All the laid-off factory worker has to do is be retrained as an engineer and move from Akron to California, where schools for his kids are closing, the government is scaling back or closing down every service they can find, where earthquakes have dropped to the bottom of citizens’ worry lists.

The alternatives are flipping burgers, being a Walmart greeter, if you are old enough, or moving to Bangladesh. They did promise jobs, didn’t they?

Well, productivity has increased. The only problem there with the way it is calculated.

First, pay has not kept up with productivity as it is supposed to. That’s the theory. Or, at least that’s the song they sing to lure you into believing the American Dream is just around the corner (where you can’t see it).

The more output of widgets you have given an established amount of man-hours, the greater the productivity. Say you work on an auto assembly line. The engine was assembled abroad. So was the transmission. And the radio, the axle and transaxle, the electronic panel.

That factory is producing more cars with fewer American workers, so productivity is up. Wow! We won.

Another way of calculating productivity is one the corporations prefer not to emphasize to the general public. How much does it cost to produce a widget? Figuring in the 75-cent per hour cost of a child from China or Thailand brings the total labor cost down a little bit. Once again, productivity is up. Rejoice!

We get to indulge in fake lower prices at Walmart, if we have a job. The corporations have a prettier bottom line, so the executives can pay themselves that extra $5 million bonus. This keeps the executives relatively quiet when they see their luckier brethren on Wall Street getting half a billion a year.

Exxon had $37 billion in earnings last year, without having to pay any corporate tax in this country. Of course, many of their former employees didn’t have to pay any income tax either. We should give Exxon a pass though. They haven’t had any monumental accidents since their eponymous tanker Valdez dripped a bit into one of our major fishing areas. We know they learned their lesson because some day they will pay for all of the damage . . . oops, I forgot that the courts let them off the hook.

Well, anyway, enjoy the benefits of “Free Trade,” since some of you have a lot of spare time to do so.

.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

First, let me reiterate my detestation for all ideologies and labels. To the extent that I use them in this post, it seems necessary and is for the convenience of the reader.

The imminent retirement of Justice John Paul Stevens highlights the problems caused by both. Stevens is commonly referred to as the most liberal Justice on the Supreme Court. He hates being so described.

Stevens was, and remains, a lifelong Republican. He was nominated by a Republican president, Gerald Ford in 1975. But, he and his retirement are just the impetus. This post is about far more.

Why is a Republican called the most liberal member of the Court? Well, it seems that terms such as liberal, conservative, left, right, capitalism, socialism, even populism are thrown around willy-nilly by people who think they know what these words mean.

The right of privacy is not explicitly enumerated in the Constitution or its Amendments. However, through the years the Supreme Courts have firmly stated and reconfirmed that it is such a basic right that many other protections that are included would be meaningless without it. They have ruled that it is an implicit right.

Justice Stevens followed that tenet in his opinion in re the Patriot Act. The ‘conservative’ members of the Court just ignored their own claims of conserving the Constitution.

In the recent decision to give corporations free speech, Justice Stevens did something almost unheard of. He not only dissented; he actually read his dissent aloud in the courtroom. He felt that the Declaration and Constitution were clear in their intent when stating “We the People” and “government of, by and for the people.”

As Justice Stevens himself noted, with the single exception of Ruth Ginsburg, every departing member of the Court, since Stevens himself came aboard, was replaced by someone to his or her right.

I have written before of the Founding Fathers’ fear that corporations would destroy their work. Here again, the ‘conservatives’ ignored the Constitution. It makes you wonder if you understand the meaning of the title they claim of being “Strict Constructionists.”

If ‘Constitutional scholars’ have wandered so far away from the Constitution, we common folk may be excused for being less than precise in our usage.

I find it odd that people are so drawn to the label of conservative, given the politicians who claim it today. The original conservatives were the supporters of the king’s prerogatives. The Founders were on the opposite end of the political spectrum.

The king claimed the right of his troops to be boarded in your home. Our Constitution proscribes that practice.

The king preferred that people not criticize him openly. The Constitution says we can criticize George III or George W.

The Founding Fathers not only were progressive, they stated that times would change. They devised a document that allowed for our social and political progress. They were certain that we would improve upon their situation, their conditions and their document. They themselves were no strict constructionists. Oddly, to be a strict constructionist one would have to be against strict construction. One would have to be a progressive. Oooh. There. I said it.

Back in the 1980s a nationwide survey of historians was taken as to the greatest Senator of all time. The winner was Robert “Fighting Bob” Lafollette. He received this signal honor about 60 years after his death in 1925. Lafollette became a Senator in 1906 and died in office. Prior to that he was the Governor of Wisconsin. Prior to that he was a member of the House of Representatives.

Lafollette was a Republican. So, why was he held in such high esteem? Most people credit another Republican, Teddy Roosevelt, with first promoting universal health care in the 1912 platform of the Bull Moose Party. Lafollette did it earlier. He also suggested unemployment insurance, social security and a host of other measures, some which appeared in FDR’s administration, some which have yet to appear.

How could a Republican other than Teddy Roosevelt be so liberal? Well, he wasn’t. He felt that conservative values meant that the benefits of our system should be broadly enjoyed. He felt an (perhaps Christian) obligation toward the well-being of his fellow Amercians.

He felt that America, its democracy, its protections, its potential, should not be denied to his fellow citizens. He thought America was too good, too great to be seen as selfish and stingy. He felt that as more people benefited from America’s system, the easier it was to conserve that system.

Lafollette wanted to conserve the benefits and promise of America. For that, he was fondly remembered and honored by those of the fraternity that keeps the record of our achievements and our failures.

At some point, conservatism became almost solely about conserving the treasure and prerogatives of the wealthiest among us. An article of faith was that government should be small. Why? Because a small government cost less but, more importantly, a small government had insufficient power and resources to interfere with their ‘Robber Baron’ activities and their credit default swaps.

Later, it subsumed the idea that to preserve all of that it was necessary to be isolationist. It also so feared the Bolshevik Revolution that it branded any deviation from laissez-faire capitalism as communist, socialist, anti-American, liberal, union, et al. It wasn’t necessary to understand any of those things. It was only necessary to have a knee-jerk reaction to any word the plutocrats told us was bad.

As this restrictive perversion of conservative began to wane, after the embarrassment of Joe McCarthy, the true believers realized they needed an infusion of bodies and money. They had finally realized that the military-industrial complex could be a goldmine. It could also co-opt the label of patriotism

Have you ever wondered why a Republican President, a 5-star general warned us against that group? Could it be that he still considered himself a real conservative? Did you ever wonder why the John Birch Society and its descendents called Ike a communist dupe; why they questioned his patriotism while advertising their own?

Where to get the people? Lyndon Johnson gave them a present. He was able to get civil rights acts passed. There go the racists.

Then there was Roe v. Wade. Then there was prayer in the schools. That caused the social conservatives to go looking for champions. They now had the numbers to go with their financial resources.

But who was running the show? Was it the social conservatives? No. They just provided the volume. The tune was still called by the ones that paid the piper. The plutocrats and their prosti . . . er, politicians worked in close harmony.

The new conservatives commandeered the Republican Party. They told the social conservatives they would overturn Roe v. Wade. They would put God back in the classroom. They would . . . Well, did they? Not just yet. After all it’s only been about 50 years.

With the Republican ‘conservatives’ enjoying electoral success, why were these promises not kept? If these new conservatives had actually accomplished these things, they would no longer have the means of motivating the troops. If the voters who had been convinced that their leaders were really conservatives felt that everything was right with the world, they wouldn’t need to come down to the polling booth. Those politicians would lose their faithful. They would lose their jobs. Better to keep them angry and going to the polls than actually come across on the promises.

Along came a spider. A part of those controlling the ‘conservative movement’ thought, “Why not control the world?” These were largely macho draft dodgers and other wannabes who thought war was as portrayed in John Wayne movies. We call them neoconservatives.

They believe that everything they dislike domestically can be overrun through bluff, bluster and making up the rules as they go along. They believe that everything they dislike internationally can be gotten rid of by a crude use of America’s supposedly unlimited military might. Unsurprisingly, they think of themselves as realists, as smarter than average.

There is nothing wrong with the concept of conservatism, beyond how it is being used and who is using it. In the form exercised by many in the past it has much to commend it. But, it has been commandeered by the political dregs of the country as a method of fooling large numbers in order to obtain and maintain control.

I can easily identify with many conservative precepts. Similarly, I can do the same with liberal and progressive. I cannot identify with capitalism, communism, socialism and such. They are tools to be used by people who understand them and their limitations. I feel most comfortable calling myself a populist but not in the sense that far too many use it. I see a bifurcation of those whose highest priority is people (Populists) and those whose highest priority is corporations (Fascists).

Take your pick. There are those two. There is room for conservative, liberal and progressive inside populism. There is only room for plutocrats, politicians and dupes among the fascists.

.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Did someone revise the English dictionary while I wasn’t looking?

Reading and watching the news is disconcerting and disorienting.

Liz Cheney, a graduate of law school and self-proclaimed patriot, calls the Department of Justice the Department of Jihad. Why? Because seven attorneys in that department once represented terror suspects before the courts.

This law school graduate says that lawyers agree with their clients. She thinks some people should not have a right to an attorney. I must have misread or misunderstood our Constitution and legal system because Liz shouts quite loudly and clearly that she is a patriot. Should I have put that in all caps?

Who is a patriot? Is Liz, who has no understanding or appreciation of our Constitution a patriot? How about her father? He violated the Constitution more times than he received deferments to avoid serving the country he loves so much.

Patriotic teabaggers call our president a Nazi. They blather about how inept our government is; how much they distrust it; how much they hate it.

Patriots want to take away your right to redress, your right to sue. They want to give businesses and corporations immunity from responsibility for ruining your life.

I am beginning to believe that I no longer understand my mother tongue. Let me explain what I think patriotism is, or used to be, and what Joe Main Street thought it was.

Most people probably thought patriotism was a virtue. They thought it was simply a love of country. They thought it was exemplified by soldiers who sacrificed their life and limb for our country, for his fellow countryman.

Watching the teabaggers and their ilk, I see no love of anything. I see hatred of minorities. I see hatred of fellow Americans. I see hatred of anyone different. Really, we are seeing hatred of themselves.

There is another word that people throw around. Nationalism. People, not just in this country, usually see patriotism as a positive and nationalism as a negative trait. Actually, they are the same. People like to portray themselves as patriots and furriners as nationalists. Many word carry emotional baggage. These are just two.

Is patriotism really a positive thing? Many thinkers over the centuries have not necessarily thought so. Let me list a few quotes on the subject. The first is what we used to like to think of it as, when we were in junior high civics class.

“Patriotism is not short, frenzied outbursts of emotion, but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime.” – Adlai E. Stevenson

But far more observers held a less favorable view.

“Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious.” – Oscar Wilde

“Patriotism is a pernicious, psychopathic form of idiocy” – George Bernard Shaw

“You’ll never have a quiet world till you knock the patriotism out of the human race.” – George Bernard Shaw

“Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.” – Samuel Johnson

“Patriotism is often an arbitrary veneration of real estate above principles.” – George Jean Nathan

“Patriots always talk of dying for their country, and never of killing for their country.” – Bertrand Russell

“Patriotism is as fierce as a fever, pitiless as the grave, blind as a stone, and irrational as a headless hen” – Ambrose Bierce

Most of those quoted must have missed civics class. They likely do not differentiate between patriotism and nationalism.

So, maybe we can’t define it as love of country but does that mean the teabaggers are right? Is patriotism merely hate of your government and your fellow man?

The word has an unarguable hold on us, regardless of how it is defined. Those of the lunatic right know this. They jumped out in front to wear it as a badge of honor. Whatever its real meaning or their lack of devotion to its commonly accepted tenets, it has a political value.

But, one should always remember that admonition, “Never trust anyone who wears his religion or his patriotism on his sleeve.” If you love your fellow man and the ideals for which your country stands, there is no need to advertise it. People will know. If you abide by the teachings of your religion, showing the love and morality of that god, there is no need to advertise it. People will know.

If you see any love for you or me coming from the Cheneys, check to see if there has been an invasion from outer space by creatures using our bodies as hosts. If you see a teabagger or Republican politician having a kind word for Obama, your are likely having an implausible dream.

Is our country perfect? No. Are our leaders motivated by our best interest? Seldom. Are our Congressmen and Senators intelligent, reputable people? I’ll have to get back to you on that. No luck so far.

My last word of warning. Distrust and avoid anyone wearing this underwear.

It is becoming ever more difficult to claim your American citizenship when traveling abroad. The teabaggers and others of that ilk are a cause of either consternation or bemusement or amusement among those looking at us from outside these borders. I care enough about my country and fellow countrymen to not enjoy others seeing us as the global village idiot.

.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

We need to send some senators to Guantanamo. They are far more dangerous to our country than any of the people already in residence there.

I’m certain you have at least heard the name of Christopher Bond, Senator from Missouri. You, however, may be forgiven for not recognizing Martha Johnson’s name.

Miss Martha was the President’s nominee to head up the General Services Administration. It’s difficult to think of a political appointment to a less political position. The GSA is primarily the nation’s landlord and maintenance arm. They do the grunt work so that government employees have a roof over their heads.

What connection is there between these two?

Little Chris (Kit) was pissed about something to do with a new Federal building in Kansas City. So, he did what any grammar school kid would do. He took “his” ball and refused to let the others play. He put a hold on her nomination.

Believe it or not, the Democrats finally showed some backbone and forced a vote. What was the outcome of this controversial nomination? She was confirmed: 96-0.

Senators are so impressed with themselves that they refer to the Senate as the world’s most exclusive club. Sometimes they call it the world’s most exclusive debating club. One problem – they no longer debate. They just pose for the cameras and talk past each other.

Given how impressed they are with themselves, they feel they deserve special privileges. So, they give themselves a bunch of special considerations. My problem with that, beyond the attitude that engenders it, is that essentially all of these privileges are anti-democratic. Somehow that doesn’t seem meet in, arguably, the world’s most successful democracy.

The privilege pertinent to the above embarrassment is the rule that permits any Senator to put a hold on any nominee or bill, for any reason, or for no reason. Any single Senator can put the whole country on hold, at his pleasure. It this any way to run an airline?

Now, another Senator has taken the next illogical step. He has put a hold on all nominations. Who is this terrorist? He goes by the American-sounding name of Richard Shelby. Unsurprisingly, he comes out of Alabama, our leading state – at least alphabetically.

Surely there is a serious national danger that calls for such a drastic measure. What could it be?

Old Dick wants a government contract to go to a defense contractor who would do assembly work on a new tanker back home in Alabama. I’m convinced that he merely wants government-funded jobs for his constituents. It has nothing to do with his being on the contractor’s payroll.

Actually, the Dick has another reason, as well. He wants the FBI to build an explosives testing facility in Alabama. We mustn’t locate such a facility too conveniently to the FBI’s primary offices in Virginia. That would only help one part of the government function more efficiently. That would violate one of his “conservative” tenants.

The Dick is famous for how tentative his tenants can be. He once pontificated, “Far too many of the president’s nominees were never afforded an up or down vote because several Democrats chose to block the process for political gain.” That, of course, was when Bush had a majority of Republicans in the Senate.

Another rule has become a “privilege.” That is the rule requiring a super majority. When the Democrats had 60 votes, that meant any Democratic Senator could stand in the way until he/she got what they wanted. That worked out so well we ended up with a joke called a healthcare reform bill. It was more like a ménages à cent.

Now, with the Republicans having 41 votes, one of that group can either stop the majority or broker a deal to get what they want. What about what the people want? Silly question.

How do they justify these privileges? They sometimes resort to calling them a part of the system of checks and balances. Pure BS.

The Constitution provides for several checks and balances. There are what are considered to be the main ones: between the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches. We also have another between the two branches of Congress. The primary one was to be between the people, on the one hand, and Congress and the White House on the other. That one has been effectively eliminated by the Senate.

There are several ways to eliminate these anti-democratic privileges. The Vice President could, at the beginning of the next session, declare them eliminated. It seems he is not so inclined. The Senate Majority Leader could also lead. Not much chance of that.

The Constitution begins, “We the People.” Forget the Constitution. The Rules of the Senate take precedence. The people have been beaten into complete submission. Do you really think the people are prepared to take time away from their 50″ flat screens and video games to regain the power promised by the Constitution? Sure, there are the teabaggers but they are a thankfully small group of yoyos that are too easily led by faux populists such as Dick Armey and the corporate interests he represents. They are ready and willing to blindly follow con men to support policies that are against their real self-interests.

It doesn’t make much sense to depend on such as the corporately mislead teabaggers to help rid us of the corporate-owned legislators. What is the solution? Realistically, there seems not to be one. They say knowledge is power. How I wish that were true.

.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Do you REALLY want a democracy? The healthcare reform farce we see in Congress is proof positive that we do not actually enjoy a democracy in the United States.

Who is to blame? You and me. Who can bring back democracy? Only you and me. How, you ask. Well, that’s what I’m here for. I have the answer. While I have the answer, that doesn’t mean that I can do it alone. I need your help.

I recall a BC comic strip from during the 1968 presidential campaign. One of the characters was Peter. He had a stone couch and gave psychiatric advice. One of the other characters came to him complaining of a recurring dream. He dreamt he was in the voting booth and that there was only one name on the ballot. Peter asked what was the name. The response was Humphrey-Nixon-Wallace.

There actually was no choice. Corporations donated to all three campaigns. Things have changed. They have worsened.

Kent Conrad is the most prominent Democratic Senator opposing the public option. Yes, I know about Max Baucus. He says he is for it (he isn’t) but will not support it because it can’t pass. Anyway, back to Conrad.

The North Dakota Democratic Party held a convention. They voted, without dissent, to include the single-payer system as their healthcare reform policy. They sent a letter to Conrad, the state’s other Senator and to their lone Representative. That letter stated their policy and added that, if single-payer was not to be, their fallback position was for a public option.

Senator Conrad has received $2,362,436 in bribes from the insurance companies, health industry and lobbyists. I’m guessing that he didn’t share any of that with his state’s Democratic Party. A poll in his state shows an overwhelming support for the public option. Still, he is recalcitrant. Who does he represent? The people of North Dakota are missing that little thing called democracy. Remember the immortal words of Deep Throat, “Follow the money.”

Conrad was in politics before but he came to the Senate in 1987. He promised he would not run for re-election if the budget deficit was not reduced. It wasn’t. He ignored that promise. By the way, his present position is Chair of the Senate Budget Committee. He is in his 23^rd year in the Senate. That is the problem.

He needs all of those bribes to pay for his re-election campaigns. No re-election campaign, no need for campaign funds. Without those bribes, he could vote the way his constituents want – for single-payer. Wow. Just think about that for a moment.

Term limits would solve the problem. But, what are the chances of them voting themselves out of office? Nil. That leaves it up to us, the voters, and those who are eligible but don’t vote.

That should be easy. While the approval rating of Congress is 9%, 95% of them get re-elected. We, you and I, are to blame. We are stupid, gullible, lazy, don’t care enough or some combination of those virtues. They won’t do it, so we must.

The corporations have a Congress. We don’t. So, the answer is obvious. Don’t re-elect incumbents.

While the overall approval rating for Congress is 9%, the majority has a higher opinion of the member from their own bailiwick. Or, maybe we are just more forgiving. That may explain why a Congressman can consistently vote against his constituents’ interests or even get caught lying, stealing or making trips to The Argentine and still maintain the support of many, possibly most, of the voters in his district.

About a third of Congressmen run unopposed. Incumbency, and the money that comes with it, keeps a lot of good people from running. We could have a peoples’ congress. And, it wouldn’t cost us a dime. All we have to do is vote against all incumbents.

Would the very few good ones get ousted? Yes, but I’m willing to bet that there are other good people in their district. Perhaps they, as Sarah Palin, can work more effectively for our benefit outside of the system, without the onerous responsibilities of office.

After one or two election cycles they might feel it to be in their interest to enact some term limits. I would personally prefer an individual limit of ten to twelve years of total public office, i.e., combining the time of holding any combination of offices, with no more than two terms in any one office. Also, no elected or appointed official should receive retirement benefits or any other benefit after leaving office. While in office there should be no benefits not available to average citizens.

Judges are required to recuse themselves if they have any relationship with either party. They implement the laws. However, Congressmen, who make the laws, are permitted to take money from various parties and still vote on those laws. What is good for the courts is good for the legislatures.

Pay for each Congressman should be based on the income of the average family in their district. If they maintain a residence in their own district plus one in the Washington area, they would get the sum of that plus the average income for residents of D.C. Their pay would be tied to how their constituents fare.

Ridding ourselves of career politicians isn’t just something that would be nice. It is absolutely vital to reestablishing this country as a democracy.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Bipartisanship sounds like an admirable quality. Is it?

When Obama wanted some Regressive Senators to sign on to his stimulus bill he had to make some deals. One of the deals was with Susan Collins. She thought $780 million for pandemic control was better spent on tax cuts.

Obama caved in the name of bipartisanship. If one side says white is white and the other side says white is black, what does the compromise look like? Pure idiocy.

Despite the idealistic glow surrounding the concept of bipartisanship, there could only be value in it if the Regressives could muster some ideas of merit. So far they haven’t. Could they? Not the bunch presently in Congress.

Those presently sitting on their heads on Capitol Hill are more concerned about scoring points against Obama or vitiating and eviscerating any proposal from the Oval Office or the other side of the aisle. Remember, we are actually paying these juveniles to indulge in their permanent snit at the results of an election that clearly showed the public was tired of their incompetence, greed and price tags.

Bobby Jindal, the clown from Louisiana, poked fun at spending money to study volcanoes a couple of days before the one in Alaska started spewing again. Perhaps Governor Palin should crusade against spending money on studying hurricanes. After all, these titans of scientific thought have made it clear that the problems caused by volcanoes, hurricanes, pandemics and a host of other matters can be readily dealt with by tax cuts. Also, tax cuts don’t require a syringe.

These leaders are truly anti-American. They want America to stand for ignorance, intolerance and torture. Their moronic ideology is more important to them than the lives and well-being of the people whose interests they were sworn to represent.

Obama needs to forget playing nice with the bullies. Senator Reid needs to remember that the majority is supposed to rule every once in a while. We have sufficient checks, balances and other mechanisms to protect the minority. We need not always cave to the minority, particularly when they are willing to let Americans die for their pitiful little isms.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites