Ellen Brown, Truthout -Publicly owned banks were instrumental in funding Germany's "economic miracle" after the devastation of World War II. Although the German public banks have been targeted in the last decade for takedown by their private competitors, the model remains a viable alternative to the private profiteering being protested on Wall Street today.
One of the demands voiced by protesters in the Occupy Wall Street movement is for a "public option" in banking. What that means was explained by Dr. Michael Hudson, professor of economics at the University of Missouri in Kansas City, in an interview by Paul Jay of the Real News Network on October 6:
|||| The demand isn't simply to make a public bank, but is to treat the banks generally as a public utility, just as you treat electric companies as a public utility.... Just as there was pressure for a public option in health care, there should be a public option in banking. There should be a government bank that offers credit card rates without punitive 30% interest rates, without penalties, without raising the rate if you don't pay your electric bill. This is how America got strong in the 19th and early 20th century, by essentially having public infrastructure, just like you'd have roads and bridges.... The idea of public infrastructure was to lower the cost of living and to lower the cost of doing business.||||
We don't hear much about a public banking option in the United States, but a number of countries already have a resilient public banking sector. A May 2010 article in The Economist noted that the strong and stable publicly owned banks of India, China and Brazil helped those countries weather the banking crisis afflicting most of the world in the last few years.
In the US, North Dakota is the only state to own its own bank. It is also the only state that has sported a budget surplus every year since the 2008 credit crisis. It has the lowest unemployment rate in the country and the lowest default rate on loans
October 15, 2011
Teaching for real: College field trips
Matt Amaral - Part of any good college-going program at the high school level is the field trips. Time and again, the kids that actually make it to college point out the field trips as being an important motivator by allowing them to see first-hand what college life is like. Every year, I take my classes who are on a college path to three colleges.
The field trips are always interesting, but not always good. Other times they are great. One year at SF State we caught Brown-Bag Theater’s performance of The Tempest by William Shakespeare. All twenty-five of my students crammed into their tiny performance area that only seated forty, and for an hour we listened to lines of Shakespeare and watched attractive college students in tights. Some of my students can barely write regular English, so they didn’t understand 90% of what was said, others fell asleep—but it was a success because it is something they all remember.
Other times we check out art galleries, symphonic performances, or do scavenger hunts. One time an art student was in a Speedo allowing anyone walking by to draw on him with a black Sharpie. The students couldn’t believe I’d let them do it. Then I drew on him too. One day as we were walking across a bridge on a field trip to UC Santa Cruz, a college student smoking a blunt met us halfway across the bridge and blew copious amounts of marijuana all over 60 of my students as they walked by. They loved it.
“Yes,” I reassured them. “People in college smoke weed too, it isn’t just for the back of your math class third period.” Unfortunately that year I wasn’t joking. MORE
Matt Amaral is a writer and high school English teacher from the San Francisco Bay Area. His blog, Teach 4 Real, is one of our favorites
The field trips are always interesting, but not always good. Other times they are great. One year at SF State we caught Brown-Bag Theater’s performance of The Tempest by William Shakespeare. All twenty-five of my students crammed into their tiny performance area that only seated forty, and for an hour we listened to lines of Shakespeare and watched attractive college students in tights. Some of my students can barely write regular English, so they didn’t understand 90% of what was said, others fell asleep—but it was a success because it is something they all remember.
Other times we check out art galleries, symphonic performances, or do scavenger hunts. One time an art student was in a Speedo allowing anyone walking by to draw on him with a black Sharpie. The students couldn’t believe I’d let them do it. Then I drew on him too. One day as we were walking across a bridge on a field trip to UC Santa Cruz, a college student smoking a blunt met us halfway across the bridge and blew copious amounts of marijuana all over 60 of my students as they walked by. They loved it.
“Yes,” I reassured them. “People in college smoke weed too, it isn’t just for the back of your math class third period.” Unfortunately that year I wasn’t joking. MORE
Matt Amaral is a writer and high school English teacher from the San Francisco Bay Area. His blog, Teach 4 Real, is one of our favorites
Obama's new war
David Dayem, Firedog Lake - The Administration’s claimed legal justification [for the Ugandan intervention] comes from a law called the Lord’s Resistance Army Disarmament and Northern Uganda Recovery Act of 2009, originally sponsored by Russ Feingold. Human Rights Watch were among the endorsers of the bill. I’m not sure this is what they had in mind. The bill authorizes the President to “provide additional assistance” to the region affected by the LRA, but there is absolutely nothing explicit about the deployment of combat forces in that law. The Constitution reserves the power to declare war to Congress alone, and they did not do that in the Lord’s Resistance Army Disarmament and Northern Uganda Recovery Act of 2009. There’s a clause about “political, economic, military, and intelligence support” that I suppose is the thin reed upon which this all hangs. The signing statement by the President after passage of the law says absolutely nothing about the deployment of forces.
...I’m sure Joseph Kony is a horrible person, among all the horrible people in the world. The question is whether it’s worthwhile or wise for the United States to be constantly policing the world, sending out US troops and spending US money to do it. Second, this is really what was at stake with the Congressional debate over Libya. Some Constitutionalists argued that the President didn’t have the unilateral right to commit the US military to action in Libya, and in fact the House never passed any resolution authorizing force even after the fact. But nobody took the next logical step to try to shut down the US contribution to the NATO mission.
This furthers a long, slow decline whereby the President becomes a unitary executive in matters of foreign policy, even though Congress has explicit rights regarding war powers. If Congress fails to use them, it only emboldens the executive, who then feels free to inform Congressional leaders after the fact that he deployed troops to central Africa.
...I’m sure Joseph Kony is a horrible person, among all the horrible people in the world. The question is whether it’s worthwhile or wise for the United States to be constantly policing the world, sending out US troops and spending US money to do it. Second, this is really what was at stake with the Congressional debate over Libya. Some Constitutionalists argued that the President didn’t have the unilateral right to commit the US military to action in Libya, and in fact the House never passed any resolution authorizing force even after the fact. But nobody took the next logical step to try to shut down the US contribution to the NATO mission.
This furthers a long, slow decline whereby the President becomes a unitary executive in matters of foreign policy, even though Congress has explicit rights regarding war powers. If Congress fails to use them, it only emboldens the executive, who then feels free to inform Congressional leaders after the fact that he deployed troops to central Africa.
Hill GOP most anti-environmental in history
Huffington Post - In just the year since the GOP took control of the House, there have been at least 159 votes held against environmental protections -- including 83 targeting the Environmental Protection Agency -- on the House floor alone, according to a list compiled by Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
"Republicans have made an assault on all environmental issues," said Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), the top Democrat on the committee. "This is, without doubt, the most anti-environmental Congress in history."
"Republicans have made an assault on all environmental issues," said Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), the top Democrat on the committee. "This is, without doubt, the most anti-environmental Congress in history."
October 14, 2011
Republicans prove God can't make up his mind
Bloomberg- Anita Perry explained how God had called her husband to run for president and is now testing Perry with a campaign in which the Texas governor is besieged by Republican rivals.
"We are being brutalized by our opponents and by our party," she said. "So much of that is I think they look at him because of his faith. He is the only true conservative. Well, there are some other conservatives, and they are there for good reasons. And they may feel like God called them too.”
As it happens, quite a few of them do.
According to Karen Santorum, Rick Santorum's wife, he, too, was called. "It really boils down to God's will," she said. "We have prayed a lot about this decision, and we believe with all our hearts that this is what God wants."
Michele Bachmann has said she regularly receives "assurance" from God about her direction, including running for office.
Frontrunner-of-the-Week Herman Cain has said that God pretty much insisted that the former pizza executive campaign for the White House. Cain, however, expressing a humility not much in evidence among the chosen few, does allow that it's not a dead certainty that God's plan includes a President Cain. "Whether that is ultimately to become the president of the United States or not, I don't know," he said. "I just know at this point I am following God's plan."
Mitt Romney, Jon Huntsman, Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich appear to have mortal political consultants.
"We are being brutalized by our opponents and by our party," she said. "So much of that is I think they look at him because of his faith. He is the only true conservative. Well, there are some other conservatives, and they are there for good reasons. And they may feel like God called them too.”
As it happens, quite a few of them do.
According to Karen Santorum, Rick Santorum's wife, he, too, was called. "It really boils down to God's will," she said. "We have prayed a lot about this decision, and we believe with all our hearts that this is what God wants."
Michele Bachmann has said she regularly receives "assurance" from God about her direction, including running for office.
Frontrunner-of-the-Week Herman Cain has said that God pretty much insisted that the former pizza executive campaign for the White House. Cain, however, expressing a humility not much in evidence among the chosen few, does allow that it's not a dead certainty that God's plan includes a President Cain. "Whether that is ultimately to become the president of the United States or not, I don't know," he said. "I just know at this point I am following God's plan."
Mitt Romney, Jon Huntsman, Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich appear to have mortal political consultants.
Meanwhile, furthermore & on the other hand. . .
Great thoughts of Rick Santorum
Rick Santorum argued that single mothers were the “political base” of the Democratic Party, and that Republicans should work to lessen single motherhood in order to score political points against their Democratic rivals. The Democratic Party, Santorum said, relies on “single mothers who run a household” and have a “desire for government” as their voter base, and concluded that building “two parent families” is necessary “to reduce the Democratic advantage.”
Stats
Since 2009, the number of teens forgoing contraception when they bed a new partner has spiked 39 percent in the United States – and 111 percent in France. Among the reasons cited were not liking it and not having adequate access to it.
Furthermore
Thelonius Monk's advice to musicians, including, "Just because you're not a drummer doesn't mean you don't have to keep time."
Why a cornfield is not the best place to hide
Rick Santorum argued that single mothers were the “political base” of the Democratic Party, and that Republicans should work to lessen single motherhood in order to score political points against their Democratic rivals. The Democratic Party, Santorum said, relies on “single mothers who run a household” and have a “desire for government” as their voter base, and concluded that building “two parent families” is necessary “to reduce the Democratic advantage.”
Stats
Since 2009, the number of teens forgoing contraception when they bed a new partner has spiked 39 percent in the United States – and 111 percent in France. Among the reasons cited were not liking it and not having adequate access to it.
Furthermore
Thelonius Monk's advice to musicians, including, "Just because you're not a drummer doesn't mean you don't have to keep time."
Why a cornfield is not the best place to hide
Iranian plot plop update
Juan Cole - The downward trajectory of Arbabsiar’s life, with his recent loss of his mortgage, all his businesses, and his second wife, along with his obvious cognitive defect, suggests to me that he may have been descending into madness.
I hypothesized yesterday that Arbabsiar and his cousin Gholam Shakuri might have been part of an Iranian drug gang. But after details have emerged about the former, I don’t think he could even have done that. Indeed, I have now come to view the entire story as a fantasy.
That a monumental screw-up like Arbabsiar could have thought he was a government secret agent is perfectly plausible. I’m sure he thought all kinds of things. But that he was actually one is simply not believable.
OK, Qasim Soleimani, the head of the Qods Brigade special operation forces of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, may not be a nice man. But he is such a competent man that US officials in Iraq widely believed that he repeatedly outmaneuvered and defeated them there.
The allegation that Soleimani was running a hard-drinking incompetent with no memory and no sense of organization like Arbabsiar on the most delicate and dangerous terrorist mission ever attempted by the Islamic Republic of Iran is falling down funny.
Moreover, there is every reason to think, as Jeffrey Toobin suggests is a possibility, that Arbab was entrapped into this plan by a criminal drug runner in the pay of the US government, who suggested most of the key details to Arbabsiar in the first place. If the latter was as mentally disturbed as the WaPo report makes him sound, he may have been particularly suggestible and therefore an excellent subject for entrapment.
There is no connection to Iran here. Arbabsiar had $100,000 wired from a third country to what he thought was the Mexican drug gangster’s account. The money did not come directly from Iran. Even if it originated there, there is no reason to think it was government funds. Arbabsiar was himself worth $2 million in Iran; for all we know, as he got lost in his fantasy land, he began being willing to spend his Kermanshah inheritance on the crazy scheme.
The DOJ complaint says that Arbabsiar boasted that his cousin (Gholam Shakuri) was a “general” in Iran but did plainsclothes work abroad and “had been on CNN.”
Since two out of three of these allegations are obvious falsehoods, why should we believe anything else Arbabsiar said about his cousin?
Richard Silverstein, Tikun Olam - Gareth Porter published an important story about the alleged Iran terror plot. In it he notes that nowhere in the Justice Department criminal complaint does it say that Arbabsiar ever agreed to assassinate anyone. In fact, it is the DEA agent who repeatedly attempts to introduce and re-introduce the notion of perpetrating an act of terror. At no point do the charges say the Iranian ever suggested this or agreed to it.
Porter says that what’s much more likely is that the alleged terror suspect was first drawn into the web by the prospect of doing a drug deal:
On May 24, when Arbabsiar first met with the DEA informant he thought was part of a Mexican drug cartel, it was not to hire a hit squad to kill the ambassador. Rather, there is reason to believe that the main purpose was to arrange a deal to sell large amounts of opium from Afghanistan.
Three Bloomberg reporters, citing a “federal law enforcement official”, wrote that Arbabsiar told the DEA informant he represented Iranians who “controlled drug smuggling and could provide tons of opium”.
In fact, in today’s NY Times a reporter interviewed neighbors who noted that young people entered and exited the suspect’s house at all hours of the day and night. It made them think that drugs were being dealt there.
The IPS reporter notes that the IRG controls a huge volume of drug trafficking in nearby Afghanistan and that they have begun to ship heroin around the world including to Mexican drug cartels. It appears that the paid DEA informant, himself a drug dealer, first approached Arbabsiar not about an act of terror, but about a drug deal. The Iranian was only, as far as the records show, interested in doing a drug deal. He listened to the tales of the DEA agent only because he was being strung along to believe there was a drug deal in the making:
…The absence of any statement attributed to Arbabsiar imply that the Iranian- American said nothing about assassinating the Saudi ambassador except in response to suggestions by the informant, who was already part of an FBI undercover operation.
…Not a single quote from Arbabsiar shows that he agreed to assassinating the ambassador, much less proposed it, suggest[ing] that he was either non-committal or linking the issue to something else, such as the prospect of a major drug deal with the cartel.
Interestingly, the FBI complaint doesn’t mention any discussion about drugs. I wonder why?
This is not only entrapment, it is the government lying about the basic nature of the case. Manssor Arbabsiar appears to be a wannabe Texas drug dealer who had connections holding product via his cousin, who may or may not be affiliated with the IRG. That the IRG deals in drugs I have no doubt. But the claim that the IRG plotted to kill the Saudi ambassador or anyone remains about the lamest claim ever to come out of the Obama administration.
Robert F, Worth & Laura Tillman, NY Times - His nickname was Scarface, the legacy of a brutal knife attack on a dark Houston street three decades ago that left his left cheek permanently marred. Friends and neighbors in Texas said that he could be gruff and intimidating, and that he often stood outside his house at night smoking and talking on his cellphone in a language they did not understand. Reuters
But Mansour J. Arbabsiar, 56, the man at the center of an alleged Iranian plot to kill a Saudi diplomat in Washington, seems to have been more a stumbling opportunist than a calculating killer. Over the 30-odd years he lived in Texas, he left a string of failed businesses and angry creditors in his wake, and an embittered ex-wife who sought a protective order against him. He was perennially disheveled, friends and acquaintances said, and hopelessly disorganized.
…“His socks would not match,” said Tom Hosseini, a former college roommate and friend. “He was always losing his keys and his cellphone. He was not capable of carrying out this plan.”
…. “He was no radical,” said Mitchell Hamauei, who owns a deli in Corpus Christi, Tex., where Mr. Arbabsiar ran a used-car lot for years. “He was a businessman, and people with money always want to make more money.”
Some of Mr. Arbabsiar’s former friends and acquaintances had a few kind words for him, saying that he was friendly and good-humored, and that his flaws were more a matter of carelessness than malevolence.
Others were less charitable, saying he was hopelessly unreliable. Sam Ragsdale, who runs his own wholesale car business in Corpus Christi, had one word for Mr. Arbabsiar: “Worthless.”
…. “Very creepy,” said Bree Tiumalu, who lives two doors down from Mr. Arbabsiar. “We thought of it as ‘the scary house.’ ” There were always lots of people coming and going from the house, mostly in their 20s, she said, but they did not socialize with people on the street. That led some in the community to suspect that drug deals were going on.
He gained American citizenship after marrying his first wife. The couple divorced in 1987; court records show that his ex-wife sought a protective order against him before letting it drop, an article in The Houston Chronicle said.
He later remarried and tried his hand at a number of businesses, selling horses, ice cream, used cars and gyro sandwiches, friends said. All of them appear to have flopped, and federal and state records show a trail of liens, business-related lawsuits and angry creditors. He was arrested in 2001 and indicted for theft in connection with the sale of a store, said the lawyer who represented him at the time, Fred Jimenez. The charges were later dismissed for lack of evidence.
For all his flaws, Mr. Arbabsiar showed flashes of decency and kindness, and sometimes lent money to friends in need, old business associates said. Dan Keetch, a used-car salesman in Corpus Christi, said Mr. Arbabsiar seemed deeply upset by the 2001 terrorist attacks, and asked him not to judge all Middle Easterners in a harsh light.
“He made a big deal about it,” Mr. Keetch recalled, “saying, ‘My friend, I’m not like that, the majority of my people are not like that.’ ”
I hypothesized yesterday that Arbabsiar and his cousin Gholam Shakuri might have been part of an Iranian drug gang. But after details have emerged about the former, I don’t think he could even have done that. Indeed, I have now come to view the entire story as a fantasy.
That a monumental screw-up like Arbabsiar could have thought he was a government secret agent is perfectly plausible. I’m sure he thought all kinds of things. But that he was actually one is simply not believable.
OK, Qasim Soleimani, the head of the Qods Brigade special operation forces of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, may not be a nice man. But he is such a competent man that US officials in Iraq widely believed that he repeatedly outmaneuvered and defeated them there.
The allegation that Soleimani was running a hard-drinking incompetent with no memory and no sense of organization like Arbabsiar on the most delicate and dangerous terrorist mission ever attempted by the Islamic Republic of Iran is falling down funny.
Moreover, there is every reason to think, as Jeffrey Toobin suggests is a possibility, that Arbab was entrapped into this plan by a criminal drug runner in the pay of the US government, who suggested most of the key details to Arbabsiar in the first place. If the latter was as mentally disturbed as the WaPo report makes him sound, he may have been particularly suggestible and therefore an excellent subject for entrapment.
There is no connection to Iran here. Arbabsiar had $100,000 wired from a third country to what he thought was the Mexican drug gangster’s account. The money did not come directly from Iran. Even if it originated there, there is no reason to think it was government funds. Arbabsiar was himself worth $2 million in Iran; for all we know, as he got lost in his fantasy land, he began being willing to spend his Kermanshah inheritance on the crazy scheme.
The DOJ complaint says that Arbabsiar boasted that his cousin (Gholam Shakuri) was a “general” in Iran but did plainsclothes work abroad and “had been on CNN.”
Since two out of three of these allegations are obvious falsehoods, why should we believe anything else Arbabsiar said about his cousin?
Richard Silverstein, Tikun Olam - Gareth Porter published an important story about the alleged Iran terror plot. In it he notes that nowhere in the Justice Department criminal complaint does it say that Arbabsiar ever agreed to assassinate anyone. In fact, it is the DEA agent who repeatedly attempts to introduce and re-introduce the notion of perpetrating an act of terror. At no point do the charges say the Iranian ever suggested this or agreed to it.
Porter says that what’s much more likely is that the alleged terror suspect was first drawn into the web by the prospect of doing a drug deal:
On May 24, when Arbabsiar first met with the DEA informant he thought was part of a Mexican drug cartel, it was not to hire a hit squad to kill the ambassador. Rather, there is reason to believe that the main purpose was to arrange a deal to sell large amounts of opium from Afghanistan.
Three Bloomberg reporters, citing a “federal law enforcement official”, wrote that Arbabsiar told the DEA informant he represented Iranians who “controlled drug smuggling and could provide tons of opium”.
In fact, in today’s NY Times a reporter interviewed neighbors who noted that young people entered and exited the suspect’s house at all hours of the day and night. It made them think that drugs were being dealt there.
The IPS reporter notes that the IRG controls a huge volume of drug trafficking in nearby Afghanistan and that they have begun to ship heroin around the world including to Mexican drug cartels. It appears that the paid DEA informant, himself a drug dealer, first approached Arbabsiar not about an act of terror, but about a drug deal. The Iranian was only, as far as the records show, interested in doing a drug deal. He listened to the tales of the DEA agent only because he was being strung along to believe there was a drug deal in the making:
…The absence of any statement attributed to Arbabsiar imply that the Iranian- American said nothing about assassinating the Saudi ambassador except in response to suggestions by the informant, who was already part of an FBI undercover operation.
…Not a single quote from Arbabsiar shows that he agreed to assassinating the ambassador, much less proposed it, suggest[ing] that he was either non-committal or linking the issue to something else, such as the prospect of a major drug deal with the cartel.
Interestingly, the FBI complaint doesn’t mention any discussion about drugs. I wonder why?
This is not only entrapment, it is the government lying about the basic nature of the case. Manssor Arbabsiar appears to be a wannabe Texas drug dealer who had connections holding product via his cousin, who may or may not be affiliated with the IRG. That the IRG deals in drugs I have no doubt. But the claim that the IRG plotted to kill the Saudi ambassador or anyone remains about the lamest claim ever to come out of the Obama administration.
Robert F, Worth & Laura Tillman, NY Times - His nickname was Scarface, the legacy of a brutal knife attack on a dark Houston street three decades ago that left his left cheek permanently marred. Friends and neighbors in Texas said that he could be gruff and intimidating, and that he often stood outside his house at night smoking and talking on his cellphone in a language they did not understand. Reuters
But Mansour J. Arbabsiar, 56, the man at the center of an alleged Iranian plot to kill a Saudi diplomat in Washington, seems to have been more a stumbling opportunist than a calculating killer. Over the 30-odd years he lived in Texas, he left a string of failed businesses and angry creditors in his wake, and an embittered ex-wife who sought a protective order against him. He was perennially disheveled, friends and acquaintances said, and hopelessly disorganized.
…“His socks would not match,” said Tom Hosseini, a former college roommate and friend. “He was always losing his keys and his cellphone. He was not capable of carrying out this plan.”
…. “He was no radical,” said Mitchell Hamauei, who owns a deli in Corpus Christi, Tex., where Mr. Arbabsiar ran a used-car lot for years. “He was a businessman, and people with money always want to make more money.”
Some of Mr. Arbabsiar’s former friends and acquaintances had a few kind words for him, saying that he was friendly and good-humored, and that his flaws were more a matter of carelessness than malevolence.
Others were less charitable, saying he was hopelessly unreliable. Sam Ragsdale, who runs his own wholesale car business in Corpus Christi, had one word for Mr. Arbabsiar: “Worthless.”
…. “Very creepy,” said Bree Tiumalu, who lives two doors down from Mr. Arbabsiar. “We thought of it as ‘the scary house.’ ” There were always lots of people coming and going from the house, mostly in their 20s, she said, but they did not socialize with people on the street. That led some in the community to suspect that drug deals were going on.
He gained American citizenship after marrying his first wife. The couple divorced in 1987; court records show that his ex-wife sought a protective order against him before letting it drop, an article in The Houston Chronicle said.
He later remarried and tried his hand at a number of businesses, selling horses, ice cream, used cars and gyro sandwiches, friends said. All of them appear to have flopped, and federal and state records show a trail of liens, business-related lawsuits and angry creditors. He was arrested in 2001 and indicted for theft in connection with the sale of a store, said the lawyer who represented him at the time, Fred Jimenez. The charges were later dismissed for lack of evidence.
For all his flaws, Mr. Arbabsiar showed flashes of decency and kindness, and sometimes lent money to friends in need, old business associates said. Dan Keetch, a used-car salesman in Corpus Christi, said Mr. Arbabsiar seemed deeply upset by the 2001 terrorist attacks, and asked him not to judge all Middle Easterners in a harsh light.
“He made a big deal about it,” Mr. Keetch recalled, “saying, ‘My friend, I’m not like that, the majority of my people are not like that.’ ”
Detective admits NY police plant drugs
Alternet - The NYPD has been under fire in recent months for illegal searches resulting in thousands of low-level marijuana arrests, mostly of people of color. As corrupt as this practice is, testimony from Stephen Anderson, a former NYPD narcotics detective, shows it's just the tip of the iceberg.
According to Anderson, who testified at trial Wednesday, New York City police regularly planted drugs on innocent people to meet quotas. Anderson should know. He was arrested in 2008 for planting cocaine on four men in a bar in Queens. …
"As a detective, you still have a number to reach while you are in the narcotics division," Anderson added.
Clearly, the NYPD was requiring officers to fill quotas. The problem, it seems, was not lazy officers, but a lack of the guilty. … Disturbing data uncovered by the Drug Policy Alliance and Queens College sociology professor Dr. Harry Levine shows many incidences of abuse of police authority. In fact, the evidence was so strong and stunk of such wrongdoing that Police Commissioner Ray Kelly actually issued an internal memo last month, ordering officers to stop charging people based on improper searches.
According to Anderson, who testified at trial Wednesday, New York City police regularly planted drugs on innocent people to meet quotas. Anderson should know. He was arrested in 2008 for planting cocaine on four men in a bar in Queens. …
"As a detective, you still have a number to reach while you are in the narcotics division," Anderson added.
Clearly, the NYPD was requiring officers to fill quotas. The problem, it seems, was not lazy officers, but a lack of the guilty. … Disturbing data uncovered by the Drug Policy Alliance and Queens College sociology professor Dr. Harry Levine shows many incidences of abuse of police authority. In fact, the evidence was so strong and stunk of such wrongdoing that Police Commissioner Ray Kelly actually issued an internal memo last month, ordering officers to stop charging people based on improper searches.
Conventional rail grows faster than high speed
It’s buried in the Amtrak news release but the high speed Acela route only had its second best year while 20 of 27 state sponsored and short distance routes set records – as did the NE conventional regional route that travels the same course as the Acela. The conventional route also carries many more passengers than the Acela.
Which raises again the question: why did Obama obsess on high speed rail (for business class riders) as opposed to expanding more conventional service? It looks like, once more, a milder version of his bailing out the banks and doing so little for ordinary homeowners.
Which raises again the question: why did Obama obsess on high speed rail (for business class riders) as opposed to expanding more conventional service? It looks like, once more, a milder version of his bailing out the banks and doing so little for ordinary homeowners.
French senate elects its first leftist president
Humanite, France - The Fifth Republic had never seen the likes of it. On Saturday, October 1, Socialist Senator Jean-Pierre Bel became the Senate’s first Left-Wing President.
Never before under the current French Constitution had a Leftist president been elected by the Senate. One round was enough for Socialist, Communist, Ecologist, and other Left-leaning senators to impose their candidate against the divided and dispirited Rightist ranks.
It all began with the oldest senator being called upon to chair the opening session - namely Communist Senator Paul Vergès from the overseas département of La Réunion. His speech on the great national and planetary issues earned him a standing ovation from the unanimous House.
Then came the time to vote for the various candidates to the Senate’s presidency. Jean-Pierre Bel was the Left’s sole candidate, Gérard Larcher was the incumbent candidate for the UMP (the governing party), while Valérie Létard stood for the Centrist parties.
Jean-Pierre Bel was elected in the first round
As each senator mounted the platform to cast a secret ballot, no incident was to be noted, except on Pierre Charon - a dissident UMP candidate against the official UMP minister Chantal Jouanno - mounting the platform: a muted voice called him a “bastard”, causing uproar in the House at such unusual verbal impropriety, and denoting how strained relations among Rightist members have become….
Now was the time for Jean-Pierre Bel to step up towards the president’s chair and deliver his first speech. Emotions ran high on this occasion, which many deemed historic.
Introducing the philosophy of his term of office as president Jean-Pierre Bel declared: “I am not going to be the servant of any clan; I shall always set the common interest first.”
While promising that “We shall never consider ourselves as a bastion”, he promised that “our opposition to all kind of injustice, exclusion, discrimination, and inequality…shall nevertheless be relentless.” Noting that all their electors [2] had voted for change," he insisted that this invests him with a “historic” responsibility, since the Senate had “opted for a political alternative”, and their electors had expressed their “discontent” and “moral dissatisfaction” and wish for a “new Senate”. He committed himself to “a democratic renovation of the higher chamber”, declared himself in favour of “a fresh impetus to be given to decentralisation” and proposed “convening all local councillors to work for the future.”
Nicole Borvo Cohen-Seat, president of the Communist, Republican, and Civil group said “this new mandate provides an opportunity to annul the local authorities’ reform imposed by the Right and rejected by local councillors.” And she went on to declare that her group will act as "a warrant for real advances in clear opposition to the government’s policies.”
On walking out of the House after the vote Jean-Pierre Raffarin, a former UMP Prime Minister said, reassuringly and rather imprudently, that “victory won in September does not guarantee victory in May”, but confessed all the same that this defeat “is a real political problem for us.”
Sitting in a neighbouring room where he had attended the acceptance speech, Pierre Mauroy, who has just left the Senate at the age of 83, confided to us that “(he) had been waiting for this moment for twenty years.” To him “it is an epoch-making event that will make things easier in 2012.”
Cécile Cuckierman, a 35-year-old Communist senator, the youngest member of the Senate, has just lived through her first session. She confessed to “feeling quite small in this venerable historic place”, but vowed that “we are at the highest level of the State in order to be in the people’s service.”
Never before under the current French Constitution had a Leftist president been elected by the Senate. One round was enough for Socialist, Communist, Ecologist, and other Left-leaning senators to impose their candidate against the divided and dispirited Rightist ranks.
It all began with the oldest senator being called upon to chair the opening session - namely Communist Senator Paul Vergès from the overseas département of La Réunion. His speech on the great national and planetary issues earned him a standing ovation from the unanimous House.
Then came the time to vote for the various candidates to the Senate’s presidency. Jean-Pierre Bel was the Left’s sole candidate, Gérard Larcher was the incumbent candidate for the UMP (the governing party), while Valérie Létard stood for the Centrist parties.
Jean-Pierre Bel was elected in the first round
As each senator mounted the platform to cast a secret ballot, no incident was to be noted, except on Pierre Charon - a dissident UMP candidate against the official UMP minister Chantal Jouanno - mounting the platform: a muted voice called him a “bastard”, causing uproar in the House at such unusual verbal impropriety, and denoting how strained relations among Rightist members have become….
Now was the time for Jean-Pierre Bel to step up towards the president’s chair and deliver his first speech. Emotions ran high on this occasion, which many deemed historic.
Introducing the philosophy of his term of office as president Jean-Pierre Bel declared: “I am not going to be the servant of any clan; I shall always set the common interest first.”
While promising that “We shall never consider ourselves as a bastion”, he promised that “our opposition to all kind of injustice, exclusion, discrimination, and inequality…shall nevertheless be relentless.” Noting that all their electors [2] had voted for change," he insisted that this invests him with a “historic” responsibility, since the Senate had “opted for a political alternative”, and their electors had expressed their “discontent” and “moral dissatisfaction” and wish for a “new Senate”. He committed himself to “a democratic renovation of the higher chamber”, declared himself in favour of “a fresh impetus to be given to decentralisation” and proposed “convening all local councillors to work for the future.”
Nicole Borvo Cohen-Seat, president of the Communist, Republican, and Civil group said “this new mandate provides an opportunity to annul the local authorities’ reform imposed by the Right and rejected by local councillors.” And she went on to declare that her group will act as "a warrant for real advances in clear opposition to the government’s policies.”
On walking out of the House after the vote Jean-Pierre Raffarin, a former UMP Prime Minister said, reassuringly and rather imprudently, that “victory won in September does not guarantee victory in May”, but confessed all the same that this defeat “is a real political problem for us.”
Sitting in a neighbouring room where he had attended the acceptance speech, Pierre Mauroy, who has just left the Senate at the age of 83, confided to us that “(he) had been waiting for this moment for twenty years.” To him “it is an epoch-making event that will make things easier in 2012.”
Cécile Cuckierman, a 35-year-old Communist senator, the youngest member of the Senate, has just lived through her first session. She confessed to “feeling quite small in this venerable historic place”, but vowed that “we are at the highest level of the State in order to be in the people’s service.”
Obama copyright czar cozied up over close to industry
Wired - Top-ranking Obama administration officials, including the U.S. copyright czar, played an active role in secret negotiations between Hollywood, the recording industry and ISPs to disrupt internet access for users suspected of violating copyright law, according to internal White House e-mails.
The e-mails, obtained via the Freedom of Information Act, show the administration’s cozy relationship with Hollywood and the music industry’s lobbying arms and its early support for the copyright-violation crackdown system publicly announced in July.
The e-mails, obtained via the Freedom of Information Act, show the administration’s cozy relationship with Hollywood and the music industry’s lobbying arms and its early support for the copyright-violation crackdown system publicly announced in July.
Sim City had 999 plan before Cain
Techland - Presidential hopeful Herman Cain has jumped to the top of Republican polls thanks to a bold tax scheme called the "999 Plan." But it'd be even bolder if Sim City hadn't come up with the idea eight years ago.
The 999 Plan would impose a nine percent corporate tax rate, a nine percent income tax rate and a national sales tax of nine percent. Those are the exact same rates used by 2004's Sim City 4 for industrial, residential and commercial taxes, the Huffington Post points out.
While it's possible that Cain's simple and memorable tax plan drew inspiration from his years as chairman and CEO of Godfather's Pizza, there's no denying that Sim City 4 had the idea first.
The 999 Plan would impose a nine percent corporate tax rate, a nine percent income tax rate and a national sales tax of nine percent. Those are the exact same rates used by 2004's Sim City 4 for industrial, residential and commercial taxes, the Huffington Post points out.
While it's possible that Cain's simple and memorable tax plan drew inspiration from his years as chairman and CEO of Godfather's Pizza, there's no denying that Sim City 4 had the idea first.
Anita Perry blasphemes God, claims he supports her husband
MSNBC [Anita Perry]: "It’s been a rough month. We have been brutalized and beaten up and chewed up in the press to where I need this today," she said. "We are being brutalized by our opponents, and our own party. So much of that is, I think they look at him, because of his faith. He is the only true conservative – well, there are some true conservatives. And they’re there for good reasons. And they may feel like God called them too. But I truly feel like we are here for that purpose."
"My grandfather was the deacon in a Christian church and he made sure I went to Sunday school every Sunday because nothing made him prouder than for me to hear him in his sermon on Sunday," she said, before trailing off and bowing her head for about 15 seconds. "My grandfather still speaks to me today."
She likened Perry's decision to run to encountering a "burning bush," a reference to the Biblical story of Moses receiving a sign from God. And Anita Perry suggested that her husband's current difficulties were a "test."
"Last week, someone came up to Rick and gave him the scripture. He said Rick, I want to tell you God is testing you," she said.
"My grandfather was the deacon in a Christian church and he made sure I went to Sunday school every Sunday because nothing made him prouder than for me to hear him in his sermon on Sunday," she said, before trailing off and bowing her head for about 15 seconds. "My grandfather still speaks to me today."
She likened Perry's decision to run to encountering a "burning bush," a reference to the Biblical story of Moses receiving a sign from God. And Anita Perry suggested that her husband's current difficulties were a "test."
"Last week, someone came up to Rick and gave him the scripture. He said Rick, I want to tell you God is testing you," she said.
October 13, 2011
Meanwhile, furthermore & on the other hand. . .
JOE MADDEN
Jen McCreight blogs about giving a talk at a meeting of Mensa, the “international high-IQ society.” ... I was struck by one anecdote in particular: the color-coded stickers that indicated huggability.
* Green = Hug me!
* Yellow = Ask me first
* Red = Don’t touch me
A group of self-selected high-IQ people feels the need to have stickers on their name tags to let strangers know whether it’s okay to come up and hug them. - Discover Magazine
Five bike friendly small towns
Family caught in corn maze (complete with 911 call transcript)
Ryanair plans only one toilet per plane
Slow and curious
Questions about how one goes about blowing up a Saudi Arabian ambassador in an overpriced Washington restaurant
Sam Smith
1. Is the Obama administration able to distinguish between an international incident and a personal mental problem? The alleged perp’s friends and his ex wife seem to think not. Wouldn’t therapy have been a better approach than entrapment? As one friend put it, “It’s a puzzle. Maybe somebody offered him some money. He doesn’t have the brain to say no.” According to the Washington Post, he was “renowned for being almost comically absent-minded, perpetually losing keys, cellphones, briefcases, anything that wasn’t tied down. He failed at a succession of ventures from used cars to kebabs.
2. Does the Obama administration really think Iran is that dumb? As Patrick Cockburn put it: “The claim that Iran employed a used-car salesman with a conviction for check fraud to hire Mexican gangsters to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington goes against all that is known of Iran’s highly sophisticated intelligence service.”
3.Why does Eric Holder’s crowd have such interesting ties to Mexican drug lords but is so hostile to the domestic - and far more peaceful and less damaging – marijuana market? Why does no one get involved anymore with a patriotic and respectable east coast hit man? And, given the economy, why are we outsourcing entrapment?
4. Name one significant thing that the United States has done in the past ten years to make it less likely that someone from the Mid East might want to do something crazy like this.
.
5. Name one case where ostracizing a petty dictator has improved the safety or progress of US foreign policy? How does making such people more paranoiac help our goals?
6. What if we treated the Saudi dictatorship the same way?
7. What was in it for Iran? As the Financial Times said, “Killing a foreign diplomat on US soil would be an extraordinary escalation of tensions between Tehran and Washington. It is not obvious why the Iranian leadership, and in particular the cautious Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the country’s supreme leader, would risk such a high stakes gamble.”
8. Name one Hollywood producer who would find this plot acceptable.
9. Name one thing Eric Holder has done really well in his career.
10. Who needs yet another war in the Mid East?
Seven lies about the economy
Robert Reich
1. Tax cuts for the rich trickle down to everyone else. Baloney. Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush both sliced taxes on the rich and what happened? Most Americans’ wages (measured by the real median wage) began flattening under Reagan and have dropped since George W. Bush. Trickle-down economics is a cruel joke.
2. Higher taxes on the rich would hurt the economy and slow job growth. False. From the end of World War II until 1981, the richest Americans faced a top marginal tax rate of 70 percent or above. Under Dwight Eisenhower it was 91 percent. Even after all deductions and credits, the top taxes on the very rich were far higher than they’ve been since. Yet the economy grew faster during those years than it has since. (Don’t believe small businesses would be hurt by a higher marginal tax; fewer than 2 percent of small business owners are in the highest tax bracket.)
3. Shrinking government generates more jobs. Wrong again. It means fewer government workers – everyone from teachers, fire fighters, police officers, and social workers at the state and local levels to safety inspectors and military personnel at the federal. And fewer government contractors, who would employ fewer private-sector workers. According to Moody’s economist Mark Zandi (a campaign advisor to John McCain), the $61 billion in spending cuts proposed by the House GOP will cost the economy 700,000 jobs this year and next.
4. Cutting the budget deficit now is more important than boosting the economy. Untrue. With so many Americans out of work, budget cuts now will shrink the economy. They’ll increase unemployment and reduce tax revenues. That will worsen the ratio of the debt to the total economy. The first priority must be getting jobs and growth back by boosting the economy. Only then, when jobs and growth are returning vigorously, should we turn to cutting the deficit.
5. Medicare and Medicaid are the major drivers of budget deficits. Wrong. Medicare and Medicaid spending is rising quickly, to be sure. But that’s because the nation’s health-care costs are rising so fast. One of the best ways of slowing these costs is to use Medicare and Medicaid’s bargaining power over drug companies and hospitals to reduce costs, and to move from a fee-for-service system to a fee-for-healthy outcomes system. And since Medicare has far lower administrative costs than private health insurers, we should make Medicare available to everyone.
6. Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. Don’t believe it. Social Security is solvent for the next 26 years. It could be solvent for the next century if we raised the ceiling on income subject to the Social Security payroll tax. That ceiling is now $106,800.
7. It’s unfair that lower-income Americans don’t pay income tax. Wrong. There’s nothing unfair about it. Lower-income Americans pay out a larger share of their paychecks in payroll taxes, sales taxes, user fees, and tolls than everyone else.
Demagogues through history have known that big lies, repeated often enough, start being believed — unless they’re rebutted. These seven economic whoppers are just plain wrong. Make sure you know the truth – and spread it on.
1. Tax cuts for the rich trickle down to everyone else. Baloney. Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush both sliced taxes on the rich and what happened? Most Americans’ wages (measured by the real median wage) began flattening under Reagan and have dropped since George W. Bush. Trickle-down economics is a cruel joke.
2. Higher taxes on the rich would hurt the economy and slow job growth. False. From the end of World War II until 1981, the richest Americans faced a top marginal tax rate of 70 percent or above. Under Dwight Eisenhower it was 91 percent. Even after all deductions and credits, the top taxes on the very rich were far higher than they’ve been since. Yet the economy grew faster during those years than it has since. (Don’t believe small businesses would be hurt by a higher marginal tax; fewer than 2 percent of small business owners are in the highest tax bracket.)
3. Shrinking government generates more jobs. Wrong again. It means fewer government workers – everyone from teachers, fire fighters, police officers, and social workers at the state and local levels to safety inspectors and military personnel at the federal. And fewer government contractors, who would employ fewer private-sector workers. According to Moody’s economist Mark Zandi (a campaign advisor to John McCain), the $61 billion in spending cuts proposed by the House GOP will cost the economy 700,000 jobs this year and next.
4. Cutting the budget deficit now is more important than boosting the economy. Untrue. With so many Americans out of work, budget cuts now will shrink the economy. They’ll increase unemployment and reduce tax revenues. That will worsen the ratio of the debt to the total economy. The first priority must be getting jobs and growth back by boosting the economy. Only then, when jobs and growth are returning vigorously, should we turn to cutting the deficit.
5. Medicare and Medicaid are the major drivers of budget deficits. Wrong. Medicare and Medicaid spending is rising quickly, to be sure. But that’s because the nation’s health-care costs are rising so fast. One of the best ways of slowing these costs is to use Medicare and Medicaid’s bargaining power over drug companies and hospitals to reduce costs, and to move from a fee-for-service system to a fee-for-healthy outcomes system. And since Medicare has far lower administrative costs than private health insurers, we should make Medicare available to everyone.
6. Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. Don’t believe it. Social Security is solvent for the next 26 years. It could be solvent for the next century if we raised the ceiling on income subject to the Social Security payroll tax. That ceiling is now $106,800.
7. It’s unfair that lower-income Americans don’t pay income tax. Wrong. There’s nothing unfair about it. Lower-income Americans pay out a larger share of their paychecks in payroll taxes, sales taxes, user fees, and tolls than everyone else.
Demagogues through history have known that big lies, repeated often enough, start being believed — unless they’re rebutted. These seven economic whoppers are just plain wrong. Make sure you know the truth – and spread it on.
Herman Cain's economist
Ezra Klein, Washington Post - Doug Mataconis sums up what we know about the man behind Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 plan:
That Cain doesn’t have a lot of specifics to back up the slogans shouldn’t be all that surprising. While he loves to mention the plan during his media appearances, he is far less willing to share any of the details behind the plan, such as the backup for his assertion that the plan is revenue neutral, or the even who has helped him come up with the plan. That’s not surprising, though, once you realize that the plan’s chief architect, Rich Lowrie, isn’t an economist at all and is in fact a Wells Fargo Branch employee working outside of Cleveland, Ohio, whose highest educational degree is a apparently a B.S. in Accounting from Case Western Reserve University.My colleague Jennifer Rubin interviewed Lowrie on Tuesday: “He repeatedly refused to say how much more of the tax burden would be borne by the poor and middle class than under the current system.”
Plops in the Iranian plot
John Glaser,Anti- War - United States officials in the Obama administration and Justice Department have explicitly claimed that Iran’s supreme leader and the Quds Force covert operations unit were likely aware of the so-called terror plot to kill Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to the United States. But evidence of that is lacking and many officials have admitted there are gaps in their understanding of the plot.
Anonymous government officials speaking to various media outlets have said that their belief that Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, “more than likely” had prior knowledge of the plot is based on inference. The Quds Force operates, they reason, in accordance and obedience to Iran’s supreme leadership, so a rogue actor is unlikely.
But unlikely describes the plot itself, as even US officials admit it was very out of character. The Quds Force has a history of shrewd covert operations and calculated dealings with proxies. “The Iranian modus operandi is only to trust sensitive plots to their own employees, or to trusted proxies,” wrote Kenneth Katzman of the Congressional Research Service on Gulf2000 on Wednesday.
And the accused perpetrator Manssor Arbabsiar and a Mexican drug gang don’t fit the protocol. “Are we to believe that this Texas car seller was a Qods sleeper agent for many years resident in the US? Ridiculous,” said Mr. Katzman. “They never ever use such has-beens or loosely connected people for sensitive plots such as this.”
“It’s a very strange case, it doesn’t really fit Iran’s mode of operation,” Alireza Nader, an Iran analyst at the Rand Corporation told the Christian Science Monitor. ”This [plot] doesn’t seem to serve Iran’s interests in any conceivable way,” he added.
Former CIA agent Robert Baer said the culpability of the Iranian leadership is not believable. “I don’t think it’s credible, not the central government, there may be a rogue element behind it,” Baer said in an interview. “They wouldn’t be sending money through an American bank, they wouldn’t be going to the cartels in Mexico to do this. It’s just not the way they work.”
Carrying out this kind of action, especially within the United States, would be against Iran’s interests, by most expert accounts. It entails a lot of risk of retaliation and potential suffering, and no discernible gain.
Another reason that top-level Iranian government coordination in this plot is unlikely is because the plot was developed for the most part by the FBI and the undercover DEA agent. Arbabsiar had originally planned to kidnap the Saudi ambassador, and only after meeting with the undercover agent did kidnapping turn into assassinating, and it was the undercover agent who first suggested using explosives.
Anonymous government officials speaking to various media outlets have said that their belief that Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, “more than likely” had prior knowledge of the plot is based on inference. The Quds Force operates, they reason, in accordance and obedience to Iran’s supreme leadership, so a rogue actor is unlikely.
But unlikely describes the plot itself, as even US officials admit it was very out of character. The Quds Force has a history of shrewd covert operations and calculated dealings with proxies. “The Iranian modus operandi is only to trust sensitive plots to their own employees, or to trusted proxies,” wrote Kenneth Katzman of the Congressional Research Service on Gulf2000 on Wednesday.
And the accused perpetrator Manssor Arbabsiar and a Mexican drug gang don’t fit the protocol. “Are we to believe that this Texas car seller was a Qods sleeper agent for many years resident in the US? Ridiculous,” said Mr. Katzman. “They never ever use such has-beens or loosely connected people for sensitive plots such as this.”
“It’s a very strange case, it doesn’t really fit Iran’s mode of operation,” Alireza Nader, an Iran analyst at the Rand Corporation told the Christian Science Monitor. ”This [plot] doesn’t seem to serve Iran’s interests in any conceivable way,” he added.
Former CIA agent Robert Baer said the culpability of the Iranian leadership is not believable. “I don’t think it’s credible, not the central government, there may be a rogue element behind it,” Baer said in an interview. “They wouldn’t be sending money through an American bank, they wouldn’t be going to the cartels in Mexico to do this. It’s just not the way they work.”
Carrying out this kind of action, especially within the United States, would be against Iran’s interests, by most expert accounts. It entails a lot of risk of retaliation and potential suffering, and no discernible gain.
Another reason that top-level Iranian government coordination in this plot is unlikely is because the plot was developed for the most part by the FBI and the undercover DEA agent. Arbabsiar had originally planned to kidnap the Saudi ambassador, and only after meeting with the undercover agent did kidnapping turn into assassinating, and it was the undercover agent who first suggested using explosives.
Obama threatens media with jail time over medical marijuana
Sign On San Diego - Federal prosecutors are preparing to target newspapers, radio stations and other media outlets that advertise medical marijuana dispensaries in California, another escalation in the Obama administration's newly invigorated war against the state's pot industry.
This month, U.S. attorneys representing four districts in California announced that the government would single out landlords and property owners who rent buildings or land where dispensaries sell or cultivators grow marijuana.
U.S. Attorney Laura E. Duffy, whose district includes Imperial and San Diego counties, said marijuana advertising is the next area she's "going to be moving onto as part of the enforcement efforts in Southern California." Duffy said she could not speak for the three other U.S. attorneys covering the state, but noted their efforts have been coordinated so far.
"I'm not just seeing print advertising," Duffy said in an interview with California Watch and KQED. "I'm actually hearing radio and seeing TV advertising. It's gone mainstream. Not only is it inappropriate – one has to wonder want kind of message we're sending to our children – it's against the law."
Federal law prohibits people from placing ads for illegal drugs, including marijuana, in "any newspaper, magazine, handbill or other publication." The law could conceivably extend to online ads; the U.S. Department of Justice recently reached a $500 million settlement with Google for selling illegal ads linking to online Canadian pharmacies.
This month, U.S. attorneys representing four districts in California announced that the government would single out landlords and property owners who rent buildings or land where dispensaries sell or cultivators grow marijuana.
U.S. Attorney Laura E. Duffy, whose district includes Imperial and San Diego counties, said marijuana advertising is the next area she's "going to be moving onto as part of the enforcement efforts in Southern California." Duffy said she could not speak for the three other U.S. attorneys covering the state, but noted their efforts have been coordinated so far.
"I'm not just seeing print advertising," Duffy said in an interview with California Watch and KQED. "I'm actually hearing radio and seeing TV advertising. It's gone mainstream. Not only is it inappropriate – one has to wonder want kind of message we're sending to our children – it's against the law."
Federal law prohibits people from placing ads for illegal drugs, including marijuana, in "any newspaper, magazine, handbill or other publication." The law could conceivably extend to online ads; the U.S. Department of Justice recently reached a $500 million settlement with Google for selling illegal ads linking to online Canadian pharmacies.
October 12, 2011
The censorship of religion’s real role in politics
Sam Smith
The clearest indication that we have not adequately separated religion and state is that we are not supposed to talk about the former during a political campaign. This allows the two to become surreptitiously blended and for us, during what is supposed to be a secular activity, to support or oppose issues whose heart is deeply religious such as abortion or gay marriage, or a deadly collection of religious wars.
The best rule of thumb is that religion is absolutely fair territory for political debate when it leaves in its wake war, a crusade against another religion, ethnic cleansing, the destruction of constitutional government, or the endangerment of domestic tranquility.
Besides, if Pope Benedict XVI talked about Jews the way he talks about gays or treated blacks the way he treats women, what would we call him? Why are we not allowed to talk about this?
The ultimate irony of conservative politicians is that they pretend to be a bastion of Christian politics when, in fact, they are comprised in no small part of despoilers, usurers, war-mongers, hypocrites, idolaters and groupies of false prophets - all of whom are frowned upon by the book they pretend to follow. And their opponents, who are more faithful to the words the conservatives only quote, are often such good Christians that they never say a mumblin' word about it all.
Most recently, the issue has arisen concerning Mitt Romney and once again the message from the establishment media is that we are to respect his faith and not question it.
While, in this land, everyone is theoretically free to practice their beliefs the beliefs one freely practices must include one’s conviction that someone else’s beliefs are full of shit.
Thus, it would be perfectly fair for citizens or the media to question Romney or such matters as speaking in tongues, the prevalence of visions, or the idea that the New Jerusalem will be built in America. Governor, in what American locale will Zion arise?
Of more immediate concern is the Mormon position on homosexuality, described by the site, What Mormons Belive, this way:
|||| The Mormon Church is firm on its position condemning homosexuality as sinful behavior…. Frequently, a gay or lesbian who has been raised a Mormon will disassociate themselves from the Church because of Mormon doctrines, but a gay Mormon community is growing. There are also many gay Mormons who wish to overcome their same-sex attraction in order to have a successful eternal marriage and gain all the blessings promised by the Lord. It is a long and difficult struggle to change one's sexual orientation, but despite the denial of many pro-gay groups and psychologists, there are many formerly gay Mormons that have done it.
The Mormon Church will not bow to popular opinion that asserts because 'they were born that way', gays and lesbians should be permitted to live a homosexual lifestyle. The Mormon Church does not accept biological determination for same-sex attraction.
The tendency toward homosexuality is sometimes unfairly stigmatized but in Mormon doctrine is not treated any different than adultery, fornication, or any other sinful act. The natural tendency toward sin is no excuse. ||||
This is pretty slimy stuff for someone running for president to be involved with and certainly worth discussing.
Many religions – especially those favored by the American right – have similar dirty pockets of belief or childish fantasies. But being president is not a fantasy; it is real. And, if because of these beliefs and fantasies, we find ourselves, for example, in an endless war in the Middle East, than not speaking of these matters is not only unwise, it could be suicidal.
The issue is not whether one is entitled to one’s beliefs; the issue is whether, as result of the beliefs of our president and majority party, we are dragged into policies that force their beliefs upon us. And a campaign is the best time to start discussing this. After the election may be too late.
The clearest indication that we have not adequately separated religion and state is that we are not supposed to talk about the former during a political campaign. This allows the two to become surreptitiously blended and for us, during what is supposed to be a secular activity, to support or oppose issues whose heart is deeply religious such as abortion or gay marriage, or a deadly collection of religious wars.
The best rule of thumb is that religion is absolutely fair territory for political debate when it leaves in its wake war, a crusade against another religion, ethnic cleansing, the destruction of constitutional government, or the endangerment of domestic tranquility.
Besides, if Pope Benedict XVI talked about Jews the way he talks about gays or treated blacks the way he treats women, what would we call him? Why are we not allowed to talk about this?
The ultimate irony of conservative politicians is that they pretend to be a bastion of Christian politics when, in fact, they are comprised in no small part of despoilers, usurers, war-mongers, hypocrites, idolaters and groupies of false prophets - all of whom are frowned upon by the book they pretend to follow. And their opponents, who are more faithful to the words the conservatives only quote, are often such good Christians that they never say a mumblin' word about it all.
Most recently, the issue has arisen concerning Mitt Romney and once again the message from the establishment media is that we are to respect his faith and not question it.
While, in this land, everyone is theoretically free to practice their beliefs the beliefs one freely practices must include one’s conviction that someone else’s beliefs are full of shit.
Thus, it would be perfectly fair for citizens or the media to question Romney or such matters as speaking in tongues, the prevalence of visions, or the idea that the New Jerusalem will be built in America. Governor, in what American locale will Zion arise?
Of more immediate concern is the Mormon position on homosexuality, described by the site, What Mormons Belive, this way:
|||| The Mormon Church is firm on its position condemning homosexuality as sinful behavior…. Frequently, a gay or lesbian who has been raised a Mormon will disassociate themselves from the Church because of Mormon doctrines, but a gay Mormon community is growing. There are also many gay Mormons who wish to overcome their same-sex attraction in order to have a successful eternal marriage and gain all the blessings promised by the Lord. It is a long and difficult struggle to change one's sexual orientation, but despite the denial of many pro-gay groups and psychologists, there are many formerly gay Mormons that have done it.
The Mormon Church will not bow to popular opinion that asserts because 'they were born that way', gays and lesbians should be permitted to live a homosexual lifestyle. The Mormon Church does not accept biological determination for same-sex attraction.
The tendency toward homosexuality is sometimes unfairly stigmatized but in Mormon doctrine is not treated any different than adultery, fornication, or any other sinful act. The natural tendency toward sin is no excuse. ||||
This is pretty slimy stuff for someone running for president to be involved with and certainly worth discussing.
Many religions – especially those favored by the American right – have similar dirty pockets of belief or childish fantasies. But being president is not a fantasy; it is real. And, if because of these beliefs and fantasies, we find ourselves, for example, in an endless war in the Middle East, than not speaking of these matters is not only unwise, it could be suicidal.
The issue is not whether one is entitled to one’s beliefs; the issue is whether, as result of the beliefs of our president and majority party, we are dragged into policies that force their beliefs upon us. And a campaign is the best time to start discussing this. After the election may be too late.
Department of Good Stuff
INSTITUTIONS
ACTION
Money Ball: You don't have to be a baseball fan to love this movie, because it's also about some of the better parts of America
BOOKS
Weaponizing Anthropology - A critique of the rapid transformation of American social science into an appendage of the national security state.
Get Up, Stand Up: Uniting Populists, Energizing the Defeated, and Battling the Corporate Elite. . . Through his brilliant analysis, psychologist Bruce Levine explains the process by which mainstream America has become demoralized and docile, how those in power maintain that power, and what it will take to turn things around."--Jim Gottstein, President/CEO Law Project for Psychiatric Rights
The End of Loser Liberalism: Making Markets Progressive is a new book by Dean Baker, one of the wisest voices in poitical journalism today. You can get a free download here
Photo gallery
More good stuff
- Police in Cleveland and Austin for handling the protests well.
- Ben & Jerry's for supporting the protests
ACTION
- The occupiers for the best political action in a couple decades
Money Ball: You don't have to be a baseball fan to love this movie, because it's also about some of the better parts of America
BOOKS
Weaponizing Anthropology - A critique of the rapid transformation of American social science into an appendage of the national security state.
Get Up, Stand Up: Uniting Populists, Energizing the Defeated, and Battling the Corporate Elite. . . Through his brilliant analysis, psychologist Bruce Levine explains the process by which mainstream America has become demoralized and docile, how those in power maintain that power, and what it will take to turn things around."--Jim Gottstein, President/CEO Law Project for Psychiatric Rights
The End of Loser Liberalism: Making Markets Progressive is a new book by Dean Baker, one of the wisest voices in poitical journalism today. You can get a free download here
Photo gallery
More good stuff
Race to the bottom
- Michael Bloomerg & Herman Cain for their anti-protest comments
- The police departments of NYC, Boston and the Iowa state police for their treatment of protesters
- Universities that are selling off their radio stations
- Verisign for wanting to dump domains without court order
- Homeland Security for its plan to identify "pre-crimes"
- American Cancer Society for rejecting gift from humanists
- Obama for naming job slashers to job creation panel
- NFL owners and players for funding the right
- Obama for threatening California pot dispensaries with criminal charges
Ranked on frequency and intensity of actions or comments in recent months that are rotten, unconstitutional, or stupid. State listings are also based on national ratings in various categories and are longer term.
WORST PUBLIC FIGURES
RICK PERRY
MICHELLE BACHMANN
JOHN BOEHNER
BARACK OBAMA
HERMAN CAIN
ERIC CANTOR
RICK SCOTT
WORST STATES
WISCONSIN
LOUISIANA
TENNESSEE
ALABAMA
GEORGIA
INDIANA
WORST INSTITUTIONS
NYC POLICE DEPT
ALEC
HOMELAND SECURITY
BANK OF AMERICA
FBI
GOLDMAN SACHS
TEA PARTY
CIA
GOP debate gets serious
Michele Bachmann says if you turn Herman Cain's "9-9-9" plan upside down it becomes 6-6-6. "I think the devil is in the details," she said at the GOP debate.
Rick Perry: "We don't need to be focused on passing this policy or that policy."
Rick Perry: "We don't need to be focused on passing this policy or that policy."
What Finland could teach us about teaching
Diane Ravitch, Ed Week - I recently returned from a trip to Europe... The highlight of my trip was visiting schools in Finland... For the past decade, 15-year-old Finnish students have consistently been at or near the top of all the nations tested in reading, mathematics, and science. And just as consistently, the variance in quality among Finnish schools is the least of all nations tested, meaning that Finnish students can get a good education in virtually any school in the nation. That's equality of educational opportunity, a good public school in every neighborhood.
What makes the Finnish school system so amazing is that Finnish students never take a standardized test until their last year of high school, when they take a matriculation examination for college admission. Their own teachers design their tests, so teachers know how their students are doing and what they need. There is a national curriculum—broad guidelines to assure that all students have a full education—but it is not prescriptive. Teachers have extensive responsibility for designing curriculum and pedagogy in their school. They have a large degree of autonomy, because they are professionals.
Admission to teacher education programs at the end of high school is highly competitive; only one in 10—or even fewer—qualify for teacher preparation programs. All Finnish teachers spend five years in a rigorous program of study, research, and practice, and all of them finish with a masters' degree. Teachers are prepared for all eventualities, including students with disabilities, students with language difficulties, and students with other kinds of learning issues.
The schools I visited reminded me of our best private progressive schools. They are rich in the arts, in play, and in activity. I saw beautiful campuses, including some with outstanding architecture, filled with light. I saw small classes; although the official class size for elementary school is 24, I never saw a class with more than 19 children (and that one had two assistant teachers to help children with special needs).
Teachers and principals repeatedly told me that the secret of Finnish success is trust. Parents trust teachers because they are professionals. Teachers trust one another and collaborate to solve mutual problems because they are professionals. Teachers and principals trust one another because all the principals have been teachers and have deep experience. When I asked about teacher attrition, I was told that teachers seldom leave teaching; it's a great job, and they are highly respected.
What makes the Finnish school system so amazing is that Finnish students never take a standardized test until their last year of high school, when they take a matriculation examination for college admission. Their own teachers design their tests, so teachers know how their students are doing and what they need. There is a national curriculum—broad guidelines to assure that all students have a full education—but it is not prescriptive. Teachers have extensive responsibility for designing curriculum and pedagogy in their school. They have a large degree of autonomy, because they are professionals.
Admission to teacher education programs at the end of high school is highly competitive; only one in 10—or even fewer—qualify for teacher preparation programs. All Finnish teachers spend five years in a rigorous program of study, research, and practice, and all of them finish with a masters' degree. Teachers are prepared for all eventualities, including students with disabilities, students with language difficulties, and students with other kinds of learning issues.
The schools I visited reminded me of our best private progressive schools. They are rich in the arts, in play, and in activity. I saw beautiful campuses, including some with outstanding architecture, filled with light. I saw small classes; although the official class size for elementary school is 24, I never saw a class with more than 19 children (and that one had two assistant teachers to help children with special needs).
Teachers and principals repeatedly told me that the secret of Finnish success is trust. Parents trust teachers because they are professionals. Teachers trust one another and collaborate to solve mutual problems because they are professionals. Teachers and principals trust one another because all the principals have been teachers and have deep experience. When I asked about teacher attrition, I was told that teachers seldom leave teaching; it's a great job, and they are highly respected.
Verisign wants right to take down sites without court order
Slashdot - VeriSign, the monopoly registry operator for .com/.net domain names, has submitted a proposal to ICANN describing an 'Anti-Abuse' policy. If allowed to proceed with such a policy, they would become judge, jury and executioner, with the ability to suspend or even cancel alleged 'abusive' domain names without due process for registrants. The proposal even recognizes that legitimate domain names may be taken down improperly, and offers a 'protest' procedure. However, VeriSign does not appear to offer any ability to protest an accusation of abuse before the suspension or cancellation. They intend to 'shoot first and ask questions later.'
Majority of Republicans want higher taxes for the wealthy
Bloomberg - More than half of Republicans say wealthier Americans should pay more in taxes to bring down the federal budget deficit.
Fifty-three percent of self-identified Republicans back an increase in taxes on households making more than $250,000, a sentiment at odds with the party’s presidential candidates...
More than two-thirds of all Americans back higher taxes on the rich and even larger numbers think Medicare and Social Security benefits should be left alone, according to a Bloomberg-Washington Post national poll conducted Oct. 6-9.
Fifty-three percent of self-identified Republicans back an increase in taxes on households making more than $250,000, a sentiment at odds with the party’s presidential candidates...
More than two-thirds of all Americans back higher taxes on the rich and even larger numbers think Medicare and Social Security benefits should be left alone, according to a Bloomberg-Washington Post national poll conducted Oct. 6-9.
October 11, 2011
Confronting post-political disorder
Sam Smith
Since history only hangs around these days for six months or so, it is easy not to notice that Republicans don’t act like Republicans anymore nor Democrats like Democrats.
Robert Taft, Dwight Eisenhower, or Margaret Chase Smith would be horrified at such political buffoons as Michelle Bachman or Herman Cain, not to mention the fact that Rick Perry has garnered $17 million for a presidential bid when he is actually qualified for little more than selling cleaning appliances on cable TV at $19.95 each. Further, they would find the desertion of the middle class on behalf of tax favoritism for billionaires thoroughly stunning.
As for the Democrats, FDR or LBJ would be pretty angry at what Clinton did to public welfare and bank regulation or what Obama has done to civil liberties, hasn’t done about the housing crisis, and threatens to do to Social Security and Medicare.
In fact, it has become increasingly difficult to tell the two parties apart. After all, liberals practically had a collective orgasm when they nominated a man for president who not too much earlier had said this of Donald Rumsfeld:
"I don't think that soon-to-be-Secretary Rumsfeld is in any way out of the mainstream of American political life. And I would argue that the same would be true for the vast majority of the Bush nominees, and I give him credit for that."
One of the few honest pieces in the mainstream media at the time was by NY Times reporter Jodi Kantor, who wrote of Obama:
"Friends say he did not want anyone to assume they knew his mind; and because of that, even those close to him did not always know exactly where he stood. . . Charles J. Ogletree Jr., another Harvard law professor and a mentor of Mr. Obama, said, 'He can enter your space and organize your thoughts without necessarily revealing his own concerns and conflicts'. . .
"People had a way of hearing what they wanted in Mr. Obama's words. . . Mr. Obama stayed away from the extremes of campus debate, often choosing safe topics for his speeches. . . In dozens of interviews, his friends said they could not remember his specific views from that era, beyond a general emphasis on diversity and social and economic justice."
Fourteen years earlier, I had written of Bill Clinton:
"Of course, in the postmodern society that Clinton proposes -- one that rises above the false teachings of ideology -- we find ourselves with little to steer us save the opinions of whatever non-ideologue happens to be in power. In this case, we may really only have progressed from the ideology of the many to the ideology of the one or, some might say, from democracy to authoritarianism.
"Among equals, indifference to shared meaning might produce nothing worse than lengthy argument. But when the postmodernist is President of the United States, the impulse becomes a 500-pound gorilla to be fed, as they say, anything it wants."
During the 2008 campaign, writing for Counterpunch, an anonymous political consultant explained America’s post-political culture: we were not choosing a politician but a product, one that made us feel good about ourselves - Obama was the iPod while Hillary Clinton was the cell phone. Wrote the consultant: "In the world of toys it is the one that stands out the most [that] is the most marketable," which helps to explain why a black, inexperienced, atypical pol like Obama did so well against Clinton. And why McCain, who still, metaphorically at least, was using a dial phone, had such a hard time.
The author also noted:
"The two primary features of the post political age are a politics completely drained of all its contents and ability or willingness to be used as an agent of change in social or economic policy, and its full integration into the world of American popular, consumer and entertainment culture. To such an extent that there exists today a seamless web between our political, economic, media and consumer cultures wherein the modes and values of one are completely integrated and compatible with the others."
One of the effects of this phenomenon is that apparently contradictory policies thrive. For example, with a political market being driven by upscale and comfortable middle class whites, "the forces that make it possible for the rapid acceptance of ideas such as gay marriage are the same which can create a society that will accept massive social inequalities."
Which helps to explain why white liberals can talk so much about equality and pay so little attention to its economic factors.
Two years ago, politics received what may turn out to have been its final blow: the atrocious Citizens United ruling of the Supreme Court. Politicians were now finally products indistinguishable from items in a mail order catalog – or small firms awaiting a large corporate takeover.
Admittedly, the ability to purchase politicians was not new, nor was the exclusive market that could afford to do so. An analysis of the 2004 primaries found that over 50% of the donations to both Kerry and Bush came from zip codes with a median income of over $100,000 a year and less than 5% from zip codes with a high level of poverty.
But Citizens United brought political bribery largely out of the closet, although most corporate donations are still funneled through cover organizations. In September 2010, just a few months after the Citizens United decision, Mother Jones described how it was working:
“The 60 Plus Association’s] spending has skyrocketed to nearly $6 million so far this year, and when Dave Weigel asked them where this tidal wave of new cash was coming from, they declined to say. But that kind of money doesn't come from five-dollar donations from tea partiers. It comes from deep pockets — including, as Suzy Khimm reports, $400,000 from American Financial Group to Karl Rove's new campaign spending group, American Crossroads, a contribution that wouldn't have been possible before the Citizens United decision.
“Jonathan Martin of Politico reports that an internal Democratic spreadsheet has tallied up the spending so far, and the story is grim: as of this week, pro-Republican organizations had paid for a total of $23.6 million worth of ads compared to $4.8 million for Democratic-aligned groups…”
And more recently, writes Salon, “Deep-pocketed corporate interest are writing big checks to members of the super committee, the group of 12 senators and members of Congress who have been tasked with coming up with a plan to cut over $1 trillion from the budget in the next decade.
Ten members of the committee got $83,000 from some of the biggest corporate donors in the country in the three-week period in August that is covered in the latest federal election filings.”
The 2012 election has changed the post-political landscape even more. Barack Obama is the most reactionary Democratic president since Grover Cleveland. Even Woodrow Wilson got anti-trust laws passed and created the Federal Trade Commission.
The Republicans, meanwhile, are – and without an ounce of shame - publicly advocating huge public gifts for all those because of their wealth and greed least deserve it. The Eric Cantors and John Boehners are part of the most despicable and decadent crowd on the Hill since the days of the segregationist South.
What is most revealing, however, is the number of GOP politicians willing to openly advocate the subsidy of the smallest political class in America. There is no conventional political explanation for this; it’s never happened before; it should make no sense. No one, for example, has complained before that the middle class wants to take “someone else’s Cadillac” as Herman Cain claims.
The only reason this works is because conventional national politics is dead. The Boehners and the Cantors are not politicians but mercenaries for multi-millionaires and corporate hitmen. It is money that counts. With enough of the money, the votes take care of themselves. The votes you can buy through advertising and the lies you tell in it. If we had a fair and democratic political system every major party presidential candidate could be indicted for taking innumerable bribes.
Which is why the current demonstrations are so important. It is not that national politics does not still have a function in mitigating failure and oppression – will Obama take less of our civil liberties than Rick Perry is a fair question – but in matters of progress or even guaranteeing the benefits we still have, it offers us next to nothing.
We are left only with ourselves, our souls, our choices – and our allies. The protesters have stepped away from their computers – discovering that there is far more than just “click here” to activism – and in just a few days have started to change the nature of things.
It is with the sharing, joining, and cooperating with one another that we can continue the struggle. Its forms are numerous – and, strikingly, like the current protests, mostly non-national in origins. More like the congregational model of the 1960s civil rights movement.
Yes, there are more protests to be held. But there are also bank accounts to be shifted to community institutions or credit unions, cooperatives to join or start, local and state initiatives to launch, law suits to be filed, and unanticipated alliances to be formed. And, of course, a constitution to amend so corporations can no longer destroy our culture and our communities by pretending to be people, too.
The fact that much of this unfinished business is not national but rooted in personal, local and state alliances will be novel to some, but change has always started at the bottom.
The task in the months ahead is not to figure out how we react to some national politician but how we can make these politicians react to us and our communities. We must create a political ecology that even their money can’t destroy.
Since history only hangs around these days for six months or so, it is easy not to notice that Republicans don’t act like Republicans anymore nor Democrats like Democrats.
Robert Taft, Dwight Eisenhower, or Margaret Chase Smith would be horrified at such political buffoons as Michelle Bachman or Herman Cain, not to mention the fact that Rick Perry has garnered $17 million for a presidential bid when he is actually qualified for little more than selling cleaning appliances on cable TV at $19.95 each. Further, they would find the desertion of the middle class on behalf of tax favoritism for billionaires thoroughly stunning.
As for the Democrats, FDR or LBJ would be pretty angry at what Clinton did to public welfare and bank regulation or what Obama has done to civil liberties, hasn’t done about the housing crisis, and threatens to do to Social Security and Medicare.
In fact, it has become increasingly difficult to tell the two parties apart. After all, liberals practically had a collective orgasm when they nominated a man for president who not too much earlier had said this of Donald Rumsfeld:
"I don't think that soon-to-be-Secretary Rumsfeld is in any way out of the mainstream of American political life. And I would argue that the same would be true for the vast majority of the Bush nominees, and I give him credit for that."
One of the few honest pieces in the mainstream media at the time was by NY Times reporter Jodi Kantor, who wrote of Obama:
"Friends say he did not want anyone to assume they knew his mind; and because of that, even those close to him did not always know exactly where he stood. . . Charles J. Ogletree Jr., another Harvard law professor and a mentor of Mr. Obama, said, 'He can enter your space and organize your thoughts without necessarily revealing his own concerns and conflicts'. . .
"People had a way of hearing what they wanted in Mr. Obama's words. . . Mr. Obama stayed away from the extremes of campus debate, often choosing safe topics for his speeches. . . In dozens of interviews, his friends said they could not remember his specific views from that era, beyond a general emphasis on diversity and social and economic justice."
Fourteen years earlier, I had written of Bill Clinton:
"Of course, in the postmodern society that Clinton proposes -- one that rises above the false teachings of ideology -- we find ourselves with little to steer us save the opinions of whatever non-ideologue happens to be in power. In this case, we may really only have progressed from the ideology of the many to the ideology of the one or, some might say, from democracy to authoritarianism.
"Among equals, indifference to shared meaning might produce nothing worse than lengthy argument. But when the postmodernist is President of the United States, the impulse becomes a 500-pound gorilla to be fed, as they say, anything it wants."
During the 2008 campaign, writing for Counterpunch, an anonymous political consultant explained America’s post-political culture: we were not choosing a politician but a product, one that made us feel good about ourselves - Obama was the iPod while Hillary Clinton was the cell phone. Wrote the consultant: "In the world of toys it is the one that stands out the most [that] is the most marketable," which helps to explain why a black, inexperienced, atypical pol like Obama did so well against Clinton. And why McCain, who still, metaphorically at least, was using a dial phone, had such a hard time.
The author also noted:
"The two primary features of the post political age are a politics completely drained of all its contents and ability or willingness to be used as an agent of change in social or economic policy, and its full integration into the world of American popular, consumer and entertainment culture. To such an extent that there exists today a seamless web between our political, economic, media and consumer cultures wherein the modes and values of one are completely integrated and compatible with the others."
One of the effects of this phenomenon is that apparently contradictory policies thrive. For example, with a political market being driven by upscale and comfortable middle class whites, "the forces that make it possible for the rapid acceptance of ideas such as gay marriage are the same which can create a society that will accept massive social inequalities."
Which helps to explain why white liberals can talk so much about equality and pay so little attention to its economic factors.
Two years ago, politics received what may turn out to have been its final blow: the atrocious Citizens United ruling of the Supreme Court. Politicians were now finally products indistinguishable from items in a mail order catalog – or small firms awaiting a large corporate takeover.
Admittedly, the ability to purchase politicians was not new, nor was the exclusive market that could afford to do so. An analysis of the 2004 primaries found that over 50% of the donations to both Kerry and Bush came from zip codes with a median income of over $100,000 a year and less than 5% from zip codes with a high level of poverty.
But Citizens United brought political bribery largely out of the closet, although most corporate donations are still funneled through cover organizations. In September 2010, just a few months after the Citizens United decision, Mother Jones described how it was working:
“The 60 Plus Association’s] spending has skyrocketed to nearly $6 million so far this year, and when Dave Weigel asked them where this tidal wave of new cash was coming from, they declined to say. But that kind of money doesn't come from five-dollar donations from tea partiers. It comes from deep pockets — including, as Suzy Khimm reports, $400,000 from American Financial Group to Karl Rove's new campaign spending group, American Crossroads, a contribution that wouldn't have been possible before the Citizens United decision.
“Jonathan Martin of Politico reports that an internal Democratic spreadsheet has tallied up the spending so far, and the story is grim: as of this week, pro-Republican organizations had paid for a total of $23.6 million worth of ads compared to $4.8 million for Democratic-aligned groups…”
And more recently, writes Salon, “Deep-pocketed corporate interest are writing big checks to members of the super committee, the group of 12 senators and members of Congress who have been tasked with coming up with a plan to cut over $1 trillion from the budget in the next decade.
Ten members of the committee got $83,000 from some of the biggest corporate donors in the country in the three-week period in August that is covered in the latest federal election filings.”
The 2012 election has changed the post-political landscape even more. Barack Obama is the most reactionary Democratic president since Grover Cleveland. Even Woodrow Wilson got anti-trust laws passed and created the Federal Trade Commission.
The Republicans, meanwhile, are – and without an ounce of shame - publicly advocating huge public gifts for all those because of their wealth and greed least deserve it. The Eric Cantors and John Boehners are part of the most despicable and decadent crowd on the Hill since the days of the segregationist South.
What is most revealing, however, is the number of GOP politicians willing to openly advocate the subsidy of the smallest political class in America. There is no conventional political explanation for this; it’s never happened before; it should make no sense. No one, for example, has complained before that the middle class wants to take “someone else’s Cadillac” as Herman Cain claims.
The only reason this works is because conventional national politics is dead. The Boehners and the Cantors are not politicians but mercenaries for multi-millionaires and corporate hitmen. It is money that counts. With enough of the money, the votes take care of themselves. The votes you can buy through advertising and the lies you tell in it. If we had a fair and democratic political system every major party presidential candidate could be indicted for taking innumerable bribes.
Which is why the current demonstrations are so important. It is not that national politics does not still have a function in mitigating failure and oppression – will Obama take less of our civil liberties than Rick Perry is a fair question – but in matters of progress or even guaranteeing the benefits we still have, it offers us next to nothing.
We are left only with ourselves, our souls, our choices – and our allies. The protesters have stepped away from their computers – discovering that there is far more than just “click here” to activism – and in just a few days have started to change the nature of things.
It is with the sharing, joining, and cooperating with one another that we can continue the struggle. Its forms are numerous – and, strikingly, like the current protests, mostly non-national in origins. More like the congregational model of the 1960s civil rights movement.
Yes, there are more protests to be held. But there are also bank accounts to be shifted to community institutions or credit unions, cooperatives to join or start, local and state initiatives to launch, law suits to be filed, and unanticipated alliances to be formed. And, of course, a constitution to amend so corporations can no longer destroy our culture and our communities by pretending to be people, too.
The fact that much of this unfinished business is not national but rooted in personal, local and state alliances will be novel to some, but change has always started at the bottom.
The task in the months ahead is not to figure out how we react to some national politician but how we can make these politicians react to us and our communities. We must create a political ecology that even their money can’t destroy.
Meanwhile, furthermore & on the other hand. . .
Stats
91 percent of kids between 2 and 17, or about 64 million people, are playing video games, up 9 percentage points compared to 2009.
Furthermore. . .
The case against book reviews
After she's voted for 70 years, GOP bigots prevent 96 year old black woman from registering
Word
Elizabeth Warren - The people on Wall Street broke this country, and they did it one lousy mortgage at a time. This happened more than three years ago, and there still has been no basic accountability, and there has been no real effort to
91 percent of kids between 2 and 17, or about 64 million people, are playing video games, up 9 percentage points compared to 2009.
Furthermore. . .
The case against book reviews
After she's voted for 70 years, GOP bigots prevent 96 year old black woman from registering
Word
Elizabeth Warren - The people on Wall Street broke this country, and they did it one lousy mortgage at a time. This happened more than three years ago, and there still has been no basic accountability, and there has been no real effort to
Reoccupying America
OWSers turn to billionaires' homes
AUSTIN POLICE CHIEF ART ACEVEDO
AUSTIN POLICE CHIEF ART ACEVEDO
- Panic of the plutocrats
- Organizing mass transfer to credit unions
- Time for a general strike?
- Lobby bucks pay off big time for banks
- Mortgage lenders still fabricating documents
- Someone actually polled the occupation
- The Green Party alternative
- Occupiers a bit more popular than Tea Party, alot more than Congress
- The party's over. What happens now?
The case against book reviews
Elizabeth Gumport, N+1 - Who reads reviews? Occasionally a lot of people. But usually just the book’s author, if she Googles herself, plus any pals, parents, exes, etc. who also search for her. Otherwise, our only readers are our friends, who feel obligated to at least skim our boring review because we liked theirs on Facebook. Why do we prioritize some imaginary “public” over people we actually know, and who read our work? Why don’t we want to write, and read, for our friends? Perhaps we fear our freedom. If we could read and write anything we wanted, what would we read and write? Probably not book reviews. Choices would have to be made.
Universities selling campus radio stations
USA Today - College radio stations, which have long given a first break to little-known musicians and offered a voice for idiosyncratic viewpoints, are at risk of losing their identity to budget-cutters, a grass-roots campaign warns.
More than 350 college radio stations are going to the airwaves to fight against a steady stream of universities nationwide that have been selling or transferring their FM licenses to non-student operations, usually in response to tighter budgets and a rapidly changing media industry.
In May, Rice University in Houston completed the sale of its KTRU-FM tower, license and bandwidth for $9.5 million. Sales are pending at Nashville's Vanderbilt University for $3.35 million and at the University of San Francisco for $3.75 million.
In most cases, the stations are being bought up by either a National Public Radio affiliate or religious broadcasters, says Mark Maben, general manager of Seton Hall University's student-run station and a board member for College Broadcasters Inc., which represents about 200 stations.
Student programming has been moving to online or HD channels. But that's not the same, says communications professor Rob Quicke, general manager of the student-run station at William Paterson University in Wayne, N.J. "When you've got an FM license, it's a huge blow to have it taken away from you," he says. "They are silencing their students' voices forever."
Quicke is the force behind College Radio Day, a loosely organized event that encourages participating stations to tout their role in training students and helping unknown bands find an audience.
Coldplay and other bands have provided audio feeds promoting the event. Among campus-based activities: Rochester Institute of Technology's WITR plans to raffle off a guitar that has been signed by every band that has done a live session at the station. KTAI FM at Texas A&M University-Kingsville will host bands and other entertainment throughout the day.
Tight budgets are usually a factor in the sales, and university officials say more students can benefit from the proceeds of a station's sale. At Rice, a student-led committee is making recommendations about how to spend the money, says Linda Thrane, vice president for public affairs.
More than 350 college radio stations are going to the airwaves to fight against a steady stream of universities nationwide that have been selling or transferring their FM licenses to non-student operations, usually in response to tighter budgets and a rapidly changing media industry.
In May, Rice University in Houston completed the sale of its KTRU-FM tower, license and bandwidth for $9.5 million. Sales are pending at Nashville's Vanderbilt University for $3.35 million and at the University of San Francisco for $3.75 million.
In most cases, the stations are being bought up by either a National Public Radio affiliate or religious broadcasters, says Mark Maben, general manager of Seton Hall University's student-run station and a board member for College Broadcasters Inc., which represents about 200 stations.
Student programming has been moving to online or HD channels. But that's not the same, says communications professor Rob Quicke, general manager of the student-run station at William Paterson University in Wayne, N.J. "When you've got an FM license, it's a huge blow to have it taken away from you," he says. "They are silencing their students' voices forever."
Quicke is the force behind College Radio Day, a loosely organized event that encourages participating stations to tout their role in training students and helping unknown bands find an audience.
Coldplay and other bands have provided audio feeds promoting the event. Among campus-based activities: Rochester Institute of Technology's WITR plans to raffle off a guitar that has been signed by every band that has done a live session at the station. KTAI FM at Texas A&M University-Kingsville will host bands and other entertainment throughout the day.
Tight budgets are usually a factor in the sales, and university officials say more students can benefit from the proceeds of a station's sale. At Rice, a student-led committee is making recommendations about how to spend the money, says Linda Thrane, vice president for public affairs.
Americans disagree with Washington's approach to deficit
Washington Post - More than eight in 10 Americans say the middle class will have to make financial sacrifices to reduce the nation’s budget deficit, but about as many oppose tax increases on middle-income families and broad-based entitlement cuts, according to a new Washington Post-Bloomberg News poll.
Some approaches to deficit reduction, however, are popular: Most Americans support raising taxes on wealthy families, and a slim majority backs reducing military spending as a way to shave the burgeoning budget gap.
Fully 81 percent of adults think that to reduce the nation’s budget deficit, the middle class will need to make financial sacrifices. At the same time, just as many Americans oppose reducing the deficit by cutting Social Security and Medicare benefits (83 and 82 percent, respectively), and 79 percent oppose raising taxes on the “middle class.” About half support cutting military spending (51 percent), while a heavy majority supports raising taxes on households with incomes upward of $250,000.
Social Security and Medicare benefits cuts — when described as blanket reductions — are enormously unpopular across the political spectrum. At least-three quarters of Democrats, Republicans, liberals, conservatives, moderates and independents oppose cuts to either program. And while younger Americans are more supportive of cuts to both programs, fewer than a quarter of any age group supports such cuts.
Some approaches to deficit reduction, however, are popular: Most Americans support raising taxes on wealthy families, and a slim majority backs reducing military spending as a way to shave the burgeoning budget gap.
Fully 81 percent of adults think that to reduce the nation’s budget deficit, the middle class will need to make financial sacrifices. At the same time, just as many Americans oppose reducing the deficit by cutting Social Security and Medicare benefits (83 and 82 percent, respectively), and 79 percent oppose raising taxes on the “middle class.” About half support cutting military spending (51 percent), while a heavy majority supports raising taxes on households with incomes upward of $250,000.
Social Security and Medicare benefits cuts — when described as blanket reductions — are enormously unpopular across the political spectrum. At least-three quarters of Democrats, Republicans, liberals, conservatives, moderates and independents oppose cuts to either program. And while younger Americans are more supportive of cuts to both programs, fewer than a quarter of any age group supports such cuts.
Obama advised by Romney crew on healthcare bill
NBC News: "Newly obtained White House records provide fresh details on how senior Obama administration officials used Mitt Romney's landmark health-care law in Massachusetts as a model for the new federal law, including recruiting some of Romney's own health care advisers and experts to help craft the act now derided by Republicans as Obamacare."
The records "show that senior White House officials had a dozen meetings in 2009 with three health-care advisers and experts who helped shape the health care reform law signed by Romney in 2006, when the Republican presidential candidate was governor of Massachusetts. One of those meetings, on July 20, 2009, was in the Oval Office and presided over by President Barack Obama, the records show."
The records "show that senior White House officials had a dozen meetings in 2009 with three health-care advisers and experts who helped shape the health care reform law signed by Romney in 2006, when the Republican presidential candidate was governor of Massachusetts. One of those meetings, on July 20, 2009, was in the Oval Office and presided over by President Barack Obama, the records show."
London cabbies turning to cooking oil for fuel
Guardian, UK - Rising diesel prices have seen black cab drivers in London turning to biodiesel from waste cooking oil – and Uptown Oil in Southwark is capitalising on the demand
It's 8am on a bright September morning and rush hour in the forecourt at Uptown Oil. Every couple of minutes, one of London's trademark black taxis pulls in at the filling station. The drivers, some of them yawning a little, some listening to the radio, make small talk with the attendants, before paying up and heading off, ready to find their next customer on the city's busy streets.
It is a scene repeated at garages around the capital, but with a crucial difference: the fuel going into these tanks has been used once already – as cooking fat in local restaurants.
Uptown Oil, located under a railway bridge in the borough of Southwark, south London, manufactures diesel from oil that has fried anything from fish and chips to English breakfast. It is one of only two commercial-scale operators doing this in the city, manufacturing an average of 25,000 to 30,000 litres of low-emission biodiesel every week, out of oil collected from nearby bars, restaurants and cafe
Boston police act like thugs
Salon - On Monday night, Boston police broke up the Occupy Boston protest, and in the process, they tore down an American flag and knocked down at least one American military veteran. A group of Veterans for Peace stood in a line in front of the Occupy Boston protesters, and after the police warned the entire group to disperse, a line of cops marched out of the darkness and seemed to move on the veterans first.
Jerry Brown refuses to ban warrantless cellphone searches
Wired - California Gov. Jerry Brown is vetoing legislation requiring police to obtain a court warrant to search the mobile phones of suspects at the time of any arrest. The Sunday veto means that when police arrest anybody in the Golden State, they may search that person’s mobile phone — which in the digital age likely means the contents of persons’ e-mail, call records, text messages, photos, banking activity, cloud-storage services, and even where the phone has traveled.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)