As President Barack Obama’s first year in office draws to a close, perhaps most In These Times readers feel the same way I do—more disappointed in the new administration and the Democratic Congress than I expected to be, even as I recognize dramatic changes since the Bush administration departed. Yet, I am even more disappointed that we on the left (progressives,… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (34)Page 1 of 1 pagesEvery principle and idea you mentioned is true. Your reasoning and explanations are right on target. So why is it so difficult to bring Liberals and Leftists together?
There is very much misinformation out there and most of the time, readers and viewers do not realize they are being subjected to it.
The recent expose` of the ‘creative’ editing of Fox News footage points to the unethical methods used by those on the right. And we have to ask ourselves, “how long has this type of thing been going on?”
The guy across the street with the Bush-Chaney bumper sticker still on his pick-up truck does just not realize that the reason he hasn’t worked for two years is because his heroes have sold him out. It hasn’t occurred to him that what seemed so ‘American’ was actually a manipulation with an aim to commit un-American acts.
Truth is used as a commodity for those who oppose real change. It is bent, twisted, and distorted and told only when convenient.
Liberals and Leftists must realize this. We must ask more questions, become more involved. Those on the right are becoming more and more desperate. You can see it in the ranting and raving of Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh. They can see their viewer base slipping away. Common sense has made advances and has spurned many of their ‘teachings’.
But as you suggest, now is the time to act aggressively. Now is the time to form a more solid union. Every lie or misrepresentation by these right-wing organizations must not only be exposed, but be researched and examined. I don’t care if remains a media subject for months. Those who make false and irresponsible remarks must be held accountable.
When Sara Palin told of ‘death panels’ while commenting on health reform, she was let off the hook much too easily by those in the media. She should have been grilled, probed, and questioned until she either explained exactly what she meant by her remarks or forced to make a public apology for saying them.
Instead of our responsible journalists bringing her silly statements to light, our President had to address them in a speech. We should be ashamed.
Posted by Eugene Connolly on Dec 22, 2009 at 2:25 AM In concept I agree , but when the rubber hits the road ; I ‘m not so sure….A merika is a extremely racist nation ; zenophobia is a breakfast food , until you deal with these facts , the future is up in the air….
Posted by blackhorse on Dec 23, 2009 at 10:01 PM Additionally , the problem of divide and rule is so deeply rooted in the so-called Amerikan mindset , that any real change has got the originate from grass root movements….Any one who truthfully believed that Obama would or could induce the changes that have to take place is naive , look , I voted for the man ; but I was damn sure that at best all Obama could do was to ” HOLD FAST “....
This system of gov’t in Amerikan , from an historical basis ; has alway been a oligarchy of rich landowning white folks…..These plutocrats have from the very inception of this nation , engauged in the systematic degradation of Afrikan people , not to mention the native populations etc….
Poor whites have been systematically giving privileges that other ethnic groups ; especially afrikans from amerika ; have not….Consequently this climate of elitism , has spread like a cancer , thru out the nation ; for almost 400 years….This indoctrination of the majority population is so complete that the very people; so- called middle class working white folks ; are the ones that have continually reelected politicians such as the Bushes and Reagan , dispite the fact that these are the very politicians that have caused the job loss to that very sector of the Amerikan populations…White skin privilege has render the majority population into idiots , walking , talking , screaming idiots…
They see their status slipping away ; but instead of fighting back in solidarity with the rest of us ; no , these folks go and get their guns and want to intimidate Obama or go fight the oh so dreaded ” terrorists “...
Before any real human , civil or radically leftist movement can take place ; these folks have got to be re-educated as too what is really going down….As the article stated only 20% of the Amerikan population thinks of themselves as liberal , liberal , not progresive , much less radically so…Additionally the same problem is in effect in other so -called ethnic groups…
This ostentatiousness , is a major problem to be overcome…With no systematic reeducational program in place , this could take some time…
Posted by blackhorse on Dec 23, 2009 at 11:12 PM Not to mention the fact that many of these ” ostentatious cripples “, regardless of ethnic or phenotypical differences are indeed quite content in their state of unconsciousness , they will in fact be resentful of any or all attempts at enlightenment , as to and regarding the true state of affairs in their beloved Amerika…
Zenophobia is only the first problem to be tackled , the excesses of nationalistic amerikanizationalism are like an onion ; as you pell back the layers , the more you will cry…
Posted by blackhorse on Dec 23, 2009 at 11:25 PM Blackhorse, I’m glad you mantioned a ‘grassroots’ movement. The first thing that would have to be done is to expose the lies and the liars. The most read, watched and e-mailed stories are the ones where the deceivers are caught and embarrassed and forced to explain their actions. When enough of these are reported and the readers and viewers begin to see the common denominator…when the ‘conspiracy’ is staring them in the face, I believe many on the fence will cross over.
I’m not naive enough to think that racism is not prevelent in our country. Many prejudices run very deep. We may not even know that we have them.
But in these cases, if we can somehow let common sense filter through this racial facade, we will be doing ourselves and our country a favor.
I can’t allow myself to believe that Americans have such short memories. The eight year nightmare of Bush-Chaney just ended a year ago! (Although we’ll be feeling the negative effects for quite some time) Many still believe that our invasion into Iraq was our response to the events of 911.
Can the conservative press be that powerful? Can facts be smothered and erased so easily?
The reason I responded to the term ‘grassroots movement’ is because my second novella, ‘Inheritance’ is based on such a movement. The fictional story runs parallel to the years of the previous administration. I’ll send you a copy of the manuscript if you’d like.
Posted by Eugene Connolly on Dec 24, 2009 at 9:29 AM Leftists, Liberals—and Losers?
Losers, without a doubt.
The failure of socialism worldwide has left egalitarians without a vision of a better economic model since the 1980s. But the implosion of the American economy demonstrates that a free-market approach is deeply flawed, and those who continue to put their faith in the market are as delusional as their counterparts who support central planning.
So, why do you continue trying to ride the dead horse of socialism? You talk as if you prefer a permanent socialist dysfunctional economic system to a proven free market system that works well most of the time, and that only falters when socialist schemes are superimposed on the free market.
The American economic curve has been mostly up (1945-1965, 1983-1995, and 2003-2007), producing healthy gains in jobs, growth, and productivity. The upward curve has been significantly interrupted exactly three times since WWII, each time by Democrats and their socialist schemes.
LBJ’s Great Society set out to make things better and succeeded in making things far worse, giving us seventeen years of economic stagnation with three recessions including the Carter Catastrophe.. Besides Medicare, which is going broke, the War on Poverty began taking hundreds of billions of dollars out of the economy each year ($6.6 trillion over a thirty-year period, $220 billion per year), substantially destroyed Black family life in the USA leading to more drugs and crime, created a swamp of fraud and corruption, and deprived the economy of needed investment capital.
[The arguments in the above paragraph and following paragraphs are graphically illustrated by the DJIA curve, readily accessible on Yahoo. Click on MAX range and CHART SETTING:SCALE:LINEAR.]
Even with the War on Poverty acting as a drag on the economy, Reagan’s reforms and tax cuts stimulated the economy, provided investment capital, and led to the most dynamic growth of jobs and productivity of any nation in history. This clearly indicates the power of the free market, even as the Democrats continued to waste our assets on the War on Poverty rip-off during the Reagan years and up to 1995.
The healthy growth ended abruptly after 1995 and was followed by a period of unhealthy growth. The unhealthy growth saw the DJIA double in four years (1996-1999), from 6000 to 12000, and the NASDAQ go from nowhere to 5000 in the same time frame. Chairman Greenspan commented on the “irrational exuberance” of the markets when the DJIA was at 6000, but neither Greenspan nor Clinton, the only two people in the world who mattered, bothered to tame the wild growth of the economy in the late 1990s. We were facing imminent economic catastrophe, with the DJIA P/E ratio at 45 and the NASDAQ P/E ratio at an astronomical 65. This was the dot.com Bubba Bubble.
[Price/earnings ratios (P/E ratios) are a basic indicator in analyzing financial data. P/E ratios historically average about 13 over a wide range of stocks and markets. A P/E ratio under 7 generally indicates that a stock/market is well underpriced, as at the end of a recession. A P/E ratio over 26 is generally considered very high and unsustainable, with a crash in the offing. The DJIA at 45 and the NASDAQ at 65 in year 2000 were historically unprecedented, except perhaps in the Dutch Tulip Bubble in 1637. In contrast, the Roaring Twenties ended with a P/E ratio of about 30, and was followed by the Great Depression.
http://www.damninteresting.com/the-dutch-tulip-bubble-of-1637]
Posted by scorp on Dec 25, 2009 at 2:47 AM (cont.)
Democrats brag about the surpluses of the Clinton years, and projected indefinite continued growth. Both views are utterly fatuous. Just within the last few weeks on TV, Hillary lamented the interrupted growth of the Bubba Bubble. If you think the economy will double every four years under any Democratic administration, you are crazy. Democratic/Marxist policies historically have created decline, not growth. Since LBJ, the worst president in history, Democratic policies (LBJ, Carter, Clinton, Obama) have led to decline and increasing poverty, Republican policies (Reagan, Bush, Bush) have led to growth and increased jobs.
Clinton did almost nothing to create the excellent economic conditions that he inherited and controlled, and much to destroy a growing economy. The growing economy was from Reagan’s actions, not from Clinton’s actions. The Cold War dividend of reduced military budgets was from Reagan, not from Clinton. Clinton gets credit for signing off on the Republican initiative to end LBJ’s War on Poverty, which was becoming political poison because of the unprecedented waste, fraud, and corruption. Clinton receives discredit for the 1993 tax hike that countermanded the Reagan growth, and that proved disastrous when the Bubba Bubble popped.
And Clinton receives discredit for the Bubba Bubble itself. The NASDAQ fell $2-1/2 trillion before Clinton left office, the vaunted Clinton surplus declined by half in Clinton’s last year in office, and government revenues were in freefall when Clinton left office due to the end of the Bubba Bubble. All of the above statements are easily verified by the historical record, so do not try to argue that it did not happen. Limit your arguments to your cockamamie Marxist nonsense view of history.
So, Bush II did a superb, if not completely original, job of repealing the Clinton tax increases and restoring the Reagan-era growth. This created four years of solid growth in jobs and prosperity until the Democrats’ mortgage follies led to the latest crash.
This latest crash was again characterized by gross fraud and corruption, as when Senators Dodd and Obama and Representative Frank were the chief recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac “campaign contributions”, at a time when Fannie and Freddie were cooking the books in the Democrats’ fraudulent giveaway of expensive mortgages to unqualified borrowers.
If you want to see how this worked (it is very informative and entertaining), read “Closing the Gap: A Guide to Equal Opportunity Lending”, a booklet prepared by FRB Boston and adopted by the Clinton Administration as government policy in 1998. “Closing the Gap” gives detailed instructions on how to violate civil law, how to violate criminal law, how to violate fiscal discipline, how to violate the rules studied in your ECON 101 class, and how to violate common sense so that the government can assist unqualified borrowers to gain fraudulent mortgage loans, all wrapped up in a pretty package stamped “Government Approved”.
LBJ’s Great Society took billions out of the economy, and the economy wient sideways for seventeen years, Obama is taking trillions out of the economy and the effect will be far greater.
So, you should not entertain thoughts of regaining a Democratic majority. It took Carter two or three years to convince the voters that he was feckless, reckless, and clueless, and Obama has done the same thing in a record six months. It will all be downhill from here, Democrats.
Enjoy
Posted by scorp on Dec 25, 2009 at 2:50 AM What are you so afraid of? I’m not going to take away your Mercedes. America was built on certain principles and since the year 2000, these principles have been stepped on, spat upon, and laughed at. Enough is enough.
The only reason the Obama Administration has seen fit to impose regulations is apparent. The amount of greed displayed by big corporations and many wealthy individuals is unbelievable. Banks were not satisfied to provide a fair and reasonable service. They found loopholes and took advantage of every one of them. It is greed, pure and simple…there is no other word for it. I know, I know, this kind of additude has always been present in our country…but not like during George W ‘s tenure. It went off the map…uncontrolled, like some addiction or plague.
Was the invasion of Iraq the ultimate display of greed or was it merely a…macho contest between George Jr. and his old man? All I know is that many wealthy people became a lot wealthier ( and still are ) as a result of the invasion.
It was a ‘perfect storm’; an empty-headed commander-in-chief, a conniving vice-president, a single-minded agenda, and the support of most corporate heads. What did we expect?
I’m not trying to endorse your ‘socialism’ insinuation. If you want to look carefully at the economic trends of the last thirty years, you’ll see that one administration’s policies are not too drastically different from the next.
The incoming president has to play the cards with which he was dealt. He has to react to what mood is out there. He and his Federal Reserve Chairman have to know when to loosen up money and when to reel it in. The economic trend which so many blamed on President Carter was actually slowly developing since the mid-sixties. When Reagan was elected, the economy was actually starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel.
But Obama inherited a disaster. I cannot think of another way to describe it. And anyone who disagrees with that statement is in serious denial. I don’t care what race, color, creed…or social status, or income level or gender you are. At least be true to yourself, for God’s sakes!
George W. Bush left us with a confused, divided country, two wars, a self-destructing economy, massive unemployment, hundreds of thousands of jobs lost to overseas countries, disillusionment of our allies and disrespect throughout the world. He left us with shame and embarrassment following the Katrina disaster and could not even account for the millions of dollars of foreign aid we received from other countries when the disaster hit. He placed us in a very awkward position in our relationship with China, and a very dangerous one with Iran. He was directly responsible for the death, injury or displacement of nearly a million people, including our best and bravest young men and women. And don’t say a word about a ‘Democratic Congress’.
When you are constantly bombarded with lies and half-truths and are already committed to two wars, Congress has very little leverage.
Our President’s only alternative is to impose restrictions and guidelines. If the big banks and corporations can no longer be trusted to perform their services within very liberal parameters, then for the sake of the national interest, they should be closely watched.
This is not called Socialism. It is called Protecting Your Country.
Posted by Eugene Connolly on Dec 26, 2009 at 8:59 AM Eugene -
Well, you have certainly hit all the talking points, in a rather vague manner, but do you have an argument to make? Like, what principles have been violated?
And I am sure you are mistaken about Obama ‘imposing regulations’. The last time Democrats imposed any regulations was when they required, by law, that banks give mortgages to borrowers who had no hope of repaying the money. And then Clinton regulations permitted mortgages to be packaged and securitized. So now we have trillions of dollars in securitized mortgages floating around the world and no one realizes thet the Democrats in Congress have guaranteed that a significant portion of the mortgages are of little worth, and no one knows which mortgages in the packages were good and which were bad. Scary! Like, $50 trillion scary.
And consider the poor bankers. If they did not lend money to unqualified borrowers, they were in violation of the laws of congress. If they did loan the money to unqualified borrowers, they were in danger of not being repaid, as actually happened. And now you call the bankers greedy? For following the Democrats’ cockamamie laws?
President Bush and Senators Hagel and McCain realized the danger in 2003 and tried to reform Fannie and Freddy, but Democrats in congress, led by Senators Dodd and Obama and Representative Frank, blocked the reforms. It is probably only a coincidence that Dodd, Obama, and Frank are the all time winners in the Freddy and Fannie campign donations sweepstakes, at a time when Freddy and Fannie were cooking the books and giving themselves big bonuses.
“All I know is that many wealthy people became a lot wealthier ( and still are ) as a result of the (Iraq) invasion.”
Name two. I can name several. Benan Sevan was the head of the UN Oil for Food program and made out like a bandit. BNP Paribas, the bank that “administered” the Oil for Food funds took in $700 billion. Russia, China, the Russian Orthodox Church, and various friendly journalists got some of Saddam’s oil vouchers and profited handsomely.
And, if the Iraq War was so bad, why did so many Democrats vote for it? It was only later that the Democrats realized that they could score political points by pretending they did not know what it was they were voting for.
“If you want to look carefully at the economic trends of the last thirty years, you’ll see that one administration’s policies are not too drastically different from the next.”
Well, yes, that is true if you ignore the severe downturn when the Bubba Bubble popped and if you ignore the worldwide markets meltdown that followed the Democrats’ “unaffordable housing” program.
“When Reagan was elected, the economy was actually starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel.”
Utter fiction. When Reagan started to squeeze the LBJ and Carter excesses out of the economy, things got significantly worse. Look it up. Democrats complained then that Reagan had made matters worse, and then complained louder when the Reagan reforms created the most economically productive period in world history. The same thing happened when Bush made the smooth and faultless correction of the potentially disastrous Bubba Bubble; Democrats could not stand it and complained incessantly, even though the damage of the Bubba Recession was minimized by Bush’s actions.
“But Obama inherited a disaster.’
Well, in a matter of speaking. The federal deficit gives a close reading of the “disaster” potential of the USA economy. We know that LBJ’s War on Poverty took $6.6 trillion out of the economy and the Democrats’ mortgage follies took an additional $1 trillion. If the Democrats had not wasted all of that money, we would now have the world’s strongest economy, bar none. And Obama is doing everything he can to waste more money when the economy is already anemic.
“This is not called Socialism. It is called Protecting Your Country.”
Naaa. LBJ’s War on Poverty and the Democrats unaffordable housing policies are socialism, and they have accounted for all the damage to our economy.
If you wish to continue this conversation, I must request that you avoid vague, undocumented, and inaccurate comments. Otherwise, why bother?
Posted by scorp on Dec 27, 2009 at 6:25 AM Think of the greatest social movements of the 20th century— the labor movement, civil rights movement, women’s movement, anti-war movement—and ask yourself what’s missing from today’s discussion.
What drove these movements for change? Who led the marches on Washington to MAKE the government hear the people, and who were the foot soldiers of the force for human rights in the US?Give up? Then think (or learn about) the massive Poor People’s marches at the start of the 20th century, and of Great Depression, and again of the 1960s—the three movements of the modern era that caused tremendous social progress in the US.
So what has changed this time around? While the poor have been the foot soldiers, the leading Progressives of the 20th century were their voice. They used the media to inform the masses, enabling the general public to see the appalling conditions that America’s poor periodically suffer, AND to explain how the treatment of the poor impacts every working class citizen. The poor, working class and middle class united to fight for changes to benefit We the Ordinary, rather than just the wealthy.
Then came Reagan and the “Republican Revolution,” which relied heavily on the media. We’ve been subjected to a quarter of a century of anti-poor rhetoric. If something is repeated often enough, people will believe it. no matter how crazy it is. We learned that there is “no real poverty” in the US—it’s merely a lifestyle choice. Worse, we were taught that the poor are actually crafty opportunists who live in comfort off of hard-working Americans. It all defies logic, but we learned to believe it.
So, America’s progressives dumped the poor, the foot soldiers. They remained silent when the safety net was shredded, even though they know we don’t have/never had a full-employment economy. Even in the face of massive homelessness and hunger, today’s progressives didn’t “get it.” They turned their backs on the poor. The poor did “get it.” They’ve been utterly alienated. They know that if they resumed their role as the foot soldiers, taking to the streets, it might benefit those who are fortunate enough to still have steady jobs, but nothing will change for them.
By disregarding the poor, US progressives have dramatically weakened any movement for the changes we absolutely must have if this country is to survive. I think we need to rethink things.
Posted by dhfabian on Dec 29, 2009 at 2:34 PM And to comment on race: Reconsider. Race has been used to keep the poor to middle classes sharply divided. Divide and conquer. This has been done by (as some writers above show) creating a myth that somehow, things are better for poor people who are white. At the same time, whites have been taught that minorities have a stockpile of advantages via affirmative action programs while also enjoying a full safety net of social services—homeless shelters, food pantries, job skills training, etc.
The rural poor often have to make do with no transportation, and emergency aid (homeless shelters, food pantries) is scarce. We have people surviving in abandoned barns without heat and water, or out in the woods. They often have no access to such luxuries as medical and dental care. Minorities don’t know they exist (even though the majority of America’s poor are white), and white people don’t acknowledge their existence. They are isolated, as alone as anyone can get, and there is very little hope left. They are America’s non-people.
Posted by dhfabian on Dec 29, 2009 at 2:59 PM Domhoff makes a good point about liberals and the left uniting, however my 43 plus years in the movement show me that this will be very difficult to do. First of all many liberals enjoy being middle class and are not about to ruffle feathers for poor folks, African American, or Latino people that they themselves view as “not worthy” and certainly not worth losing their status in their respective communities.
A classic example is the ongoing healthcare reform issue. The real left pushed for Medicare For All ( single payer) while the liberals threw in the towel and pushed for the vague ( and now non-existent) public option. As a result both proposals from the Senate and House stink and will NOT benefit anyone other than the HMO monopolies.
As a former democratic party precinct chairman, trade union activist and fighter for social justice since 1965 I can tell you that depending on the Democratic party for change is a serious error. Domhoff is critical of third party candidates, but in reality it is the Democratic Party that deserves to be criticized. Al Gore did not lose the 2000 election because of Nader’s candidacy. He lost because he lacked the balls to clhallenge Bush’s theft of the election and the entire line of Democratic liberals in the Senate refused to come to the aid of the electorate in Florida denied their legal right to vote!
What is badly missing is a viable alternative to the corporate controlled and dominated two party system. Organized labor, civil rights organizations, feminists, gays, REAL liberals, socialists, greens, reds and progressive populists must unite and form a third party free from corporate control! It will not be easy, but it is possible.
Those of us who have worked in mental health are familiar with the saying that states ” Insanity is defined by repeating the same failed thing over and over again expecting change.” For us to cling to the false promises and false hopes of neo-liberals in the Democratic Party will only continue to bring us disappointment and feelings of hopelessness!
Posted by Frank (Pancho) Valdez on Dec 29, 2009 at 5:28 PM The Democratic Party is the place where social movements go to die - just look at the Civil Rights Movement to see a classic example.
The labor movement is in a death spiral in large part because of it’s decades long subordination to the Democrats.
And Brother Domhoff proposes EVEN MORE subordination to the Democrats!
Brother, you have got to be kidding!
We need to take the struggle to the shop floor and to the streets, and, above all, decisively and permanently break with the Democratic Party!
Posted by Gregory A. Butler on Dec 30, 2009 at 1:34 AM Social movements have NEVER begun in the Democratic Party! We have unemployment compensation, Social Security, labor rights (as useless as they currently are) not because of the kindness of Democrats, because workers demanded such!
Back in the 30’s workers were organized and directed by members of the Communist and Socialist parties. These old lefties were well versed in the concept of class struggle, as well as organizing workers based on the WORKER"S needs, not the whims of labor bureaucrats and sell out politicians!
Today labor acts as it it afraid to ruffle feathers and DEMAND real healthcare reform! Labor acts as if it is afraid to offend Obama and the rest of the Democratic Party by DEMANDING labor law reform!
I rest my case. A viable, third party that is controlled by labor, greens, reds, feminists, civil rights activists, progressives and others opposed to continued corporate domination must be organized. The apologists for the democrats will scream and holler that it can’t be done, but it can and that is what they fear the most!
Posted by Frank (Pancho) Valdez on Dec 30, 2009 at 3:40 PM Pancho: unfortunately, most countries in America (I mean the big America, not the USA who call themselves America as if they were the owners of the whole continent)and Europe too are ruled by corportions behind the throne. To make things worse, people who don’t belong to majority parties (usually two in each country) seem not to be able to join forces. What you propose has been my dream for decades but somehow at the time of elections they don’t have the means or the will to get together into a third force but tend to form groups that don’t stand a chance of winning an election. I am afraid the so-called middle class is not much help because they tend to be too busy with their attempts to make money, send their children to private schools and try to reach the “American dream” and prefer to ignore that they are the “useful idiots” of the system many of them criticize but not in a loud enough voice and prefer to ignore the poor.
Posted by Maria on Dec 31, 2009 at 5:51 AM Maria has said what I’ve been trying to say all along, but much more eloquently. But it may be more complicated than it seems. The working middle class are the key to any permanant change, but in today’s culture, it is not as simple as pursuing the ‘American Dream’. It is more like trying to survive. I don’t think it is ignorance or apathy, but a definite preoccupation with trying to keep your family’s head above the water.
Most of us are just scraping to get by. We’ll half-listen to many arguments concerning programs and issues because we honestly don’t have the time. We find ourselves being swayed by opinions that we hear the most and the loudest. We just don’t realize that those points of view belong to the people with the most resources to convey them…the power brokers. And the reason we’re bombarded with these lies, half-truths and innuendoes is that these people have the most to lose if a substantial change occurred.
Look at the ads in this publication; Our president dressed as a doctor, with ‘Obamacare, stop him’, another one depicting the Illinois governor, suggesting ties with the former governor, whose acts he admonished, and even one promoting Ann Coulter.
Why do these ads appear in this magazine? Because many responsible publications are in serious financial trouble these days. They are forced to accept any kind of advertising they can get. They are trying to get by, just like the rest of us.
Maria mentioned that “they don’t have the means or the will” to get together. The ‘means’ is the power and the power is the wealth. So the only way to make a difference is to use our common sense, and ‘will’ it to happen. It ‘s not as silly as it sounds. Look at the last election.
If we hear an anti-administration statement by those on the extreme right, let’s question it. Remember, we voted for the right candidate. We agreed with his visions. Let’s not abandon our principles now that we’ve been heard. I’m not suggesting blind loyalty, I’m pleading for individuality and common sense. Don’t be fooled again.
The actions of the Republican Party after the election remind me of years ago, when the Chicago Bulls beat the Pistons in the finals to advance to the Championship Series. Instead of the members of Detroit’s team congratulating the Bulls, they just walked off the court.
That selfish action didn’t look good for the NBA.
The additude of the Republican party doesn’t look good for our country. Their members act as a group. There is no individuality, no independent thinking. The days of Senator Chuck Hagel are gone.
And if I’m not mistaken, after that snub by the Piston players, the Bulls went on to win six championships in the next eight years.
Posted by Eugene Connolly on Dec 31, 2009 at 9:20 AM Dear Maria;
At the rate things are going the so-callee middle class will cease to exist. Then they will have to concern themselves about putting food on the table, paying the utilities, cutting back on their spending, just like most of us have had to over the past 8-9 years. I’m not trying to be sarcastic, just realistic.Yes, most Latin American and Europiean countries are controlled by corporations to one degree or another. However in France or Italy the workers will not tolerate extremism from the bosses or government! Massive general strikes shut the country down until the government agrees to either cease and desist from their errant ways or at least negotiate a compromise. That is power. Power that comes from having viable Left parties such as the Communist or Socialist parties.
Eugene, it’s not just the Republicans that are screwing us. The neo-libs from the Democratic Party are just as much to blame. Given the fact that both parties accept bribes… oops I meant campaign contributions from the corporate monster, our chance for needed change is slim if at all. I am very disappointed with Obama’s performance thus far. He could have been the best president we have ever had, but he has chose to prove the theory that it doesn’t matter what color the political leader’s skin is. What truly matters is whose class interests is he/she protecting?
Posted by Frank (Pancho) Valdez on Dec 31, 2009 at 3:36 PM Damn….There was a whole lottaof talkin’ goin on while the ’ horse was away….And double damn , Scorp is on the snoop , looking for the light at the bottom of the well…
Hi Maria , I see you are in on this subject , too , excellent….
Eugene , I do agree that a grass roots movement is keg , but I am not so sure about the ” hearts and minds ” rhetoric…..What has to be understood is that the indoctrination that I mentioned has been in effect for so long ; hundreds of years ; and the lack of media outlets to truthfully challenge these misconceptions is nowhere to be found…
.Additionally , folks would rather watch amerikan idiol , instead of doing the research that is needed to debunk all of that , what I call Amerikanizationalism…Folks don’t like to hear about how bad the gov’t is treating them , they would rather tune out…Point in fact , this guy scorp has been posting his own particular brand of neo-conservative , militaristic minded propaganda for years… You think this guy is going to stop ? ? ? No , he will not , and no amount of intellectually based arguments or discussions will change the guy…Amerika is full of these nut cases ; the universities turn them out like some kind of assembly line production….
Understand , I do agree with you Eugene , but I believe that the methods used to bring about the social reforms that are needed , have been neutralized , ie the 60’s civil and human rights movements…Remember , every leader of that movement , whether a neo-liberalist like the Kennedys or a radical leftist such as the Fred Hamptons of the world , every leader was either assassinated or jailed unlawfully…. Neutralized…
This fact has to be examined thoughtfully and completely , because the forces at be will kill the man , so we have to understand how to continue the plan….This is the truth of the 60’s movements , that the movement was neutralized , using military tactics , murder and deceit…..
Hey ,I didn’t mean to be so goom and doom, but the facts are what they are , true….
Posted by blackhorse on Jan 4, 2010 at 10:48 PM It is descouraging but understandable. The USA has been sending troops to and fro, and right now have a few new targets on the list, always on false pretenses of dangers, while the rest of the population have been carrying on with their lives as if nothing was happening. When I see CNN en Espańol I have the impression of watching a science-fiction film, with all the news about Wall Street, Christmas shopping, sports, and home care, specialists of all sorts teaching how to cook, how to lose weight, how to do your purchases through the net, and one can’t help wondering whether the United States society is not schizophrenic, as you don’t see anybody showing concern for being at war, for being responsible for a great share of the contamination of the planet, for the manipulation of what went on in Honduras, for the lack of respect shown in Copenhaguen and, before that, in Kyoto, for the fears spread around the planet regarding the flu pandemia which suddently ceased to be talked about, once the sale of vaccines for millions of dollars was accomplished. It is hard for me to understand the lack of concern people show for the rest of the world, specially knowing that the USA is responsible for many of the dramas and deaths which have been suffered in distant, and not so distand countries.
Such a selfish behaviour cannot produce any results, but astonishment and repulse in people who still believe a different kind of world would be possible, should we all take our share of responsibility and acted in a compassionate way.
Posted by Maria on Jan 5, 2010 at 4:51 AM Maria , first hello….Secondly , what nation is your flag ? ? ? And third , you hit the nail right on the head….Living in the States is indeed a trip , any true , serious conversation about current affairs is look at as extremely uncool , boring or folks think that because you don’t have a professional degree in a particular subject of interest , you don’t know what you are talking about…
Posted by blackhorse on Jan 5, 2010 at 11:23 PM Case in point is that guy Rick Maifeld on the Honduran conversation….He and Natalie will argue to no end on pionts of fact that can be clearly seen and or understood by the naked eye or thru plain common sense…Rick does not know that the Federal Reserve is a privately owned corporation , he challenged the Blackhorse to ” prove it “...Well I gave him a list of the banks that own the Fed , nothing back from the guy…Nataliie is worse , but this is the mainstream status quo in the Amerika…Don’t think or reason , ah no , react , be a reactionary , be afraid , be zenophobic and definitely , be a bigoted , self hating wannabe capitalist…..
Posted by blackhorse on Jan 5, 2010 at 11:37 PM Blackhorse, the flag shown in my comment doesn’t belong to the country I have been living in for some years, which is Costa Rica, though I am Argentine. Unfortunately, what you say of your country is pretty much the same here too.
Ideals, compromise, free thinking, cooperation instead of competitivity is absolutely out of fashion, but the worst part is I can’t help feeling that it’s as if the human brain is shrinking, probably because anyone with a clear mind can’t help seeing where we are heading to, and prefer to look at their own navels because it’s less painful.
I’ve worked very hard all my life, since the age of 16 but never kept my mouth shut before unjustice, which turned me into a nuisance and, of course, a loser by present standards but I have no regrets, since I never cared to make money or have power because the price is too high and I was never ready to pay for it. It was nice meeting you again.
Keep your chin up and let’s go on with our battle.
Posted by Maria on Jan 6, 2010 at 4:38 AM After viewing blogs from this topic and on other web sites it appears as if the “Chicago Wonder Boy” (Obama) has lost some of his appeal. Again I reiterate I voted for him hoping to see change. All I have seen thus far is bulls..t! More corporate giveaways, more corrupted politicos, more excuses to prolong both wars, more stalling of needed efforts to save our environment, not much left over for the people!
I have also seen a growing expression of the need for a third party alternative to the corruption we have now. The question remains when do we put it together? Where and when? Who is willing to do it? The choice is ours and solely ours to make. Never in the history of the U.S. has it been more obvious that our electoral system DOES NOT WORK!
The great Mexican revolutionary General Emiliano Zapata is credited with having made famous the following phrase: “Prefiero morir de pie, que vivir de rodillas!” Translation: “I would rather die fighting standing on my feet than to live on my knees!” How many of us are that committed to struggling for justice?
Posted by Frank (Pancho) Valdez on Jan 6, 2010 at 7:00 PM Pancho, while reading your last comment I couldn’t help but smiling, as to the left of my computer I have a photo of Emiliano Zapata (one of my heroes). Old as I am I would be willing to follow or rather cooperate with a man of his worthiness, but although I know there are many valuable people all over the world who could lead the very much needed change, , the corporate system will continue their distracting tactics so they have no voice.
As to your previous definition of “insanity”, I am afraid it suits me and my ideas, so I will cease pretending I am a sane old woman, while deep inside me I feel proud of not having lost hope, despite everything tends to show me I am wrong. Love.
Posted by Maria on Jan 6, 2010 at 8:33 PM Maria, it is not a sign of mental illness to have hope and the desire to see needed change. It is only insane when we continue to follow false leaders and political parties such as the Democrats.
In Mexico there is a saying that goes like this; “Sufres por que quieres!” Translation: “You suffer, because you want to!”
I do not wish to suffer and see my children or unborn grandchildren suffer as I have and my parents before me. Therefore I agitate, I educate and I try to organize. Perhaps I will catch a bullet in the head for my efforts, but at least I will go down fighting!
Viva La Causa! Abajo con los pinche capitalistas!
Posted by Frank (Pancho) Valdez on Jan 6, 2010 at 11:02 PM I think you haave taken the only possible and noble way to live, Pancho.
As a matter of fact, I have been twice to Mexico, visiting my daughter and two grandchildren.. The youngest one was born there, so I am very proud of having a Mexican grandson.
VIVA LA CAUSA. Lots of love.
Posted by Maria on Jan 6, 2010 at 11:47 PM I am utterly contemptuous of all Marxists/ communists/ socialists/ leftists/ “Progressives”/ “Liberals”/ free-thinkers or whatever label that you are now calling yourselves. What are you, having an identity crisis?
I am sure you are equally contemptuous toward me, no problem.
All these labels have become part of your problem. When you fail to win your goals under one label, you create or steal a different label. The “Liberal” and “Progressive” labels are stolen property. The Bill of Rights to the Constitution and the Second Amendment are liberal. President Theodore Roosevelt was a leading progressive. Both liberal and progressive are near-polar opposites of Marxism. It took decades, but the American people, at least, are now coming to understand that if it quacks like a Marxist and waddles like a Marxist, it is a Marxist.
The reasons for my contempt are the universal failures of the Marxist concept. At the most basic level, workers of the world were supposed to unite. Never happened, workers weren’t interested (maybe the Wobblies in the USA and a few workers’ groups in Europe, but that is it, and none of them were notably successful or enduring). Elitists, such as yourselves (and Marx), then took it upon themselves to create the revolution in behalf of the workers. That was stupid. Workers at least had the benefit of practical experience, even if they were not interested in world revolution. Elitists have no practical experience, and know nothing about governance. Lenin, Castro, and Obama were lawyers, Mao and Kim were warlords, Guevara was a doctor. None of them know the difference between a spanner and a double-jack, much less how to run a country. And when they tried, they only developed a talent to consume resources and people, not to advance social and economic progress. Social Democrats are no better at running a country, but mercifully without all the dead bodies laying around.
Regardless, I am amused/bemused by the displeasure expressed above on this thread toward Obama, Democrats, and neo-libs (neo-Marxists). Does nothing make you happy?
Are you becoming aware, however dimly, that Marxism does not work? Probably not. Historically, true believers have blamed Marxist failures on inadequate Marxist practitioners rather than the faulty Marxist concept. Each of you will turn / is turning viciously against Obama for his perceived inadequacies in establishing the Marxist paradise, and it will not sink in that the Marxist concept is flawed. You will search for another, more pure, Marxist to lead you. And after 150 years your search will again be fruitless and again you will have learned nothing.
I want to explore Maria’s ideas on cooperation versus competition. Both are universal complementary human traits, even if Maria does not like competition. Think of football teams, soccer or NFL. Cooperation is required to build a winning team in a competitive environment. There is no incentive to work hard toward a goal without the cooperative and competitive elements. American Indians played lacrosse over miles of territory, and called it the “little brother of war”, in lieu of actual warfare. Zapata was not competitive?
Each of you have, or have access, to a computer. Computers are the product of a competitive industrial environment. Has the Soviet Union or any Marxist state ever produced anything equivalent? Of course not. Marxists use their cooperative energy to build regimentation and bland and smothering uniformity, and their competiitve energy on internal disputes (Bolsheviks versus Mensheviks) and on suppressing dissent which is in competition with the Marxist world view. Workers were more likely to be killed or suppressed under Marxism than to lead the Marxist
revolution And millions died in the process.If Maria is so opposed to competition will she give up her computer in solidarity with the ideals of the Soviet Union? Probably not. The Marxist plan failed to create a workable state in the Soviet Union, so the current plan is to seize a workable state and turn it to Marxism. You can see the results in Venezuela, where Chavez has destroyed a workable economy based on energy. Now Obama is trying to do the same thing in the USA, and you do not like the results.
The Constitution of the United States of America was not a casual effort. It was the enlightened product of the Enlightenment, a growing process that recognizes human rights and balances the rights of individuals and of groups. Cooperative efforts within the Constitutional context are democratic, and include elections, the House of Representatives, and the Executive function. Competitve efforts within the Constitution are republican, and include the senate, as origiinally established before the Seventeenth Amendment disrupted the equation, and the Electoral College. The judiciary is elitist, at least in those areas where judges are appointed and not elected. States Rights are republican and the rights of the people and of the States were given primacy in the Constitution, but these rights have largely been usurped by the growng democratic mob rule that the Founding Fathers feared. The Constitution was designed to finely balance cooperative and competitive / democratic and republican elements to give a workable and enduring result.
Whatever you have to say about the American system, it has endured and has brought economic progress and political freedom to billions of people wordwide. One-hundred years ago, there were less than twenty democracies in the world. Now the number is approaching one-hundred fifty, mostly inspired or coerced (Germany, Japan) by the United States of America. Exactly zero have been inspired by Marxism, unless you want to count the Democratic Peoples Republics of Korea, Cuba, and Venezuela as democracies.
The Constitution established a huge playing field and an indefinite time frame for the “little brother of war” and war itself that is the American political process, as highlighted by the Tariff of Abominations that was the real cause of the War Between the States, the various declared and undeclared foreign wars, the Great Depression, racial and sexual emancipation and suffrage, the LBJ social and economic disaster that led to the Reagan Revolution, and now the Obama Marxist effort with which you are unhappy. It has been a great show, and I am happy to have observed and partcipated.
But I still do not understand your continued attempts to ride the dead horse of Marxism, and your beating the dead horse in your frustration. What is the point? What is it that locks you into a failed system? Do tell, I am urgenly in need of understanding.
Not that I expect a coherent statement from follwers of an incoherent philosophy. Maria was once going to enlighten me on global warming, but thought better of it. From her statements above she still believes in the faulty global warming concept, even as those of us north of the border are subject to record cold, a trend that began eleven years ago. The climate cycles have been endless, regardless of Marxist diktats that we are in a period of perpetual global warming.
Posted by scorp on Jan 8, 2010 at 8:18 PM I believe the ‘identity crisis’ is what got this discussion started in the first place. So we’ve now come full circle.
I came across a paper which my daughter wrote over a year ago for one of her college courses. It may sum up how many of us feel.(She is quoting Marx’s Communist Manifesto, I believe)
“In the place of the old bourgeois society, with its classes and class antagonisms, we shall have an association in which the free development of each is the free development of all” (Marx 20)
I’m not sure why, but this quotation by Karl Marx disturbs me the most. I think its the way he uses the word ‘free’. I’ve always known that Communism takes away a person’s individuality. And individuality has nothing to do with land or property. It’s our freedom to think and dream.
Capitalism works. It provides opportunity for all. It is based on the idea of free enterprise and profit motive.
But judging by what we now know, the last six or seven years brought a severe break in the concept of Capitalism. It somehow lost its integrity. It was replaced with dishonesty and greed. My generation must never allow this happen again.Sara Connolly
Lost its integrity, indeed.
Posted by Eugene Connolly on Jan 9, 2010 at 6:26 AM The competitive industrial environment you speak of is often in the form of subsidies and investments of public funds to corporations and the military who produce the gadgets we employ.
The public pays the upfront costs of development and the profits then are collected by the corporate entity.
The free market story is another sham, tell it like it is..exploitation of resources and labor in the advancement of profit.
Further, what separates the greedy from those who are concerned about the world we leave our children is not so much ideology but compassion. The same compassion the right scoffs at, and tars us with as weak.
If we don’t soon realize that we are all in this together, we will surely destroy civilzation.
Posted by IBEW 108 on Jan 9, 2010 at 2:21 PM Eugene, IBEW -
Competing individuals and competing groups are universal. The question is how to treat the competitive (and cooperative) urges, how to minimize unfairness, and how to maximize individual opportunity and growth.
IBEW, why did you choose for your example of a competitive industrial environment “investments of public funds to corporations and the military”? Why not choose Obama’s socialist expropriation of GM and Chrysler, and his giving the stolen properties to his supporters in the UAW? Or perhaps you could have chosen Representative Murtha and his multiple fraudulent earmarks and ethical investigations.
We can play this game all day, to no good effect. Now look at Government Motors. Detroit autos were in trouble, all other American auto manufacturers were not in trouble eighteen months ago, before the big crash. Ford maintained its independence and is thriving (relatively), GM and Chrysler continue to sink. Few want to buy a Government Motors product because of the taint of socialism, among other things. GM and Chrysler will fail, at a cost of billions of dollars to the taxpayers and to the workers involved. There were laws to handle this type situation, and the law was ignored in favor of criminal expropriation.
The “investments of public funds to corporations and the military” are legal, if or if not wise. The Government Motors case was outright extralegal theft. The objective rule of law has held quite well in the United States of America where we can “throw the bums out” (Jimmy Carter comes to mind) when they violate our laws or our values.
The current problem with Obama and the Democrats is that they are using both legal and extralegal methods to install a system that favors one group - themselves. This is the way Marxist states always end up. The dictatorship of the proletariat becomes the dictatorship. Coupled with the Marxists are the Chicago mobs in an unholy alliance. Should we be concerned that the executive power of the United States government is invested in a person that violates the laws, violates his campaign promises, is allied with the most corrupt political mob in America, and wants to change the Constitution to solidify his Marxist/mob philosophy?
Marxists historically divide people by class, promote class warfare, seize power, and then betray their supporters to seize absolute power for themselves: Lenin killed the kulaks, Stalin killed the military officers and the party hacks, Mao starved the peasants, the Viet Minh killed the Viet Cong, and most of the haunted and haunting pictures of the victims of Tuol Sleng were lower order communist cadre. ( I have been to Tuol Sleng and the Killing Fields. Check out the victims’ pictures in order to understand what Marxism is really about.)
Eugene, I appreciate your daughter’s take on the problem. But everytime there is a hiccup in the system, everyone thinks that “capitalism” is failing. Capitalism has worked quite well for most of our times. Since WWII, we have created the envy of the world for jobs and growth, with steady appreciation of individual and national well-being. When capitalism is allowed to function, it functions very well. But imposing socialist burdens on a capitalist system leads to less than optimum results.
LBJ and the Democrats created the first hiccup when they began taking hundreds of billions of dollars out of the system each year for their inefficient Medicare system an their utterly wasteful and corrupt War on Poverty. That disaster substantially destroyed Black family life in the United States, the poverty rate barely moved, markets went flat for seventeen years with three recessions, and the total cost of the War on Poverty now equals half of our national debt. You cannot abuse a system on that scale without causing major problems.
The second hiccup was the Bubba Bubble / Bubba Recession. The markets were allowed to rise far too high in a speculative bubble in 1996-1999. The NASDAQ bubble popped in January 2000, and NASDAQ lost $2-1/2 trillion dollars before President Clinton left office. Removing that amount of money from the economy was damaging, but this was plain vanilla stupidity, not socialist stupidity.
The third hiccup was the Democrats’ mortgage follies. The housing bubble was fueled by the socialist sub-prime mortgages, a plan to help the poor own housing / a plot to impoverish the world (take your pick). The popping of the housing bubble, coupled with the inflated national debt, led to a system meltdown.
I note with interest that both the Democrats’ War on Poverty and their unaffordable housing policies were designed to favor the poor, and ended hurting everyone, the poor most of all. Good intentions can take you a long way in Democratic Party circles, and to a Marxist Hell.
There are many ways that the capitalist system could (and should) be improved, but conflating capitalist successes with Marxist catastrophes is not one of them.
Posted by scorp on Jan 9, 2010 at 4:52 PM Scorpy , you and I both know capitalism is a died dog….The problem with the capitalist model is that it is too absolute…
So-called socialism , is a false flag ideology also ,because folks such as yourself take an all or nothing approach to everything…Your industrail military complex ideology , kills both dogs , whether socialist or capitalist….
The key is moderation , balance ; profit is ok , but when the situation gets to the point where gov’t is selling is soul for a fist full of dollars ; thats fascism , you know ; the corporate controll of gov’t…..If your house is burning down and you call the fire dept. , you don’t what them showing up at your house ; and the first thing the fireman asks isn’t where’s the fire , but instead ; “will that be viza or mastercharge ??? “; No ; you what the fire put out….
You examples are the same old rhetoric , you don’t like facsist gov’t policies when they are implemented by the so-called left , but when your little right-wing neo-cons want to prop up the military contractors , this Blackhorse knows for sure ; scorpy has nothing but praise and salutations….
None of these policies are sustainable ; and you know this , man , but like all right-wing neo-conservative sympathizers , you pass the buck…
Hey ; if you don’t like the so-called Obama bailouts , pull your money out of the big banks and place it in a smaller local bank or a locally owned credit union…THE CAPITALIST HAVE BEEN PLAYING THIS GAME FOR A LONG TIME….All excuses are just that ; an excuse to continue with the same ol’ status quo…
Posted by blackhorse on Jan 12, 2010 at 11:26 PM Pancho and Maria….Blackhorse thinks that Obama is probably looking at his wife right now and thinking…” sweets , why didn’t you talk me out of running for this job…” The situation in Amerika is such that no individual , ” especially the first president of the US that is openly a man of color,[ there have been other presidents of color but they all passed for white] ,“can do anything to help the common citizen….
The state of affairs is so corrupt that , right now all this guy can do is untangle the knot of bullshit Buckfush { thats f_ck Bush } has left after his 8 long , long , long years in the oval office….
My own personal belief is that , Obama will need the first 4 years in office to bring stablity back to the gov’t , then if he can beat the likes of the Scorps in the world and win a second term , we might and I mean might or maybe , possibly see a more leftist leaning Obama policy wise…
One thing is clear about Obama , and that is that he doesn’t like to let the left hand know what the right hand is doing….I don’t want to sound too hopefull though , but at that level of gov’t , it’s all you can hope for…
Amerikan so-called democracy has never been a reality , so it really doesn’t make much sense now to think it will change anytime soon..Unless of course the people rise up and demand a different sort of gov’t , which at this time seems unlikely…
Blackhorse will repeat the same advice that I gave to the scorp , and that is ; we need to pull our money out of these large internationalist banking concerns , and place it in smaller locally run banks…I have some info on this , and will post on this subject next time I am on this site…
Until then ” the stuggle continues “......true
Posted by blackhorse on Jan 12, 2010 at 11:57 PM Scorpy, answer me this, I guess I’m thick in the head. How does a President who spends, lends, or promises 12,13,14 TRILLION Dollars to Wall Street get painted as a socialist?
Would not an investment such as that go to the masses in a true socialist state?
By the way, I do believe our society is divided by class such as the Marxist model you described. And our pictures?
JFK
RFK
MLK
Cross the master of war…..
Just asking.
Posted by IBEW 108 on Jan 13, 2010 at 10:59 AM IBEW -
Scorpy, answer me this, I guess I’m thick in the head. How does a President who spends, lends, or promises 12,13,14 TRILLION Dollars to Wall Street get painted as a socialist?
Would not an investment such as that go to the masses in a true socialist state?
In respect for your self-acknowledged cranial density, I will limit my answer to words of one syl-la-ble
There has absolutely, positively, never, ever been a “true socialist state”. Marx hypothesized a situation where the workers seized power and controlled everything, making politicians, priests, and capitalists superfluous. Marx was not a worker, and did not check with the workers on his grand scheme. The workers were not interested in initiating worldwide revolution, and never have been.
Marx was an elitist, good at creating hypothetical constructs totally divorced from reality. But elitists are good at promising workers stuff that cannot be delivered, in order to gain the workers’ support for the elitists’ goals. So the elitists decided to start the Marxist revolution themselves, nominally on behalf of the workers. That was stupid, because elitists are devoid of practical experience in governance.
All elitist Marxist states (the only kind that has ever existed) end up being run by people who do not know what they are doing, and who will sacrifice all workers, all material, and all principles to achieve short-term goals.
The signature characteristics of Marxist states are operational inefficiency and institutional corruption. The Soviet Union died of operational inefficiency and institutional corruption, and China only delayed that fate after President Nixon introduced free markets to China. China has not solved all its problems, because it refuses to adopt democracy and the rule of law, the other two legs of the troika that drives a modern, successful economy.
Meanwhile, the USA keeps playing with the Democratic Partys’ socialist schemes, and is thereby wrecking its economy. We would have no economic crisis if there were no national debt.. LBJ’s War on Poverty had a cost, $6.6 trillion, that is over half the current national debt. Another $1 trillion is traced directly to the Democrats’ unaffordable housing scheme. Those are hard numbers, and easily confirmed. Less easily confirmed are the costs of the wasteful, inefficient Medicare bureaucracy. Both the War on Poverty and the unaffordable housing program died of Marxist inefficiency and corruption, and American taxpayers paid the cost. But the Democrats are doing their damnedest to expand Medicare. Like the War on Poverty and the unaffordable housing gig, the Democrats in Congress will treat Medicare as their private ATM, and the taxpayers will have to pay for that, as well.
How does a President who spends, lends, or promises 12,13,14 TRILLION Dollars to Wall Street get painted as a socialist?
The Soviet nomenclatura lived like kings while the workers lived in oppressive near poverty, that is when they were not being starved, or locked up in the gulag, or being executed. If you think you are going to get anything out of Obama you are crazy. Only people who are politically useful to Obama will profit. But then you are a member of the IBEW, so you are politically useful to Obama. Enjoy your temporary status, because the revolution is coming.
Posted by scorp on Jan 14, 2010 at 6:55 AM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by G. William Domhoff
- Leftists, Liberals—and Losers?
How and why progressives must unite for real change. - Not a Dead Ender
- Can Radicals Be Liberals, Too?
- Which Side Are We On?
Redefining Who’s Us and Who’s Them - Playing the Market
The start of a new egalitarian politics might be found where you least expect it - Greens or Green (Egalitarian) Democrats? continued
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1979 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
427 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2009 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
