2010 EDITORIALS
TIME TO GO
THE TOXIC WAVE
THE INFAMOUS 45
UPPING ANXIETY
HIGH UNEMPLOYMENT
THE TIME IS
COMING
BAD DECISION
QUESTIONS FOR
OBAMA
A COMMENCEMENT ADDRESS FOR TODAY
GLOBAL IGNORANCE
NO JOBS
EXPANDING THE CIRCLE OF INFAMY
2010
TIME TO GO
Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell, should get his
wish. It
is time for President Obama to be replaced, at least by 2013. The last
straw was his "deal" over extending the Bush tax cuts which Obama
described as a compromise but which was much closer to copitulation.
The negotiaton process to reach the "best deal that I could get" has
become all too familiar as Obama recognized when he compared it to the
health care Public Option proposal. First, give away something that
could be used as an opening bargining chip, in this case the federal
employee pay freeze, in that case never putting Single Payer on the
table. Then signal that he would compromise to get a deal even if
Republicans wouldn't budge. His concilatory approach was seen as
weakness and McConnell, along with his 40+ Senate Republican zombies,
who care nothing about the good of the country, took full advantage.
With the right wing about to control the House, the prospects for more
extortion and more concessions are bright.
Obama's justification for the cave-in, in a press conferece to face
down disgruntled Dems (Dems that Obama didn't include in the
negotiations), was that he wouldn't hurt middle class tax payers. But
no mention was made about hurting their children who will have to pay
for this tax break for the wealthy under what will likely be even
harsher circumstances. Then again those tykes don't vote yet. There is
also the duplicity of saving unemployment payments for those about to
run out but not getting any extension of benefits for the so-call
99ers. We all know that those 2 year tax cut extensions will now be
extended indefinitely but the unemployment entension is only for 13
months, setting up another hostage situation.
Lawrence O'Donnell defended the deal by saying that tax rate hikes for
lower end tax payers could not be legislatively reversed in the next
session of congress (assuming that the tax cuts were allowed to expire)
and that the pain was unacceptable. No one challenged him with the
prospect of just mailing out checks which would roughly cover the take
home loses, but no checks would go to the wealthy. When faced with the
appropriate heat, would House Speaker Boehner deny legislating that
middle class relief? If coupled with extended relief for the wealthy,
Republicans would face prominent public ire, as indicated by the polls.
The onus would be squarely on them instead of Obama and the Dems
getting much of this blame. Or the Fed could do it, using some of their
bond buying money. Apologists suggested that more tax relief went to
those below the top 2% and that would act as some stimulus. But it is
widely recognized that tax cuts do not effectively create jobs when
compared to direct government spending, stimulus spending that could
come from that tax revenue. And, in any case, what about the deficits?
Aren't we still supposed to be reducing them? \The President has done
some good things but his Dr. Jeckel, Mr. Hyde personality has resulted
in a man we cannot trust. His campaign rhetoric was inspiring and given
the choice between Obama and McCain, he had to be selected even without
any track record of national accomplishment nor evidence of governing
capability. But the "change we can believe in" and "yes we can" has
become much more like Bush redux and no we can't.
Obama's foreign policy differs little from Bush's. More troops in
Afghanistan and hands off Pakistan. North Korea remains beligerant
while it accumulates more nuclear bombs. The Palistanian situation
remains unresolved as more Israeli settlements are built. Burma
continues its repression. China continues to support rogue regimes and
eats our economic lunch. Iran continues to fester. None of this differs
from what Bush has, or would have done.
But it is not nearly as easy to give Obama a pass on domestic issues.
Of the 3 main objectives he addressed, no satisfactory remedies have
been established. The Bush initiated bank bailout staved off depression
but the unaccompanied regulation left the too-big-to-fail banks even
bigger, derivatives underregulated and a smoldering pile of toxic
assets still in place. Big banks still avoid stimulating the economy
and the foreclosure mess continues to hold down housing values. The
stimulus was too small, devoted too much to tax cuts rather then direct
spending and its benefits went under publicized. The Affordable Care
Act, derivisively called "Obama Care" puts no certain constraints on
premium escalation while requiring everyone to sign up for insurance.
Increasing medical efficiencies to lower costs were unaddressed as was
the employer provider-patient disconnect when it comes to using only
needed services. Climate change legislation has been forgotten. Energy
independence is just a talking point. DADT remains in effect as does
the gun show loophole.
However, Obama can be legitmately impeached and removed for violating
his oath of office--to uphold the law. It is clear that Bush and Cheney
and their administration officials committed serious illegalities when
ordering torture and warentless wire taps. Nigeria wants Cheney for
bribery. Other offenses are likely to surface with proper
investigation. But the lack of prosecution also includes the
bank/housing fraudsters who almost brought down the whole economy. This
is playing out as people are being thrown out of their homes by bank
agents who may not even have rightful title to the properties! Allowing
Obama to get away with this only permits a new lower standard of
Presidential accountability in the future.
Finally, any real change we could believe in would have to start with
going hard after the corruption that pervades Washington and is
centered in congress. Even the apparence of bribery should be grounds
for quick explusion as it diminishes trust.
Now is the time to start headhunting for a true progressive (with
spine) alternative for a 2012 primary challenge. Any decent Republican
candidate for president will beat Obama now that he has abandoned his
base and blown up his credibility. Even if he is reelected, there are
no signs that McConnell and Republicans won't continue to "walk him
like a dog" as one commentator put it. The dream is broken, it is time
to cut our loses.
December 9, 2010
JBM
GO BACK TO TOP
THE TOXIC WAVE
National polls clearly indicated that jobs and the
economy,
including home foreclosures, have been the top priority for governments
to address. So voters across the nation, in their collective "wisdom",
ushered in a wave of political sludge that will further gum up the
works in Washington, making it, and us, meaner and weaker--if we are
lucky. Worse still would be that they get their way; that Obama and
Dems allow the right wing to take us into another, even deeper
recession if not an outright depression.
The Conservative mantra this year, led by the Tea Party, has been to
cut government spending and get it out of our lives--while it creates
jobs. But cutting government spending means cutting government jobs.
Unemployed government employees will have less to spend on goods and
services, business will slow and more private sector jobs will be lost.
And without another stimulus, state governments are going to cut still
more jobs. What the dolts can't seem to understand is that without the
previous stimulus the official unemployment rate would have been
significantly higher than 9.6.
And cutting government jobs will reduce the governments ability to
regulate business so if Conservatives have their way there will be more
Wall Street fraud, more oil spills or other "accidents", more tax
cheats etc.. Without more spending on infrastructure we will witness
continued degradation and inefficiency, making us even less
competitive.
The GOP mantra always involves cutting taxes, especially for the super
rich. Cutting taxes allows beneficiaries to "invest" in the stock
market and firms who will continue to shift workers overseas in order
to maximize short term profits and returns. Major corporations have
been the chief way the private sector channels income and wealth to the
top 1%--at the expense of the middle class. Targeted spending is much
more efficient at creating jobs which will benefit the country for
years to come. Of course, Republicans can't be deficit hawks and tax
cutters at the same time except in front of the excessively stupid.
Voters should have kept in mind that the economic mess was inherited by
the party they put back in charge of the House, that the impending
House majority leader brooks no compromise and that the Senate minority
leader wants to end the Obama presidency in 2012 first and foremost,
regardless of the damage it might do to the country. So unless Dems do
exactly what they are told by these types->gridlock; at least on the
core issues.
Some say that gridlock is okay. What they don't want to conjure with is
that circumstances change and that an increasingly out of step,
inflexible government will only have bigger problems to deal with
later. We've seen a lot of that already.
But specifically: Do Republican voters really believe that less
regulated banks will stop throwing people out of their homes after they
sold them improvident, if not deceitful loans?
Do they really believe that repealing the American Care Act will make
us a healthier nation?
Do they really believe that shrinking the government will bring back
jobs? The answer seems to be yes; and that is the bigger problem.
November 3, 2010
JBM
GO BACK TO TOP
THE INFAMOUS 45
There is no question that Washington, actually the
congress,
actually the Senate, has failed to address the ongoing problems that
continue to grow around us. Economic concerns are in the forefront but
are not exclusive. Everybody is pointing fingers but many of the truly
reprehensible culprits, those directly responsible for stopping or
stalling remedies that would benefit most Americans, are rarely outed
for all to see. This has been a huge Democratic mistake as many
citizens don't even know the names of those who would destroy the
country we wish we had. Here is the list:
Lamar Alexander, John Barrasso, Robert F. Bennett, Christopher S. Bond,
Scott Brown, Sam Brownback, Jim Bunning, Richard Burr, Saxby Chambliss,
Tom Coburn, Thad Cochran, Susan Collins, Bob Corker, John Cornyn, Mike
Crapo, Jim DeMint, John Ensign, Michael Enzi, Lindsey Graham, Chuck
Grassley, Judd Gregg, Orin Hatch, Kay Baily Hutchison, James Inhofe,
John Isakson, Mike Johanns, Jon Kyl, George LeMieux, Richard Lugar,
John McCain, Mitch McConnell, Lisa Murkowski, James Risch, Pat Roberts,
Jeff Sessions, Richard Shelby, Olympia Snow, John Thune, David Vitter,
George Voinovich and Rodger Wicker are all Republican Senators who have
stood as one to keep America in decline (Scott Brown joined the list
this year). /You may recognize some of the names of the worst Senators:
minority leader McConnell is right on top; against any proposal that
doesn't directly benefit the super rich but many are close behind,
including DeMint, Coburn, Inhofe, McCain, Kly and Hatch. Others are so
obscure that many residents of their own states can't even name them.
But they all have one vote and that vote has been cast to abuse the
filibuster and rule by minority. The result has been the demise of
compromise and hundreds of pieces of legislation sent over from the
House which have been left to die. This do-nothing nihilism for
expected political gain has brought out the Tea Partiers who have been
corralled and co-opted by the plutocrats and thrust into the political
arena to supply frightful and disturbing incompetency.
Voters in some states stand out as significantly detrimental to our
overall welfare: Oklahoma, Kentucky and South Carolina have provided
the worst of the worst but the old South, right around to Arizona,
richly deserves condemnation.
There are many more who deserve national excoriation and job removal
including House minority leader John Boehner, propagandist Rush
Limbaugh, Rupert Murdock and the Fox "News" people, but they don't
directly stand in the way of getting this country back on a positive
track.
And that brings us to the 5 others that do: Supreme Court justices
Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Alito and Kennedy. The egregious Bush v.
Gore decision begat Roberts and Alito who will be around for a
long time to inflict the likes of the horrific and ludicrous Citizens
United V. FEC ruling on us.
When you get angry at the direction we are going, these are the people
to focus on. And, of course, never forget Reagan and Bush 43.
October 23, 2010
JBM
GO BACK TO TOP
UPPING ANXIETY
It is highly likely that distant historians will look
back at
these troubled times as a "golden age", the one before a potential
storm of calamities descended on our nations. As the "not if but when"
clock ticks away we can see (if we choose to look) a potential slew of
coming assaults near the horizon. Many have seen various anxiety
provoking reports which have been shunted off into our subconscious.
Too many day-to-day worries to deal with. But the prepared won't be as
shocked if one or more of the following occur:
(1) We are all aware that nuclear war was averted because the few
nations that had the capability also had control of their atomic
weapons. We are also aware that the number of nuclear weapon making
countries is expanding and includes at least one rogue state with more
to come. We know that terrorists want at least one nuclear bomb to use
and that North Korea et. al. will want the sales income as long as it
can't be traced back to them. We also know that world organizations
won't act together to forestall such a transaction or use. Then there
are the "loose" nukes that are unaccounted for....
If and when such a bomb goes off the damage won't be confined to the
specific location. It will send shock waves around the world. There
will be the fallout plume to consider. Financial markets will oscillate
around the globe and that insecurity will cause a market contraction.
Retaliation will be expected but the perps may be hard to identify. One
detonation would likely lead to a military response which could quickly
draw in other nations. Urban residents might think they will be next
and panics would ensue. The cost to relieve and rebuild would be
humongous and much of the advanced world is in precarious financial
shape. Billions of people would be emotionally afflicted.
(2)But there is another type of warfare that is growing in
likelihood--cyber warfare. As Richard E. Clark and Robert K. Knake
point out in Cyber War,
the U.S. is most vulnerable to attack by hackers, acting alone or for a
government or terrorist organization. Our private sector has
consistently resisted regulation that would require their electronic
systems to "harden" against attack. The authors contend that we quickly
need to install a deep packet inspection system for Tier 1 ISP's and
isolate electric power and grid communication systems detached from the
Internet. Hear all the popular uproar for even these basic precautions?
However, until we get serious about protecting ourselves from cyber
attack we may not even have a viable military threat to counter foreign
or even domestic demands. It is even less likely that we will be able
to trace the attack source and counter it effectively without drawing
in innocent bystanders, who will want revenge. You can see where this
might all go. The darkness and chaos may come sooner than anyone
thinks.
(3)Scientists can't predict when but they are sure a major
earthquake(s) will hit the U.S. west coast this century. The loss of
lives and damage will affect the whole country. This won't be some
villages in Chile. This won't be some Gulf oil spill. This will dwarf
those disasters combined. Fortunately, this assault will be limited in
scope. But it might pile on to some other hit.
(4)Such as a meteor strike. These are very rare occurrences these days
but as time marches on the odds increase. Anything sizable striking
earth could end life as we know it.
(5)But let's put that one aside for now. Much more likely are 2 man
made calamities.
We are warming the planet. Weather systems are becoming increasingly
unstable. Summers will get hotter and torrential rains and flooding
will be more frequent. Sea levels are rising which will force
populations away from coasts in massive numbers. Where will they go?
Drinkable water sources are drying up and will force people away from
America's Southwest. This is a slow moving disaster and there would be
time to avert the worst damage if we in America had an efficaciously
functioning government and an informed, cohesive citizenry. We have
neither and no positive change is in sight.
(6)And relatedly; as it warms and populations increase it becomes
evermore likely that some form of plague(s) breaks out. Air and water
borne chemical pollutants are likely to combine with overcrowding and
inadequate sanitation to reduce immune systems which will be unable to
cope with an air (or water) transmitted, delayed symptomatic
disease(s). Global air travel could spread this mutation pandemicly,
well before any antidotes or relief can be discovered and generated.
(7)Finally, but not necessarily exhaustively, financial collapse could
be related to any of these misfortunes, or it could occur by itself.
America has been in an untenable situation for some time. We have
covered up our maldistribution of income and wealth with financial
bubbles and middle class borrowing until there is nothing left but a
dangerous debt load and the prospect of depression up ahead. Big
business controls the government and acts in its own short term
interest, not in the interest of the country or the world. This has
been touched on in previous editorials. Suffice to reiterate here,
until we take from those who have too much to refortify our middle
class, any assaults will be compounded by our misplaced financial
priorities.
So enjoy it while you can; it could be worse.
August 18, 2010
JBM
GO BACK TO TOP
HIGH UNEMPLOYMENT
<> As America's problems continue to get worse, even
our
mid-term
elections become vitally important in the face of runaway partisan
conflict. And the centerpiece issue for this November's campaigning and
outcomes (barring some unforseen disaster) will be our high
unemployment numbers and their relationship to the national deficits
and debt. So let's clarify for those paying insufficient attention.
Unemployment figures aren't
coming down anytime soon.
Ignore the Obama administration's optimism. The numbers are now
structural in nature, an outcome of globalization and subversive
political and counterproductive economic policies over the last
decades.
When capital and transport can move around the globe quickly and
cheaply due to technological advances, businesses will travel to where
they can minimize labor costs thereby maximizing profits. There will
continue to be a gravitational pull towards leveling wages between
relatively backward and advanced nations. Dictatorships, and those
countries with mercantile policies in the developing world, will keep
the wages of their workers artifically low in order to maximize
exports. The American government will not be able to force these
nations to raise their workers wages. [We could close our borders to
imports (or institute tariffs) but that would spark retaliation and
drive up prices, if we could get Americans to make those products at
all.] So our wages will be dragged down towards or below poverty or we
will export those jobs, except where we have a technology lead or where
they are proximity dependent. Patches, such as the Earned Income Tax
Credit and tax writoffs for hiring will only desguise the overall
decline from the halcyon days after WW II when we controlled world
manufacturing and services.
Traveling under the radar for the most part is another structural
factor. In order to compete, American businesses are becoming evermore
productive (while others hire illegals at below poverty wages). This
means using technology to replace the most costly aspect of that
output; the employee. Robots don't need expensive medical insurance nor
retirement benefits. And they don't need coffee breaks. The recession
has just sharpened the impetus to invest in worker reducing technology
rather than rehire.
And add in the substandard educational system in our country. We not
only don't graduate a quarter of our high school students, we have
virtually no vocational acadamies to produce recognized, up-to-date
technical workers. On top of that, shriviling the course load down to
math and English isn't preparing students for living in the modern
world.
The outcome has been a hollowing out of our middle class which over
borrowed for decades to keep up with relatively declining incomes. Now
that the housing bubble has burst the inevitable scale back in consumer
spending, which has propped up our economy for decades, is under way.
That reduced demand is the primary reason that business isn't
expanding. Forget the Republican intentionally misleading nonsense that
big business is holding on to its money because of enonomic and
regulation "uncertainty". Business doesn't see increased sales in the
near future so why should it expand? But keep in mind that Republicans
are doing virtually all they can to minimize any job expansion that
might occur due to government stimulus, including bank lending to small
business.
Keeping the Bush tax cuts, which are about to expire, is paramount for
the right even though it comprises much (30% according to Fareed
Zakaria) of the deficits and debt they say they want to reduce. Ample
evidence refutes their lies about tax cuts being self financing,
especially compared to targeted jobs bills. It is clear that
Republicans want a soft, cheap labor market for the benefit of business
profits, continuing the upward redistribution of income and wealth that
has transpired since the Reagan presidency.
However, they are right about tax hikes accelerating the downward
spiral towards depression. While other taxes, such as a financial
transaction tax (to reduce speculation) and gasoline tax increases (to
encourage more fuel efficient car sales) would be beneficial, they
would have to be off-set with targeted stimulus outlays to rebuild our
infrastructure, especially in the energy production and transmission,
conservation and transportation fields. Such expenditures, closely
monitored, sans pork, would begin to reshape our economy
constructively. The private sector would benefit enormusly from more
efficient energy, communication, transportation infrastructure and
climate stability. We badly need a better consumption-investment
balance. Tax cuts won't do that.
It should be clear, to anyone paying any attention at all to the
overall picture, that the Republican/Conservative/Tea Partiers are
rabidly detrimantal to out nation's health. Dems are better but not by
nearly enough--but they are better, And maybe they would get even
better if right wing obstruction was removed from congress. Do your
part.
August 5, 2010
JBM
GO BACK TO TOP
THE TIME IS COMING
<> Observers, looking down the road, could see the
portents of the
Friedan-Steinam led feminist revolution of the 1960's. Women wanted
equality (in all beneficial areas) while retaining the advantages of
sexual attraction and exclusive rights to reproduction. As the cover
story in the July/August issue of The Atlantic magazine
indicates, that time has about come. As author Hanna Rosen describes,
women are dominating society as never before. We have known that in
modern, stable societies women outlive men. Now, in post industrial
societies, education trumps physical attributes and females are not
only doing better in public schools but are approaching 60% of the
college attendees. Better educated women have been moving up the ladder
from secretary to middle management and now to senior management
positions. And with that economic power, increased as male oriented,
union production jobs have been devastated by the recession (and
offshored for decades), women have increasingly become independent,
including when it comes to the children they choose to have. Men are
being marginalized.
The process is working its way up the social strata. America's senior
management and professional class may not be too concerned yet but the
changeover is bubbling up from the working class towards them. That is
when the full perception will be consensually apparent.
This has never happened before on any kind of scale we may soon see.
The human species has not only survived but has thrived until it has
taken over the planet. Through natural selection it has developed
adaptive capabilities to deal with competitors (e.g. hunting instead of
being prey) and environmental changes but one relationship has remained
constant--women have needed men to protect and provide, especially when
they were vulnerable during pregnancy. They sought out the good men and
traded sex for safety and wherewithal. This mutual insufficiency bound
couples, and extended families into tribes, into nations and into the
global world man dominates today. As women become self sufficient,
aside from an occasional boy-toy fling (perhaps for pregnancy purposes)
less desirable males will find it harder and harder to attract a mate,
especially for a term long enough to fulfill his fatherhood role. Two
related dynamics have been continuous: males leave occupations that
women advance to and women still want men they can look up to. They
will find such men increasingly harder to find in the work place.
Women, less violently oriented, have always civilized males, especially
the ones that didn't have much going for them. Heads of households felt
important. They were needed. However, these males will become
increasingly detached, they will be loose cannons. Unable to fill any
positive, admired role in society, they will likely drift into
des