Didn't you forget to mention how the corporate rulers bring in cheap labor to do those jobs they can't export? I know it is considered right wing and racist to be against uncontrolled immigration, but I disagree. All over the world they are bringing in immigrants from poorer countries to work cheap in better off countries - lowering wages and causing huge unemployment suffering - that's how they get and stay rich, by exploiting people. These immigrants are their pawns, the workers their victims, the countries they come from still suffer but someone comes out of all this unscathed, indeed rather better off - the rich ruling class who get their profits up and their pound of flesh. It's time the left and the right united against our true enemy - not each other, but the rich ruling class.
Maybe tomorrow ... if there's anything left of Dodge City!
I dream of Marshal Kane, having foresworn violence of any kind, taking his gun and ammo belt out of deep storage. From the Wikipedia synopsis:
In the end, Kane faces the Miller Gang alone. Kane guns down two of the gang, though he himself is wounded in the process. Helen Ramirez and Amy both board the train, but Amy gets off when she hears the sound of gunfire. Amy chooses her husband's life over her religious beliefs, shooting Pierce from behind. Frank then takes her hostage to force Kane into the open. However, Amy suddenly attacks Frank, who is forced to push her aside, giving Kane a clear shot, and Kane shoots Frank Miller dead. As the townspeople emerge celebrating, Kane contemptuously throws his marshal's star in the dirt and leaves town with his wife.
I know, I know. Pardon me. We're supposed to limit ourselves to very serious chart-based technical discussions ... no "economic fiction" ... but I'm a fundamentalist going under the radar ... like Warren Buffet counting heads outside some chain store he's thinking about acquiring ... what changes do I see around me in real life? So far, none. And that's no "economic fiction"! (Besides, when things get really really bad, that's not the time to lose your sense of humor!)
So I have my projections, and others have theirs. We'll see.
My projection? Maybe Marshal Kane. Maybe Marshal Romney. But someday.
I'll see what I can dig out with corporate taxes and charts. Generally the MNCs have tax havens and use double dutch and other vehicles to pay 0, or close to it. I'll try to find the percentage of business and sizes who actually pay anything close to 35%.
Isn't the idea to get increased one-time revenue in order to say:
"See, when you treat as sacred the tax loopholes for MNCs and lower rates on upper-income brackets, the government actually takes in MORE than in did before!"
... and if not exactly more, there will be some finagling of stats to show how that a revenue increase should and would have happened ... except for the horrible 'anti-business' atmosphere created by progressives within the Democratic Party ... especially that arch-progressive Obama!
Does anyone doubt that we will see such claims made by the 'right' throughout blogdom in 2012? Complete with charts, graphs and scholarly speeches by Nobelists in economics!
Can today's vote of 95 Dems AYE but also 95 Dems NAY be accurately cited as evidence of blinders worn by "the left" (whatever 'the left' may mean!) and of a "delusional frenzy" or "Obamamania"?
No, of course, not. While it's practically a certainty that Obama will not have any effective opposition within the Democratic Party at the national-candidate level ... and while it appears unlikely that we will see any candidate better than Romney from the GOP, and that's a very likely 'fact' ... there's no need to grossly exaggerate ... especially when such exaggeration undermines your credibility and can only tend to discourage any independent tendency among congress critturs of either party.
Why not focus on congressional races and try this time for something better than faux 'Tea Party' opposition to the two-party system of corruption and treason? -- regardless of party affiliation! If we cannot put some third party representative in the U.S. House in 2012 -- JUST ONE SUCH REPRESENTATIVE -- what the hell are we as a people?
I am neither Republican nor Democrat. I appreciate that EP called it right about Obama in 2008, but we will never know how a McCain administration might have turned out ... quite possibly war with Russia and nuclear Armageddon. Similarly, we have no idea if Hillary would have won in November, assuming she would have won, how a Clinton administration -- on the distaff side -- would have been any different than the Obama administration has been.
BTW: Yes, Romney's business record -- outsourcing and downsizing -- is scarey, but that need not be predictive of his presidency. True, we have nothing but experience to guide us, but that doesn't mean that our projections from experience are always correct or accurate. I harbor a hope that Romney is at least truly loyal to the Constitution ... and I have grave doubts about many other Republicans in that regard, not to mention many Democrats. (I doubt whether some of them have even read the document!)
Wow! Lyndon LaRouche is still around! Wonderful! (Although I've never known him to be so negative about the prospects for the U.S. ... or, well, maybe not 'negative' ... maybe just realistic!)
They don't need to read Ayn Rand or anything else -- Rush, or some clone of Rush, has read it all for them!
But if some people must read and aspire to a lofty intellectual status, let their studies be confined to the 'National Review'. That, in pursuit of 'Snobbery and Elitism Forever', will free them of the last vestiges of common sense and realistic self-interest.
May fantasy rule! May the People escape from the coming Tempest to a Fantasy Island ruled by a magical Prospero, ultimately revealing himself to be a great humanitarian who will bestow wealth and happiness on everyone -- freeing all, including himself, from their delusions.
"I would disagree tho that Obama is a closet Repub. That would mean he has some core beliefs that he adheres to."
'UponReview', I agree with the gist or intent of your comment, BUT to suppose that being a Republican in this day and age means having any core beliefs whatsoever ... ridiculous! What could we possibly gain by thinking that we would be making progress by replacing Tweedle Dee with Tweedle Dum? We would simply be proving ourselves dependent on having some delusional system, whatever it may be, as opposed to at least striving to be free in our thinking of any delusional system.
The Republican Party is run by the RNC, which is a money-making organization, neither more nor less. The RNC enforces party discipline through its control of the campaign fund purse and support of extreme right-wing mass media. If you want principle, don't look to the Republicans or to the so-called 'Tea Party' -- which, as an indepenedent party, ran exactly one candidate for Congress in 2010, and that single candidate lost with money opposing from the RNC and related campaign-funding organizations. The RNC is totally opposed and will do whatever it takes to prevent the emergence of a third party in the U.S.A. today. Another Ross Perot is their greatest fear -- the greatest threat to their greedy ambitions! That is the reason for the 'Tea Party' and for its being coopted from its original populist protectionist roots by moneyed interests indistinguishable from the RNC -- to prevent the emergence of a viable altenative to the two major parties. The so-called 'Tea Party' no sooner arrived in Congress in 2011 than they announced their support for one, and only one, aspect of Obama's agenda -- namely, any and all 'free' trade 'agreeements'.
The Democrats have no unity, no party discipline whatsoever, and that is their great -- as a party their only -- virtue. If you don't believe that, look at today's vote in the House. Of course, 66 'Tea Party' members of Congress were allowed to vote NAY on the budget deal, after determining that they had 95 Dempulbicans to offset their 'defection', which was as much posturing as was the entire negotiation process. Republicans voting for it numbered 174. This same kind of breakdown has occurred with all votes on fast-track 'free' trade. NAFTA, for example passed with far more votes from your 'highly pricipled' ("core beliefs") Republicans than from the Democrats! Proof is that nobody is mentioning that there were as many Democrats voting NAY as voted YEA -- 95 of each! Your chances of finding a principled member of Congress are much better with Democrats than with Republicans.
Whatever "core beliefs" Republican may once have had are now hollowed out, The core is mush, like any rotten apple. All persons who once were Republicans standing for some kind of principle have long since left the Party ... or did the Party leave them?
On the other hand, I can certainly see registering Republican for tactical reasons, depending on which state you are in, in order to support a particular candidate or candidates at various levels of government. I may do that myself. But it won't be thinking that the 'Republican' label stands for anything but $Do$ $Re$ $Me$.
Herein lies the problem. As far as I know, no one is challenging Obama in a Democratic primary.
Romney is a corporate raider. He's the guy who made money by acquisition, firing all of the people and selling off the rest of the company.
Think about it. The GOP field gets worse from there. We have corporate mouthpieces for more offshoring to China and then we have our bat shit crazies from the Tea party.
There literally is absolutely no one, not a single one, who has any economic knowledge, isn't corporate corrupt and frankly basic common sense.
What we need is someone like Byron Dorgan to run for President. He has a degree in economics and appeals to all political flavors simply because he's common sense politics.
But we do not have that. So, we're in HUGE trouble, even while Obama ushers in almost a guarantee he won't be re-elected. It's like 2010 backlash where people voted in these crazies because they were so absolutely pissed Wall Street was bailed out and Congress refused to do a real Stimulus, i.e. Buy American, hire America direct jobs. (instead no real bang for the buck spending).
So, we get another backlash and probably get another true loony or so corrupt person representing multinationals with this almost hatred of the U.S. workforce, middle class sort of Republican.
What a disaster.
But hey, we were here in 2008, reporting extensively on Obama's economic advisers, his votes, his real positions...we tried to tell people that Hillary was more Progressive than Obama, shock of all shocks and they were looking at economic disaster...
While we talk about the crazies of the Tea party, frankly, I think the left should look at their own blinders, building themselves up into delusional frenzy on "Obamamania", completely ignoring the facts, background, real positions.
He's not a Black dude, he's a Harvard dude, He's a Chicago school dude, need you say more?
I would disagree tho that Obama is a closet Repub. That would mean he has some core beliefs that he adheres to. Unfortunately it's clear he has always chosen to put his reelection and financial future ahead of the country's
best interests. An in-depth look at his background seems to time and again suggest he is an empty suit - that he chose politics as an opportunity vs a mission or calling. It would be imcomprehensible that he can have the
some of the worst of the bankers and wall st in his administration, that he would have the campaign contributions from those moneyed interests in the amounts that he has and will receive, and yet be determined to defend, much less advance, a progressive agenda.
At least with Bush we knew what he believed no matter how misguided.
Obama may in fact be more dangerous in that we have to look at his actions and ignore his words and protestations.
"I know that Eric Canter is holding treasury bills and playing them short in the market but the amounts of a few thousands of dollars are far too small to worry about by Washington standards. What of others, what of those other Washington insiders who have witnessed this soap opera develop, will they ever be investigated?"
One thing is clear: investigations will not take place in the current congress -- or, if they do, they will be so partisan and FOX slanted as to amount to just another distraction! And filings will not be welcomed in most federal district courts, so prosecutions from other than the Department of Justice will abort. Taking all currently available evidence together, the necessary mobilization of investigations into the evident corrupt practices and abuse of insider information needs to happen, It needs to extend, ASAP, in grand jury investigations brought by the office of the Attorney General. Investigations need to extend, whenever the trail leads that way, into the offices of the corporate media. If the economy continues to weaken, various emergency provisions of law can be invoked.
Even without declaring a national emergency, the President can order full use of all PATRIOT Act provisions, mobilization of the entire NSA database, to get the goods on whomever -- of whatever party in Congress, in the military, in the Supreme Court or in the Executive Branch -- may be dirty regarding substantial ($1Million and up) insider-information profiteering in currency, U.S. bonds and precious metals markets.
The President can order mobilization of the entire Department of Justice, and if a U.S. Attorney in some district balks, he and his staff can be put under the intensest scrutiny of all. Same with judges prejudiced toward easy early dismissal in these cases. Not the small fry -- every case should measure up to a $Million minimum, because those crimes alone will probably clog the dockets in many districts.
Convictions before 2013 will probably be impossible, but the more that can be stirred up, the more indictments can be brought and gotten out into the open through what remains in this country of a free and independent press -- the better.
Of course, it will be partisan, with Republicans exclusively attacking Democrats though congressional investigations while the DOJ will include some investigation and prosecution of Democrats but will find much much better hunting on the Republican side.
That's a populist action that Obama can undertake, risking widespread constant attacks on himself in the corporate media (different only in being more blatant than how his image is systematically eroding today, in the absence of any real populist offensive coming out of the White House) but also laying the groundwork for widespread popular support among the people. Otherwise, Obama may as well announce right now that he won't be running in 2012.
The first duty of the Executive is to enforce the law.
The outlaws are in town, hanging out at the saloon, right now! Everyone knows they are taking over the town with or without elections, and they fully intend to control any elections that may take place.
Obama's choice is to pack his saddle bags and get out of Dodge with his tail between his legs or get out there on the Main Street at High Noon -- which means yesterday, not November 2012.
The President need not choose between Left and Right, but he does need to choose between populism and an early retirement -- possibly with his enemies using against him those weapons that he chose to forgo using against them.
Just returned from the store, headline of today's Sac Bee indicates oh happy, happy day -- the deal is done! The Republic is saved!
BTW:
"Obama just wishes we would go away quietly."
Yes, Obama has this term -- "the professional left" -- he ought to know since that would be his category as a community organizer back in Chicago. Numerian, I hope you are drawing a handsome paycheck for your efforts!
I couldn't find a better word than branches to refer to the triumvirate of House, Senate and White House. And yes, about the only thing the Democrats can do in the Senate is control the agenda. In any event, the liberal wing of the Democratic Party is viewed by party officials as a nuisance - like the Tea Party on the right, only without the ability to threaten any Democratic safe seats. Obama just wishes we would go away quietly. He does not think we are needed to win an election. He has the great unwashed middle of the road independents to do that for him.
First, there are three "branches" of the government: legislative, executive and judiciary. Second, it's almost a stretch to say that the Democrats "control" the Senate, since under Senate rules it takes a super-majority to truly control.
I look at it this way: the Republicans have near-control both of the Congress and of the judiciary (unless you can see Bush v. Gore as 'non-partisan). However, the Democrats (Obama) control the White House.
There are Republicans in the Obama government, so even there partisan control is less than what might be thought -- if partisan 'control' ever mean anything in the U.S. system.
On the congressional side, Democrats control one of the two chambers of Congress at best, but the House has an edge here because only the House can originate a budget bill. That's important in this game of chicken that is being engaged in the name of the Tea Party.
As for that the Republicans need 50 Democrats willing to go along ... it will be amazing if Republicans can't get that ... given the history of congressional Democrats since about 1950 ... but it is possible.
We've already shown with graphs that the 2004 tax holiday did not create jobs. All of the data is pointing to MNCs outsourcing jobs, investing in EEs, abroad, nothing to for the U.S.
Today the U.S. Congress will vote on a legislative
package that, if passed, will mean the end of the United
States. If the package worked out through the debt ceiling
negotiations with the Obama administration is passed, it
means that the United States is sunk overnight, and the
U.S. and the world goes into a Dark Age.
Today Lyndon LaRouche issued this urgent call.
“We are in an emergency situation...What the press is saying
is misleading. ...This is intended to be the Hitler Coup,
right now. It’s the equivalent of the Hitler Coup, only it’s
worse. You’re going to see a lot of dead Americans piling
up on the streets, and I mean it literally—unless we turn
this thing around.
“We still have the possibility of turning it around.
The urgency with which we can respond to this, is going
to be decisive.”
The legislation which is intended to be voted on
sometime today, August 1st, will establish the following:
1. An initial cut of $1 trillion from the federal
budget.
2. The creation of what Obama has named the
Supercongress, a 12 person body composed of 6
Democrats and 6 Republicans who are tasked to
come up with an additional $1.5 trillion in cuts by
November 23rd of this year.
3. The recommendations made by the Supercon
gress for an additional $1.5 trillion in cuts will
be sent to both houses of Congress to receive
only an up or down vote. The House and Senate
cannot amend or filibuster the recommendations
of the Supercongress. If the Congress votes no
on the recommendations, the $1.5 trillion in cuts
will be evenly distributed between the defense
budget and domestic entitlement programs.
If the Congress does not go along with the proposed
cuts of the Supercongress, the cuts go through
anyway.
This is what the Congress is voting on today. As
of this morning there is opposition from the Progressive
Caucus and Black Caucus. However, many other members
of the Congress are ready to vote for treason. They
are capitulating to the terror campaign run through the
Obama White House, Wall Street, and the City of London
that has said if the debt ceiling is not raised it will cause
a government shutdown, the U.S. credit rating and the
credit rating of cities and states will be downgraded, and
the markets will crash.
This is a lie.
The crash is not determined by these factors, the
crash has already happened. These measures will not buy
time, they will guarantee the destruction of the United
States Constitution.
Our only line of defense in this coup attempt is
the passage of Glass-Steagall. Mobilize for action, call every
member of Congress, and tell them that a vote for the
debt deal is a vote for treason. Demand the reinstatement
of Glass-Steagall, H.R. 1489, immediately.
Glass-Steagall is our defense, it is the only measure
that will save the nation.
The vote today is Obama’s Hitler Coup. It is in
our hands to stop it, now.
Didn't you forget to mention how the corporate rulers bring in cheap labor to do those jobs they can't export? I know it is considered right wing and racist to be against uncontrolled immigration, but I disagree. All over the world they are bringing in immigrants from poorer countries to work cheap in better off countries - lowering wages and causing huge unemployment suffering - that's how they get and stay rich, by exploiting people. These immigrants are their pawns, the workers their victims, the countries they come from still suffer but someone comes out of all this unscathed, indeed rather better off - the rich ruling class who get their profits up and their pound of flesh. It's time the left and the right united against our true enemy - not each other, but the rich ruling class.
Young man, you are totally awesome! I look forward to the information. Going to IRS audit myself in a few days!
Alas! No-show at sundown.
Maybe tomorrow ... if there's anything left of Dodge City!
I dream of Marshal Kane, having foresworn violence of any kind, taking his gun and ammo belt out of deep storage. From the Wikipedia synopsis:
I know, I know. Pardon me. We're supposed to limit ourselves to very serious chart-based technical discussions ... no "economic fiction" ... but I'm a fundamentalist going under the radar ... like Warren Buffet counting heads outside some chain store he's thinking about acquiring ... what changes do I see around me in real life? So far, none. And that's no "economic fiction"! (Besides, when things get really really bad, that's not the time to lose your sense of humor!)
So I have my projections, and others have theirs. We'll see.
My projection? Maybe Marshal Kane. Maybe Marshal Romney. But someday.
I'll see what I can dig out with corporate taxes and charts. Generally the MNCs have tax havens and use double dutch and other vehicles to pay 0, or close to it. I'll try to find the percentage of business and sizes who actually pay anything close to 35%.
Isn't the idea to get increased one-time revenue in order to say:
"See, when you treat as sacred the tax loopholes for MNCs and lower rates on upper-income brackets, the government actually takes in MORE than in did before!"
... and if not exactly more, there will be some finagling of stats to show how that a revenue increase should and would have happened ... except for the horrible 'anti-business' atmosphere created by progressives within the Democratic Party ... especially that arch-progressive Obama!
Does anyone doubt that we will see such claims made by the 'right' throughout blogdom in 2012? Complete with charts, graphs and scholarly speeches by Nobelists in economics!
Robert Oak:
Can today's vote of 95 Dems AYE but also 95 Dems NAY be accurately cited as evidence of blinders worn by "the left" (whatever 'the left' may mean!) and of a "delusional frenzy" or "Obamamania"?
No, of course, not. While it's practically a certainty that Obama will not have any effective opposition within the Democratic Party at the national-candidate level ... and while it appears unlikely that we will see any candidate better than Romney from the GOP, and that's a very likely 'fact' ... there's no need to grossly exaggerate ... especially when such exaggeration undermines your credibility and can only tend to discourage any independent tendency among congress critturs of either party.
Why not focus on congressional races and try this time for something better than faux 'Tea Party' opposition to the two-party system of corruption and treason? -- regardless of party affiliation! If we cannot put some third party representative in the U.S. House in 2012 -- JUST ONE SUCH REPRESENTATIVE -- what the hell are we as a people?
I am neither Republican nor Democrat. I appreciate that EP called it right about Obama in 2008, but we will never know how a McCain administration might have turned out ... quite possibly war with Russia and nuclear Armageddon. Similarly, we have no idea if Hillary would have won in November, assuming she would have won, how a Clinton administration -- on the distaff side -- would have been any different than the Obama administration has been.
BTW: Yes, Romney's business record -- outsourcing and downsizing -- is scarey, but that need not be predictive of his presidency. True, we have nothing but experience to guide us, but that doesn't mean that our projections from experience are always correct or accurate. I harbor a hope that Romney is at least truly loyal to the Constitution ... and I have grave doubts about many other Republicans in that regard, not to mention many Democrats. (I doubt whether some of them have even read the document!)
Wow! Lyndon LaRouche is still around! Wonderful! (Although I've never known him to be so negative about the prospects for the U.S. ... or, well, maybe not 'negative' ... maybe just realistic!)
Thank you.
They don't need to read Ayn Rand or anything else -- Rush, or some clone of Rush, has read it all for them!
But if some people must read and aspire to a lofty intellectual status, let their studies be confined to the 'National Review'. That, in pursuit of 'Snobbery and Elitism Forever', will free them of the last vestiges of common sense and realistic self-interest.
May fantasy rule! May the People escape from the coming Tempest to a Fantasy Island ruled by a magical Prospero, ultimately revealing himself to be a great humanitarian who will bestow wealth and happiness on everyone -- freeing all, including himself, from their delusions.
"I would disagree tho that Obama is a closet Repub. That would mean he has some core beliefs that he adheres to."
'UponReview', I agree with the gist or intent of your comment, BUT to suppose that being a Republican in this day and age means having any core beliefs whatsoever ... ridiculous! What could we possibly gain by thinking that we would be making progress by replacing Tweedle Dee with Tweedle Dum? We would simply be proving ourselves dependent on having some delusional system, whatever it may be, as opposed to at least striving to be free in our thinking of any delusional system.
The Republican Party is run by the RNC, which is a money-making organization, neither more nor less. The RNC enforces party discipline through its control of the campaign fund purse and support of extreme right-wing mass media. If you want principle, don't look to the Republicans or to the so-called 'Tea Party' -- which, as an indepenedent party, ran exactly one candidate for Congress in 2010, and that single candidate lost with money opposing from the RNC and related campaign-funding organizations. The RNC is totally opposed and will do whatever it takes to prevent the emergence of a third party in the U.S.A. today. Another Ross Perot is their greatest fear -- the greatest threat to their greedy ambitions! That is the reason for the 'Tea Party' and for its being coopted from its original populist protectionist roots by moneyed interests indistinguishable from the RNC -- to prevent the emergence of a viable altenative to the two major parties. The so-called 'Tea Party' no sooner arrived in Congress in 2011 than they announced their support for one, and only one, aspect of Obama's agenda -- namely, any and all 'free' trade 'agreeements'.
The Democrats have no unity, no party discipline whatsoever, and that is their great -- as a party their only -- virtue. If you don't believe that, look at today's vote in the House. Of course, 66 'Tea Party' members of Congress were allowed to vote NAY on the budget deal, after determining that they had 95 Dempulbicans to offset their 'defection', which was as much posturing as was the entire negotiation process. Republicans voting for it numbered 174. This same kind of breakdown has occurred with all votes on fast-track 'free' trade. NAFTA, for example passed with far more votes from your 'highly pricipled' ("core beliefs") Republicans than from the Democrats! Proof is that nobody is mentioning that there were as many Democrats voting NAY as voted YEA -- 95 of each! Your chances of finding a principled member of Congress are much better with Democrats than with Republicans.
Whatever "core beliefs" Republican may once have had are now hollowed out, The core is mush, like any rotten apple. All persons who once were Republicans standing for some kind of principle have long since left the Party ... or did the Party leave them?
On the other hand, I can certainly see registering Republican for tactical reasons, depending on which state you are in, in order to support a particular candidate or candidates at various levels of government. I may do that myself. But it won't be thinking that the 'Republican' label stands for anything but $Do$ $Re$ $Me$.
That says it all
Herein lies the problem. As far as I know, no one is challenging Obama in a Democratic primary.
Romney is a corporate raider. He's the guy who made money by acquisition, firing all of the people and selling off the rest of the company.
Think about it. The GOP field gets worse from there. We have corporate mouthpieces for more offshoring to China and then we have our bat shit crazies from the Tea party.
There literally is absolutely no one, not a single one, who has any economic knowledge, isn't corporate corrupt and frankly basic common sense.
What we need is someone like Byron Dorgan to run for President. He has a degree in economics and appeals to all political flavors simply because he's common sense politics.
But we do not have that. So, we're in HUGE trouble, even while Obama ushers in almost a guarantee he won't be re-elected. It's like 2010 backlash where people voted in these crazies because they were so absolutely pissed Wall Street was bailed out and Congress refused to do a real Stimulus, i.e. Buy American, hire America direct jobs. (instead no real bang for the buck spending).
So, we get another backlash and probably get another true loony or so corrupt person representing multinationals with this almost hatred of the U.S. workforce, middle class sort of Republican.
What a disaster.
But hey, we were here in 2008, reporting extensively on Obama's economic advisers, his votes, his real positions...we tried to tell people that Hillary was more Progressive than Obama, shock of all shocks and they were looking at economic disaster...
While we talk about the crazies of the Tea party, frankly, I think the left should look at their own blinders, building themselves up into delusional frenzy on "Obamamania", completely ignoring the facts, background, real positions.
He's not a Black dude, he's a Harvard dude, He's a Chicago school dude, need you say more?
Why should they pay any taxes at all. The people have no jobs, let them read Ayn Rand!
Excellent post and comments.
I would disagree tho that Obama is a closet Repub. That would mean he has some core beliefs that he adheres to. Unfortunately it's clear he has always chosen to put his reelection and financial future ahead of the country's
best interests. An in-depth look at his background seems to time and again suggest he is an empty suit - that he chose politics as an opportunity vs a mission or calling. It would be imcomprehensible that he can have the
some of the worst of the bankers and wall st in his administration, that he would have the campaign contributions from those moneyed interests in the amounts that he has and will receive, and yet be determined to defend, much less advance, a progressive agenda.
At least with Bush we knew what he believed no matter how misguided.
Obama may in fact be more dangerous in that we have to look at his actions and ignore his words and protestations.
Careful with this link, because OpEdNews is short of bandwidth lately! Give them a break!
Anyway David Glenn Cox in "For the Benefit of Mr. Kite", asks this question -
One thing is clear: investigations will not take place in the current congress -- or, if they do, they will be so partisan and FOX slanted as to amount to just another distraction! And filings will not be welcomed in most federal district courts, so prosecutions from other than the Department of Justice will abort. Taking all currently available evidence together, the necessary mobilization of investigations into the evident corrupt practices and abuse of insider information needs to happen, It needs to extend, ASAP, in grand jury investigations brought by the office of the Attorney General. Investigations need to extend, whenever the trail leads that way, into the offices of the corporate media. If the economy continues to weaken, various emergency provisions of law can be invoked.
Even without declaring a national emergency, the President can order full use of all PATRIOT Act provisions, mobilization of the entire NSA database, to get the goods on whomever -- of whatever party in Congress, in the military, in the Supreme Court or in the Executive Branch -- may be dirty regarding substantial ($1Million and up) insider-information profiteering in currency, U.S. bonds and precious metals markets.
The President can order mobilization of the entire Department of Justice, and if a U.S. Attorney in some district balks, he and his staff can be put under the intensest scrutiny of all. Same with judges prejudiced toward easy early dismissal in these cases. Not the small fry -- every case should measure up to a $Million minimum, because those crimes alone will probably clog the dockets in many districts.
Convictions before 2013 will probably be impossible, but the more that can be stirred up, the more indictments can be brought and gotten out into the open through what remains in this country of a free and independent press -- the better.
Of course, it will be partisan, with Republicans exclusively attacking Democrats though congressional investigations while the DOJ will include some investigation and prosecution of Democrats but will find much much better hunting on the Republican side.
That's a populist action that Obama can undertake, risking widespread constant attacks on himself in the corporate media (different only in being more blatant than how his image is systematically eroding today, in the absence of any real populist offensive coming out of the White House) but also laying the groundwork for widespread popular support among the people. Otherwise, Obama may as well announce right now that he won't be running in 2012.
The first duty of the Executive is to enforce the law.
The outlaws are in town, hanging out at the saloon, right now! Everyone knows they are taking over the town with or without elections, and they fully intend to control any elections that may take place.
Obama's choice is to pack his saddle bags and get out of Dodge with his tail between his legs or get out there on the Main Street at High Noon -- which means yesterday, not November 2012.
The President need not choose between Left and Right, but he does need to choose between populism and an early retirement -- possibly with his enemies using against him those weapons that he chose to forgo using against them.
Just returned from the store, headline of today's Sac Bee indicates oh happy, happy day -- the deal is done! The Republic is saved!
BTW:
"Obama just wishes we would go away quietly."
Yes, Obama has this term -- "the professional left" -- he ought to know since that would be his category as a community organizer back in Chicago. Numerian, I hope you are drawing a handsome paycheck for your efforts!
I couldn't find a better word than branches to refer to the triumvirate of House, Senate and White House. And yes, about the only thing the Democrats can do in the Senate is control the agenda. In any event, the liberal wing of the Democratic Party is viewed by party officials as a nuisance - like the Tea Party on the right, only without the ability to threaten any Democratic safe seats. Obama just wishes we would go away quietly. He does not think we are needed to win an election. He has the great unwashed middle of the road independents to do that for him.
First, there are three "branches" of the government: legislative, executive and judiciary. Second, it's almost a stretch to say that the Democrats "control" the Senate, since under Senate rules it takes a super-majority to truly control.
I look at it this way: the Republicans have near-control both of the Congress and of the judiciary (unless you can see Bush v. Gore as 'non-partisan). However, the Democrats (Obama) control the White House.
There are Republicans in the Obama government, so even there partisan control is less than what might be thought -- if partisan 'control' ever mean anything in the U.S. system.
On the congressional side, Democrats control one of the two chambers of Congress at best, but the House has an edge here because only the House can originate a budget bill. That's important in this game of chicken that is being engaged in the name of the Tea Party.
As for that the Republicans need 50 Democrats willing to go along ... it will be amazing if Republicans can't get that ... given the history of congressional Democrats since about 1950 ... but it is possible.
We've already shown with graphs that the 2004 tax holiday did not create jobs. All of the data is pointing to MNCs outsourcing jobs, investing in EEs, abroad, nothing to for the U.S.
Today the U.S. Congress will vote on a legislative
package that, if passed, will mean the end of the United
States. If the package worked out through the debt ceiling
negotiations with the Obama administration is passed, it
means that the United States is sunk overnight, and the
U.S. and the world goes into a Dark Age.
Today Lyndon LaRouche issued this urgent call.
“We are in an emergency situation...What the press is saying
is misleading. ...This is intended to be the Hitler Coup,
right now. It’s the equivalent of the Hitler Coup, only it’s
worse. You’re going to see a lot of dead Americans piling
up on the streets, and I mean it literally—unless we turn
this thing around.
“We still have the possibility of turning it around.
The urgency with which we can respond to this, is going
to be decisive.”
The legislation which is intended to be voted on
sometime today, August 1st, will establish the following:
1. An initial cut of $1 trillion from the federal
budget.
2. The creation of what Obama has named the
Supercongress, a 12 person body composed of 6
Democrats and 6 Republicans who are tasked to
come up with an additional $1.5 trillion in cuts by
November 23rd of this year.
3. The recommendations made by the Supercon
gress for an additional $1.5 trillion in cuts will
be sent to both houses of Congress to receive
only an up or down vote. The House and Senate
cannot amend or filibuster the recommendations
of the Supercongress. If the Congress votes no
on the recommendations, the $1.5 trillion in cuts
will be evenly distributed between the defense
budget and domestic entitlement programs.
If the Congress does not go along with the proposed
cuts of the Supercongress, the cuts go through
anyway.
This is what the Congress is voting on today. As
of this morning there is opposition from the Progressive
Caucus and Black Caucus. However, many other members
of the Congress are ready to vote for treason. They
are capitulating to the terror campaign run through the
Obama White House, Wall Street, and the City of London
that has said if the debt ceiling is not raised it will cause
a government shutdown, the U.S. credit rating and the
credit rating of cities and states will be downgraded, and
the markets will crash.
This is a lie.
The crash is not determined by these factors, the
crash has already happened. These measures will not buy
time, they will guarantee the destruction of the United
States Constitution.
Our only line of defense in this coup attempt is
the passage of Glass-Steagall. Mobilize for action, call every
member of Congress, and tell them that a vote for the
debt deal is a vote for treason. Demand the reinstatement
of Glass-Steagall, H.R. 1489, immediately.
Glass-Steagall is our defense, it is the only measure
that will save the nation.
The vote today is Obama’s Hitler Coup. It is in
our hands to stop it, now.
Pages