Dennis Kucinich on the Democrats’ Bailout Betrayal
The passing of the $850-billion bailout pulled the plug on the New Deal. The Great Society is now gasping for air, mortally wounded, coughing up blood. It will not recover. It was murdered by the Democratic Party.
We are on our own. And don't expect any help from Barack Obama and Joe Biden, who lobbied hard for the bill and voted for it. Ignore their rhetoric. Look coldly at the ballots they cast against us. We, as citizens, have only a handful of representatives left in Washington, most of whom were left sputtering in rage and frustration on the House floor. The sad irony is that some of them were Republican.
"This was the largest single act of class warfare in the modern history of this country," Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, who led the fight in the House against the bailout, told me by phone from Cleveland. "It is a direct attack on the American people's ability to be able to stabilize their homes and their neighborhoods. This single vote will define the careers of everyone. We are back to taxation without representation, to markets that are openly rigged."
"We buried the New Deal," he said of the vote. "Instead of Democrats going back to classic New Deal economics where we prime the pump of the economy and start money circulating among the population through saving homes, creating jobs and building a new infrastructure, our leaders chose to accelerate the wealth of the nation upwards. They did so in a way that was destructive of free-market principles. They ripped away all the familiar moorings. We are in an uncharted sea where the traditional roles of the political parties are being switched. The Democrats have unfortunately become so enamored and beholden to Wall Street that we are not functioning to defend the economic interest of the broad base of the American people. It was up to the Republicans to protect not just a so-called free market but the American taxpayer and attempt to block this. This is an outrage. This was democracy's Black Friday."
Obama arrived on the Senate floor Brutus-like to thrust a knife into the back of the working and middle class. He lobbied hard for the bill. He did so, according to some who met with him on Capitol Hill, because he feared that if he opposed the bailout and it triggered a market collapse it could cost him the election. Better to placate the thieves on Wall Street than stand up for the masses of enraged and swindled citizens.
Obama's betrayal is the betrayal of the Democratic Party. The Democrats gave us the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, which ripped down the firewalls that were put in place by the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act. The 1933 act, designed to prevent the kind of meltdown we are now experiencing, established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC). It set in place banking reforms to stop speculators from hijacking the financial system. With Glass-Steagall demolished, and the passage of NAFTA, the Democrats, led by Bill Clinton, tumbled gleefully into bed with corporations and Wall Street speculators. They achieved fundraising parity with the Republicans. They used institutions like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as a welfare gravy train. The Democrats, including Obama, are as compromised as the Republicans.
Obama's voting record in the Senate is in line with the corrupt Democratic mainstream, including Biden, who works on behalf of corporations and especially the credit card industry. Obama knows where power lies in the United States. It is not with the citizens, who with ratios of 100 to 1 pleaded with their representatives in Washington not to loot the national treasury to bail out Wall Street investment firms. Power lies with the corporations. These corporations, not us, pick who runs for president. You cannot be a candidate without their blessing and money. These corporations, including the Commission on Presidential Debates, a private corporation, determine who gets to speak and what issues candidates can or cannot challenge, from universal, not-for-profit, single-payer health care to Wall Street bailouts to NAFTA. If you do not follow the corporate script you become as marginal and invisible as Ralph Nader or Bob Barr or Cynthia McKinney.
Obama has always served his corporate masters. He opposed Rep. John Murtha's call for immediate withdrawal from Iraq and supported continued funding for the war. He voted in July 2005 to reauthorize the Patriot Act. He did not support an amendment that was part of a bankruptcy bill that would have capped credit card interest rates at 30 percent. He opposed a bill that would have reformed the notorious Mining Law of 1872, which allows mineral companies to rape federal land for profit. He did not back the single-payer health care bill HR 676, sponsored by Kucinich and John Conyers. He advocates the death penalty and nuclear power. He backed the class-action "reform" bill-the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA)-that was part of a large lobbying effort by financial firms, which make up Obama's second-biggest single bloc of donors. CAFA would effectively shut down state courts as a venue to hear most class-action lawsuits. Workers, under CAFA, would no longer have redress in many of the courts where these cases have a chance of defying powerful corporations. CAFA moves these cases into corporate-friendly federal courts dominated by Republican judges.
Obama's support for the bailout, however, is his most egregious betrayal. He had a brief, shining moment to prove he could lead, to capitalize on a popular revolt that cut across the political spectrum. He never attempted to address or mobilize the aspirations and passions of the vast majority of Americans. He was as craven, servile and cowardly as the party he represents. He returned to the campaign trail after Friday's vote as a slick and polished sales representative for our corporate state, telling us to calm down and accept the inevitable.
"Some of the most powerful speeches against this were given by members of the Republican Party who are on the political right," Kucinich said. "They did a superb job in poking holes in the underlying assumptions of the bailout. They say what they believe. Give me somebody who says what they believe and I can figure out how to get them to a new place. When people say one thing and do another it is very hard to be able to move a debate."
So let us honor, in our moment of defeat, the handful of elected officials who valiantly defied their party leaderships in the House to stage a remarkable revolt that at first succeeded. Kucinich is one. There were others-Brad Sherman, Marcy Kaptur, Peter DeFazio, Lloyd Doggett and Robert C. "Bobby" Scott. They are about all that is left of the old Democratic Party, the party that once looked out for the poor and the working class. Send them a note of thanks. They deserve it. And if you live in their districts make sure you get to the polls in November. They did not sell you out.
"We had two take-it-or-leave-it propositions and the second one was worse than the first," Kucinich said, referring to the plan that came loaded with pages of tax cuts. "Tax cuts are antithetical to a bailout. We never solved the problem. There were never any hearings on the bill. This premise, that we could prop up the stock market with a $700-billion investment and create some liquidity, was flawed. The problem is that banks do not want to loan to each other. It is not a liquidity problem. Banks are afraid they are going to collapse in short selling. There is a war going on between security firms and banks. Banks are under assault. They are not loaning. The dynamic is driven by the Accounting Standards Board, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Fed."
The root of the financial crisis, as critics of the bailout plan point out, is that millions of homeowners cannot pay their mortgages. The bailout, as the market decline on Friday following the vote illustrated, does not address the crisis. It solves nothing for the 10 million Americans who face foreclosure. It solves nothing for the growing numbers of unemployed and underemployed. It may well be the equivalent of tossing $850 billion of taxpayer money (including $150 billion in tax cuts) into a furnace and watching passively as our economy continues its plunge.
"We face a perfect financial storm," Kucinich warned. "The elements are the deficit spending for the war of 3 to 4 trillion dollars, the trillion and more tax cuts, the war itself and the lack of serious investment in the country. We are being hollowed out. We are going to see more unemployment and more people losing their homes. With $700 billion we could have made a real investment in the country, in jobs, in infrastructure and in homes. Instead, we got robbed."
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
225 Comments so far
Show AllHere is the result of a search on campaign contributions given by Richard Fuld of Lehman Brothers, whose compensation is estimated at $500 million over the last 8 years. There are obviously some errors and gaps in this record, but the general idea comes through. This one mogul who "raked in" 500 million in the last few years gave contributions of 1 to 3 thousand each to many different politicians. (How parsimonious, considering the return!) He gave to the Ds and the Rs, covered all bases.
There are lots of Richard Fulds, so you can multiply this phenomenon many times. Dennis Kucinich, Marcy Kaptur and others with a true concern for the populace probably received nothing like this.
Now these same recipients are the ones who vote on how to approach the bad debts on Wall Street. We need to change Congress - elect smart and honest people based on many many ordinary people working for them door to door for free.
Open Secrets Website, Center for Responsive Politics.
Search for Congressional Campaign Contributions by Richard Fuld of Lehman Brothers
Total for this search: $102,800
Date Amount Recipient
DATE AMOUNT RECIPIENT
05/07/08 -- $5000 -- Securities Industry & Financial Mkt Assn
01/28/08 -- $2000 -- Reed, Jack (D)
10/19/07 -- $2000 -- Clinton, Hillary (D)
05/30/07 -- $2000 -- Obama, Barack (D)
05/29/07 -- $2000 -- Clinton, Hillary (D)
04/09/07 -- $10000 -- Democratic Senatorial Campaign Cmte (D)
03/31/07 -- $2000 -- Dodd, Christopher J (D)
03/31/07 -- $2000 -- Dodd, Christopher J (D)
03/31/07 -- $2000 -- McCain, John (R)
03/27/07 -- $5000 -- Securities Industry & Financial Mkt Assn
06/26/06 -- $5000 -- Bond Market Assn
09/28/05 -- $1000 -- Lowey, Nita M (D)
09/02/05 -- $1000 -- Crapo, Mike (R)
03/30/05 -- $2000 -- Lieberman, Joe (I)
03/30/05 -- $2000 -- Lieberman, Joe (I)
03/15/05 -- $5000 -- Bond Market Assn
03/09/05 -- $1000 -- Clinton, Hillary (D)
10/22/04 -- $2000 -- Bowles, Erskine B (D)
07/08/04 -- $2000 -- Driscoll, Joseph Edward (D)
03/26/04 - $25000 -- Democratic Senatorial Campaign Cmte (D)
02/27/04 -- $5000 -- Bond Market Assn
10/09/03 -- $5000 -- Lehman Brothers
07/30/03 -- $1000 -- Dodd, Chris (D)
07/30/03 -- $1000 -- Dodd, Chris (D)
07/03/03 -- $2000 -- Bush, George W (R)
04/17/03 -- $2000 -- Gephardt, Richard A (D)
03/27/03 -- $2000 -- Lieberman, Joe (D)
03/26/03 -- $1000 -- Lowey, Nita M (D)
03/26/03 -- $1000 -- Schumer, Charles E (D)
03/26/03 -- $1000 -- Schumer, Charles E (D)
Joe
Exactly. Both Dims and Pugs are have been bought. The oligarchs grease both their palms, that way no matter who wins, McCain or McObama, we still get Bush III. I know this is hyperbole but the basic gist is correct. That is why in spite of the fact we put the Dims in control of the Congress Bush is still enacting his policies basically unopposed.
A vote for either is a vote for the SAME, that's why my protest is to vote for neither. Go 3rd parties! Go 5% matching funds!
double post.
I'm still not voting for Obama, but I won't fault anyone who does. I just hope that people don't get complacent when he gets in power and take him to task. I don't want Bill Clinton Mark 2. My vote for Nader is just a personal decision. Tell ya what, I'd give him a billion bucks if I could.
itsjustkarma
Please say more about "register".
So what, just vote for what you believe in, even if that requires a third party. The cornerstone of democracy is that you can freely vote your opinion and you don't need anybody else's advice that you 'have to' vote for a big party or you 'have to' vote for the person who is going to win. If that results in John McCain winning the election, as some people seem to believe, just make the country ungovernable. Since John McCain is participating in the election (In my opinion it would be unthinkable to vote for that baboon), there is a chance that he wins the election (especially since there are so many uneducated Americans who don't understand anything about what is going on). That does not mean you will have to accept him as your president. He'll probably steal the election by disenfranchising millions of voters and destroying millions of ballots elsewhere and Obama will cave in just the second day. Forget about Obama. What are YOU going to do when something like that happens ? You know what it takes. Just get into action.
Instead of discussing whom to vote for you would rather prepare a thorough monitoring of the election with citizen election monitors on every street corner. Trust me, John McCain has zero chance to win if the rules were fair in American elections.
DON'T ALLOW THEM TO STEAL YET ANOTHER ELECTION
To answer Umlaut's question, Bill Clinton didn't even pretend to care about environmental and labor issues when he zealously promoted and signed NAFTA into law shortly after taking office in 1993.
This blatant betrayal of the people who allowed him to beat Bush 41 resulted in voter apathy among Democrats in the 1994 midterm elections that allowed the Gingrich Republican takeover of Congress that then resulted in the Republicans pushing through their agenda for the remaining 6 years of Clinton's presidency.
I'm voting for "war-monger lite".
If it will save even a few lives, it will be worth it.
I hate that he voted for the Bailout.
But, due to Obama's willingness to talk plainly (as he did in Philadelphia a few months ago) about the deep roots of racism in this country, that is sufficient reason for me to vote for him.
Why doesn't the left ever acknowledge that this is an essential issue?
Could it be that we only hear (on this CD forum) from white progressives?
Don't you see how garden variety bigots and (worse) active white supremacists are being given the green light by McCain and Palin?
Their rhetoric scares me to the core.
WE CAN'T LET THEM INTO THE WHITE HOUSE!!!
Obama '08
"The Democrats gave us the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, which ripped down the firewalls that were put in place by the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act. "
the wiki link says "The bills were introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (R-TX) and in the House of Representatives by James Leach (R-IA)."
"Senate 90-8-1 and in the House: 362-57-15. This 'veto proof legislation' was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999"
What am I missing here? Does he mean the dems went along with it? then ok, but gave it to us? not really. It certainly wasn't Clintons's fault, although he may have voted for it anyway, who knows.
_____________________________________________
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it, misdiagnosing it and then misapplying the wrong remedies. " Groucho Marx
"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people."
H. L. Mencken
last friday saw the end of any previously held notion i might have had, that would equate a demoncrat as being a crumb better than the repukes.
Only third party candidates for me please, the dems can kiss my vote "goodbye" FOREVER!!!
the repukes never had it to begin with. even chuck hagel cant fly under this radar! oh wait, hes going back to the private sector, surprise surprise...
(smart man he is though, he knew that the proverbial shit is going to hit the fan)
Dennis Kucinich-is it time to leave the dems yet?, how many times will you be betrayed by your own party? or is everything you do just lip-service for them? come on, tell the truth, your secret is safe with me!
dhv writes...I believe that to engage those we stand against while maintaining our own connection to their humanity is, as Dr. King embodied, the ultimate act of moral courage. I can’t know where Mr. Hedges stands in his own soul and perhaps, while he wrote the article above, he was maintaining a heart at peace. I DO know that, while I agree with and appreciate most of the points he made, upon finishing reading, I did not feel called to the “better angles” of my nature—rather, the more hateful and intolerant parts of me were stirred against my fellow citizens.
I felt moved to write about this because I believe the spirit with we approach change work is strategically essential to our success. Beyond that, however, if I am to follow my own urgings, what is in Mr. Hedges’ heart is irrelevant as far as what I may learn from him, both in his analysis and the tenacity of his efforts. I continue to admire him and the the good will that I believe ultimately moves him to action. May we all work as hard for the benefit of the common good, and may we all do so with a keen sense of our common humanity.
Ephraim, i do believe you totally missed the point of dhv's comment. thats ok though, 'humans' arent perfect ;)
This article is another perfect example why I supported, campaigned for, and contributed to Dennis Kucinich during the primary campaign. My heart does not bleed for Obama and this is more reason why I'll probably vote for Nader. Obama is a trader to us Dems.
You mean traitor. I'm sure Obama's a trader too, mainly of trust.
Unfortunately you having supported, campaigned for, and contributed to Dennis Kucinich has indirectly helped Obama, a corporate master. Kucinich is a great waste of the left's energy, time and cash.
Watch this. If Naomi Klein is right, the horse is already out of the barn and we have no time to waste.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XgkeTanCGI&eurl=http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/36675
Just as I begin to question my support for 3rd party candidates, I come across an article such as this one.
I'm still votin' Nader. I don't care what anyone else says. And when Obama wins (better him than McCain), I will hold him accountable, and hope that the rest of us follow suit.
Thanks for the the reminder Mr. Hedges. Great piece.
"When Obana wins...." no chance if we all vote for Nader and those great 3rd party candidates.....you'll have McCain/Pulin and maybe even Pulin herself (ugh) if McCain fades into the sunset.....then who will you hold accountable???? And I do agree Hedges article is great....What is the solution??? I'll just MOVE ON and work for Obama, the old lesser of two evils move....sorry Ralp Nader, love you....
thegreatrockyhill sez:
"..when Obama wins (better him than McCain).." & "I'm still votin' Nader."
Voting for Nader is not going to change Nader's chance of winning, but it might help McCain's.
There are two people that have a chance to be the next President. If you don't vote for one of them you are leaving the decision to others.
Never mind that MOST states are safe states for either Democrats or Republicans. NO ONE IN A SAFE STATE HAS ANY EXCUSE TO VOTE AGAINST WHAT THEY BELIEVE IN!
For example, if you live in California like me, both of us, everyone we know and every Californian on all our email lists could vote for Nader (and possibly scare the pants off the Bush-enabling corporate "Democrats," sending them a serious message they could not ignore) and Obama will still get all of California's electoral votes.
If you live in a "battleground state," I can almost understand your surrender to lesser-evilism, but since most voters DO live in safe states, and you don't acknowledge that in your gloom-and-doom scenario, I can only assume that either you are unaware of the (admittedly archaic and antidemocratic) Electoral College or you are simply a DPA who is using fear to pressure others into voting for the candidate of YOUR choice. If that is indeed the case, SHAME ON YOU!
ctrl-z
Not succumbing to lesser of two evilism, sorry. I'm not holding my nose. I doubt Nader will be a factor anyway. He really wasn't in the last 2 elections no matter what his detractors suggest. 3rd parties will never gain strength as long as people continue their sheeplike devotion to the Big 2. And change 'aint comin' from them...unless the people raise hell.
You are leaving the decision to others.
If you want to build third party strength work on it between Presidential election years until the third parties can actually make a difference.
Right now all they can do is send progressive votes down the drain.
Here is to my real progressive vote going down the drain and here is to the progressive pretenders throwing their vote down the drain on pond scum like Oboma: THE MORE OF THE SAME CANDIDATE.
"You are leaving the decision to others."
So who do I vote for? War-monger vs. war-monger lite?
"If you want to build third party strength work on it between Presidential election years until the third parties can actually make a difference."
Well you have a point there, but how can they gain strength if no one votes for them. When will the right time be to vote Green or whatever?
"Right now all they can do is send progressive votes down the drain."
But what if the progressive that is put before is isn't progressive enough?
thegreatrockyhill sez:
"So who do I vote for? War-monger vs. war-monger lite?"
That's not how I'd characterize it. How about 'Anti-choice vs. Pro-choice'? Or, 'Military Man vs. Constitutional Law Scholar'? But even if it was 'War Monger vs. War Monger lite'? Which would you rather have?
"...how can they [third parties] gain strength if no one votes for them. When will the right time be to vote Green or whatever?"
How does any organization gain strength? By organizing. Getting people to commit money and time. By working at the grassroots level to field local candidates and then using that as a base to move up. When is the right time to vote Green? When they have enough votes to have an impact on the outcome of elections.
"But what if the progressive that is put before is isn't progressive enough?"
If you were dying of thirst would you refuse a glass of water because it wasn't full? A viable candidate who 'isn't progressive enough' is still preferable to the candidate that is even less progressive, or to a candidate who isn't viable at all.
~ctrl-z's~ whole conceptualization is skewed.
HOW will a vote for Nader "help" McCain?
This is never explained.
WHY must we only work on "third party strength...between Presidential election years"?
This is never explained.
On top of this you are told that failure to do what ~ctrl-z~ (not YOU, ie an "other") IS TELLING YOU TO DO will mean "You are leaving the decision to others."
No explanations AND a bizarre self-contradiction.
Hilarious.
Good point. How it is my vote for a 3rd party helps McCain is also a mystery to me seeing as I would rather not vote than vote for Obama. If Nader had not run in 2000 and 2004 I would have voted for a socialist or no one at all. Again how that helps McCain is beyond me. Perhaps our resident reboot can shed some light.
matti
I'm going to assume you are pretending not to understand, rather than just being incapable of understanding.
Between Obama and McCain, the only candidates with a chance of winning, McCain is the candidate of the right and Obama is the candidate of the left. No matter how much you argue they are the same, it is irrational to pretend Obama isn't to the left of McCain. So if someone who is leftist/liberal/Democratic/progressive chooses to vote 3rd party, it's a vote that, in all likelyhood, would have gone for Obama, not McCain. That's how voting for 3rd party candidates helps McCain.
You can work on 3rd party strength during Presidential election years, but if you vote 3rd party you're taking a vote that could have had an influence on the outcome of the election and using it to send a message.
If you think sending a message is more important than voting on a viable candidate, you are leaving the choice of the President to others - those who choose to vote on a viable candidate.
So, is sending a message more important than the outcome of the election?
Your logic says that if there are two people, both of whom kill innocents, steal vast amounts of money, betray those who trusted them, enrich the coffers of the military/industrial complex who thrive on wars and taking control, you will support the one YOU THINK might be slightly better. You have no evidence that this is so. While others who have had enough of this and are voting elsewhere have piles of evidence to make our case.
And you think this is progress?
I say turn your backs on those who would do such harm to others. Turn towards those who would heal the planet. If we do this, work towards a better world, others will join us. Most people see the corrupt candidates for who they are. Those Obama supporters know what he has done but IMAGINE McCain is worse. Maybe so. Zinn said the Republicans are SLIGHTLY to the right of Obama. In other words, Obama is a right wing corporate lackey.
Vote Nader, 08!
Hank o'Fur -
Lists of differences between McCain and Obama have been posted here time and again. To pretend you haven't seen them is disingenuous.
If you can't see a difference between "Bomb, bomb Iran" & "We will talk" you're just plain blind.
You're willing to let others select the President because you want to vote for someone who will never be elected President.
Those of us who care about the future of the country will be voting for someone who has a chance. Someone who is closer to progressive ideals than McCain.
Vote Obama '08
My "support for Obama" has always been a ittle shaky.Well, not during the 2004 Convention--I thought he would be going places. I liked him.
Then, he won Iowa caucus. (I had wanted Edwards). So I gave him another look-see. He seemed "just fine", but I sensed a "detachment".Maybe he is different in person.
Well, he got nominated. OK. Then, WOOOOSH!! He runs RIGHT with speed seldom seen, evenin the world of USA politics. I thought, oh no. I kept listening. Oh no.
I was trying to decide a 3rd Patty--still am, I guess.. I had to go to a Union Hall today, to have my house re-appraised, so my taxes wont go up (I wil lose my house if they dont agree--stay off me--it is way below median value , even for Ohio)). Everyone there was voting Obama, signs everywhere.,etc. I thought, well, you know, McCain...and I ran into some rightwing on TD--I realized how much I truly hate them. I thought, well, everybody wants Obama, but I was not comfortable with it.
I agree with Hedges on everything.(Well, not everything. I'm agnostic>) Everytime I try to make a case for Obama, I end up with tortured logic! Family, friends, former political groups--many are not speaking to me! That is just absurd. They dont evenn want me to help to check voter challenging this year. I guess they dont trust me. Well--same/same. But, to imply that I would allow my judgement to be clouded, its really pretty insulting.
For all its "historical significance" , I think that this election has ended up being the most divisive yet.
Good luck with your house and I hope you keep it!
They tell us it's the little things
That surely mean a lot
(Advice which is bestowed on you
From when you were a tot.)
Small gifts and minor compliments
We all must take to heart
And recognize their value.
For this is the highest art!
So why then, when we err
(With small infractions we might make)
Does this cause great eruptions
And teutonic plates to shake?
A dollar from your bank account
Once entered in as credit
Was actually a buck you spent
And should have been a debit.
This will not break the IMF
Nor crumble the World Bank
But earthly masters punish you
And make you walk the plank.
Although the dollar's value
Is declining as we sit,
Their errors are the grander kind
But yours will make you shit.
Forget the holy practices
Which employ deficit spending.
Just overdraw by seven cents
You'll think you're life is ending.
Humble yourself and send a card
In which you humbly state
Regrets for losing seven cents
From your accounting slate.
Will bankers smile forgivingly
And laud your small, sweet action?
Will your repentent card cause them
A forgiving reaction?
Guess again, my child,
They will never react so well.
Because, you see, all bankers
Come to us direct from hell.
They see no value in our lives
Nor things which grow each day.
They reason that we take up space
And for this, we must pay.
So they create false money
With its fluctuating worth
They worship at a temple
Which contains no love or mirth.
Dismiss their admonitions
When bad math might cause you stumble.
Their evil cannot last for long.
Rejoice! For they'll soon crumble.
Their empires are all fantasy
Built on some strange belief.
Look forward to their toppling
And pray they never get relief.
Keep focussed on the days
When small things will again have value.
Love of money is a sham.
The banks all suck, I tell you.
Thanks for this!
I gave Cindy a hundred bucks. Hope that helps.
I feel that this is another Clintonesk moment.
I was not crazy about Clinton--but he never did anythign like this!!
BTW--Hillary Clinton wanted to freeze interst rates (and ARMs--it is what all teh W. EU countries did) about 2 years ago. When she would being it up in the debates, Obaam would call it a "moral hazard".
It would have saved us this horrible worldwide mess.
What I meant is...."listen to what I say and do not pay attention to what I do".
Hedge says "We, as citizens, have only a handful of representatives left in Washington..."
Neither of the two main congressional candidates on my ballot come close to representing my views, so I moved to San Francisco to help Cindy Sheehan unseat Nancy Pelosi.
The point is, we can support good candidates wherever they are. Many national supports of Sheehan have already elected to volunteer in Cindy's campaign, especially doing phone banking from afar. people on the east coast can call voters in San Francisco in the evening for free on most cell phones.
There is SOMETHING each of us can do. Visit http://www,cindyforcongress.org
Can't afford SF, cant afford a cellphone.
I tried to move to SF a few years ago--well,, Berkeley or Oakland. But, the positions I applied for (after I check ed housing costs)well, I guess I shouldve known I couldnt afford it. I had some friends there, but, they were already 3-4 to a house.
That is alot of the problem with the bailout. If I couldve sold my dump of a house (they reassessed it today, as being "unfinished"--at least my taxes will go down), or my parents' former country house, I would have left Dayton, Ohio a long time ago.
It will be along time before I will have a chance to vote for anyone besides Turner vs Mitaskides, or Voinovich vs, ???. Maybe forever.Until there is liquidity in the housing market, they have a whole lot of us where they want us.
no more pesky middle class. Lords and serfs.
The fact that Democrats are going to bat for the finacial elites of the oligarchy should not come as a surprise to anyone by now. Wall St. and the MIC own them and the Pugs. It is so obvious by now that you'd have to be a committed self-deluded hardcore DPA to believe otherwise. A vote for a Dim is a vote for the SAME.
And don't expect any help from Barack Obama and Joe Biden, who lobbied hard for the bill and voted for it.
-so true, Chris, but don't worry I wasn't expecting Obama to do anything other than what he did. No surprise.
"It is a direct attack on the American people's ability to be able to stabilize their homes and their neighborhoods.
-read that again slowly DPAs
our leaders chose to accelerate the wealth of the nation upwards.
-when you live in an oligarchy that what "leaders" do
Power lies with the corporations.
-yup, oligarchy.
Obama has always served his corporate masters.
-ding!
Obama arrived on the Senate floor Brutus-like to thrust a knife into the back of the working and middle class.
-I know what a snake!
He lobbied hard for the bill. He did so, according to some who met with him on Capitol Hill, because he feared that if he opposed the bailout and it triggered a market collapse it could cost him the election.
-Obama would sell his soul to win the election. I am convinced there is nothing he would sellout on. Nothing.
Obama's betrayal is the betrayal of the Democratic Party.
-ding!
Obama's voting record in the Senate is in line with the corrupt Democratic mainstream
-a vote for Obama is a vote for the SAME
including Biden, who works on behalf of corporations and especially the credit card industry
-I didn't know that but Biden struck me as a scoundrel
Time to dump the Pugs and Dims! Vote 3rd party or we are doomed!
What's the deal with these dems.? They KNOW where the general public stands, sheesh, on virtually everything, the FISA Bill, Impeachment, Patriot Act, funding the Iraq war, now the bailout of the billionaires. THEY WERE ELECTED TO STOP THE WAR AND IMPEACH BU$H, but they don't do what they were elected for in the first place because it might cost them votes in the 2008 election??? The calls into the House and Senate were 100:1 AGAINST PASSING THE FUCKING BAILOUT, and they vote for it because a financial disaster MIGHT happen if they vote against it and it might cost them votes? We are in a financial disaster. Already, like right now!!! Why are they unabe to see that simply doing as their constituants want every now and then might just accidentally net them a few votes??? Is it just me or is any one else confused as well...'cause I sure as hell don't see the logic behind their reasoning?!?
Vote 3rd party, Get McCain.
At ~ctrl-z~:
Why again?
Vote McBama - Paden !
Give your soul to your corporate masters like the willfully ignorant coward you are
correctamundo, Obama bin Biden or Mad Kane/Appalling will result in the same.
Remember the "credit cared bailout", the one that let MBNA buy up the credit cards you had owned for years? Did you wonder why alot of your credit cards payment centers moved to Delaware or Utah? Biden sponsored this for his son, Hunter, who worked for MBNA.Did you remember getting all of those offers in the mail? I dont suppose anyone remembers when cc fees were about 7.9% a month.
to make it worse, they passed teh Bankruptcy Bill, and, now, you can no longer file bankruptcy, even on just credit card bills, if you own a house, or you wil forfeit the house, Only states where it doesnt apply are Arizona and Florida.
This is all what makes me so angry when I heaR people talking about how "stupid" people had to be to "get these loans". Credit card rates went through the roof, (They soon wil again--teh Senate just passed another toothless cc bill), people had put medical bills, food, necessities on them--and, now , they couldnt file bankruptcy,. So they took out equity loans, to pay off their 39.99% cards. The Biden bill gave teh cc cos. permission to "change the contract", but, you could not.The "double cycle billing", teh huge late fees, the credit reporting that isd allowed to lie , and you have to BUY your score (you can get copies of the reports, but al they do is "put your note i there" that the info. is wrong)
Starting to make sense, people?
In the meantime, wages went down, the dollar inflated, housing prices tanked, IRAs and pensions tanked (they never shouldve been in the mkt>) and-the dessimatin of teh middle clas (whose wealth is usually tied up in housing) was complete. Well, not completely complete --until the other day.
Thanks for the info. Good points.
(Note: rather long posting ahead…)
I have great admiration for Chris Hedges. I am inspired by his willingness to look the ugly realities of our world in the eye and take action from a deep sense of moral courage. He illuminates issues in ways that helps us cut through our own denial and delusions so we can better take actions that make a real difference.
In Mr. Hedges' brilliant work “War is a Force That Gives Us Meaning,” he frames his thesis in terms of the life-instinct (Eros) and death-urge (Thanatos) aspects of the psyche as identified in Greek mythology and taken up in psychology. He suggests that in war it becomes nearly impossible not to fall in thrall to the terrible beauty of Thanatos, the horrific reality of which he had ample opportunity to observe and experience during his many years as a war correspondent. He further observed that, in his wartime experiences, it was only in the presence of Eros—when near those who were in or expressing love—that he found relief from Thanatos and a reconnection to humanity.
All of which is to say that I fear, based on the tone and spirit I’ve picked up in articles by Mr. Hedges over the last year or two, that he is being drawn into the gravitational pull of Thanatos, even as he strives well and hard for justice and decency for the sake of Eros. More and more frequently, I find, he uses the kind of language he so insightfully identified in “War is a Force That Gives Us Meaning” that he pointed out has always been used by groups to demonize one another and create the atmosphere that allows people to cross the moral line into a state of War.
In the piece above, he writes…
“Look coldly at the ballots THEY cast against US. We,
as citizens, have only a handful of representatives left
in Washington…” (Emphasis mine)
Mr. Hedges makes clear in his book that casting our fellow humans as The Other—especially in us-against-them terms that paint one’s own group as embattled victims—is an essential prerequisite to a state of war.
“Obama arrived on the Senate floor Brutus-like
to thrust a knife into the back of the working and
middle class.”
Beyond the violence of the language, I can only imagine that, in another state of mind, Mr. Hedges would be aware of how ugly stereotypes of Palestinians and other Arabs often include that knife-wielding image and might avoid such terms. I find its use here, referring to a public figure that is the focus of a campaign that uses the demonization of Islam to attack him, very disturbing. In fact, while I appreciate the facts put forward, the cumulative tone of much of the article comes across to me as a relentless attack on Senator Obama and the Democrats, with a great deal less attention to Senator McCain or other Republicans.
Set aside the question of whether such attacks may serve to sabotage the Democrats and, perhaps, contribute to a Republican victory. (I for one do believe an Obama administration would be better than a McCain administration, just as I believe we would not have waged a war that killed hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children if Al Gore had won the election in 2000.)
What is much more deeply troubling to me is that, lately, I see little evidence in Mr. Hedges writing of any recognition of the humanity of those whose policies and actions he stands against. Who knows better than he that, ultimately, the only antidote to Thanatos is Eros? The means always inform the ends, either poisoning or redeeming them. We simply cannot create justice and peace when our hearts are at war. That knowledge was, extraordinarily, the ground of being in African-American communities in the struggles for freedom and civil rights.
I believe that to engage those we stand against while maintaining our own connection to their humanity is, as Dr. King embodied, the ultimate act of moral courage. I can’t know where Mr. Hedges stands in his own soul and perhaps, while he wrote the article above, he was maintaining a heart at peace. I DO know that, while I agree with and appreciate most of the points he made, upon finishing reading, I did not feel called to the “better angles” of my nature—rather, the more hateful and intolerant parts of me were stirred against my fellow citizens.
I felt moved to write about this because I believe the spirit with we approach change work is strategically essential to our success. Beyond that, however, if I am to follow my own urgings, what is in Mr. Hedges’ heart is irrelevant as far as what I may learn from him, both in his analysis and the tenacity of his efforts. I continue to admire him and the the good will that I believe ultimately moves him to action. May we all work as hard for the benefit of the common good, and may we all do so with a keen sense of our common humanity.
Very well written.
I'm sure Chris Hedges will be thrilled to have heard from the angel, dhv. No mere human could have written such a sanctimonious screed. How disappointing that Hedges seems angry about something, that his soul is stirred to expressing emotions opposed to some other group of equally wonderful and good people, the Republicans and the Democrats who fully support them, as they lay waste to the entire world. Hedges is succumbing to the "gravitational pull" of the Thanatos principle, bearing death in his too angry soul over all these trifles. dhv could mentor Hedges back to superior spiritual health, if only he'd stop thinking about these buzzards in Congress as "the Other," and casting the rest of us as their victims. Doesn't Chris know we're all God's chillun' and nobody's a bad guy in all this? Maybe he's forgotten the words to Kumbaya, having witnessed so much war and all those naughty dispiriting things that make one see how evil actually operates. Poor Chris, if only he'd listen carefully to the enlightened dhv. Then he'd write drivel that changes nothing, as most writing does, and we'd all be spiritually uplifted and blissfully content, and nobody would have to feel like a silly victim of anyone ever again.
Ephraim and Adam Sandler would like to thank the Academy
I read "War Is a Force..". It was a dark, disturbing, and, painfully honest, book. Until you have seen the kind of death he has seen, I really doubt thta you could imagine what is in his mind, but, also in the minds of the troops and civilians , in Baghdad, and, many other parts otf the world , right now.
I admire honesty. However a person may feel, who am I too judge? Havent you ever heard, "Walk a mile in my shoes?". I wil not judge, even Mccain, for his behavior , when they are on a situation wher it is life/death, eros/thanatos, kill or be killed. I suggest you grant others the same respect, unless you have also been in this situation yourself.Gawd, our govt asks them to go--the least we can do is listen.
"Am. Facists" sounds dark--but, it has some very funny parts in it. Hedges readily admitted that he "purged his soul" in "War...". It is a simple thing to "remove oneself" from the death and destruction we allow to happen, especially if you wont have to pay for the war (we all wil be now) not fight it. Dont say it is all voluntary--stop loss made that a farce.
Not only are people dying in teh middle east, people wil die in the streets this winter, from a lack of houusing, I think that it is most appropriate that we come to ternms with what this horrible mess realy means to the common people of this country, and, around the world..
I do not know whether a "knife in the back" refers to "Islam"--but I dont think that anyone at CD (or Hedge) think that Obama is a "Muslin" . If they do--they are stupid. Rev. Wright, a Muslim? So what if he was a Muslim?
I think Hedges was referring to, you know, the ROMAN incidetn. I am sure that you know that , too. I do believe that Obama has shown us which side he is on. If you refuse to accept it, you wil probably feel better, for awhile.
Is this a book report or are you scared?
This article by Hedges is very dramatic, loaded, inflammatory, and one-sided. Please watch Bill Moyers Journal from Sunday night for a more objective and thorough analysis.
There is plenty of blame to go around for getting into our economic mess. Nobody likes the idea of the bailout/rescue bill. But how many banks must fail before our economy becomes completely dysfunctional? We must also consider the impact of our economy on the rest of the world, to which we have spread our problems. Aren't we obligated to do something?
Fraud and deregulation are partly responsible for the mess. But so is greed, and many ordinary Americans need to own up to being part of the problem. We have become a very materialistic society. Many of us want more than we need, and buy more than we can pay for. It's time for us all to pay up.
Please re-read the article. Much of it was not opinion--but facts. The Bills that Obama and Biden sponsored and signed. The Amendments offered by Kucinichh et al in the House, and the ones offered by Sanders--Obama lobbyed for this.
I mean, you can say, like"I dont care, I'm gonna vote for Obama, anyway". But, you cannot HONESTLY say that, yo think he cares about the average person in the face of so much money.
It was no more melodramatic than those waxing ecstatic over Obama
"It's time for us all to pay up."
What do you mean "us" kimosabe rich-man?
What a load of crap
"It's time for us all to pay"
US ALL, the working people have been paying for the rich since 1980. And you think it's a good idea that this nonsense stealing continue
How about giving the bailout to the people, who will buy things like groceries, cars, pay off credit cards, mortgages....things that will actually stimulate this rancid corporate conservative created economy.
Why are you so quick to agree that the poor bailing out the rich is such a good thing to do. Have you been awake the last 28 years ?
orangutan,
I don't see Kucinich as a fraud, maybe he is, but I doubt it.
I think the point to emphasize is why the Democratic Party has put up with him.
His function, for them, is to keep progressives from leaving the Party.
Recently, as Kucinich has become more outspoken against the Democrats, they have responded by trying to remove him from office.
http://kucinich.us/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=28&Itemid=76
Thanks for that link and inf. Just goes to show ya..
If voting for Nader puts McCain in the White House with his charming vp Palin, would the world be a better place???? (She finally read a NYTimes article, she boasted)....She could look into Putin's eyes as intently as she looks into the TV camera and check out his soul....Putin/Palin the perfect politial pair !!! Another thanks to Bernie Sanders of Vermont....like Nader, Kucinich and the others like them I plead DON'T HEAD FOR THE COUNTRY DOWN UNDER,we need you here !!
Not facing up NOW, to how coporate Obama is, after al the selling out he has done , just since his nomination, is , simply, ridiculous.
Want accountability in action?
How about working to elect Cindy Sheehan to Congress representing San Francisco?
Her victory against Nancy Pelosi will send a huge message.
As speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi could have weighed in on the bailout for the average person's benefit. That did not appear to happen.
Couldn't Nancy Pelosi from her powerful position control what got voted on in the house? She could have helped end funding for the war. We already know about her public declaration against impeachment, not holding Bush accountable.
www.cindyforcongress.org
Cindy needs money! Send her some if you can.
The blame game is how criminals are caught and punished.
Look back.
Place blame.
FREE AMERICA
REVOLUTIONARY (DIRECT) DEMOCRACY
B.O. is beginning to smell more and more like McCain Lite, but hopefully we will have a better chance of moving him to the left than we would J.M.
actually, on several key issues Obama sounds more like McCain heavy
and you forgot to mention that if McCain is elected his crimes against humanity will meet resistance
If Obama is elected his crimes against humanity will meet little, if any resistance. The left caved to Clinton because of his false label, and they'll do it again for African American Clinton
Plus,
Why don't you stop playing lesserevilism, grow a pair, and do something that requires a spine, like support the underdog who stands for your beliefs. Until you do.....They Win
Lesserthoughtism sez:
"actually, on several key issues Obama sounds more like McCain heavy"
You know, not matter how many times people point out the differences between Obama and McCain, someone tosses out the vague generality that they're the same.
So,
Why don't you stop playing lesserthoughtism, grow a pair, and do something that requires a spine, like support the candidate who stands a chance of getting elected. Until you do.....They Win
HILARIOUS!
Now jumping on the bandwagon is "do(ing) something that requires a spine"?
Whereas sticking to one's principles implies one needs to "grow a pair"?
The Bravery of Conformity!
Fantastic!
One day I hope to have that strength to do what I'm told.
The only bandwagon I see around here is the anti-Obama one, and you're already on it.
Out in the real world people are trying to decide on which of the two candidates with a chance to win will be best for the country.
On the anti-Obama bandwagon you're in a dreamland where who will be the next President makes no difference. Where votes make no difference or where the chance the votes might be stolen means you shouldn't vote at all. Where sending a message is more important than selecting a President.
Oh, there is a difference all right! It is much nicer if a pleasant chap sends us all to hell than an unpleasant one.
Yes. We dont need a "more attractive and charming" capitalist sell-out.
Baaaaahhhhhhh
Thought I'd speak your language for a second
Waaaaahhhhhhh
Thought I'd speak your language for a second
yes, you hit the nail on the head. unfortunately taking the easy way out is par for the course in the dem camp. they in no way stand toe to toe for our beliefs any more than the repubs do. in fact, they are more of a hindrence to our cause.
I'm in agreement. They, the Democrats are the biggest hindrence we (those who wish to take our country back) face.
"...I think you reserve impeachment for grave, grave breeches, and intentional breeches of the president’s authority,…I believe if we began impeachment proceedings we will be engulfed in more of the politics that has made Washington dysfunction,…We would once again, rather than attending to the people’s business, be engaged in a tit-for-tat, back-and-forth, non-stop circus.”
- Barack Obama, Constitutional Scholar, in 2007, explaining that lying our country to war, outing an undercover CIA agent, illegally wiretapping its citizens and torturing prisoners denied habeas corpus are not grave offenses
Yes,
The fascists go after slick for getting his knob polished
but it would be "tit for tat" to go after the fascists for intentionally misleading the American people into an immoral, illegal, unConstitutional war-oil grab-occupation
(which has lead to a million dead Iraqis, mostly women and children, and 5,000 Americans who apparently didn't mean it when they swore an oath to protect the Constitution),
illegally spying on the American public, arresting without warrant, torturing the same people who have yet to even be charged with a crime, torturing people to death, and on and on and on.
Obama is nothing more than a silver tongued corporate whore. The kind of rat filth that rises to the top when the people sell out and fall into line for that oh so corporate control game, lesserevilism
Lesserthoughtism
All the other trolls should thank you for making them look good in comparison.
Do you have actual arguments or just the same "lesser evil" thing.
Tell us what Obama has DONE for the people. We don't care about your faith, we want to hear facts. For example, what is it that makes you think he will be better than McCain, even though he has the same bosses, receives the same money from the military/industrial/political complex and has been thoroughly vetted. You think the empire doesn't vet it's PR people?
Hank Fur sez:
"Tell us what Obama has DONE for the people."
Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama
"Obama voted in favor of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and cosponsored the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act.[57] In September 2006, Obama supported a related bill, the Secure Fence Act.[58] Obama introduced two initiatives bearing his name: Lugar–Obama, which expanded the Nunn–Lugar cooperative threat reduction concept to conventional weapons,[59] and the Coburn–Obama Transparency Act, which authorized the establishment of USAspending.gov, a web search engine on federal spending.[60] On June 3, 2008, Senator Obama, along with Senators Thomas R. Carper, Tom Coburn, and John McCain, introduced follow-up legislation: Strengthening Transparency and Accountability in Federal Spending Act of 2008.[61]
Obama sponsored legislation requiring nuclear plant owners to notify state and local authorities of radioactive leaks.[62] In December 2006, President Bush signed into law the Democratic Republic of the Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act, marking the first federal legislation to be enacted with Obama as its primary sponsor.[63] In January 2007, Obama and Senator Feingold introduced a corporate jet provision to the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act, which was signed into law in September 2007.[64] He introduced Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act, a bill to criminalize deceptive practices in federal elections.[65] Obama also introduced the Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007.[66]
Obama and Richard Lugar visit a Russian mobile launch missile dismantling facility[67]Later in 2007, Obama sponsored an amendment to the Defense Authorization Act adding safeguards for personality disorder military discharges.[68] He sponsored the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act supporting divestment of state pension funds from Iran's oil and gas industry, and co-sponsored legislation to reduce risks of nuclear terrorism.[69][70] Obama also sponsored a Senate amendment to the State Children's Health Insurance Program providing one year of job protection for family members caring for soldiers with combat-related injuries.[71]"
It is you who refuses to discuss things but instead just waits till others state their position and the jumps them -as if from under a bridge- with some B.S. attack.
This would appear to make YOU the "troll", not anyone else.
Vote for anybody but the two parties
And watch President McCain get sworn in.
Not if you help us build an alternative. It's up to you, not us. We've already seen the mountain top! And it ain't the Democrat Party. It's the power of the people to refuse to go along. At last!
Could this be the moment we have been waiting for?
Have you ever heard of the power of persuasian? You know, like when yo try to sell somebody Viagra, or something?
See, if you want to "sell Obama", you ned to point out good things about him (like y wold viagra), instead of just fear-mongering about how "awfulizing" it will be if we dont vote Obama.
Awfulizing. Catstrophizing---doesnt work so well, now that things are so f*cked up.
Let's not forget that it was Billy-boy Clinton who was recieving money from
the Red Chinese and others, in the sell-out of our industrial base to China.
The Clintons have become multi-millinaires since the sell-out, a treason act
if we dare say it. It was the Clintons and Bush families who promoted this
Free Trade, Global Economy, Nafta, Cafta, and all those other alphabet nick
names for their own selfish money makers. Will these people ever be called on
to explain this crap? Time for a major revolt in this country if there ever was one. Bring back the Guillotine..
freddie kilowatt,
Unplug that water hose, duder. You are electrocuting yourself.
Hey guys and gals, there is hope. We, the people, can make our world into anything we want. We don't have to let a handful of spivs, carpetbaggers and amoral politicians run the world for their exclusive benefit.
We can have a revolution like they did in France, clean the place up, hang the evildoers and robber barons from the nearest tree, take their assets and share them around.
It's up to us. Let's start building the barricades!
For some answers, click on:
www.dangerouscreation.com
This is very true, actually. But, trying to "rally the troops" around here, is like, trying to get a capitalist to "fail on their own".
Sign me up! Oh, crap! I forgot where I put the matches.
The BIG question is..who is bringing (and springing) for the gasoline?