Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- When You're Cutting Social Security, 'Wealthy' Begins at $25K
- With Little More Than a Note, Obama Deploys US Troops To Niger
- Stripped of 'Country of Origin' Label, US Agrees to Sell Tear Gas to Egypt
- Who Can Own Life? Farmer vs. Monsanto Before US High Court
- 5 Reasons Why the Keystone XL Pipeline is Bad for the Economy
- Who Can Own Life? Farmer vs. Monsanto Before US High Court
- Scale Implosion: After Ruining America, the Era of Giant Chain Stores Is Over
- Decolonize the Consumerist Wasteland: Re-imagining a World Beyond Capitalism and Communism
- 5 Reasons Why the Keystone XL Pipeline is Bad for the Economy
- Lose Your Lawn
Popular content
Today's Top News
Ignoring Propethic Predictors
I've wondered often why people who go to "town meetings" held by campaigning politicians rarely ask fundamental questions.
Here is one that should have been asked of presidential candidate Barack Obama: "If you get to the White House, will you appoint to top positions Americans who have a track record of making the right decisions in their respective fields?"
"Of course, I will," Obama would have undoubtedly replied.
Of course, he did not when it came to the collapse of the corrupt Wall Street casinos and the bailout of these gamblers by the American people. Obama chose the very Wall Streeters and Wall Street servants who were involved in, condoned, or profited from the speculative binges that led to the biggest government bailout scheme in world history. The President's explanation is that he wants experienced people who know how Wall Street works. Yeah, right! In reality, he wanted political cover.
Something very important is missing when even people who are part of the ruling establishment are ignored, marginalized, or ridiculed even though their detailed, public warnings prove to be all too accurate.
Consider billionaire, Ross Perot. Back in the 1980s and 1990s, Ross, as everyone calls him, was right on General Motors, right on NAFTA trade, and right on the federal deficits.
In 1984, he joined the Board of Directors of GM after selling his successful company, EDS, to the auto giant. He could scarcely believe how stodgy, bureaucratic, and insensitive GM executives were in running the company. He tried to shake up the boys at the top to meet the fast-growing competition from Asia and Europe.
The GM brass couldn't stand Ross "at large" probing up and down the company, so in 1986 they bought out his shares in return for him leaving the Board.
Two years later, reflecting on his experience at GM with a reporter from Fortune, Perot called the "General Motors system a blanket of fog that keeps people from doing what they know needs to be done."
Warming up, Perot continued: "One day I made a speech to some senior executives. I said, ‘Okay, guys, I'm going to give you the whole code on what's wrong. You don't like your customers. You don't like your dealers. You don't like the people who make your cars. You don't like your stockholders. And, to a large extent, you don't like one another. For this company to win, we're going to have to love our customers. We're going to have to stop fretting about dealers who make too much money and hope they make $1 billion a year though us. The guys on the factory floor are the salt of the earth-not mad-dog, rabid, burn-the-plant-down radicals. And all this sniping at one another-the financial guys vs. the cars guys-is terribly destructive.'"
GM didn't listen to Ross. Now, after a long, relentless slide, GM is bankrupt, abandoning their workers, two thousand of their dealers, and their customers' grievances. Moreover, GM is into the U.S. taxpayer for over $70 billion.
Perot devoted much of his 1993 published book Save Your Job, Save Our Country to NAFTA and trade. Looking back, he was right most of the time. NAFTA cost more U.S. jobs than it created, generated a huge U.S. trade deficit with Mexico, and mainly benefited the "36 businessmen who own Mexico's 39 largest conglomerates or over half of Mexico's Gross National Product."
The border-located maquiladora factories have high worker turnover and squeeze the laborers in often unsafe conditions for little pay.
Here is how Perot described the scene behind the boasting of Washington, DC, and corporations about the large increase in trade after NAFTA:
"Most of the goods produced in the maquiladoras are shipped into the U.S. market. Consequently, most of the so-called trade between the U.S. and Mexico is not trade as trade is commonly understood. Rather, it is primarily U.S. companies shipping their own machinery, components, and raw materials across the border into their Mexican factories and then shipping their finished or semi-finished goods back over the border into the U.S."A good deal of the U.S. auto industry went south after NAFTA, leaving workers and communities stranded in Michigan and other states. Bankrupt Chrysler is planning to move a modern, award-winning engine plant in Wisconsin to Mexico after receiving billions of dollars in taxpayer bailouts.
On Perot's nationally-televised deficit warnings (with charts), what more need be said? Even he did not envision what would pile up after his clarion calls. The burden on the next generation and the tax dollars diverted from our country's needs to pay the interest on these trillions of dollars of debt were pointed out again and again nearly twenty years ago by the Texas entrepreneur. He even has a website (perotcharts.com) updating the red ink.
In Bush's and Obama's Washington, there is no room for Perot to gain visibility and recognition.
It is one thing for the Washington politicians to ignore prescient progressive commentators, like William Grieder, who have been prophetically right on. It is quite another escape from reality to turn their backs on leaders within the business establishment itself.
There are many like Perot who must be watching the day's news and saying "we told you so, but you didn't listen then and you are not listening now."
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



80 Comments so far
Show AllNader my man, I proudly voted Perot twice and then you thrice even when most others chose the "lesser of the 2 evils" and allowed this country to be f---ed. In case you haven't been reading some of the responses, it appears that even amongst those who supported you in 2000, some of them have been infected with the "a vote for Nader is a vote for Republicans" disease and supported that criminal scumbag Obama. Unlike JFK and Paul Wellstone, if Obama loses his life he won't be missed. That man and his party henchman are bald-faced liars conspiring with the GOP when in fact, he has a mandate to listen to you and fix this country which he's not doing. I am so angry at Obama for ignoring all those who matter that I feel that it is best that Obama's wife and children be taken away and locked up behind bars until Obama pays attention to us and the same thing goes for the rest of the politicians on Capitol Hill ! Obama has no right to ignore you. I hear he's even censoring dissent on his site which further angers me into cursing that he goes down in flames. Any of you out there still wanna defend that SOB? Be my f---ing guest and BRING IT ON !!
Dittos and more dittos. I worked on the Perot campaign (twice) as a county coordinator. I voted twice for Ralph, but voted for Obama simply out total despair, a little sympathy for the kids who were working for him, and as a shear gamble he might, just might, do something --anything, good. Of course, he and the dems have been a total failure in every respect. Every single one. But its no surprise.
It's going to take a mass rebellion and rioting in the streets of Washington D.C. to evict these people.
Otherwise, we are so screwed.
We're screwed. Get used to it.
Don't blame you for feeling frustrated with Obama. But since you didn't vote for him, at least you are not to blame. I didn't vote for Perot (didn't vote at all) but I did later vote for Ralph Nader. As a gay man, I had hopes that Obama would keep his promises to us. I'm disappointed in his record so far on gay rights, but more importantly on health care, economic recovery, and at least acknowledging that our government was and is engaged in torture. I see now just another politician that over half the country wasted their vote on. I had hoped he would display at least a modicum of courage. Now I see a smooth politician (read liar) who never intended on keeping his word.
Fred,
While I agree with you on Obama turning out to be a major disappointment, I don't think it makes sense to sound like Rush Limbaugh here on Obama losing his life. We can vote him out in 2012 you know. Ok, so maybe that's 3 years too long a wait. Still, why not be a part of those who want to change Congress in 2010. If 2010 is to be the year Independents gain relevance in one or both chambers, watch Obama turn away from Bush's policies. Let's curb the violence my friend. Wishing someone something bad does nothing to help you or us.
2012? Vote. Surely ye jest. LOL
I don't like it that we have to wait until then given Obama's faster regression but there's no other way. In the meantime, if we could work on reforming Congress next year and beyond, at least we'd be fighting for progress. I would also suggest taking local and state elections seriously which I'm doing out here in VA since we have a gubenatorial election coming up this fall. A different Congress can and will change Obama.
2012 will be just in time to keep him from looting the treasury and giving it to the banks and investment banks, allowing enough resources for projects to help the common citizen.
Whew! We barely dodged THAT bullet.
As a serial Nader voter, I ask: "Are fellow Americans so stupid that they don't know when they are getting royally screwed?"
Nader is right on. The last sentence: "You didn't listen then and you are not listening now." One huge question comes to mind? WHY? Knowing all these things; the way the U.S. economy is sinking.......one would have to wonder why the politicians want to continue business as usual. What do they know that we do not? There is no sense to the waste and destructiveness of our present system. So, what is really going on?
Maybe there is a large incoming asteroid and they don't want us to panic.
Or maybe there is a large incoming debt bomb or other financial catastrophe on the horizon, far worse than most expect right now, and they are scrambling to maximize their own personal positions and do not want the little people to compete with them or otherwise get in the way.
Now that sounds likely. More likely than an asteroid, at least.
Yeah, its an "asteroid" alright... a FINANCIAL asteroid.
The financial asteroid already hit. There is no, and will be no, recovery, no matte how many happy HS headlines they come up with in the WSJ or FT.
I think the reality is that the super-rich wear blinders and really can't see what's going on. As long as their holdings are increasing, they believe everything is OK. They do not care about, or even acknowledge the existence of the billions who are not part of their circle.
What's sad is that so many Americans (and others?) believe that the people in power are smarter and more knowledgable than the rest of us. They can't see that, for example, Larry Summers is a complete idiot, 160 IQ or not.
"Bankrupt Chrysler is planning to move a modern, award-winning engine plant in Wisconsin to Mexico after receiving billions of dollars in taxpayer bailouts."
Where under the spectrum of "patriotism" does this fall? You take taxpayer money and move your operations to Mexico. Thank you, Chrysler, for taking my money and using it to move my job to Mexico.
So. Should I be a "patriot" buy an American brand, Chrysler, with engines made in Mexico by Mexican labor, or should I be a "traitor" and purchase a Japanese brand, Honda, made in Ohio with nearly 100% American made parts?
Whoever said corporations are patriotic?
Do like I'm doing, and hold on until someone somewhere offers a cheap, effective electric car. I just hope my 1990 Ford Falcon station wagon holds out for another few years.
The betrayal of the American worker by all sides is almost past beliving. I'll never buy a GM or Chrysler car again.
Honda makes many cars in Ohio, Toyota makes Tundra's in Texas, American cars, manufactured in America and in the case of Toyota, much of the engineering and design input from here. Who cares who owns the factory? I don't. It could have beemn Americans, but they choose differently. So a true Patriot would by the car that is providing American jobs.
Personally I drive a 59 AH Sprite around that gets 42 miles to the gallon in town. But its 102 now so I'm in the Tahoe. Oops!!! But its a 2001 so its much better than a new Prius.
Don't buy a new car at all. Buy a car that is already in circulation, and you're not supporting any car company. But if you do buy a new car, buy a volkswagon, because they are planting trees, enough to offset the carbon used for a year by each car they sell. What's more important, patriotism or survival. Our very survival is in jeopardy if we don't change our present course dramatically.
My VW really sux. Don't buy VW.
Oh cry all you want for the prophets in the wilderness, Ralph.
Perfection, so now the ensuing distress of what used to be called the lower middle class will be framed as "anarchy" and "we" will call for law and order.
Then bingo, POLICE STATE. (police nation?) Oh yeah the money, it's gone too.
Suddenly REALLY poor for the first time in generations, our shocked, medicated, country will be ready for a "prophet".
You think islamic fundamentalism is exotic?
Getta load of what real american koo-koo bananas crazy ass problem solving looks like!!!
"it was the best of times, it was the worst of times"
It will probably start in california, in various spots, like the dancing madness of the middle ages.
We will beg for a strong man to handle this crisis...
Ralph Nader was right all along and you can't handle it so shut up already ! With the way Obama is ignoring, bullying, and censoring, I wouldn't miss it if Obama gets seriously ill or worse, loses his life unlike JFK and Paul Wellstone.
Obama? Is that you?
Does anyone know what "Propethic" means ????
It seems to be a misspelling of prophetic. It's not in the Merriam/Webster OnLine dictionary.
Ralph, they don't ask the right questions because the status quo is a way of life for them. To think outside the box takes a creative spirit unknown in our times.
All great creators were shunned by the patriarchal forces who fear originality above all else (or what Jung called individuation) and thought for themselves, not needing their hands held by some collective power who knows what is best for everyone else.
By my reckoning, you are one of those people who is consistently shunned by the powers, Ralph, and one reason why I listen to everything you have to say!
Even Einstein could not find work at any university since his professors (the patriarchal forces of academia) refused to recommend him for skipping their classes, because Albert had bigger fish to fry wanting instead to do independent work far more visionary than anything they could ever contemplate.
van Gogh was ignored in the art world for his somber paintings selling only one painting before his death.
Johnny Depp created and crafted a character called Jack Sparrow and was immediately called on it by panicky film executives who demanded to know what he was doing - they thought his portrayal was bizarre and he was ruining the film. Yet the film went on to huge success and brought Depp an Oscar nomination for the character he crafted.
Culture ignores creative efforts that leave others uncomfortable, and we treat those who abide by their own inner vision, norms, or activism, as abnormal only because it challenges their own entrenched and comfortable lives, void of the creative impulse, and call to individuation.
Many hear the 'call' but few if any ever act on it. No one wants to take the risk of thinking outside of the cultural box. True creators suffer punishment for breaking someones rules about what is, or is not, acceptable in any realm of engagement, and probably why you upset the herd, my friend.
When we worship at the alter of the petty tyrannical gods of culture, we become unoriginal and uninteresting people whose soul has long been stolen by the forces of conformity: those marching lockstep with Obama toward the precipice.
The creative individual is a master of courage not afraid to upset someone else, and his or her confining borders of irrelevance. Such people are those who shout out, "The emperor has no cloths" when everyone else is either too afraid to speak, or has a vested interest in the status quo.
Those who rock the boat of contemporary values, are never accepted in culture because they are fifty to hundred years ahead of every one else.
Carry on with my respect and admiration, sir, you have earned it!
You nailed it, elohim.
Sioux Rose
ELOHIM: What a great post! I would add spiritual iconoclasts to your category of creative types, for this ilk certainly manages to march to its own ideological drummer, and the consequences are seldom painless in a society composed mostly of conformist sheep. The patriarchal angle is SO right on!
I used to joke that Einstein developed the theory of relativity because he was late for dinners attended by stodgy scientists and academes. So excusing his tardy tendency he turned to his "audience" and said, "It's all relative, fellows. Let's just relax and have a good time." Or could you imagine Einstein going for a bank loan and encountering the banker from Mary Popkins? ("A British bank is run with precision! A British home requires nothing less!") And about that precision, dang, those buses REALLY run on time, I mean to the fraction of a minute in London! Now contrast that with Puerto Rico where you're lucky if a bus runs every hour, and when you get on it, and take a cursory glance of peoples' watches, you will find them varying by several minutes or more. Time is anything BUT uniform or "on time" in the tropics! If the Geyser "Old Faithful" was positioned near San Juan, I'm quite certain it would blow off steam when it felt like, rather than in accord with any predictable schedule.
Remember Rose, someone always benefits from organized disorganization. There was a very good man in
Puerto Rico who put a petting zoo and a dolphin tank plus lots of saltwater fish tanks near the beach in the Pinones sector. He had these adorable miniature deer that were tame and would come right up to you and nuzzle your hand. You could pet the dolphin, too. The mafia didn't like it so they poisoned the deer, dolphin and destroyed the fish tanks. The only survivors were the two giant turtles. No one was ever caught. Unfortunately, these people with brutal mindsets run the world now. As to the British buses, trains, etc running on time, we could use some of that in the USA but I don't particularly admire the Britsh mindset. They go to war quite promptly, as well.
Sioux Rose
AGG: I lived in Puerto Rico from l977-l986 and I know nothing about that petting zoo you're talking about, and I know Pinones! I lived near Isla Verde. What year was that, do you recall? I think the Latin mindset is more on a tropical wavelength that for the most part dilates time, whereas the Brits almost fit the characterization done by Phil Hartman's "Anal Retentive Fisherman" on SNL. How could they thus NOT be on time? Every culture has pros and cons.
People who didn't vote independent are idiots. I'm not name calling, its just the facts.
Ross Perot talked a good talk, but he looked like a clown on TV with all his charts. Compare him to Obama, who is handsome, very well spoken, and lies like the consummate politician he is. Oh, and he's a very fetching shade of light chocolate. The black man's time has come. Unfortunately, what we need is an honest and brave man in the White House, who is not afraid to keep his promises and represent the people who voted him in. It really wouldn't matter if he was green and had warts.
Yes, and if there were such a person, we'd off him pronto.
Well, not WE. But someone would.
My two greatest memories of Ross Perot were his quirky and idiosyncratic speaking style and his choice of Admiral William Stockdale as his running mate.
Ross was (and I am sure still is) a true patriot. Ross was indeed right about the "sucking sound" of jobs being vacuumed out of the country by NAFTA and our impossible debt structuring arrangements.
Ross would have made a great trade representative, head of the Department of Commerce, or possibly head of the President's board of economic advisors--but he was not really presidential material.
In a similar manner Ralph would make a great Ted Sorenson or Arthur Schlesinger (whom JFK very prudently deferred to and kept around to educate him about the considerable body of knowledge he knew he didn't know). But alas, there just aren't any politicians around anymore capable of deferring to such knowledge and intellect.
Poet
You've hit it right on the head.
And GHW Bush or Clinton were more qualified than Perot to be president?!?! I beg to differ, but the argument is moot.
"but he was not really presidential material"
You mean not really garden compost?
I agree with Nader about Obama's betrayal and dishonesty but Obama isn't alone. If we had a Congress, Supreme Court, and a media that actually informs the citizenry well Obama would have been none of what he is today. I suggest we send Obama a strong message starting with Congress and the Senate next year. If we can make one or both chambers of Congress a victory for Independent leaders and even make them relevant, Obama will be forced to change his agenda and only then will Obama more likely listen to Nader and follow up on his excellent ideas.
I voted for Perot in when I was first eligible to vote. I was disheartened he lost; he made so much sense. It's nice to see my vote back in the day was right on.
After FISA, there was no excuse for voting of Obysmal.
Vote third party. Go Nader.
I worry that the election of Obama has pacified the public to the degree that they (in large part) simply aren't paying attention any more. The man we voted for is not the president we got. I worry that so many people are so grievously misinformed/under-informed, thanks to the marriage of Big Media and the political establishment. I worry that the bulk of the population has been thoroughly indoctrinated by the "War On (fill in the blank)" and "Get tough on..." strategies that split us into a mass of Us vs. Them groups. We are told who is bad: Phantom terrorists with WMDs, poor people (especially women and children), the few who smoke tobacco,lazy American workers, and on and on.
In recent years, we've seen our political leadership push a stunning amount of misinformation which, for the most part, the public has absorbed and accepted as fact, allowing themselves to be manipulated. It worries me a lot when I see President Obama continuing what was begun with the Reagan Administration.
I believe the Constitution, designed by the richest men in America, enshrines government by the predators, for the predators, and of the predators. As Markley says, "Get used to it."
Ralph and posters may be right to blame politicians, but you forgot to include ourselves.
We share most of the blame for depending on representatives to save us when daily evidence shows that they can be bought and intimidated by oligarchy corporations, banks, shadow governments and the Washington establishment.
Instead of trying to change this obsolete and corrupt system of government that represents the money-power instead of the We the People, we persist in trying to keep it alive.
Real democracy, direct and decentralized, tried and proven, is here and now: http://ni4d.us/
We do have a role of course in electing our leaders but our leaders have a greater responsibility too and discussing this is one way to help raise awareness that we really do need to hold them accountable. You have to understand that even amongst those who voted Obama or even Mccain, a lot of them would have voted for Ralph if only they had that dedication without fear to say let's give it a try. I know I was one of the chickens on the last minute. But the real problem is we're always stuck with this question "Ok, so the Democrats are no better than the Republicans but we can't afford to vote for Nader and likewise because we risk giving it to the Republicans so why should we vote Independent?" That attitude needs to be erased or else we're stuck in an infinite loop picking between A and B only.
Remember what you describe only applies to the winner-take-all presidential elections. Could Nader have gotten his policies through congress let alone the senate if he had miraculously won? In a world where a majority had a level of consciousness to support Nader, congress would be filled with progressives and it really wouldn't matter who was president.
I hesitate to mention it here but Doom4 is gonna rock.
"In a world where a majority had a level of consciousness to support Nader, congress would be filled with progressives and it really wouldn't matter who was president."
That's what I thought I was discussing but thanks for the reminder. I agree that Nader would have had no chance of getting his policies through this Congress but he would have at least forced Congress to listen although the media and the military would be there to stage a possible rightwing coup against him just like they did FDR in 1934. God knows who will run in 2012 aside from Obama and whoever the Republican nominee is. I'd much rather we progressives and liberals pay more attention to our upcoming midterm elections which are equally important. We can't afford not to keep trying to reform Congress election after election.
I read "our leaders" as referring to presidential nominees probably cause I'm so used to posters emphasizing that decision, blaming Obama voters all the time when Nader would never have won anyway. I can't believe Europe is turning right. Capitalism seems to have escaped the crisis unharmed.
I'm talking about direct democracy, not representative democracy:
Main Entry: direct democracy
Part of Speech: n
Definition: a form of democracy in which the people as a whole make direct decisions, rather than have those decisions made for them by elected representatives
Example: A referendum is a form of direct democracy, as is the practice of recall, by which an elected offical may be voted out of office between elections if enough people sign a petition to remove him and then win the subsequent vote.