Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- In Blind Poll, Republicans Choose Progressive Budget Solutions Over Their Own Party's
- Not Guilty By Virtue of Videotape, Which, Unlike the Police, Doesn't Lie
- Manning: Before Wikileaks, Leaked Docs Offered to NYT, WaPo
- Bob Woodward Embodies US Political Culture in a Single Outburst
- State Dept. Releases Keystone XL Environmental Impact Statement
Popular content
Today's Top News
War, Debt and the President
President Barack Obama touted his debt ceiling deal Tuesday, saying, “We can’t balance the budget on the backs of the very people who have borne the biggest brunt of this recession.” Yet that is what he and his coterie of Wall Street advisers have done.
In the affairs of nations, Alexander Hamilton wrote in January 1790, “loans in times of public danger, especially from foreign war, are found an indispensable resource.” It was his first report as secretary of the treasury to the new Congress of the United States. The country had borrowed to fight the Revolutionary War, and Hamilton proposed a system of public debt to pay those loans.
"President Obama’s debt ceiling deal is widely considered a historic defeat for progressives, a successful attack on the New Deal and Great Society achievements of the past century." (photo: U.S. Army / Staff Sgt. Brendan Stephens)
The history of the U.S. national debt is inexorably tied to its many wars. The resolution this week of the so-called debt ceiling crisis is no different. Not only did a compliant Congress agree to fund President George W. Bush’s wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with emergency appropriations; it did so with borrowed money, raising the debt ceiling 10 times since 2001 without quibbling.
So how did the Pentagon fare in the current budget battle? It looks like it did fine. Not to be confused with the soldiers and veterans who have fought these wars.
“This year is the 50th anniversary of [Dwight] Eisenhower’s military-industrial complex speech,” William Hartung of the Center for International Policy told me while the Senate assembled to vote on the debt ceiling bill. Speaking of the late general turned Republican U.S. president, Hartung said: “He talked about the need for a balanced economy, for a healthy population. Essentially, he’s to the left of Barack Obama on these issues.”
Michael Hudson, president of the Institute for the Study of Long-Term Economic Trends, explained the history of the debt ceiling’s connection to war:
“It was put in in 1917 during World War I, and the idea was to prevent President Wilson from committing even more American troops and money to war. In every country of Europe—England, France—the parliamentary control over the budget was introduced to stop ambitious kings or rulers from waging wars. So the whole purpose was to limit a government’s ability to run into debt for war, because that was the only reason that governments ran into debt.”
The Budget Control Act of 2011 assures drastic cuts to the U.S. social safety net. Congress will appoint a committee of 12, dubbed the “Super Congress,” evenly split between Republicans and Democrats, to identify $1.2 trillion in cuts by Thanksgiving. If the committee fails to meet that goal, sweeping, mandatory, across-the-board cuts are mandated. Social services would get cut, but so would the Pentagon.
Or would it? The Congressional Black Caucus and the Congressional Progressive Caucus opposed the bill. Congressional Black Caucus Chair Emanuel Cleaver called it “a sugarcoated Satan sandwich.” For fiscal years 2012 and 2013, the discretionary funding approved is split between “security” and “nonsecurity” categories. “Nonsecurity” categories like food programs, housing, Medicare and Medicaid (the basis of any genuine national security) will most likely be cut. But the “security” budget will get hit equally hard, which Democrats suggest would be an incentive for Republicans to cooperate with the process.
The security category includes “Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the National Nuclear Security Administration, the intelligence community [and] international affairs.” This sets up a dynamic where hawks will be trying to cut as much as possible from the State Department’s diplomatic corps, and foreign aid, in order to favor their patrons at the Pentagon and in the weapons industry.
Hartung explained that the contractors, in addition to having the support of Speaker of the House John Boehner, “had Buck McKeon, the head of the House Armed Services Committee, whose biggest contributor is Lockheed Martin, who’s got big military facilities in his district, [and] Randy Forbes, whose district is near the Newport News Shipbuilding complex, which builds attack submarines and aircraft carriers. They used their influence to get people on the inside, their allies in the House, to push their agenda.”
President Obama’s debt ceiling deal is widely considered a historic defeat for progressives, a successful attack on the New Deal and Great Society achievements of the past century. Congresswoman Donna Edwards, D-Md., summed up the disappointment, in which half the Democrats in the House voted against their president, tweeting: “Nada from million/billionaires; corp tax loopholes aplenty; only sacrifice from the poor/middle class? Shared sacrifice, balance? Really?”
The Project on Government Oversight says of the “Super Congress” that “the creation of the committee doesn’t come with many requirements for transparency.” Who will be the watchdog? With the 2012 election coming up, promising to be the most expensive ever, expect the committee’s deficit-reduction proposal, due by Thanksgiving and subject to an up-or-down vote, to have very little to give thanks for.
Denis Moynihan contributed research to this column.
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...
139 Comments so far
Show All"What matters most is not who is sitting in the White House, but "who is sitting in" -- and who is marching outside the White House, pushing for change."
— Howard Zinn
Stop worrying about who to vote for. Real progressive change doesn't come out of the ballot box. It comes from the activities of independent mass movements.
THANK YOU,
I do have a good life outside of the political discussions on Common Dreams, but the topic of discussion here is normally politics and voting is an important part and if it is not important to you I hope you find better things to do.
Maybe you can tell us about your activities of independent mass movements.
You sound like you are a real guy with a real name, very refreshing.
RE: "... the topic of discussion here is normally politics and voting is an important part..."
This is the idea that I am challenging: Is voting an important part of politics? On first blush most people would say, duh! But this is a serious question. Has voting (at the presidential level) ever changed anything for regular working Americans for the better in your lifetime? Obviously voting for Obama (and I would argue Clinton as well) did not. When Emma Goldman famously said "if voting changed anything it would be illegal" she did not intend it to be taken as cynicism, but as fact!
I encourage you to read the following book; it will explain a lot about US politics crucial to understand that you'll never see on a progressive website:
"The Democrats: a Critical History" by Lance Selfa
RE: Maybe you can tell us about your activities of independent mass movements.
Mass movements are currently in a moribund state in this country. I have been working for many years in several organizations, both progressive and radical to change that.
Tom,
The fact that voting may have changed nothing can hardly be interpreted to mean voting is unable to change anything - it all depends on what you do with your vote. If you keep using it to support either side of the "duopoly" of course nothing changes, but that is hardly a reason to belittle, demean, or condemn the process.
The vote is one of the most important tools we have as citizens - it is time we used it wisely ....
RE: The vote is one of the most important tools we have as citizens...
That is the general perception, but is it really true? If you use the scientific method (do your homework) you will find that the perception is not well founded. I also recommend Selfa's book to you. He gives exhaustive evidence that many of the perceptions that Americans have, including about voting, are not grounded in factual reality.
Now, I did not say don't vote, I am saying that for the vast majority voting is vastly overrated. If people really want to change things for the better, they should shift their time and resources to activism - away from electoral politics. Electoral politics is controlled by the duopoly. Third parties are structurally excluded from meaningful participation.
Case in point: the defense strategy that the teachers' union in Wisconsin is using is to recall GOP legislators rather than engage in movement building and activism. The Wisconsin Dems made some ineffective and symbolic gestures. But as we can see at the national level, the Democrats lead by Obama are leading the attacks on working people in the debt ceiling decision that will result in cuts to SS and Medicare/Medicaid. The Wisconsin teachers' union should be doing what the Wisconsin firefighters union is doing: refusing union funds to Democrats (who will sell them out anyway).
Alexander Hamilton is surely no good guy from the progressive viewpoint. Quite the contrary he favored handing over the loot to the big banking crowd in his day. It was the anti Federalists and later the Democratic Republicans led by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison who were the good guys opposing Hamilton in his and the Federalists' give away and hand outs for the rich. They finally prevailed, and Hamilton became Jefferson's least favorite of the founding fathers, with Benjamin Franllin being his favorite. He also thought highly of Thomas Paine.
Think Shay's rebellion from the early days of US historyif thinking about struggle as well. "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God" as Thomas Jefferson put it.
Iran is in the cross hairs, still. Iran and Syria are targeted for war by the USG.
I've been a regular DN! viewer for many years. I can't agree with the contention that DN! has been supportive of Obama, either before or after the election. Sure, there was momentary jubilation at seeing Americans elect a black man as president, and there was some hope that maybe Obama wouldn't turn out to be the right winger he has shown himself to be. (Even Ralph Nader expressed some of that hope before the election.) But over the last few years, there have been very few enthusiastic Obama supporters on the show, and many strong critics.
You're full of sh*t. I was listening to DN since well before 2008 and they were nothing but skeptical of corporate candidate Obummer. In the weeks following the election in 2008 DN had on Noam Chomsky, Naomi Kline, Tariq Ali, Arun Gupta, Bill Ayers ... and many others who were highly critical of Obama.
.
Provide the transcript where DN was euphoric over O's election.
Ah, DN apologists... "In the weeks following the election in 2008..." Isn't that a tad late? And by the way, I am a life-long listener, and I'm so frustrated with DN it's hard to express. They are part of the problem.
Ah, ideological fundamentalists .... "they are part of the problem...."
.
Guess you missed DNs coverage before the election too huh? Apparently. After all why would you tarnish your ideological purity by listening to news coverage that's "part of the problem"?
.
You remind me of the zombie democrats who always turn up here whenever a Ralph Nader article gets posted.
It's just a troll shill, by attempting to discourage people from watching more accurate reporting of the news. Keith Oberman is quite interesting on Current T V where he can say those things that he couldn't on MSNBC. Bill "Comb Over" O'reilly.
Before signing the budget cutting legislation on Tuesday Obama declared that it was merely “an important first step in ensuring that as a nation we live within our means.”
Actually this is not accurate. It's the second step.
The first step was deregulating the mainstream media and handing it over entirely to the corporations most resolved to the fascist takeover of America.
With the ability to control the message and thus shape the public mind the debate would narrowed to the size of a straw and shifted far to the right.
Only the number of thousands of billions to be cut from the safety net would be echoed on the t.v. screens and radios reaching tens of millions of Americans every hour.
There would be no discussion of clawing back the trillions of loot stolen from Joe Sixpack by the Wall Street Wolfpack.
There would be no discussion of prosecuting the war criminals for the lies that have launched us into six wars thus creating the necessity to shut them down saving trillions of taxpayer dollars.
Instead, the media promptly informed us that the Uniparty had decided the best means to remedy the debt 'problem' would be to restrict public anger to a mere twelve of their own tribe.
Predictably, none of the propaganda outlets had afforded the public any time to respond to this scheme.
With the media fronting for the Uniparty and the public hypnotized into a state of paralysis there's literally no resistance for the same play to be run over and over.
Until the public voice can be heard in its true level of representation on the public's airwaves the only possible outcome is continued defeat.
-----------------
Whoever controls the media controls the country. Period.
I see an opening here where the propaganda just cannot erase reality in people's minds.
---------------
It is indeed fascinating to see small sections of the public waking up to the fact that reality and what they've conditioned to believe is reality by the media have nothing in common.
Perhaps a good analogy would be a young boy who walks into his house and unexpectedly and finds his dad sleeping with another woman. The dad tells his young son that nothing wrong has happened and he's only imagining things.
The young boy would then have a titanic mental struggle. Either he could believe his own eyes and conclude that his dad is a liar and cheater (an incredibly difficult thing for any child to cogitate). Or he could continue with the more comfortable and less challenging (pseudo) reality that all is well.
While it's an interesting time to be an observer of human behavior and an analyst of the media it's an awful time to be an American citizen waiting for your fellow countrymen to finally wake up.
And when we do make a move the media always has a counter-move ready to disrupt, diffuse or discredit our movement.
Like a good chess player they're thinking three moves ahead.
Meanwhile the public is still trying to figure out the game of checkers.
Only when the pain of an unknowable critical mass of people becomes great enough will the public have the potential to develop the focus to break out of the trance induced on them by the media and the oligarchs.
Hopefully by then it won't be too late.
Cygnus is right on, and he's consistently related this message to the forum, fitting it to suit the latest outrage and/or sell out.
I agree with your post, Jill, up to this weird statement:
"Each segment of the media is carefully split up to appeal to various members of our population--the Democratic loyalists, the Tea Party, the more radical left, mainstream Republicans etc."
Please DO tell what MSM niche speaks to the "more radical left." If you put Rachel Maddow into that niche, then you are repeating a RIGHT WING talking point. There is NO ostensible voice of the Left seen or heard in mainstream media, and the "radical left"? Give me a break... you're talking slightly left of center centrist/liberals.
Apart from that significant false meme, I do agree that niche marketing is a strong strategic way of hitting specific demographic audiences. It's also a very good smoke screen covering up what is NOT covered, and thus rendered invisible through purposeful marginalization... like any viable anti-war, pro-union, anti-corporation protest event.
There is NO ostensible voice of the Left seen or heard in mainstream media, and the "radical left"?
---------------------
The only member of the media with a leftist perspective (somewhat widely available on American televisions) is Max Keiser. And I don't think he considers himself a leftist. He simply defends more left-leaning principles and policies more often and better than anyone else. He doesn't mince words. He doesn't argue from the defensive posture. He doesn't argue from within the boundaries set by mainstream media. While his show is mainly focused on finance he has branched most recently into environmentalism. His show is carried on RT (available on some cable systems) and he has a website MaxKeiser dot com.
Second would be The Alyona Show (also available on RT). While she has quite a few Libertarians on her show she defends left viewpoints as loudly as anyone on televison. Unlike Rachel Maddow she doesn't waste her audience's time highlighting the nearly invisible differences between the parties. Alyona tackles the stories found on the better Progressive websites ignored by everyone else. She also offers some good commentary.
As far as radio goes Thom Hartmann is quick to rush to the defense of Barack Obama whenever a caller assails him and therefore can no longer be considered a friend of the left. It's too bad. Thom Hartmann has brought many good discussions and interesting perspectives to the forefront. True Progressive talk radio simply no longer exists. All the hosts with sizable audiences are Democratic party sell-outs.
Without the internet the true left would not have any voice.
Thank you for the info. You're my favorite poster on this particular point, one I feel cannot be mentioned often enough since it explains why so many are so mis-informed. In my view, Jill created a false equivalency among the voices heard in the MSM. The venues you've related speak to a limited audience. I knew of neither. And I don't think anyone can argue that these Left voices are FAR less evident, than the domination of the Right, by Rush, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Bill O'Reilly, etc. There is NO equivalence.
Just because there are a 100 cable channels hardly means 100 distinctly different voices or sensibilities get aired. Since most come under the ownership of the same handful of broadcast empires, the messages are tailored to suit the owners. NOT the people!
Thank you for the info. You're my favorite poster on this particular point,
------------------
Thank you. Only someone who has been posting at this site as long as I have would remember my rants on anti-trusting the too big and already failed media megaliths into a thousand pieces and restoring a new improved Fairness Doctrine.
Control of the media is truly the most awesome weapon of our ruling fascists.
I observed (on many websites) that when the issue of restoring the Fairness Doctrine was even mentioned more right-wing trolls came out on the offensive (with their sharpest fangs and claws) than on any other topic.
Thus, the vulnerability of the ruling class was laid bare for those paying attention.
Take away control of the media from the oligarchs and put it in the responsible hands of the public and watch how quickly democracy is restored.
An informed country, which would act in its best interest, would long ago have put all the war criminals and bank robbers behind bars. And you can bet that SS and Medicare wouldn't be starved to pay for billionaire tax cuts either.
That's why more than anything they fear an informed public. And that's why they fight like hell to maintain their lock-tight grip on all sources of information. Of course, the internet is next.
Flashpoints on KPFA is an absolute gem! Best of all - it's free w streaming or podcasting past shows.
I stopped listening to Thom Hartmann about a year ago ... after he lined up like a good democrat behind Obamacare. He became unlistenable soon after, in my opinion. Always defending O and the cratz ... always deflecting blame.
.
You might try listening to Dan Carlin's podcast Common Sense. He could be characterized as a sort of left libertarian ... Or maybe a Thom Hartmann who hasn't sold out. It's an interesting show anyway.
.
I don't get much of a chance to listen to Mike Malloy anymore ... but I don't think he's sold out. I could be wrong.
I would like to see a designated day when everyone would DISCONNECT, CANCEL, and DROP OFF their cable equipment in person, en masse, in protest. The first emancipation from the 24/7 propaganda is to turn off that noise (loud corporate commercials included), stream of lies, and extraordinary stupid content. The second step to regain the power: CONNECT with everyone within a 2 mile radius and start strategizing how to repair this dysfunctional socio-political-economic system! Boots on the ground, massive non-violent protests, constructive rebuilding of communities.
The ruling-corporatist-monopoly-cartel is actively in the business of "divide & conquer," since a populace fighting among itself is the perfect cover and distraction from the day-to-day stealing that these treasonous "titans" engage in at our expense. If they see a populace unite, they'll run to their beloved Cayman-Dubai islands in their corporate jets to pass the time counting their ill-gotten gains.
"Whoever controls the media controls the country. Period."
Cygnus- You are so right and this can not be over stated...What really blows me away is that the "airways" are A part of the people's "commons", in other words, WE OWN THEM...Amy Goodman constantly points this out. The 5 or so Major Broadcasters use them for A pittance compared to the $$$ they reap...The loss of the "Fairness Doctrine" and creeping Media monopoly and Consolidation completes the package..
I can think of no other dilemma that keeps us out of the ball park so complete and totally.
Campaign "Finance Reform" would be second on my list of inequities...
Thanks for sounding off on this tragic state of affairs, for things will never, ever change for the masses as long as the Kleptocrats control the message...
Bill Moyers along with A host of others has continually spoken quite eloquently about this and the Documentary: "Orwell Rolls in His Grave" should be required watching....
Excellent analysis. It's stark, but it's the truth, I think, I see things much the same way.
After retiring from full-time work I watched a huge amount of TV the last few years and became aware of the undeniable right-wing slant to television news and political comment. It seems like TV is 98 percent right-wing, or greater. Peace advocates and other truly reasonable voices almost never even get to speak. So, your final line is one I have to completely agree with.
If a gang of criminals in an extremely well-funded and sophisticated syndicate or gang took over a nation's government from within by means of propaganda and deception and other methods it would look suspiciously like what has actually happened to the U.S., in the last decade in particular, when the transformation of government became much more obvious, as the criminals who are transforming it have become more and more emboldened by the impunity within which they operate- the wars and huge robberies of the Treasury and private payoffs and who knows what other criminal ventures- involvement with money laundering and drugs, and other things.
It's the super mafia, and it's not coming, it's here. And it is here to stay unless some genius figures out how to dislodge it.
I never thought I could say these kinds of things about the government of this country, but it seems to me there has been treason, and not a little of it either, and that traitors are being allowed to walk free by those now holding the reins of power.
Treason, because certainly the wars and the effects of the Wall Street criminality have had such a severe effect on the health and strength of the U.S., that it can truly be said that those who engineered the wars and the financial crash have acted to "give aid and comfort" to extra-national entities, or entities within the U.S., whose desire is to see the dissolution of the united States of America and the end of even the highly flawed system of "representative democracy" we used to have, or thought we did.
It's all smoke and mirrors from Washington now, more so than ever in my 60 plus years, and it really seems like the Gang That Couldn't Think Straight or Act Nice has taken over. It really reminds me of the part of "The Wind in the Willolws" where the "weasels and stoats" take over and occupy Toad Hall, and just start crudely partying down and trashing the place.
The only practical solution I see is various forms of noncompliance and continuing protest, and for those who dare, refusal to support the wars financially, or at least publicly willing to take such a stand.
Not that that would stop the wars, but damned if I will willingly help pay for them. The wars are not about security and defense but are a major means to bleed the Treasury empty, so that the wealth of the USA and of We the People goes faster and faster into private hands, and much of it outside of the country to unknown individuals and even to enemies of the U.S.
And it's all being done right in front of the American public.
If a person was beaten, robbed, raped, all at the same time, you would think he would notice! But the soothing propaganda and the distractions make the abuse possible. It's like, "Hey, look over there! (and another pocket picked when you look).
Yeah, I am tired, and this writing is a little emotional. I thought the fraud of the Vietnam War was bad- and it was- but now I feel like the evils of the Vietnam years have been upgraded and improved, and that propaganda has become so developed t be incredibly subtle, yet so powerful and effective.
It's so subtle and effective that half the time I myself am not even aware I am being conditioned. Conditioned to think certain ways and feel certain ways, by every single calculated announcement from "officials" and "spokepersons", named and unnamed, who via the MSM spread and repeat their carefully crafted messages; messages which sway public opinion so smoothly that the public ends up believing that it has formulated its own opinion!
Whew. A rant but I'll let it go because I love CD and the people who comment here. It's one of the smartest sites on the web, although the bickering is unfortunate and all too common.
As others have said before, the right succeeds by a unity of purpose that the Left can't seem to manage. The Left is always working at cross-purposes, and wasting too much time splitting hairs. I'm guilty of this myself. Leftists love to act the philosopher, I think.
But when a house is on fire is not the time to argue about all the various other uses for water, or whether potable or non-potable water is best for flame... What matters is to put the fire out as quickly as possible before there's nothing to save. And that, to me, is the dilemma of the Left.
It goes like this folks. The UBER- CLASS has identified the rest of us ants swarming around their feet as the problem that needs to be dealt with immediately, especially the few red ants. To that end the Congress / the military/Security apparat and its new Super Committee will be tasked to do ant removal. First step starve and smash as many as possible in the 3rd and 4th world's , which include an increasing segment of the pop. of what's left of the Ex. Republic called the USA now USA INC.
Obama didn't pass the bill. And what fall out would have occurred had he decided to veto the bill.
You all keep talking about Uniparty this Uniparty that. But still cast blame on Obama when Congress is where the laws happen!!!!
Jesus!!!
Actually, Obama played a major role in negotiating the bill -- and in shutting progressives out of the negotiations. Just as with the health insurance industry bailout.
Corvo
Agreed, just as he continues to be largely supportive of the state of Israel and its continued oppression of the Palestinian people.
and the violent repression of democracy movements in Bahrain, Egypt, Honduras, etc. etc. etc. . . .
The same way he supported the conservative Democrat over the progressive in the 2010 primary elections---every time.
Hell obomba supported an independent Lieberman - the worst of the worst Blue Dog fascist warmongers - over the winner of the democratic primaries.
What do you expect? Holy Joe was Oblahblah's mentor.
The bills are written in the bowels of corporate America. The lobbyists then deliver them to their whores in congress along with a bucket full of Federal Reserve notes which the Supreme Court now tells us are Free Speech Notes. With input from all the pseudo-factions of the Uniparty minor revisions are made. Scripts are then submitted to all the assets strategically placed in positions of power in the corporate media where they are dutifully read until, through unending repetition, they become the totality of the public debate.
Obama is the current spokesmodel for the Uniparty making him, understandably, the lightning rod for most of the public outrage.
O Rei, you really need to take the blinders off and start paying attention. If not for yourself, then at least for your children. Obama is the one who proposed cutting Ss, Medicare, and Medicaid - NOT the Republicans in Congress. It was your beloved messiah President who put the New Deal safety net on the chopping block - WHEN THE CONGRESSIONAL RETHUGS HADN'T EVEN MENTIONED IT!
This is what pisses me off about you idiotic Obama-worshippers - just like the previous Bush worshippers - no matter what your boy does, you just can't see it. Here he is gutting SS and Medicare and Medicaid and yet you will still tell everyone to "lay off the poor guy, it isn't his fault" when it IS. Then you'll go vote for his fucking traitorous ass in 2012.
YOU are what is wrong with Amereicha.
re: your last paragraph: yep. :-)
Demonstorm, you are so RIGHT! President Obama should do the job congress is responsible for. President Obama should do the work each individual citizen "should" do. Let's keep all the responsibility on President Obama and not do anything more than vote. Got even a smidgen of a good ideas behind that right-eous anger?
Exactly! Apparently some people on this site have sense.
Nuts, emigrate!
Obama will cause the fall of the Democratic party. He has trashed every ideal it has ever stood for, and has gone far beyond what even Bush was capable of destroying. A vote for Obama is a vote for Wall Street. Solution? Elect progressives to Congress and it won't matter whether the greater or lesser evil sits in the WH.
Adding to the already expansive fascist/totalitarian checklist in this country - one that includes a massive propaganda system and an economic "system" that is built solely for the aggrandizement of the elite, we can finally check off another term:
Politburo:
Definition:
the principal policy-making and executive committee of a Communist....er fascist party
Why, we wouldn't be the evil empire would we?
Nah.
I'm sick of hearing about the Eisenhower speech - a Huge example of do as I say and not as I do. The Eisenhower admin thru the CIA ran roughshod throughout the world causing coup after coup protecting Corporste profits that the Cabinet members personally held stock in - then at the end he spoke up.
Even Obummer can do that - lets try paying attention to What They Do not What they Say.
Good analogy for "progressive" media - only after they help get the bums elected by either failing to vet them critically, as was the case with DN and Obama, or failing to highlight actual progressive opposition to the Dems in a timely manner, as was the case with DN and the GP nominee for Governor, do they then turn about and "thrill" their base with cutting and cogent critique. This has happened often enough that those who fail to notice can honestly be suggested as being "in denial" ....
I agree. Although, better late than never, his actions sure did entrench the beast that he finally warned us about.
Barack Obama for the Republican nomination; Donna Edwards for the Democratic nomination; Somebody Amusing for the Independent nomination.
Barack Obama for the Republican nomination; Donna Edwards for the Democratic nomination; Somebody Amusing for the Independent nomination.
The first paragraph of the article describes what has been Obama's modus operandi from the start: say one thing, do another. He believes that he can fool enough of the people enough of the time to get away with it. The sad thing is he might be right.
Surely both parties understand that cutting social programs while the economy is already lying face down in the mud is going to be calamitous. Yet they have the audacity to inflict this gratuitous pain before a presidential election and in brazen defiance of the public will. They are convinced that they can do whatever they want because the American people have nowhere to turn. We have a choice of worse and worser in the voting booth, and we can't even tell which is which. Either way, Washington just keeps getting Righter and Righter, more and more fascist.
We need to find a way to break out of the trap. It ain't gonna be easy. The corporatist infrastructure is extremely strong, pervasive, and entrenched.
MLB: I agree with your post entirely. This level of moral turpitude is hard to fathom, especially when so much is at stake. Those who presently govern assign millions to cruel fates as if it were nothing. They even wear smiles; and like doctors who hide the patient's true diagnosis, go about AS IF they were delivering viable medicine.
This charade is taking place on a scale that constitutes a global horror... for truly its impacts do rebound across much of the world through foreign wars, as well as the goodies sold to the banking elites of Europe which turned out to be financial weapons of mass destruction. The result is that Disaster Capitalism takes aim at millions of citizens in Europe.
Meanwhile, climate changes point to lesser harvests and oceans run afoul of healthy seafood. And where is the primary investment in these times, not greener technology that would alleviate the need for oil (and its wars), but instead directed at yet more forms of weaponry!
This level of depraved indifference to life, hidden behind the notion of the Judeo-Christian ethic, is blasphemy on a scale the world has never seen. So much for the notion of "civilization."
The beast will fall... what generates out of its carcass is yet to be seen, and that's where those of us alive to shape the process, must follow our ideals.
With this capitulation . . . Obama has cemented his legacy as a kowtowing corporate militaristic shill whose wonderful gift of oratory means nothing to those adversely affected by his actions.
That he has avoided the full and anger-laden criticism by his supporters amazes me. He has successfully hidden his actions behind the egregiously blatant ones of his GOP colleagues with whom he has more in common that one would ever have thought possible, making them accountable for his actions------ standard tactic of abusers.
Bart "I Didn't Do It" Simpson would be so proud.
Give the man another Nobel Peace Prize quickly, during the 15 minute lull between the last and the next round of drone attacks.
I find Amy Goodman's initial, sweeping historical premise important: nation states borrowed and went into debt in the first place primarily in order to fight wars - not to build public works infrastructure, spur growth of the domestic economy, or whatever. As she puts it "the history of US national debt is inexorably tied to its many wars."
It began with repayment of George III's European rivals for their help in the Revolutionary War, through American involvment in both World Wars, followed by the institutionalization of deficit spending to simultaneously fund Vietnam and the Great Society, now financing the present endless bloody, sometimes shadowy corporatized entanglements abroad in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere.
This is not a uniquely American trait. Wars of aggression (even if fought on credit extended by foreign lenders) could be seen as potentially wise long term investments. Government borrowing to fight wars of self defense could be justified as a matter of necessity and national survival. According to Michael Hudson, "Parliamentary control over the budget was put into place to stop ambitious kings or rulers from waging wars." Clearly, it proved an ineffectual counterweight.
The post-WWII Marshall Plan made perfect sense on Uncle Sam's balance sheets and the books of the big American banks. How else could the Brits and other ravaged countries of Europe have ever repaid the IOU's stacked up for repayment to the grand arsenal of democracy?
Af for this week's sordid debt ceiling bill, it certainly looks like the can has been kicked down the road once again. Instead of a Catfood Commission, come this November we're set to shuffle real decision making authority over to a gridlocked "Super Congress" committee stacked to engage in a thoroughly bipartisan shredding of what's left of the New Deal safety net.
Guns should trump butter once again. Terrible economics. Even worse politics.
Bill from Saginaw