SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
October, 15 2008, 12:25pm EDT
Contact:
Taruna Godric 416 916 5202 ext 414
Email: smcommunications@therealnews.
US Nationalizes Banks, Candidates Talk Economy
Mike Whitney: Both candidates promote stimulus but real solution is higher wages
WASHINGTON
US President George W Bush made the radical announcement on Tuesday of
the partial nationalization of 9 of the nations leading banks. With
the presidential candidates offering their solutions to deal with the
current financial meltdown. The Real News spoke to Mike Whitney,
columnist for Counterpunch.org. Mike Whitney feels that " neither
candidate shows that they really have any grasp of the situation as it
stands now"
. Barack Obama spoke in Ohio on Monday: "Today, I'm
also proposing a 3 month moratorium on foreclosures. If you're a bank
or a lender that is getting money from the rescue plan that passed
congress and your customers are making a good faith effort to make
their mortgage payments and renegotiate their mortgage, you will not be
able to foreclose on their home for 3 months."Obama also proposed
allowing people to withdraw up to 10 thousand dollars from their
retirement accounts without any penalty for the remainder of the year
and 2009.
John McCain made his announcement in Pennsylvania on Tuesday."On my
orders, the Department of the Treasury will guarantee one hundred
percent of all savings accounts for a period of six months. - I will
cut in half the capital gains tax on stocks purchased and held for more
than a year from a rate of 15 to 7.5 percent."
Whitney feels McCain's proposals are " not really creating any
innovations so far as policy" is concerned, and that Obama's "700
billion dollar bill (is) just the first installment on this bail out
(and) is essentially a tax on every man, woman and child in America of
$2000."
Whitney says that "wages aren't keeping pace with production" but
the Federal Reserve and the treasury would prefer people be indebted to
them than see people's wages increase. The only solution according to
Whitney is "wages have to increase so there is greater distribution to
strengthen the society."
You can find complete coverage of this story at our website: US Nationalizes Banks, Candidates Talk Economy
The Real News Network is a television news and documentary network focused on providing independent and uncompromising journalism. Our staff, in collaboration with courageous journalists around the globe, will investigate, report and debate stories on the critical issues of our times. We are viewer supported and do not accept advertising, government or corporate funding.
LATEST NEWS
Analysis Identifies 50+ Election Deniers Vying to Oversee Voting Across US
The threat of election-denying candidates is particularly acute in Arizona, where they are running for governor, secretary of state, and attorney general.
May 04, 2026
As President Donald Trump continues to push Republicans to aggressively gerrymander ahead of the 2026 midterm elections, a new analysis has found more than 50 candidates running for key offices who have in the past engaged in efforts to nullify election results.
As reported by NPR on Monday, election watchdog States United Action has released a report showing that election-denying candidates are running for offices in 23 states where, if victorious, they would have a direct role in certifying future elections.
States United classifies election deniers as candidates who meet one of five criteria: Falsely claiming that Trump won the 2020 election, spreading conspiracy theories about the election results, refusing to certify the 2020 election, supporting litigation to overturn election results, and refusing to concede a race after being defeated.
In total, States United found at least 53 such candidates running for positions this year, including secretaries of state and governorships, that would put them in position to try to block or impede the certification of elections.
The threat is particularly acute in Arizona, where election deniers are running for governor, secretary of state, and attorney general.
This prospective Arizona election denial ticket is headlined by MAGA hardliner Andy Biggs, who voted against certification of the 2020 election results as a US congressman and who is running to unseat incumbent Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs.
States United CEO Joanna Lydgate told NPR that her organization is tracking election deniers running for office to "provide voters with the most accurate information possible" and "understand exactly what these candidates stand for and whether they fundamentally believe in free and fair elections in this country."
As election deniers are trying to win key offices throughout the US, the Trump administration is working to get more directly involved in purging voter rolls ahead of the midterms.
According to a Monday report from CNN, "Republicans and the Trump administration are now testing the scope of the federal law that imposes that ban on 'systematic' removal programs within three months of an election, as President Donald Trump pushes for more aggressive reviews of voter rolls for non-citizens and other ineligible voters."
What this means is that states could in theory purge voter rolls just weeks ahead of elections, giving people removed from the rolls almost no time to file challenges.
Wren Orey, director of the Bipartisan Policy Center’s Elections Project, told CNN that purging voter rolls less than three months before an election means there's a high risk that "voters won’t have adequate time or notice to be able to provide the documents that they’ll need ahead of the election."
"Maybe their birth certificate doesn’t meet the requirements," Orey explained. "Maybe they don’t have one handy, maybe they don’t have a passport. That could take months to get."
Brent Ferguson, the senior director of strategic litigation at Campaign Legal Center, told CNN that he was particularly disturbed by the Trump White House's involvement in this effort to manage voter rolls.
"It sets up a situation where the federal government itself is the actor trying to purge voters from the rolls in the days before the election," Ferguson said, "which is clearly illegal."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Dem Establishment Accused of ‘Putting Thumb on the Scale’ Against Progressive Candidate
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee decided to boost conservative candidate Jasmeet Bains instead of progressive Randy Villegas.
May 04, 2026
The Democratic Party's congressional campaign arm faced backlash on Monday for boosting the more conservative candidate in California's 22nd District, where two Democrats are vying to unseat GOP Rep. David Valadao.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) has added Jasmeet Bains, a California State Assembly member, to its "Red to Blue" program, which gives chosen candidates fundraising and organizational support as they seek to flip Republican seats. The DCCC's decision to elevate Bains over Randy Villegas, an educator and political newcomer endorsed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and major unions such as the United Auto Workers, was seen as the latest example of Democratic leaders seeking to thwart a progressive candidate with genuine grassroots momentum.
"Just like they did in Maine and Michigan, the Democratic establishment is again putting its thumb on the scale—not to support the stronger candidate, but the candidate who will bend to party leadership and its corporate donors," said Ravi Mangla, national press secretary for the Working Families Party (WFP), which has backed Villegas.
“Randy Villegas is the top Democratic fundraiser in the race, despite not taking a penny from corporate interests," said Mangla. "He’s racked up more key endorsements than his opponent. And he’s the only candidate with the energy and momentum to beat David Valadao in November."
California primaries are nonpartisan, so the incumbent Valadao will face Bains and Villegas in the June 2 contest. The top two vote-getters will advance to the general election.
The American Prospect's Emma Janssen reported last week that Bains and Villegas "represent two opposing approaches that Democrats across the country have articulated as the key to beating Republicans."
"Bains is running a more conservative campaign—what some, including Villegas, have called 'Republican Lite,'" Janssen noted. "Villegas, on the other hand, is running to the left and has been endorsed by progressive leaders."
Villegas has accused Bains of "flip-flopping on a variety of issues," including Medicare for All and whether Israel's assault on Gaza rises to the level of genocide. Villegas has joined human rights organizations, legal experts, and many others in answering the latter in the affirmative.
Bains, who is endorsed by Democratic Majority for Israel, previously said she believes Israel has committed genocide in Gaza before reversing herself.
“It’s clear that Assemblymember Bains is willing to change her answers or sell her answers to the highest bidder and the highest donor, and that she doesn’t actually stand for anything but whatever her corporate donors tell her to do,” Villegas told the Prospect. “Her flip-flopping on all these issues is disappointing, but it’s also not surprising from somebody who has failed to actually stand up for our communities in Sacramento.”
In its endorsement of Villegas published on Sunday, McClatchy Media’s California editorial board wrote that "Bains and Valadao represent a status quo shaped by complacency," whereas Villegas "is the embodiment of the Central Valley’s values."
"At 30, Villegas reflects a growing generational divide within the Democratic Party. Like many young progressives, he is frustrated by the party’s lack of action on crucial issues such as universal healthcare and the war in Gaza," the editorial continued. "There is room for Villegas to deepen his expertise on certain policy issues, but he brings a fresh perspective. He believes in hard work and family. He has far more in common with his district than his opponents."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump's Strait of Hormuz Ploy Aims to Manufacture 'Pretext for Escalation,' Iran Warns
"Any American interference in the new maritime regime of the Strait of Hormuz will be considered a violation of the ceasefire," said a member of the Iranian Parliament.
May 04, 2026
Iranian officials warned Sunday that US President Donald Trump's newly announced plan to help "guide" stranded ships out of the Strait of Hormuz is an attempted provocation aimed at justifying additional military action against the Middle Eastern country.
An unnamed senior Iranian official told Drop Site that Trump's plan, announced on Truth Social and confirmed by the US military, "is primarily intended to provoke Iran into taking an initial step toward confrontation, thereby creating a pretext for escalation and enabling him to justify further military action in response to an Iranian initiative."
The official added that "our definitive position is that any commercial vessel attempting to transit through designated restricted routes without prior coordination will be promptly intercepted by Iranian forces."
"Should US military vessels respond, such actions would be met with an immediate and corresponding response from Iran," the official continued. "The US military vessels are far from the corridor area. If commercial vessels attempt to move, they would be engaged well before reaching any American ships," the official added. "Trump has effectively turned them into bargaining tools in his political game."
Ebrahim Azizi, who heads the national security commission of the Iranian Parliament, warned in response to Trump's plan that "any American interference in the new maritime regime of the Strait of Hormuz will be considered a violation of the ceasefire" that took effect in early April.
"The Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf would not be managed by Trump's delusional posts," Azizi added.
Trump wrote on his social media platform on Sunday that his administration has told countries with vessels stranded in the vital strait that "we will guide their Ships safely out of these restricted Waterways, so that they can freely and ably get on with their business." Iran closed the strait—through which around 25% of the world's seaborne oil trade and a third of global fertilizer trade flows each year—in response to the US-Israeli war as well as the Trump administration's naval blockade against Iran.
The US president characterized his plan, which is titled Project Freedom and set to take effect on Monday, as a "humanitarian gesture on behalf of the United States," but provided few details on how it would work.
US Central Command (CENTCOM) said in a statement on Sunday that military support for Project Freedom would "include guided-missile destroyers, over 100 land and sea-based aircraft, multi-domain unmanned platforms, and 15,000 servicemembers."
"Last week, the U.S. Department of State announced a new initiative, in partnership with the Department of War, to enhance coordination and information sharing among international partners in support of maritime security in the strait," CENTCOM said. "The Maritime Freedom Construct aims to combine diplomatic action with military coordination, which will be critical during Project Freedom."
Brian Finucane, senior adviser to the US Program at the International Crisis Group, wrote that CENTCOM's statement makes the president's plan "sound like information-sharing backed by a vague threat of military action."
The president's scheme drew immediate support from one of the most vocal boosters of the Iran war, US Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who said he "totally" agrees with Trump's decision to launch Project Freedom.
"I hope this conflict can end diplomatically," said Graham, "but it is now time to regain freedom of navigation and forcefully respond to Iran if they insist on terrorizing the world."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular