1930’s GREAT DEPRESSION POLITICS IS NOW REPEATING ITSELF

...a 1930's "Hooverville" shanty


The GOP is currently reading Herbert Hoover’s play book. Let’s just hope Obama is reading FDR’s.

I wonder how many people in the country are interested today in US history? (I ask this because based on today’s schools, most young people don’t even know the meaning of the subject: “US History”.) I also wonder how many Americans understand how history is repeating itself today, especially regarding the repeating of the politics of the past Great Depression of the 1930’s.

I am sure some of you must now be scratching your heads saying, “What in the world is he talking about?”

Well, first it’s not just the similar bad economic times of then and now. That is a given. It was extremely bad back then for 25% of the nation’s working families out of work, and it’s very bad today for 10% of today’s working poor and the middle class. (And did you know that today’s 10% of Americans is about the same in the physical numbers affected as the 25% was back in the 1930’s?)

But my point here is in regards to the past politics between the two major political parties, which were the same parties as they are today. And as you will see, the politics was very similar to what is going on between the Democrats and the Republicans today.

First, let’s look at what the Republicans are saying.

Even though the Republicans were the ones that got the country into this mess, (just as they did in the 1920’s), back 85 years ago, they were also saying that “deficits didn’t matter”, just as it was previously stated by president’s Reagan, Bush I and Bush II. At least, that’s what they said when they were all in power.

But as soon as the economy went into the toilet and the Democrats came back into power, all you will ever hear from the Republicans is how important it is to pay down the federal debt. This is exactly what the GOP was saying back in the early 1930’s and especially after FDR had decided to spend by investing in America’s people and jobs instead of waiting for the banks and Wall Street to kick in with some help.

If one wants to seriously study that period in America’s past, they will see that President Hoover and the Republicans eventually did throw a few tokens for helping the disadvantaged of that time. However, after FDR won his first election, for the most part the Republicans were waiting for the Democrats to fail and the economic problems to “fix themselves”. And yes, just as they are today, the corporations and the banks back then were sitting on all their money and they were not lending it to the middle-class entrepreneurs of the time for getting any small businesses started or for growing current small businesses. (Sound familiar?)

All of the conservative rhetoric for those years after the 1920’s market crash was for dealing with the country’s debt and of course, “we can’t spend money on the American people and infrastructure projects, it will just increase the federal debt”.

But when FDR took the reins in 1933, he immediately started some government programs for getting Americans back to work. Since there was no “Unemployment Insurance” for providing the average unemployed worker with some spending money, FDR instead immediately instituted government jobs programs that started to put some spending money in the people’s pockets. As has been stated by the economists today, the best way to start re-vitalizing the economy is to put money into people’s hands that will need to spend it right away, and that’s exactly what FDR did.

But even though FDR initially did the right thing, the Republicans eventually wore him down and around 1937, FDR started to focus on paying down the debt.

As soon as the administration moved their attention to this approach regarding the debt, the country immediately dipped into another recession. And the economic recovery also went into a complete stall.

And just as it is today with President Obama, FDR was also coming up to running for another four years in office. So, even though FDR ran on the idea of “paying down the debt”, after he won his re-election, he changed his mind about paying down the debt. He then made a State of the Union speech where he basically said, “I have tried to wait for the corporations and the investment community to start hiring and investing in America, but they are still sitting on their fortunes. Therefore, I am going to start investing in the American people. Since the banks won’t lend, I will now commit millions of public dollars for lending to those that need financing for their small and medium size businesses and for buying a new home. I will also invest in more government sponsored jobs and research programs that will start new industries or improve those already in operation.” FDR went on to say that, “Yes, this spending will increase our debt somewhat, but when the average American gets a job, he immediately spends the money he earns and he will also pay taxes. And as we expand that approach, the debt will go down and the country will be all the better, after everyone that wants a job, has one.”

And as history has shown, that approach worked to the point that for decades, the US, and its subsequent infrastructure, were the envy of every nation on this globe.

Just as it was with president Hoover’s GOP, today’s Republicans only talk about paying down the debt. They vote “no” to anything that is positive for the average middle-class American. They have done this to the point that they even voted against healthcare for 9/11’s first responders, “no” on extending unemployment insurance payments and “no” for virtually any spending that isn’t immediately paid for. (Wouldn’t that have been a nice approach when Reagan and both the Bush’s and the Republicans were in power and while we had a fiscal surplus?)

Is President Obama currently drinking the GOP’s “Kool-Aid” about paying down the debt instead of taking care of the people? Or is he going to do what FDR did by running in 2012 on paying down the debt, and then, if he’s re-elected, change his mind and focus on jobs and government support for jobs, instead of worrying about minor increases in the federal debt? Let’s hope so.

I find it interesting that it has always been the case, whether in business or in human nature, one must always take risks in their investments. This is true whether you are investing in a business plan, or in people, in order to achieve eventual success. Someone always has to take a risk, whether it is in a major company such as “Apple Computer”, or in a small, one-owner business such as “Kara’s Cupcakes”. They both take some kind of lending risk and they can both become successful well beyond their original investment. And yes, if the tax loop-holes are filled, they both will repay those investments many times over through increasing their employees and by properly paying their taxes year after year.

The GOP's approach didn’t work back in the 1930’s and it won’t work today because it is against the basic rules of democracy, economics and capitalism. The Republicans’ idea is more along the ideas of the era of Charles Dickens and his Christmas Carol’s Ebenezer Scrooge. Apparently, the GOP would prefer there to only be the “Scrooge’s” and the poor “Bob Cratchet’s”, but nothing in-between such as a strong middle-class.

I’m hoping that the president is reading his American political history and that he follows a modern day, 21st century version of what FDR did, after he realized the best alternative approach.

I guess now we will just have to wait and see.

Copyright G.Ater 2011

Follow me on Twitter: gater01

WANT A PURE DEFINITION OF “HYPOCRITE”? HOW ABOUT THE “REPUBLICAN PARTY”

...Is Ebenezer Scrooge the real symbol of the GOP?







Now why would I even say something like this:

Here are just a few examples of the on-going GOP hypocrisy:

GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES:
If you listen to the recent speeches of Republican 2012 presidential hopefuls, you’ll find several of them talking at length about the harm done by government workers, who have they say, multiplied under the Obama administration. A recent example was an op-ed article by the outgoing Minnesota GOP governor Tim Pawlenty, who declared that “thanks to President Obama,” government is the only booming sector in our economy: “Since January 2008”. Now, as I recall, wasn’t Mr. Obama inaugurated in 2009….?

The reality is that the private sector has lost nearly 8,000,000 jobs, while local, state and federal governments added 590,000.
In addition, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), full-time government employment has fallen, not risen, since January 2008. And since January 2009, after President Obama actually did take office, government employment has “fallen by more than 300,000” as hard-pressed state and local governments have been forced to lay off teachers, police officers, firefighters and other workers. I would say that Mr. Pawlenty is either being ignorant of the facts, (Is that possible ?)……or he is being a tad hypocritical.

DADT:
The Republicans in the Senate stated last week that if the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT)” issue was brought for a vote before Christmas, the Democrats were only doing it at that time for embarrassing the GOP Senators that would vote against it. (That’s pure nonsense! DADT had been scheduled for a possible vote in the Senate in early December since last Summer.) The Republicans then said they would vote for DADT, but they were then going to hold up the S.T.A.R.T. nuclear treaty. In other words, the Republicans had already Filibustered and held up the critical nuclear treaty for months. Now they had decided to continue holding up this very serious US / Russia missile treaty, which would deal with monitoring possible world-wide loose nukes. This was their first choice, versus their knowing they would be seriously embarrassed before Christmas by voting against gays serving openly in the US military.
Now those are interesting, ridiculous and highly hypocritical priorities.

SENATOR JIM DeMINT (R-SC):
This “Tea Party” senator had the gall to say that he was against the latest compromise tax proposal (that was recently passed) because it slightly increased the federal deficit. Now, in the very same sentence, Senator DeMint said that he supported the permanent tax cuts for the wealthy which would have increased the federal deficit by billions more than the compromise tax cut bill…..? Just another strike for their hypocrisy.

GOP SENATORS: AS A GROUP:
All of the GOP Senators recently questioned the Omnibus Budget Bill as being too large. The minority leader, Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY), even questioned, “Where did this [such a big bill] come from?” It was then pointed out to Senator McConnell by another Democratic senator that, “did he just forget?” The Democratic senator went on to say that this is the same bill that every senator had worked on, both Democrat and Republican, for the previous seven months and every senator knew how large it was. In addition, some of these same Republicans had requested putting their own earmarks in this massive bill, but they were now saying that they were going to vote against it.

Even though earmarks are much less than 1% of the total budget, Republicans have recently cast “earmarks” as the “hallmark of government waste” and they have instituted a voluntary GOP party-wide ban on all “earmarks”. However, during this same session, a number of GOP members of this Congress immediately violated their own earmark ban by asking for more…..(guess what?.....”earmarks”). Yahoo again for GOP hypocrisy

But there’s more……….

“HOLIER-THAN-THOU” GOP:
The Republicans have always tried to take the high road with their so called “Pro-life” and “Family Values” political stance. Of course, they are not “Pro-life”, they are “pro-fetus”. After a child is born, the Republican proposals for budget cuts would let a new-born child from incest or a rape victim starve to death, or they would at least deny it health care. Oh yes, they rant loudly against a woman’s right to choose, but after a woman is forced to give birth, “it’s not their problem”.

And let’s not forget the wonderful publicly disgraced Republicans with such bogus strong “family values” such as; Tom DeLay, Larry Craig, David Vitter, John Ensign, Mark Sanford, Newt Gingrich, Mark Foley, Jack Abramoff and Jim Greer. (Oh, and let’s not leave out the war-mongers; George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.) Just one more big dose of even more hypocrisy…..

GOP VOTE AGAINST 9/11 FIRST-RESPONDERS:
First, just after the 9/11 terrorist attack, the government under President George W. Bush, had the air at ground-zero thoroughly tested. The government was then ordered by the Bush administration to tell the workers at the Twin Towers disaster that the air was dirty, but was still safe to breath. (It was later admitted that the initials tests showed the air to be full of toxic gasses and harmful particles that would eventually become stuck in the worker’s lungs.) Even knowing this, GOP Senators such as Jon Kyl (R-AZ) and Tom Coburn (R-OK and a physician), have voted multiple times against any healthcare coverage for these sick first responders. Many of these individuals were the firemen and rescuers that were running up the stairs as the civilians were running down, trying to escape the towers. Many of these volunteer individuals have already died from that toxic exposure. In addition, these were not just local residents. Many of these were outside volunteers that came from every state in the union, just to help clean up while helping those looking for their loved ones.

Oh, and FYI. The reason the Republicans were voting against the “First Responders Healthcare” is that the cost of this healthcare was to be paid by closing a tax loop-hole that gave multi-national companies a tax-break for moving their operations out of the US.

Yes, just another “right-on” for Republican hypocrisy.

SENATOR JOHN McCAIN:
This senator from Arizona has gone totally senile and is now the “Senior GOP Hypocrite”. The senator, previously known as a “Maverick” and a reasonable moderate Republican, has virtually done a 180º turn around on everything from “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, to his previous support of the “Dream Act”. This man, that had lost to Barack Obama in 2008, has now become a very bitter and frustrated, hypocritical old man.

All the above is just a small example of the proof that: “Hypocrisy continues to reign supreme within the Republican Party!”.

Copyright G.Ater 2010

Follow me on Twitter: gater01

ONE MORE CASE SHOWING THAT FOX NEWS IS JUST A REPUBLICAN TOOL

Another legitimate news source calls out Rupert Murdock’s fantasy news channel.

I have been stating the obvious about Faux News and the Fox Network for years, and they just continue to add to their bad reputation for offering vast amounts of falsified news. As I once wrote, “There could be a nightly 2 hour news program, just for correcting the untrue information that is presented daily on Rupert Murdock’s fantasy network.” I even heard someone on the radio recently say that, “Rupert Murdock and Fox are second only to Walt Disney in their approach for offering make-believe news and modern-day fairy tales.”

Well, a week or so ago, another valid news provider, the 2nd largest newspaper in the country, namely the Los Angeles Times, has joined the rest of us in calling out Mr. Murdock’s bogus news network.

Yes, the LA Times, a reputable news source, has joined with the real truth-teller; Media Matters, in stating that the claims of Glen Beck, Sean Hannity, and Bill O’Reilly, saying that Fox News is “Fair & Balance” is just a bunch of “Bull”.

The recent Times article told about how Media Matters first reported in 2009 about a leaked e-mail from Bill Sammon, the Fox News' Washington managing editor, where he had instructed his reporters to avoid the phrase "public option" when referring to a then proposed healthcare plan. The e-mail was sent during the period when debate over the Democratic healthcare bill was at its height in Congress. Sammon’s memo came out after the Republican pollster, Frank Luntz had appeared on Sean Hannity's show encouraging Hannity to use the phrase "government option" instead of “public option’. Luntz had stated that such terminology decreased public support for the proposal. Sammon then told his Fox reporters to; "Please use the term 'government-run health insurance' instead of, 'public option' whenever possible."

Now that kind of instruction wasn’t such a big deal. However, Mr. Sammon has now gone a major step further when he recently sent another message to his reporters saying; “"We should refrain from asserting that the planet has warmed (or cooled) in any given period without IMMEDIATELY pointing out that such theories are based upon data that critics have called into question."

This e-mail was sent by Sammon to his news reporters and was also revealed by Media Matters. This memo went out 15 minutes after a Fox News reporter had “accurately explained to viewers that United Nations scientists had issued a report saying 2000 to 2009 was shaping up to be the warmest decade on record — even warmer than the 1990s, which were warmer than the 1980s”.

The Times went on to state that;
“Such data aren't in serious dispute among climate scientists. The way the data are interpreted can vary; it's legitimate for climate skeptics to reach conclusions that contradict mainstream theories. But only a crank would deny the underlying temperature data that show the Earth getting warmer — records compiled by independent stations around the world, combined with satellite measurements and confirmed by observations of rising sea levels, vanishing glaciers and other inputs — because to do so is to deny material and measurable facts. Instructing reporters to treat such facts as controversial is like telling them to question the laws of gravity when discussing plane crashes. The only reason for doing it is to further a partisan agenda, in this case an attempt to cast doubt on climate science in order to fend off government efforts to limit greenhouse gases.”

The Times article finished by saying; “Fox should either come clean about this and crack down on such partisanship in its news ranks, or it should stop pretending to be an objective news source.”

Here, here; LA Times, I couldn’t have said it better except to say that instead of “Fair & Balanced”, their tag-line should be changed to “The #1 source for your GOP Talking-Points”.

Copyright G.Ater 2010

Follow me on Twitter: gater01

MICHELE BACHMANN CONTINUES HER WACKY WAYS

...Judge Scalia and Michele Bachmann




It’s rumored that Representative Bachmann is from a galaxy, far, far away.....


For anyone that follows national politics, it was very astounding to hear that House Representative, Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), recently announced that she's is now offering congressional constitutional education classes for incoming GOP freshmen representatives. And to help with this endeavor, the super-conservative Supreme Court Justice, Antonin Scalia will be teaching the first course.

In a recent interview with Lou Dobbs, Bachmann described the forthcoming weekly sessions as similar to; "What the NFL does and what the baseball teams do." Bachmann also stated that, "We're going to practice every week, if you will, our craft, which is studying and learning the Declaration, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights."

She went on to say, "Justice Scalia has graciously agreed to kick off our class the hour before we cast our first vote in Congress, we'll meet in the Capitol, we'll have a seminar on some segment of the Constitution, we'll have a speaker, we'll have questions and answers, we'll wrap our minds around this magnificent document. That'll set the tone for the [1st] week when we're in Washington."

As well as Scalia, Bachmann has mentioned her intent to get another member of the Supreme Court bench, Chief Justice John Roberts, to lead a future seminar.

Beyond Supreme Court Justices, Bachmann has also made plans to court a variety of other conservative stars, such as the FAUX NEWS network’s 9/11 "truther" & conspiracist, Judge Andrew Napolitano, and the right-wing talk personality, Sean Hannity. It has been reported that she will also have the controversial evangelical and separation-of-church-and-state denier, David Barton, to teach the classes. (Now just what does an off-the-wall congress woman; a conspiracy nut; a less than truthful talk-show host; and a man that says that the “separation of church and state is an American myth” have to offer the new freshmen members of the US Congress?)

Yes, this is the same Michele Bachmann that accused the Obama administration of plotting to divert money from Republican to Democratic districts all over the US and for their plan to tax the wealthy for funding the operation. And the same Michele Bachmann that told Chris Matthews on his political “Hardball” show on MSNBC: “The news media should conduct a penetrating exposé to determine whether [all of the] members of Congress are ‘pro-America or anti-America’.” Has Ms. Bachmann become a female version of the late Senator Joseph McCarthy who seemed to find a Communist under every rock and behind every bush.

Talk about the “Blind-leading-the-Blind”.

The idea that this nut-case representative should be allowed to oversee new freshmen representatives regarding the proper definition of the US Constitution, and that one of the conservative associate judges that supported the activist court’s decision called Citizens-United, and would be teaching the basics of the US Constitution……..this is all highly disturbing.

Just to support my previous “nut-case” comment regarding Ms. Bachmann, here is just a short list of some of Ms. Bachmann’s previous "bizarre" direct quotes. In fact, today, there are whole web sites dedicated to Rep. Bachmann’s wacky statements.

MICHELE BACHMANN DIRECT QUOTES:

• “Not all cultures are equal.” (A recent negative reference about any non-Christian culture.)

• "I don't know where they're going to get all this money because we're running out of rich people in this country."

• “Literally, if we took away the minimum wage—if conceivably it was gone—we could potentially virtually wipe out unemployment completely because we would be able to offer jobs at whatever level."

• “This is an earthquake issue. This will change our state forever. Because the immediate consequence, if gay marriage goes through, is that K-12 little children will be forced to learn that homosexuality is normal, natural and perhaps they should try it.”

• “I find it interesting that it was back in the 1970s that the swine flu broke out then under Democrat President Jimmy Carter. And I’m not blaming this [latest swine flu cases] on President Obama, I just think it is an interesting coincidence. “

• "Carbon dioxide is portrayed as harmful. But there isn't even one study that can be produced that shows that carbon dioxide is a harmful gas."

• "There are hundreds and hundreds of scientists, many of them holding Nobel Prizes, who believe in intelligent [human] design."

• “Thomas Jefferson told us 'having a revolution every now and then is a good thing,' and the people -- we the people -- are going to have to fight back hard if we're not going to lose our country."

• “We’re in a state of crisis where our nation is literally ripping apart at the seams right now, and lawlessness is occurring from one ocean to the other. And we’re seeing the fulfillment of the Book of Judges here in our own time, where every man doing that which is right in his own eyes—in other words, anarchy.”

• “God calls us to fall on our faces and our knees and cry out to Him and confess our sins. And I would just ask your listeners to do that now. Cry out to a Holy God. He wants to hear us, He will hear us if we will confess our sins and cry out to Him. Our children are worth it and obedience to God demands it.”

• “Spending comes just as natural to liberals in Minnesota and the Minnesota legislature as bashing decency comes to the editorial board of our major metropolitan newspapers.”

• “This really is the number one issue for our country right now, how are we going to deal with this threat of radical Islam taking over our country.”

• “On gay marriage, this is probably the biggest issue that will impact our state and our nation in the last, at least, thirty years. I am not understating that.”

• “It’s part of Satan I think to say that this is ‘gay’……. It’s anything but gay.”

• “We need to have profound compassion for [gay] people who are dealing with the very real issue of sexual dysfunction in their life and sexual identity disorders.”


Folks, you cannot make this stuff up……

Yes, this woman not only won her re-election, she has people from all over the US sending her donations since her Chris Matthews / Hardball, TV interview. She has now been recently added to the House Intelligence Committee (Now there’s a laugh.) and she’s announced that with this kind of national support, she may run for the Senate or even the US presidency in 2012.

This just proves that there are a bunch of nut-cases out there supporting even bigger nut-cases like Bachmann, and not only do really exist, they also breed and unfortunately, they vote.

God help us all!

Copyright G.Ater 2010

Follow me on Twitter: gater01

WILL AFGHANISTAN BECOME OBAMA’S VIETNAM?

...Afghan rebel using a US "Stinger" missile against Soviet aircraft in the 1980's.



This is a question that is being asked much more often today.

All of the current issues regarding the US and Afghanistan really started when the United States decided to help the rebel Afghan Mujahedeen in fighting the Soviets that were occupying their country starting back in 1979. (If you happened to see the movies; Charlie Wilson’s War and Rambo III, those will give you the romanticized version of what the US was doing.) Basically, the US was supplying the locals with military arms and the portable “Stinger” missiles for blowing the Soviet helicopters out of the sky during the 1980’s. Eventually, the rebels made their point with 270 confirmed Soviet kills using these American-made shoulder-mounted, heat-seeking missiles. The Soviets eventually departed from the country in total defeat in 1989.

But since the Afghani’s, in all of history, have never had a functioning central government, unfortunately the US decided to virtually ignore the political national leadership vacuum that was left by the departure of the Soviets. At this point, Afghan’s Muslim Taliban tribes took back the control of their local regions and villages, just as they had done centuries ago.

It is important to understand that today, 80% of the inhabitants of Afghanistan are totally illiterate. The villages are run under totalitarian rule by their religious Imam’s. All of the education for these villagers comes from memorizing their holy book, the Quran, which is interrupted for them verbally by their zealous religious leaders. There are no televisions or broadcast radio stations and no newspapers except in a few of Afghanistan’s larger cities. There are few paved roads, or hospitals or schools. In these rural villages, the women are not allowed to attend school and are totally subservient to their male family members or their husbands.

This is the basic definition and description of most of Afghanistan today. When the US invaded Afghanistan in the pursuit of the terrorist, Osama Bin Laden and his al Qaida, Afghanistan’s total Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was stated as only being at approximately two billion dollars. It was, and still is, one of the poorest nation in the world. (And today, the US is spending $370 million per day, just to support the US military in Afghanistan.)

Now, just exactly, who and what is the Taliban?

The name Taliban is from the Arabic word for student, “taleb”. They are extreme fundamentalist Sunni Muslims, mostly from Afghanistan’s remote Pashtun tribes. The Taliban currently dominates large areas of Afghanistan as well as a large part of Pakistan’s tribal border areas.

The Taliban’s goal is to establish a puritanical society that neither recognizes nor tolerates any other religion nor any form of Islam divergent from their own. They scorn all concepts of democracy or any secular political process as an offense against Islam. The Taliban’s Islam is however, a close kin of Saudi Arabia’s very strict Wahhabism. The Taliban’s version of Islamic law, or Sharia Law, is historically inaccurate, contradictory, self-serving and fundamentally a deviant from the prevailing interpretations of normal Islamic law and practice.

In the many centuries of the existence of the region known as Afghanistan, they have never been conquered by any outside occupiers. That includes from Alexander the Great in 330 BC to the Soviet Union. For centuries, Afghanistan has been referred to as the “place where empires go to die”.

What is really disturbing is that what is going on today is exactly what the terrorist, Osama bin Laden said that he wanted the US to do, even before his 9/11 attacks on the Pentagon and New York City’s Twin Towers.

Bin Laden, years ago, wrote that he wanted the United States to pick a fight with, and to invade, a Muslim country in the Middle East. He stated that he wanted the average US citizens to always remain fearful of Muslims and that he wanted this fear to cause the draining of America’s financial coffers and of all of Americas international investments. He further stated that these invasions by the US would turn the Muslim world against the West, specifically the United States. It would also be the best recruitment tool for his al Qaeda and other Muslim groups such as the Taliban. It appears that due to the mismanagement of the Bush administration, bin Laden pretty much got what he had predicted.

So, knowing all this, just what did the US do?

Well, not only did President Bush decide to go into Afghanistan after bin Laden (and then let him escape), he then preemptively invaded a second Muslim country that didn’t have anything to do with 9/11 or with Osama bin Laden.

So, back to the original question, will Afghanistan become Obama’s Vietnam?

Based on the military efforts to date, we are NOT winning the hearts and minds of the local Afghans. Just as in Vietnam, military efforts against the Afghan locals, in such an unforgiving terrain, will not allow for a “conventional winning of the war”. Every time the military used a remote drone to drop a bomb on a nest of insurgents, even if they hit their target, they usually kill or maim other local innocent civilians. This immediately turns the whole village against all Americans. Today, there are thousands of displaced Afghani’s due to the devastation that continues to occur between the Taliban and the US military.

In addition, the Taliban and the few remaining al Qaeda groups continue to perform hit-and-run attacks in Afghanistan while they then withdraw to their hideouts in the mountainous borders areas of our so-called partner, Pakistan.

And on top of all this, the Afghan and Pakistani governments are so corrupt that the US is spending ten times per soldier what it cost for supporting a soldier in Vietnam. Per the US Pentagon, it costs $750,000 per US soldier sent to support the US military’s efforts in Afghanistan.

In our current economy, can we continue to spend this kind of US treasure in personnel and in tax-payer revenue in such a “no-win” situation? What do we gain by occupying this country until 2014 and beyond?

Today, the only real winners are the giant US Military Industrial Complex and the thousands of sub-contractors supporting this so called “war”. But it’s not a war….it’s an “occupation of a foreign country that doesn’t want us there”.

To answer the question, yes it is very possible that if history repeats itself, Afghanistan could easily become Obama’s Vietnam.

For more information on what’s going on in Afghanistan today, you may want to watch the six short internet videos of the award winning documentary “Rethinking Afghanistan” by Robert Greenwald. Go to : www.rethinkafghanistan.com

Copyright G.Ater 2010

Follow me on Twitter: gater01

PROGRESSIVES & INDEPENDENTS: COOL YOUR JETS & GET A GRIP!

...Still the base of Obama's support.












The latest tax-cut proposal wins far more than it gives up.


I wish the nation’s “Super Liberals” out there would “get a grip” and back off their strong rhetoric against the president’s tax-cut proposal with the “hostage taking” GOP. It was the “Conserv-a-Dem’s”, up for re-election, they were the ones that didn’t agree with the president for dealing with the tax-cut issue in the months before the mid-term elections. Due to the failure of addressing the issue before November, there were probably more lost Democratic seats in the House than were necessary.

As much as I sympathize with the progressives who are ready to stand their ground, let's first just try to “get real”. At almost one trillion dollars, the total package is larger than the original Obama stimulus package. (Even the major economists that had said the original stimulus package was too small, now agree with this added “stimulus” plan.) Most of the money is properly directed at middle and lower-income families through payroll and middle-class tax cuts, tax credits and unemployment insurance. The tax-cuts for the wealthy is only 13.5% of the total package.

Hopefully, President Obama will now take the opportunity to call out the Republicans for their bizarre economic policies which is still mired in ”trickle-down” nonsense and their blatant deficit hypocrisy. (Oh you know, hypocrisy such as Senator Jim DiMent, R-SC, that is against the tax-cut compromise plan because it provides for more jobs and slightly raises the deficit, while his support is for permanent tax-cuts for the rich, which provides for no jobs or unemployment insurance and it raises the deficit by a whopping 700 billion dollars.)

Yes, it’s unfortunate that the president did not bring more of the House Democratic Caucus into the negotiations with the Republicans. It’s also sad that the president has not shown more energetic support for other previous middle-class issues such as healthcare’s “Public Option”, accelerating the “DADT” issue, and for going after the tax cut issue before it went into a last minute “lame-duck“ situation. However, killing the deal now would mean a middle-class tax increase, no extended unemployment benefits, no payroll tax holiday and nothing for jobs. Voters would surely feel they had been robbed - and the Democrats, perhaps unfairly, would get all the blame (as they always seem to do).

As I have said, I am aware that this is very painful. The president had to go back on a highly-visible campaign promise. Democrats in Congress are understandably irate at being lectured so sternly by a president for whom ending the tax cuts for the wealthy was so important that it was supposed to be non-negotiable - until he had to negotiate it away. It's an unfortunate story, for the country’s middle class and especially for the Democratic Party.

However, this latest deal, with Republic opposition support, could avoid a double-dip recession, provide for 2 million jobs, add a single percentage point to the GDP, while the president and the Democrats could take credit for any improvements in the economy.

The unfortunate part is that the White House still seems to underestimate the anger and disillusionment among the party's loyal left-of-center and liberal base. These supporters need some victories to lift the spirits of these Democratic faithful.

In addition, President Obama needs to train his newfound passion and outrage on his foes in the GOP, not on the friends and supporters that his press secretary, Robert Gibbs, (to his dismay) had once called the "professional left". FDR had once said in a speech that he, “Relished the hatred that the Republicans had for him,”. I think that many of the faithful Democrats would like to hear something strong and forceful like that from President Obama.

But putting that aside, let’s look at the “good”, the “bad” and the “very ugly” points of the proposed tax deal:

VERY GOOD:
First, as we know, “tax cuts” are the “Holy Grail” of the GOP. One very good news item is that the GOP’s “no-holds-barred” approach about tax-cuts for those Americans that don’t need them, show just how callus and un-caring the Republicans really are. It also shows just how dogmatic they are in blindly following their leadership, right off the cliff if necessary, without questioning whether their direction is good for the American middle-class. They don’t even question the fact that they want to increase the federal deficit (that they were mostly responsible for) by another 700 Billion US dollars, as they continue screaming about the high federal deficit….?. That’s 700 billion that our kids, our grandkids and their kids would have been stuck with.

The latest “Tax Deal Proposal”, and its 2 year temporary tax cut extension for the rich, would only give the opposition $130 Billion of their requested 700 Billion dollars. In addition, under the terms of the deal, some popular, short-term tax credits for 98% of Americans and small business incentives would be extended and a temporary payroll tax cut will also be implemented. (In fact, the two year, 2% payroll tax cut means working Americans would be getting additional revenue in their pay checks from the payroll tax cut.) Additionally, the federal inheritance tax would be revived for those amounts above $5 Million.

This is a much bigger positive for the American middle-class than it is for the top 2% of America’s wealthiest (which they didn’t ask for anyway), but the Republicans are still supporting.


VERY GOOD:
Unemployment checks will now start again for those starting to run out of coverage.


GOOD:
The “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” issue, the nuclear “START” treaty and the “Dream Act” can now (hopefully) proceed with discussions in the senate, once a deal has been struck. These are some of the hostages that the Republicans have been holding up and will hopefully now release for debate.


GOOD & BAD:
The BAD: Obama had to agree to back down on taking back the tax cuts for the rich, even though it’s adding billions to the national deficit as these wealthy Americans have increased their riches by an average of $100 million per family in a down economy.
The GOOD: Fortunately, the tax-cuts will only be a temporary two-year extension. If the economy does continue to improve, the president would have a strong case to veto the making of the tax cut permanent after the two year extension. By vetoing, it could also make his re-election more possible as well as to potentially add more Democrats in the senate or the house in 2012.


VERY BAD:
Still nothing so far for helping those that have gone beyond their 99 weeks of unemployment.


VERY BAD & VERY UGLY:
During all of this, he US will still be required to borrow money from China & India. In addition, revenue that should be directed to improving the nation’s infrastructure, creating jobs and implementing Green energy projects will be stopped or stifled by the new Republican run House of Representatives.

In any case, I’m not looking forward to the next two years……

Copyright: G.Ater 2010

Follow me on Twitter: gater01

CUTTING TAXES HAS USUALLY LEAD TO HIGHER UNEMPLOYMENT

...The unemployed of 2010


The data shows that the above head-line is usually true.

Don’t you just love studies, data and statistics?

Yes, I have said for years that anyone with any brains can design a study or can manipulate statistics to prove just about anything. But then again, there are also those right-wing talking blow-hards such as Rush Limbaugh and those on the FOX network that just make-up their own so called ”facts” for attempting to prove their statements or positions.

However, the reality is that some studies with properly acquired data do show truthful results, such as trends and facts regarding the realities of what’s actually going on in this world of ours.

As one example, there was an extensive study performed by a major British University where democratic nations, including the British Empire, the US and the other democratic governments in the world were surveyed over their previous 30 years. The properly collected data showed, with absolute proof, that more citizens within these countries died from suicides, murders and homicides when conservatives were running the governments, compared to when liberals were in the majority.

Now just why would that be the case?

The supporting background data showed that in all of these situations, when conservatives were in power, unemployment usually increased. When this occurs, the stresses within working families increases causing difficult emotional circumstances and thus, unnecessary deaths in each country also increased.

In addition, conservatives usually do not support the concepts of unemployment insurance and they also tend to cut the taxes that are normally used for supporting the social programs that are so seriously needed during those times of emotional and economic strife.

As another example of these types of truthful studies, the political writer and successful novelist, Larry Beinhart, who also writes regularly for the internet’s buzzflash.com, has put together data that illustrates and supports the following statements:

• Statement #1: Tax cuts usually lead to higher unemployment.

• Statement #2: Tax increases usually lead to lower unemployment.

Example:
>>Since 1950, there were five increases on taxes for the rich. Four out of five times, unemployment went down.

>>Since 1950 we have had ten cuts to the top margin tax rate. Six out of 10 times, unemployment has gone up.

Here is some of the selected data for demonstrating Mr. Beinhart’s statements:

>>YEAR - UNEMPLOYMENT RATE - RESULTS

>>1968 - 3.6% - Tax Hike / Unemployment down
>>1969 - 3.5% - Tax Hike / Unemployment down
>>1970 - 4.9% - Tax Cut / Unemployment up
>>1971 - 5.9% - Tax Cut / Unemployment up
>>1981 - 7.6% - Tax Cut / Unemployment up
>>1982 - 9.7% - Tax Cut / Unemployment up
>>2001 - 4.7% - Tax Cut / Unemployment up
>>2003 - 6.0% - Tax Cut / Unemployment up
>>2010 - 9.8% - Tax Cut / Unemployment up

Is this “absolute proof”? Oh, probably not. However, it does seem more than just a coincidence.

But this is real evidence of the legacy of the GOP’s so called “Trickle Down or Voodoo Economics” that has provided more wealth for the rich and fewer jobs for working Americans.

Copyright G.Ater 2010

Follow me on Twitter: gater01

IT TAKES A CORRUPT FOREIGN COUNTRY TO FINALLY CALL OUT “TRICKY DICK CHENEY”

...”Tricky Dick” himself

Obama & Company didn’t have the stomach, but a corrupt Nigeria called it like it is.....

The man that was the actual “hand” inside the operation of the previous, “GOP sock-puppet American President”..... the former Veep, Richard Cheney, is now going to find it much harder to leave the country.

Business Week magazine has now confirmed the report from the Nigerian Guardian Newspaper that the government of Nigeria is, “charging Dick Cheney with bribery”. Nigeria is formally making the accusation that Halliburton spent $180 million bribing Nigerian officials in order to win a $6 billion natural-gas contract. Cheney was Halliburton’s CEO between 1995 and 2000. (Isn’t it ironic that one of the most corrupt nations on earth was offended by a foreign country bribing their own government officials….?)

While several other non-US companies are also being charged with briberies, none of them were even close to the size of the alleged bribes from the Halliburton subsidiary. Business Week now states that, "KBR and Halliburton agreed to pay $579 million in February 2009 for bribery payments to Nigerian officials that stretched from 1994 to 2004." Nigeria's Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, has added that Cheney's arrest warrant "will be issued and transmitted through Interpol," the international police investigative organization.

The idea of “Tricky Dick Cheney” being arrested by Nigeria may sound absurd. However, since the Obama Administration apparently didn’t have the guts to do what was right in going after the previous gangster team of “Bush & Cheney”, perhaps the hard work will now be attempted by those foreign countries that were also duped by the villainous “Dynamic Duo”, or in this case, the infamous “Darth Vader Cheney” in particular.

Other countries such as Spain, Portugal, Italy and a few others are also considering war crime suits against both Bush & Cheney for the false info they were provided that convinced them to assist with the unnecessary and costly invasion of Iraq.

This latest news from Nigeria has however, been received by many with an amused shrug, and with no small amount of dismissal. The Washington Post’s reporter Al Kamen, for example, wrote, “It’s not as if Cheney, now suffering from some very serious heart problems, was planning to take the family on a cruise up the Niger Delta any time soon. The odds of his showing up in Africa – except maybe for a hunting trip – are zero.” Mr. Kamen is probably correct. However, being that Interpol has 188 member countries, Mr. Cheney could be at serious risk for being picked up in any of these member countries.

On the other hand, I would assume the Obama administration’s is not taking this as lightly as one might initially expect.

It must be understood that no matter what you may think about Interpol, this organization does not have an army of international police personnel. Interpol is an information-sharing agency. Interpol helps coordinate information and legal efforts among its 188 member countries. It’s the “member countries” whose governments are supposed to enforce any potential warrants. It’s not Interpol‘s responsibility to arrest Cheney or anyone that has been charged with an international crime. As with other Interpol warrants, that honor goes to the “associated government”, which in this case is the United States. And this international police agreement puts President Obama’s Department of Justice in a highly compromising position.

Aside from the obvious political implications of attempting to arrest a former US vice president, Obama and company are only presented with two possible choices, and neither one is desirable.

First, they can ignore the warrant, thereby straining US relations with a very friendly, “natural resources-rich” Nigeria. It also undercuts America’s current leadership role in Interpol, which is today headed by an American, Ronald Noble, who had previously worked for President Clinton’s Treasury Department.

The second option is to move forward with the arrest of Dick Cheney.

Of course, this would inflame the right wing, and not just because of Cheney’s undeserved, but revered status among the conservatives.

One must remember that President Obama recently inflamed the Republicans by extending certain diplomatic immunities to Interpol agents while they were operating in the US.

This extension lead the conservatives to falsely claim that the President was “eroding the Constitution”. The conservative Washington Examiner even wrongly suggested Obama’s move “may be the most destructive blow ever struck against American constitutional civil liberties,” while Andrew C. McCarthy from the conservative National Review made the ridiculous claim that “an international police force would be working unrestrained by the U.S. Constitution and American law.”

As usual, these messages were grossly misstated because, as it was previously made clear, Interpol doesn’t perform any “arrests”. They only investigate and report their evidence to the member country’s law enforcement organizations.

In any case, after the Nigerian government issues their warrant, the White House will be forced to defend any required action or inaction.

This long over-due case could eventually become a big “pain-in-the-U-know-what” for Obama and a bigger political “brouhaha” than anyone can imagine today. Only time will tell.....

Copyright G.Ater 2010

Follow me on Twitter: gater01

THE DINOSAUR & THE "EISENHOWER REPUBLICAN".....BOTH ARE LONG-TIME EXTINCT

...The T-Rex and the “Eisenhower Republican”: Both hold the same status in history.

A true Republican from the 1950’s would probably be referred to today as a “Centrist Democrat”.

For years now, I have been admitting that I was at one time a “registered Republican”. In fact, I was not just a Republican, I was an “Eisenhower Republican”. With younger people today, especially the very progressive "Liberal" ones, they would probably just look at me in “Shock & Awe”, and ask, “How could you have ever allowed yourself to be one of those idiot, right-wing nut jobs?”

Well, if I were just referring to today’s far right GOP, I would probably be asking the same question. And, based on the fact that my youth was spent campaigning against the US military draft and the war in Vietnam, (while a Democratic president was sitting in the White House), being a Republican in the 50’s and early 60’s was more like being a middle-of-the-road Democrat in today’s world.

In fact, today I continue to hear from some of those politically astute individuals that are over 50 years old that say: “Eisenhower was one of the best Democratic presidents we’ve ever had.”

Now, since Eisenhower was a Republican president, just why would they even say such a thing?

Actually, all one has to do in order to support this statement is to look at the 1956 Republican Party Re-Election Platform document. If you did not read the title at the top of the platform’s front page, today you could easily confuse the 1956 document with that of a recent Democratic Political Platform.

Here are some actual excerpts from the 1956 GOP Platform that was presented over 50 years ago at the GOP convention which was held at the Cow Palace, in Daly City, California, just south of San Francisco::

Actual GOP Platform Exerts:
>>> Our great President, Dwight D. Eisenhower, has counseled us: “In all those things which deal with people, be liberal, be human. In all those things which deal with people’s money, or their economy, or their form of government, be conservative.”
(For a GOP president to even include the word “liberal” in an official statement would be unheard of today.)

>>> “Republican leadership has enlarged federal assistance for construction of hospitals, emphasizing low-cost care of chronic diseases and the special problems of older persons, and increased Federal aid for medical care of the needy.
We have asked [for] the largest increase in research funds ever sought in one year to intensify attacks on cancer, mental illness, heart disease and other dread diseases.”
(Definitely doesn’t sound like any Republican concept from a recent GOP platform.....)

>>> “We demand once again, despite the reluctance of the Democrat 84th Congress, federal assistance to help build facilities to train more physicians and scientists.”
(Today, this would be considered by the Republicans as either an undue expansion of the federal government’s powers or a communistic plot.)

>>> “We have encouraged a notable expansion and improvement of voluntary health insurance, and urge that reinsurance and pooling arrangements be authorized to speed this progress.”
(Today, the GOP would consider this as supporting the so-called “Obamacare Death Panels”.)

>>> “We have strengthened the Food and Drug Administration, and we have increased the vocational rehabilitation program to enable a larger number of the disabled to return to satisfying activity.”
(A little different from the Bush administration that tried to classify PTSD’s issues as a “temporary medical condition” and the GOP that today wants to disband the FDA).

>>> “We have supported measures that have made more housing available than ever before in history, reduced urban slums in local-federal partnership, stimulated record home ownership, and authorized additional low-rent public housing.”
(Yes, it is hard to believe that this was actually a part of the Republican platform of 1956. The Republicans would never be caught saying this in today’s GOP platforms.)

>>> “We recommend to Congress the submission of a constitutional amendment providing equal rights for [both] men and women.”
(My Goodness, the GOP in 1956 actually supported what would become the Equal Rights Amendment!!!)

As you can see, based on the 1956 GOP Platform, there was little difference (at the time) between the Democrats and the Republicans in their desires for the American public.

This was also at a time well before it required millions, or billions, of donated dollars from corporate America in order to run for and win a federal political office. In today’s world, if an issue is not supported by “Corporate America”, elected politicians will just ignore what the average American wants or needs.

Just as there were only a handful of lobbyists on “K-Street” in DC when Ronald Reagan came into office, today there are over 17,000 registered lobbyists, and that’s just in Washington DC. And isn’t it interesting that in Great Britain, lobbying is against the law and you can go to jail (and some Briton’s have) if you are found guilty of lobbying.

When will America ever learn the lessons that the British citizens eventually learned?

As I said, yes, I was once a proud “Eisenhower Republican”. Unfortunately, that specific American species has now been extinct for decades.

Copyright, G.Ater 2010

Follow me on Twitter: gater01

WHY IS “WASTE PAPER” AMERICA'S #1 EXPORT?

...Alexander Hamilton: the first US Treasury Secretary








And what does "Waste Paper" have to do with America’s first Secretary of the Treasury?


Alexander Hamilton was the first United States Secretary of the Treasury. He was a “Founding Father”, an economist, and a political philosopher. He was also a valuable aide to General George Washington during the American Revolutionary War.

He was one of America's first constitutional lawyers, and he wrote most of the Federalist Papers, the original and continued primary source for “Constitutional interpretation”.

But with all this, Hamilton was mainly the primary author of the economic policies of the very first US executive administration. His plans for US trade and for running the economy of the new nation were fully adopted by the George Washington Administration. These plans established the funding of the then federal government’s debt. He also established a system of tariffs and a positive trade relationship with Great Britain.

The trade and tariff system that Hamilton designed protected the nation’s fledging businesses so that they could survive and grow without concern for unfair competition from other nation’s competitive products.

I am telling you about all of this as I am very proud to say, I am a direct descendant of the first treasury secretary. I am the last male on my mother’s side of the family to actually carry the “Hamilton” name, as that is my middle name.

What is so interesting about what the first Treasury Secretary developed is that the economic and trade tariff system that Hamilton developed was the basic foundation of the system that this nation used and followed for almost 200 years.

It was not until Ronald Reagan and later George H.W. Bush began dismanteling the nation’s trade and tariff regulations, that it opened the door to the so called “free trade” and “trickle down” approaches. This was also when these presidents began giving the nation the first “trillion dollar deficit” that eventually allowed Hamilton’s US trade system to begin to dissolve.

I recently read a local conservative’s comments that “this nation has seen a tremendous growth in national wealth and prosperity over the past 20 years”. From one specific point-of view, that is correct. But “wealth and prosperity” for whom? It definitely was not for the American middle- class population that has been the foundation of this nation and the previous envy of the world.

In addition, most of this recent American wealth did not come from this nation’s manufacturing of products that were supportive of a growing and caring nation. Instead, much of the wealth was either from “moving money around” on Wall Street, producing absolutely nothing of value, or from building products for the US Military Industrial Complex.

It must be noted, that when a company produces a hammer or a saw, those items can then be used for building productive products for many American or foreign citizens. Building cannons, guns, bombs and fighter aircraft produces nothing long-term for the average American. These products of destruction are eventually, either destroyed or they become obsolete and useless.

There is another reality that is interesting about the plans that Mr. Hamilton developed for this nation.

That reality is that the basic foundation of what Hamilton foresaw for this nation is exactly what other successful and growing nations are using today.

Those nation’s economies that are at the top of the growth charts today have all adopted variations of Hamilton’s plans for their current successes. These growth economies, with major increases in manufacturing output are occurring in countries such as South Korea, India, Vietnam, Taiwan, Germany and now China. They all have their versions of Hamilton’s economic and trade designs. They also have a tariff system that protects their own manufacturers, while still letting in the products and raw materials that they need in order to keep their economic machines running at peak levels.

And just where is my proof for all of this?

Well, for what is currently destroying the American economy, first I would say that the fact that during the 8 years of the George W. Bush administration, “42,400 factories closed within the borders of this United States” is one example. And more proof today is, the #1 export product in the United States is “waste paper” for recycling.

In addition, here is just a short list of the long-time items and product types that are no longer manufactured in the United States. I have also listed the year that they were last manufactured in the US. (You will notice that all but one item disappeared within the last 10 years.)

Lost Items - plus the Last Year it was manufactured in US:

Converse Shoes (Started 1918) - 2001
Mattel Toys - 2002
Minivans - 2003
Levi’s - 2003
Radio Flyer Wagons - 2004
Dress Shirts - 2002
Televisions - 2004
Vending machines - 2003
Cell Phones - 2007
Railroad Track Parts - 2008
Pontiac cars - 2010
Flatware Table Utensils - 2010
Light Bulbs - 2010
Canned Sardines - 2010
Stainless Steel Rebar - 2003
Baseballs - 1969
Etch-a-Sketch Toys - 2000


OTHER BASIC FACTS:

>>> The US lost 32% of its manufacturing jobs since 2000

>>> Of the printed circuit boards used in millions of products, 84% are now manufactured in Asia

>>> US spends $3.90 on Chinese goods for every $1.00 China spends on US goods

>>> 70% of US GDP is “consumption based”

>>> 70% of US GDP is spent on “services”, not products

>>> It is currently predicted that China’s economy will be 3X the US economy by 2040

>>> Even for the “use of the Internet”, (which we invented), the US was 4th in the world in 2001, it’s now 15th

>>> 43.6 million Americans are now in poverty, and that number is steadily growing


Author’s final note:

I think my long-time relative, Alexander Hamilton, is currently turning over in his grave. I think I can also truthfully say that this was not his vision of his new nation.

Copyright G.Ater 2010

Follow me on Twitter: gater01