Why Occupy Failed

Occupy Wall Street has failed.

No doubt many will protest  this judgement, noting that the unconventional movement did much to raise awareness or change the public discussion.  Others will insist that Occupy has yet begun to fight, and will be back in the Spring, pitching tents and drumming on drums in a city plaza near you.

Yet by its own measure, the movement is a failure.  “We will continue to occupy” the several Occupys assured us, “until our demands are met.”  With the dispersal of the OLA camp, the last of the 24/7 presences are gone.  The occupii exited with barely a whimper.  The many homeless, who’d swelled the occupii ranks, simply returned to their usual places of encampment.  The rest sought the refuge of that room above the garage their parents always keep ready for them.

Even had the physical occupations continued, the movement remained stalled so long as it was incapable formulating any specific goals to “occupy” for.  Three months of Working Groups and twice-daily General Assemblies could not come up with a uniform list of demands, or even a “consensus” on whether to have any demands at all.

Occupying for Occupying’s Sake

The insistance on physically holding public spaces was based on a false reading of the “Arab Spring” and Tahrir Square protests.  In Tunisia, Egypt, or Syria, where anti-government protests are quickly and brutally broken up, it was necessary to maintain a continuous presence.  In America, where the government allows its citizens to protest quite freely, a 24/7 presence is neither required nor justified.

By protesting ’round the clock, the occupii acted like cargo cultists, blindly aping the Egyptians’ tactics, treating “occupation” as some magic talisman that brings about revolution.

Before very long, the occupations became about little more than the right to occupy.  The First Amendment’s protection of free speech and peacable assembly was twisted into the right to commandeer public property indefinitely.  In places like Oakland, factions of anti-police, anti-city hall malcontents hijacked the protests.  The original bogeymen, bankers and politicians, were forgotten as the occupii directed their rage at cops, mayors and college deans.

Occupussy

How quickly it’s forgotten that the successful revolution in Tunisia was sparked by the death of a fruit vendor at the hands of the police.  That the protestors in Tahrir Square endured beatings and stabbings by mounted pro-Mubarek thugs.  That protesters in Syria are murdered daily, yet more keep coming out.

Here in the US, the occupii found it intolerable when Oakland restricted their protests to the hours of 6 a.m. to 10 p.m., rejected as insulting Los Angeles’ offer of free office space and farmland, cried ‘tyranny’ when New York asked for a few hours to clean Zucotti park.  If the occupii want to know real tyranny, they should visit Argentina, and speak to the relatives of the 30,000 anti-government protesters who “disappeared” during the 1970s.  They should visit the streets of Berlin, Budapest, or Prague, and imagine ‘occupying’ while a 36 ton T-54 trundles down at you.  They should google the words “tiananmen square.”

Despite their vow to “fight like an Egyptian”, the occupii couldn’t stand up to some “nudging and bumping” by police horses.  The entire movement seemed to melt when hit with a few ounces of pepper spray.  These protesters aren’t tough like the Egyptians — they’re a bunch of occupussies.

We Are Our Demands

Although several regional groups did issue lists of demands, these all proved vague and overbroad.  What started as a singular message  – end corruption on Wall Street — was diffused until every pet cause, every simmering resentment, every inchoate dream, made the roster.

For the occupi cadre, the very concept of issuing specific demands was anathema:

[N]o single person or group has the authority to make demands on behalf of general assemblies around the world.  We are our demands. This #ows movement is about empowering communities to form their own general assemblies…. Our collective struggles cannot be co-opted.

The demand for demands is an attempt to shoehorn the Occupy gatherings into conventional politics, to force the energy of these gatherings into a form that people in power recognize, so that they can … divert, co-opt, buy off, or … squash any challenge to business as usual.

The unwillingness to articulate concrete demands so frustrated sympathetic observers, they felt obliged to pitch in by drawing up suggested demands for Occupy to adopt.  In the October 12th issue of Rolling Stone, Matt Taibbi offered five, narrowly-targeted goals:

1. Break up the “Too Big to Fail” monopolies
2. Pay for your own bailouts via a miniscule tax on stocks trades
3. No public money for private lobbying
4. Repeal the carried-interest tax break
5. Ban upfront bonuses for bankers

In a December 4th editorial, the L.A. Times offered its own list of five demands for OLA:

1. Sweeping financial reform
2. Makes taxes more fair
3. Combat corporate influence in politics
4. Address rising tuition and student debt
5. Downgrade marijuana from Schedule I status

[h/t Fionnchu]

While the last two objectives might necessitate spin-off movements (Occupy UC & Occupy Humboldt County) the Times’ list was at least a step in the right direction.

The One, Real Occupy Demand

What Taibbi, the L.A. Times, and most of America failed to realize is that, for the occupii, formal demands are moot.  For the occupii reject our present system of government as unworkable.  Occupy was envisioned not as a protest or rally, rather a revolution.  It’s one goal, one demand: to replace our current system of government with an anarchist, direct democracy.  They truly intended to camp-out in public until the rest of the world agreed to scrap our current civilization and replace it with the occupii’ vision of utopia.

David Graeber, a prominent anarchist, and one of the original organizers of #OWS, explains:

Anarchism is a revolutionary political philosophy, theory, and way of living that strives toward a more free and equal society without government, authority, domination, capitalism, or oppression. Key to the anarchist analysis is its unflinching criticism of authority, or of some people holding established power over others.  Anarchism considers government in any form … unnecessary, harmful, and undesirable…. The General Assemblies and committees within Occupy are experiments in this kind of self-management.

The occupii reject as futile any attempt at working within a system that is “absolutely and irredeemably corrupt.”  What’s the point of asking the government to reinstate Glass-Steagall or reverse Citizens United, when we’re on the verge of abolishing government entirely?  “Anarchists wish to see human relations that would not have to be backed up by armies, prisons and police. Anarchism envisions a society based on equality and solidarity, which could exist solely on the free consent of participants.”

Graeber proudly points to occupi’s adherence to five anarchist principles:

1)    The refusal to recognise the legitimacy of existing political institutions — “acting as if the existing structure of power does not even exist.”  Just as Ghandi urged the Indian people to flaunt British regulations on trade, the occupii flaunted city curfews.

2)   The refusal to accept the legitimacy of the existing legal order – “[O]rganisers knowingly ignored local ordinances … simply on the grounds that such laws should not exist.”

3)   The refusal to create an internal hierarchy, but instead to create a form of consensus-based direct democracy – “From the very beginning … organisers made the audacious decision to operate not only by direct democracy, without leaders, but by consensus.”  To avoid either the co-opting of a “formal leadership structure” or a majority “bend[ing] a minority to its will”,”all decisions will, of necessity, have to be made by general consent.”

4)   The embrace of prefigurative politics –

“Zuccotti Park, and all subsequent encampments, became spaces of experiment with creating the institutions of a new society – not only democratic General Assemblies but kitchens, libraries, clinics, media centres and a host of other institutions, all operating on anarchist principles of mutual aid and self-organisation – a genuine attempt to create the institutions of a new society in the shell of the old.”

Occupy = Anarchy

And now we understand.  Occupy was never about something as mundane as ending corruption on Wall Street — it was about transforming society from the bottom up. The little occupy camps were demos of the future anarchist utopia to come.  Once the American people saw anarchy in action, they’d realize that “if we are to live in any sort of genuinely [i.e. direct] democratic society, we’re going to have to start from scratch….”

Graeber admits that

We may never be able to prove, through logic, that direct democracy [is] possible. We can only demonstrate it through action. In parks and squares across America, people have begun to witness it as they have started to participate.

The occupii expected to transform society by showing everyone the wisdom & beauty of things like “Positive Speech,” a “less aggressive and more conciliatory type of communication” that avoids “negative statements which close the door to constructive debate.”  Example: “‘Don’t touch that dog or it will bite you’ could be phrased as ‘Be careful with that dog because it could bite you and neither of us would like that.’”

Leaders would be replaced by “Moderators” whose job was to “bring together the general sense of the Assembly rather than follow a protocol, Ideally, this figure should not need to exist. (everybody should respect everybody).”

In fact, all the quirks of Occupy — the GAs, the hand jive, etc. — have long been hallmarks of the heretofore pathetically inconsequential anarchist movement.  These “new forms of organization” are the anarchists’ very ideology, Graeber emphasized in a 2002 New Left Review article. “It is about creating and enacting horizontal networks instead of top-down structures like states, parties or corporations; networks based on principles of decentralized, non-hierarchical consensus democracy. Ultimately … it aspires to reinvent daily life as whole.“  (Emphasis added.)

Offering a trial sample of anarchy in action is not the worst strategy, as good historical examples are hard to come by.  Tenuous claims are made to assisting the civil rights movement, Vietnam protests, women’s ERA, and the downfall of Miloslovec. The disastrous Paris Commune of 1871 (see excursus below) is sometimes mentioned, but occupii tend to omit anarchy’s crowning achievement: its crippling, via obtuseness and intransigence, of the Republican coalition in the Spanish Civil War, ushering in nearly four decades of Franco’s fascist tyranny.

Time’s Up

This article began with a declaration of Occupy’s failure.  Its founders are convinced Occupy has already succeeded far in excess of their wildest dreams.  ‘We’ve only just begun’, the occupii insist, ‘just give us more time, and we can change the world.’

Perpetual irrelevance breeds habitual indolence.  Having puttered away for decades in obscure organic co-ops & peace centers, having attended innumerable & fruitless gripe sessions in UU community halls, the anarchists who started Occupy never learned how to act decisively or effectively.  This September, they went virtually unnoticed, as usual, while engaged in their latest, futile fist-shake at society: a tiny protest near Wall St.  Suddenly and unexpectedly, OWS made the headlines — courtesy of one cop’s injudicious use of pepper spray — and ignited a dense duff of accumulated resentment among the general population.

The occupii interpreted this spontaneous public outcry as an acceptance of their radical philosophy.  “[I]f any significant number of Americans do find out what anarchism really is, they might well decide that rulers of any sort are unnecessary.”  In that, they are mistaken.  Ordinary people want direct, concrete action taken now, by leaders using the existing political and societal system.  Ordinary people are not willing to wait until an alternate utopia grows “organically” at the speed of mildew.  Ordinary people are certainly not ever going to join experimental tent communes.  Not in a million years.

The clock has run out for Occupy.  Media attention is an evanescent thing.  In this game, dirty laundry is always trumps.  Kim Kardassian and Ginger White did more do sink Occupy than any mayor or police force.

We can only hope that the radicalism and sheer idiocy of the occupii experiment did not overly tarnish the broader, sane movement to end corruption on Wall Street and in Washington.  Now that Occupy has failed, ordinary people can take over, applying the sound principles of hierarchy, leadership, focus, and working within the system.  The occupii should follow the army adage: either lead, follow, or get out of the way.  Since you’ve proven you can’t lead, and refuse to follow, y’all know what to do.

(c) 2011 by True Liberal Nexus.  All rights reserved.

Excursus — Occupy Paris, 1871  (after the jump)

Why the #Occupy Movement Will Fail — Part 2

Part 2 –  ”Vague and Overbroad”

From our fellow true liberal, Fionnchu, the twelve demands made by the #Occupy Chicago group:

1. Reinstate Glass-Steagall
2. Repeal Bush-era tax cuts
3. Prosecute “the Wall Street criminals” who caused the 2008 financial crisis.
4. Overturn Citizens United v. United States
5. Pass the “Buffett Rule”; Close Corporate Tax loopholes
6. Strengthen SEC, Consumer Protection Board Regulatory Powers
7. Limit the influence of lobbyists on legislation
8. Prohibit ex-government regulators from working in the industries they once regulated
9. Eliminate Corporate Personhood
10. Give Equal Time for Free to all political candidates
11. Pass the Fair Elections Now Act
12. Forgive Student Debt

The old copy-editor in me couldn’t resist tidying up that list a bit. For the full, wordy wording of the list, see here.

Marketing 101

Lack of focus and muddled messaging is one of the primary reasons the #Occupy movement will ultimately fail.  The mental laziness evidenced in OWS Chicago’s rambling, stream-of-conscienceness demands is appalling.  The average person’s grocery list jotted on the back of an envelope — 1. Produce; 2. Dairy; 3. Meat; 4. Dry Goods; etc. –  is better thought-out.

Horrors, people, I used to work for “The Man”, but he taught me how to influence behavior through effective messaging.  I now pass those teachings on to you so you can bring down The Man with his own weaponry.  So stop the chanting and drumming for a moment, and listen up.

For better impact & clarity, these twelve points can be grouped under three broad, catchy headings:

1. Put Muzzles &  Choke Collars on the Rabid Dogs of Wall Street   (1, 3, 6)
2. End the Corporate Whoredom of Politicians  (4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11)
3. Stop the Ultra-Rich From Pillaging, & Turning the Rest of Us Into Peasants  (2, 5, 12)

That’s all for today’s marketing lesson.  Class dismissed.  You may now rejoin the tie-dye or pumpkin-painting committees.

Vague and Overbroad

Unless not bathing for several months, crapping in public, and having anonymous sex in tents is all the Occupyers ever had in mind, nothing will come of this movement without a bit of planning.

“The Chicago protesters have vowed to stay in the streets until their demands are met”, but living outdoors in the Windy City will soon be a frakking freezing prospect.  So unless they are down with frostbite in delicate places, the Occupyers would be wise to establish some specific steps toward achieving their demands, along with concrete milestones.

So, ignoring for the moment the worthiness of these twelve demands, let’s examine just how clear, and how practicable they are.

1. Reinstate Glass-Steagal

Clarity:  Very Specific

Feasibility: High

SitRep: From 1933 to 1999, Glass-Steagal regulated banks, speculation, and established the FDIC.  For 66 years, it deterred the reckless financial practices that had brought on the Great Depression.  In 1999, Congress freed investment banks from the regulations of Glass-Steagal, which led to rampant & reckless speculations, the collapse of banks like CitiGroup, the TARP bailout, and the eventual onset of the Great Recession.  Bipartisan attempts to reinstate Glass-Steagal have gotten nowhere. President obama has occasionally called for minor tweaks to investment regulations.

Concrete Steps:

a) Demand that the president commit to a firm date when he will introduce legislation to Congress for a full reinstatement of Glass-Steagal;

b) Demand a pledge to vote to reinstate Glass-Steagal from every member of Congress;

c) Issue a pledge to refuse to vote for anyone running for federal office in 2012 who does not make this commitment;

d) Issue a pledge to refuse to vote for president obama if he does not give and then meet a deadline to introduce legislation to reinstate Glass-Steagal.

2. Repeal Bush Tax Cuts

Clarity:  Very Specific

Feasibility:  Straightforward, but Unlikely

SitRep:  President obama lied to us.  During his 2008 campaign, he vowed to repeal the Bush tax cuts, then reneged when given the Democratic super-majority to do so.  Now that he’s lost that friendly Congress, he promises to repeal the cuts — if we re-elect him & reward him with another Democratic majority in 2013.  Fool me once ….

Concrete Steps: #Occupy should demand that obama:

a)  Publicly & repeatedly say these words: “I broke my promise. I lied to you. I am sorry. I let John Boehner do me up the ass, and I liked it!  I am easily the most dickless of Dickless Wonders the World has ever seen”;

b)  Within 30 days, introduce to Congress stand-alone legislation repealing the Bush Tax Cuts;

Occupyers should:

c) Sign a pledge to refuse to vote for obama in 2012 if he does not meet these demands.

3. Prosecute Wall Street Criminals

Clarity:  Vague and Overbroad

Feasiblity:  Impossible

SitRep: Those “criminals”, Goldman Sachs, were already investigated, and found to be only slightly guilty.  They made $4 trillion on the scam, paid a $500 billion penalty, which was so surprisingly light that Wall Street reacted by raising GS stock value by $800 billion in one day.  In other words, they made out like bandits.

Just the other day, obama said “it might have been greedy, but it was legal.”

Concrete Steps:  Too late shutting the barn door once the horse has escaped.  Now, all you can do is ask yourself, WWDHD? (What Would Dirty Harry Do?)

4. Overturn Citizens United

Clarity: Very Specific

Feasibility: Hard but Do-able

SitRep:  SCOTUS ruled 5-4 to consider a corporation a person for the purposes of free speech & campaign contributions.   80% of Americans polled oppose the ruling.

Concrete Steps:

Plan A (complicated)  

Requires:

a) A dead SC justice — Alito, Kennedy, Roberts, Scalia, Thomas (pick one);

c) a POTUS pledged to appointing judges who’ll rule this way;

c) a Senate willing to confirm said appointees:

d) an appeal

Plan B (simple)

Pass a Constitutional Amendment.  (See Article V of your operating manual)

5.  Pass Buffett Rule

Clarity: Very Specific

Feasibility: Straightforward

Concrete Steps:  See procedure for Glass-Steagal above.

6. Strengthen SEC, Consumer Protection Board Powers

Clarity:  Vague and Overbroad

Feasibility: Straightforward — if clarified

Concrete Steps:  Draft specific elements, divided between those that can be enacted by presidential policy, and those that require legislation.  Demand deadlines for appropriate action as per above.

7. Limit Influence of Lobbyists

Clarity:  Ephemeral

Feasibility: if clarified, Achievable in long-term

Concrete Steps:  No means exist to tackle the problem head-on, but would be greatly ameliorated if real campaign finance reform were enacted.  The public should also think twice about voting for a candidate who brags about raising one billion dollars in campaign contributions.

8. Ban Ex-Regulators from Working in Same Industry

Clarity: Very Specific

Feasibility:  Piece of Cake

Concrete Steps:  Simply add a standard non-compete clause to every regulator’s contract.   The inverse, prohibiting industry execs from becoming regulators, is perhaps even more important.

Can be implemented either by:

a) Presidential policy, or;

b) Act of Congress, or;

c) Constitutional Amendment

9. Eliminate Corporate Personhood

Clarity:  Specific, but sweeping

Feasibility: Dangerous and impractical

SitRep: Treating a corporation as an individual person for certain purposes is a sound and well-established tenet of our western legal system.

Entirely eliminating corporate personhood is, in fact, a radical, unprecedented proposal with unforeseen dangers.  Many advantages to the commonweal, such as limited liability for investors, the ability for the government to regulate & tax, or the courts to prosecute, single entities, would be lost.

Concrete Steps:  Stick to a constitutional amendment denying personhood to corporations in the specific instance of free speech & campaign contributions. (see #4 above.)

10.  Equal Access for Candidates

Clarity:   Vague and Overbroad

Concrete Steps:  Before the feasibility of this can be assessed, the Occupyers need to define exactly what this “equal time for free” entails (debates? media? voters’ guides?), what constitutes “reasonable intervals”, and how the FEC would be empowered to do so.

Overarching campaign finance reform would be a simpler resolution of this issue.

11. Pass Fair Elections Act

Clarity:  Specific

Feasibility:  Difficult

SitRep:  The bill was reintroduced to Congress yet again in April.  It has bipartisan sponsorship, but never gets out of committee. Gets no press coverage whatsoever.

Concrete Steps:  Formal demands for pledges from Congress members to pass, and the president to sign, with pledges to not vote for those who refuse.  Accost candidates in public — including that queen of all contribution whores, barack obama — and ask why they don’t support this.

12. Forgive Student Debt

Clarity:  Specific but sweeping

Feasibility:  Unlikely, but Achievable in long-term

SitRep:  Most of the world’s nations, realizing that a skilled & educated populace yields strength & prosperity, offer free higher education to every citizen.  In the US, the focus is not on that common good, rather on the personal advantage of greater earning power derived from holding a degree.

Unlike other nations, colleges in the US are largely private or state run. There is no federal university system.

Further, the cost of a private college education in the US is grossly over-inflated.  Any federal grant program would in part subsidize these inflated prices.

Concrete Steps:  Draft legislation – with specifics – that: 1) forgives all current outstanding federal student loans; 2) creates a federal college grant program; 3) provides funding, possibly through a tax on the admissions revenue of private colleges & universities.

Before this proposal has any chance of succeeding, the sway over our culture by anti-social memes needs to be broken.  Prepare for a long slog on that one.  And if you’re thinking of joining the Occupyers, pack your long-johns.

(C) 2011 by ‘tamerlane’.  All rights reserved.

Why the #Occupy Movement Will Fail

Occupy Wall Street ______ County
Notes/Decisions from the Oct 16th planning Meeting

[Editor's note:  this is a digest of the actual meeting minutes posted by the local Occupy group in tamerlane's neck of the woods.]

Hello All, thanks to those who came out to the meeting yesterday.  I made a big mistake in not getting everyone to signup for the mailing list




DECISIONS REACHED:



1) The Next Rally

• Everyone should be involved with printing and handing out the flyer


• Rally to be organized organically
• Peacekeepers Lorianne, Pamela, Guari, Mia, Heather will help move the flow of people
• The Plaza will have musicians and speakers organized on the fly for those that want to step up. I didnt consense on this but i think Jefferey’s small amp is fine
• The sign crew should get cardboard, more tables, and sticks (I think it was heather that said she has sticks too)

• People should organize carpools… then drive one car in.



2) The Rally After That

• Other than the time and place, no logistics are planned.



3) Continued Movement



• The group agreed to attempt to keep visibility and movement, nothing has been planned.

4) Working Groups, Roles



• Outreach to Latinos*: Jeffrey    [* 8% of county population]

• Music: Jeffrey, Lorianne, Janie


• Non-Violence Training Coordinators: Joe and Pamela


• Goals: ??



5) Other Possible Actions to support




• Possible support of Michael Moore talk
• Nov 9th, End corporate person hood (talk?) need more info…


• Halloween OWS themed costumes


• Oct 28, 29 (Cant remember name now…alternatives to violence?) workshop, Gauri had details



6) Resources to be shared on website

• Guidelines for dealing with law enforcement
• Non-Violent theory and guidelines

If you know of a good online source for info on any of these, please send them to me




7) Political Action items brought up

• we had no consensus

6 ) [again] Next Planning Meeting



• If it rains we will need to find a new location and leave a sign at the bandshell.  

• 
Also lets have another facilitator other than me.

[Ya think?]

Conspiracy Enough

Time to Remember, Time to Forget?

As America commemorates the 10th anniversary of the terrorists attacks of September 11, 2001, the MSM is filled with stories that tell us what emotions are appropriate, while also urging us scoff at the poor, deluded “9/11 truthers” who, a decade later, still cling to preposterous theories. ‘Enough conspiracy, already!’ we’re told.

I’ll deal with my own emotions, myself, thank you.  But, indeed, the truther theories, with planned demolitions, phantom planes, and vast networks of conspirators, are almost exclusively garbage.

Blind Pigs

All conspiracy nuts suffer under a sense of helplessness in a world they find hard to comprehend.  The nut takes comfort in the “knowledge” and certainly of secret forces controlling events behind the scenes.  Icons of power — the military, obscure government agencies, pan-global corporations, feature prominently.  To provide an explanation suitable for complexities they themselves can’t figure out, the nut’s conspiracies must be massive, elaborate, widespread — an host of confederates;  plans perfected to the minutest detail; the gullible public always responding exactly as intended.

While these baroque fantasies make entertaining cinema (cf. THE STING, THE USUAL SUSPECTS, NINE QUEENS), in reality they are impossible … and unnecessary.

Conspiracies and conspirators do exist, but not at all like the nut’s visions.  Like the blind pig that occasionally finds an acorn, truthers do rarely stumble across something real.  But in their zeal to uncover a clue under every leaf on the forest floor, they only obscure the very thing they hoped to reveal.  Sniffing false trails galore, and drawing ridicule on legitimate inquiries, the truther is unwittingly the conspirator’s most diligent accomplice.

Subtle Nudges

Rather than elaborate hoaxes hatched in underground lairs and supported by convoys of black vans, a minute number of  people in power, for intents both altruistic and craven, do steer the course of events via subtle, covert nudges.  ‘Spark’ moments need not be created out of whole cloth, merely facilitated, or at the very least, exploited with vigor when they fortuitously occur.  Just a few examples of “nudges” of serendipitous turning points that dramatically changed the course of History:

•  1862 — Lincoln seizes on the marginal victory of Antietam to issue his long-contemplated Emancipation Proclamation;
•  1870 — An unexpected dynastic crisis in Spain allows Bismarck, knowing France will go to war to prevent German unification, to goad the French Emperor into mobilizing his unprepared army;
•  1898 — Coveting Spanish colonies in the Caribbean, the U.S. uses the sinking of the battleship Maine in Havana harbor (labeled a terrorist attack, it was in fact a chance boiler explosion) as a causus belli;
•  1933 — The Nazis use a terrorist attack on the Parliament building (Reichstag) as a pretense to declare martial law;
•  2001- 2003 — The Bush administration uses the 9/11 terrorist attacks to implement surveillance on citizens, then launch wars in oil-producing nations.

Better to label these actors “Manipulators” than “Conspirators”.  Whether the sparks were created, facilitated, or simply exploited is besides the point.  In every case, the manipulator(s) had an ultimate goal, with a broad but definite plan, well in advance, just waiting an opportune moment to enact.

9/11 — M.O.M.

The classic sleuthing technique is to identify who had the means, the opportunity, and the motive to commit the crime.  There was a small cabal in the United States who had a burning desire for a terrorist attack.  Known as “The Vulcans” (in honor of the Roman God, not the Star Trek race), they were neo-conservatives, pro Israel-expansionism, capitalist purists with oil connections.  All held positions in the Reagan/Papa Bush administrations.  Their names are familiar:  Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleeza Rice, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Colin Powell.

Declaring the USA the last superpower standing, they saw a golden opportunity for our nation to mold, though unopposed military action, the world to our whim.  They also entertained the jalousie that capitalism fosters democracy — open up a country to big business, lay a few pipelines, and peace, freedom & coca cola sales will follow.  We know this was their plan, because Cheney & Wolfowitz first put it to paper in February, 1992, in what became known as the Wolfowitz doctrine.

With their golden chance to implement their New World Order cut short by Bush’ failed reelection bid, they sullenly awaited a future opportunity.  Growing restless, the Vulcans formed the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), and issued periodic calls for overthrowing Saddam Hussein, unilateral strikes to seize oil-producing regions, and fun stuff like that.  Yet they lamented that “the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one” to be expedited only by “some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”

Then opportunity knocked again with the 2000 election of  Al Gore  Baby Bush.   Happy as pigs reunited with shit, the Vulcans commandeered the administration:

• VP/Puppet Master — Cheney
• Secty of State — Powell
• Secty of Defense — Rumsfeld
• Deputy Secty of Defense — Wolfowitz
• National Security Advisor — Rice

They only had to wait a further seven months, 32 days for their catalyzing, Pearl Harbor-like event to occur.

No need to detail here how ruthlessly they exploited that event, only to mention in passing how the complete failure of their New World Order highlighted their hubris.

Conspiracy Enough

Indisputable is that their actions & lies following the 9/11 attacks were criminal, deserve punishment and, thanks to Nancy Pelosi, will go unpunished.  Yet the unanswered question, which, a decade later still deserves an answer, is: did the Vulcans just exploit a chance event, did they create it from scratch, or did they willingly serve as the event’s mid-wives?

The evidence is compelling to indict Dick Cheney and Condoleeza Rice guilty of conspiring to intentionally allow the 9/11 attacks to occur.

They did so, not by arranging planned demolitions, staged crash sites or faked phone calls, rather simply by preventing any action being taken on overwhelming evidence of imminent terrorist attacks.  In other words, Cheney and Rice conspired to ‘let one through’ to get the Second Pearl Harbor they craved.

A few others, like Donald Rumsfeld and Scooter Libby, may have been involved, but for it to work, no one beyond the VP and the NSA were required to be ‘in the know.’

• Their many position papers provide Motive;
• One month’s advanced notice of a pending terrorist attack provided the Opportunity;
• Holding all the necessary key positions in the administration, with the power to direct the actions of the military and security agencies, provided the Means;

It’s plausible, though not required, that the Vulcans knew the exact date and details of the terrorists’ plan, and iced the cake by diverting the Air Force with a “routine” training exercise involving hijacked airliners, having FEMA stage a practice response to a terrorist attack in Manhattan, and sequestering Shrub in a kindergarten in Florida.  But sometimes dumb luck happens, too.

The ‘tell’ that 9/11 was more than just a dream-come-true for the Vulcans is the handling of the infamous President’s Daily Brief (PDB) of August 6, 2001.  How Rice & Cheney must have squirmed at that morning’s briefing, when Shrub’s brain inexplicably turned on for a moment and with growing alarm scanned the words:

“Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.”

“… since 1997 has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the U.S. …” 

“… his followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber….” 

“… to retaliate in Washington …”

“… patterns of suspicious activity … consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks …”

“… Bin Laden supporters … in the U.S. planning attacks with explosives.”

The suddenly conscious president’s concern, and his suggestion that something be done about all this, where brushed aside by Condi:  ‘No need to worry, Mr. President, that’s historical information.’  Thirty-seven days later, that “historical” information became very up-to-date.

–

Flash forward to Rice’s testimony before the 9/11 Commission, where, like the consummate liar, she diverted scrutiny by focusing on an irrelevant details. In response to criticism of her and the administration’s handling of the crisis, Rice emphasized repeatedly that she’d told the President the PDB was “historical information.”  The members of the commission, so intent on posturing and blustering, failed to ask the logical follow-up question:

‘Secretary Rice, seeing as it was made painfully clear that was NOT historical information, what led to you believe it was?’

Which makes Condi Rice either really fucking dumb, or really fucking evil.  She’s never struck me as unintelligent.

Keep Seeking, Keep Asking

Ten years after, and no serious questions are asked anymore.  We’re encouraged instead to remember, honor, mourn, commemorate, etc., while singing so loudly during the seventh inning stretch as to drown out any voices of doubt inside our heads.  We are then shown the deluded 9/11 Truthers as a moral lesson.

That is a false dichotomy.  The dead can be remembered while serious, albeit uncomfortable, questions are still asked:

• What was the scope of culpability of National Security Advisor Rice in not responding to the PDB warning?
• What is the full explanation for Cheney’s actions on 9/11, and the NORAD & FEMA hijacking/terrorism drills scheduled that day?
• Why has no one been charged with crimes for willfully lying about Iraq’s WMD program?
• By what measure can we evaluate al quaeda’s potency, 2001 v. 2011?
• By what measure can we say we are “safer” now than before?
• Why do we continue to engage in useless airline travel precautions that add up to nothing more than shamanistic ritual?
• Why are we still fighting two hopeless wars that have nothing to do with terrorism?
• Why are our constitutional liberties still being violated?
• What’s so wrong about seeking the truth?

(c) 2011 by True Liberal Nexus.  All rights reserved.

Late For Work

Vacation season is officially over.  Time to shake the sand out of your beach blankets, throw the clubs in the trunk, and catch the

961 days and still no jobs plan? You're late for work, Mr. President!

last ferry to Wood’s Hole.  Time to get back to work.  AP reports that our Slacker-in-Chief will be spending this Labor Day at an AFL-CIO rally.  Presumedly, this is meant to:

1. Offer a kiss & make-up session to AFL-CIO head Richard Trumka;
2. Show obama’s solidarity with ordinary working folk.

The first bullet point is critical, considering all the things Trumka has said about obama lately:

“This is a moment that working people and quite frankly History will judge President Obama on his presidency; will he commit all his energy and focus on bold solutions on the job crisis or will he continue to work with the Tea Party to offer cuts to middle class programs like Social Security ;

“I think he made a strategic mistake when he confused the job crisis with the deficit crisis a number of months ago — when he would talk about job creation and then in the same sentence talk about deficit reduction and people got the two confused;

“I don’t know whether [obama's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness is] making a difference or not…it’s a legitimate question whether that commission has done anything worthwhile.”

Trumka described obama’s job proposals to date as “nibbly things that aren’t going to make a difference,” and warned that “if they don’t have a jobs program I think we’d better use our money doing other things.”

The second action item will be covered by a mellifluous sound bite assuring that Dear Leader “gets” the struggles of us ordinary folk, along with a promise to make lots of promises in that jobs speech that’s been promised for a month now.

Does anyone else detect a certain lack of urgency here?  Ignoring the PR faux pas of not delivering The Big Jobs Speech at least by Labor Day,  what can we surmise about a president who, facing the worst employment figures in decades, (1,579 mass layoffs in July alone, totaling 145,000 workers) waits until Day 961 of his term to offer a proposal?

That barack obama does not actually give a rat’s ass about the “struggles of ordinary folk,” that’s what.

• barack obama doesn’t care about my friend who called me this Labor Day weekend to tell me they’re losing their house.  After working for years as the CFO of a small manufacturer, that company went belly-up.  The only job they could find, bookkeeping, doesn’t pay enough to keep up on the mortgage;
• He doesn’t care about my sister, scrounging for work after years of dedicated service as the E.D. of a large charity.  When the donations dried up (a serious problem for most non-profits, and a hidden cost of this not-officially-a-recession), the charity shut its doors;
• He doesn’t care about the two young people I met this Summer, who despite having good degrees from good colleges, have zero prospects on the horizen for gainful, full-time employment;
• He certainly doesn’t care about either me or my new client.  Me, desperate for some new business, I find someone who, after watching me ride their horse, wants to put it in training.  But they can’t, because their hours were just cut in half, and may be laid off soon.

How could barack obama, and his poncy wife, Mechelle Antoinette, relate to ordinary folk when they’ve coasted their entire adult life, and spend the past three years living like royalty on the people’s tab?   Barry’s own work history is a bit dubious:

Barry Barack Hussein Dunham Obama Soetero Soebarkah II

(Alleged) Curriculum Vitae 

• 1975 or 1976 — ice cream scooper, Baskin-Robbins — Honolulu
• Date unknown — deli counter clerk, business name unknown — Honolulu
• 1980 — gift shop sales clerk, business name unknown — Honolulu
• Sometime between 1981-1983 — construction worker, business name unknown — New York; (yeah, right)
• Sometime between 1981-1983 — position unknown, company unknown — New York
• Sometime between 1981-1983 — telemarketer, company unknown — New York
• 1983-84 — data entry clerk, BIC — New York
• 1985 — project coordinator, NYPIRG — New York
• 1985-1988 — community organizer — Chicago; whatever the fuck that entails
• 1992 – Project Vote, Chicago; registered voters
• 1993-2004 — associate, Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland — Chicago; one litigation, handled Tony Rezko’s financial affairs
• 1993-2004 — part-time lecturer, University of Chicago Law School — Chicago; no lectures given
• 1997-2004 — state senator, Illinois; 129 ‘present’ votes, no legislation 
• 2005-2008 — U.S. Senator; no legislation, no committee meetings
• 2009 – present — President, United States — Washington; jack shit accomplished

So why should anyone in America care what this loafer has to say in his Jobs Speech?  His record of inaction, failure, and broken promises leaves him a sad joke without a shred of credibility.  Sure, a dwindling cadre of obots, like cargo cultists scanning the skies for the return of John Frum, faithfully await the day their Messiah will finally reward them with acts of wonder and majesty.  But they can forget about the promises of “green jobs” ever being fulfilled, as barry just yesterday caved to corporate interests and killed a clean air measure.

And that leaves us with…

… Rick Perry, who’ll no doubt have a photo op at some Texas factory, claiming that  ’Every Day is Labor Day in Texas.’  When that really should be, ‘every job in Texas is a shitty job.’   Because, sadly, Perry’s “jobs miracle” (sic) was a momentary blip fueled by new jobs at or below minimum wage.  Texas can now proudly share with Mississippi the title of “State with the most low-paying jobs per capita.”

Looking at it from another perspective, over the past decade, a million Texans have merely been compelled to trade in their old, good careers for new positions at Wal*Mart and Pollo Loco.  And now unemployment there is creeping up again, while Perry has gutted schools, social services, and infrastructure — all the things “struggling ordinary folk” working one of Perry’s shit-ass miracle jobs might need.

Helping the likes of Perry get elected will be the likes of Michelle Malkin, who dedicated this Labor Day to slandering trade unions, with a list of Top 10 Union Thug Moments (no, I will not link).

I find a list of the Top Ten CEO Killers of Jobs more appropriate:

1. Jack “Neutron Bomb” Welch, GE, 100,000
2. Fritz Henderson, GM, 100,000
3. Vikram Pandit, Citigroup, 75,000
4. Lou Gerstner, IBM, 60,000
5. Ken Lewis, Bank of Fucking America, 35,000
6. Jeff “Job Czar” Immelt, GE, 34,000
7. Mark Hurd, HP, 33,600 (including 24,000 in one day)
8. Carly Fiorina, HP, 30,000 (not HP again!)
9. James Owens, Caterpillar, 27,500
10. Ivan Seidenberg, Verizon, 21,000

With at least a lifetime achievement award going to “Chainsaw Al” Dunlap.

Alternately, Malkin could have listed the Top 10 Mass Layoffs of 2011:

1. Merck 13,000
2. Borders 10,700
3. Cisco 6,500
4. Lockheed Martin 6,500
5. Pfizer 5,530
6. Blackberry 2,000
7. Delta Airlines 2,000
8. Boston Scientific 1,400
9. Sears 700
10. Gannett 700

We’ll leave Goldman Sachs 1,000, off the list, as that’s poetic justice.

Malkin has no use for unions, or ordinary folk for that matter, having never put in a single day of honest, hard work in her life:

Michelle Malkin

Curriculum Vitae

• 1992-1994 — Cub reporter for Los Angeles Daily News
• 1995 —  Intern at libertarian think tank Competitive Enterprise Institute
• 1996 — Free-lance columnist, Seattle Times
• 2002 — present –  Book author
• 2004- 2009 —  Commentator, FOX News
• 2007- present  –  Blogger

Malkin could use some broader experience to pad out her resume.  Maybe she could move to Texas for a year to work at a Wal*Mart or a Pollo Loco.

Like Malkin, neither barack obama nor Rick Perry understand what it’s like to be an ordinary folk struggling to keep a job, struggling to find a job, struggling to survive on the low pay of a crappy job.  We ought to help them understand.  Both barry and Rick have performed miserably in their current positions.  Yet Rick is asking us to give him barry’s job, while barry wants us to re-up him for another four years.  Here’s how we should respond:

Hi, Rick?  Don’t call us: we’ll call you.

Hello, barry? — you’re fired!

If ever there was a time to hang a “Help Wanted” sign, it’s now.  To fill our open position, we need to recruit someone who’s hardworking and has a proven track record in high government positions.  They need to be intelligent, confident, and exhibit exceptional leadership qualities.  They must be ready to hit the ground running and assume the full responsibilities of the job on Day One.

It’s a hard job, even more so as the previous employee made a total mess of things.  It may be a tough sell to convince the right person, but we need to make an offer they can’t refuse.

If you know of anyone who fits this description, let them know the job is theirs for the taking.

Not My Agenda

With his radio shows, The List and Talking With, John Smart provides a great service  by interviewing a wide spectrum of political activists, religious leaders, and other persons of public import, offering a virtual agora for open discussion, exchange of ideas, and debate.

On the July 27, 2011 edition of Talking With, Smart interviewed Amy Siskind, co-founder of The New Agenda (“TNA.”)  Siskind’s comments were at once obfuscating and revealing.  TNA’s singular goal is to increase the number of women elected to office.  While every true liberal would welcome such an increase, TNA’s method of achieving it is  counterproductive to promoting gender equality, and dangerously corrosive to our society in general.

Replacing (R) & (D) with (XX) & (XY)

Describing itself as an “organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home,” TNA vaguely sets its goals as achieving “safety and opportunity for all women by addressing issues which unite us and by advancing women into leadership roles.”

TNA claims it is a “non-political” organization.  But aside from the token bio of an athlete or link to some actresses charity, (plus a blog devoted to the standard denunciations of society’s affronts to women), TNA is primarily devoted to supporting political candidates.

We also know, from Siskind’s own telling of the story, that TNA’s founding members were political activists: Democrats, feminists, but most importantly, Hillary Clinton supporters.  Once upon a time, they fought for things like universal healthcare, social programs, a fair tax burden, gay rights, protecting the environment, and, naturally, women’s choice.  That was their old political agenda.

Following the Democratic Party’s rejection of their beloved candidate, these women readily abandoned their former principles to embrace a new agenda — help elect women of any political stripe.  TNA doesn’t give a damn what your position is on women’s rights or any other issue.  if you’ve got the XX chromosomes, you’re deemed a better choice for the office than any man could ever be.

If any doubt remained whether TNA has replaced the traditional Left vs. Right political struggle with the battle of the sexes, one need only look at TNA’s perverse labeling of races – “Solid Woman”, “Likely Woman,” “Leans Man,” etc.

Searching for Sexism in All the Wrong Places

An additional objective of TNA is to oppose sexism against any female candidate.  A laudable goal, considering the many & egregious instances of sexual stereotyping in the media and politics.  Sadly, TNA can often be found tilting at windmills, attacking sexism where none exists.  Let’s look at four examples among many:

1) Gypsies, Tramps and Sluts

As proof of Siskind’s theory that “powerful woman are always diminished by being thrown into one of three categories” — either “bitch,” “ditz” or “slut/whore”, she pointed to the accusations of two extra-marital affairs (i.e., “slut”) made against then-gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley. Siskind dismisses out-of-hand the possibility that these affairs actually may have happened.  Yet the allegations by her former speechwriter and another GOP politico were made in some detail, were backed by sworn affidavits, and were considered credible enough to be investigated by at least one local paper.

Moreover, in Haley’s case, such questions were entirely germane.  Haley ran on a “family values” platform, while a large part of her appeal lay in her image as a wholesome mom and obedient, Christian wife.  Haley had also publicly censured her predecessor & erstwhile mentor, Mark Sanford, for his own affair.  To expose the hypocrisy of such a “family values” candidate is no more sexist than to investigate the illicit affairs of Jon Edwards, Arnold Schwarzenegger … or Ted Haggard.

2) Shut Up, Bitch!

Back in 2009, TNA got its panties all in a wad over the perceived sexist slight of TNA’s official Hlllary surrogate, Kirstin Gillibrand.  On the occasion of the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor, Gillibrand, like every other Democratic Senator, had been allotted five minutes to read into the record a brief, sugar-coated, meaningless endorsement.  The notoriously long-winded Gillibrand “was just over 6 minutes and 15 seconds into what was to have been her five-minute speech” when chairman Patrick Leahy was seized by such overpowering misogyny as to gently remind Gillibrand that her time was up.  When the loquacious rookie senator demanded “a minute more”,  the wimminz-hatin’ Chair gaveled her.

TNA provided this “typical example of sexist behavior” from Leahy, who “apparently … didn’t take his anti-grumpy meds yesterday morning”  – ouch, Amy! Talk about bitchy — with a thought bubble: “Sigh, young lady, what YOU have to say is simply not worth the time of day. Finish off so someone important (e.g. a male senator) can speak.”

Except that Gillibrand was the last speaker before the vote. Except that every other senator came in near or under the allotted five minutes.  Nah … had to be the sexism.

3) The Shrill Word

Like other “gender-degrading” language, use of the word “shrill” has been banned by TNA as a “description of a woman’s natural vocal range:”

As we all know, the word ‘shrill’ has a very negative connotation when used to describe a woman or a woman’s voice. The term ‘shrill’ has recently been used by the media as a purposeful weapon against female candidates, although never male candidates.

This “disparaging adjective is a textbook example of gender-coded language that has been around for a long time…. This type of language is demeaning, misogynistic, and reminiscent of the Victorian era” and so must never, ever be used again. By anyone.

Except for TNA members, like Amy Siskind, who are allowed to call each other “shrill.” Siskind here:

I was driving my kids to their post-camp pre-school dental appointments when my cell phone rang.

Cynthia … was calling to let me know that she was hearing that McCain would announce shortly AND that he had picked a woman!

On the way back from the dentist, the phone rang again — Cynthia was so excited when she called. She was screaming that is was Palin – we both shrilled with excitement.

This must be like how it’s OK for niggahs to call each other “niggah,” but we can’t.  I don’t quite understand the logic, but how could I, seeing as I’m not a Shrill.

4) American History For Ditzes

On Talking With, Siskind accused the media of unfairly peppering Sarah Palin & Michele Bachmann with hard “questions on historical figures and Paul Revere” that male GOP candidates were not asked.  In Siskind’s world-view, this can only be due to misogyny, and totally unrelated to:

1. The Tea Party claiming philosophical heritage from the American Revolution;
2. Both Palin and Bachmann exhibiting a glaring igrorance of said American Revolution by making outrageously false statements.

Siskind’s argument might be more persuasive had she presented examples of male TP figures bolloxing American History, and then highlighted the double standard in treatment.  Yet she didn’t (or couldn’t), and instead copped out with her standard interpretation: that every attack on a female candidate is always a sexist attack.

Abortion Is Never an Issue (Unless Amy Says it Is)

TNA insists that abortion rights should never be a factor in women’s voting.  TNA’s 2008 epiphany was that Choice v. Pro-Life only divides women, diverting them from their common goal of helping women everywhere beat men.  So, TNA will never make a candidate’s stance on abortion an issue in a campaign.

Except when Siskind endorses a candidate, as she did with Meg Whitman over Jerry Brown.  The “non-political” TNA felt justified in breaking its no-endorsement pledge because one of Brown’s (female) staffers used one of the FORBIDDEN WORDS to describe Whitman — “whore.”

So, in a Huffy Poo article, Siskind exhorted women, especially former Hillary supporters, to back Meggers – “a working mom” (ROTFLMAO) over Brown and his “long track record of sexism.”  Siskind pointly referred to a decades-old Brown comment implying ambivalence on women’s choice, then falsely claimed that Whitman had never changed her position, when in truth Meggers had flip-flopped at least twice that year.

OK, except when Amy Siskind gets really mad, supporting a woman’s right to control over her own body is not relevant.  Why?  Because GOP “women understand women’s issues. Plain and simple.”

• That’s why TNA favorite Sharron Angle advised the victims of rape or incest to “make a lemon situation into lemonade”;
• That’s why TNA favorite Kelly Ayotte dragged Planned Parenthood before the Supreme Court in an attempt to save a New Hampshire law requiring parental notification prior to abortion on a minor;
• That’s why TNA favorite Nikki Haley voted repeatedly to make all abortions illegal, then as governor vetoed $56 million in education spending;
• That’s why TNA favorite Sarah Palin nominated a known perpetrator of sexual harassment for the position of Alaska’s public safety commissioner.

Qualified for Pub[l]ic Office

Siskind insists that Michele Bachmann “is very qualified to be President.”  This ‘qualification’ must be Bachmann’s pudenda, since in most circles, a career House back-bencher with zero legislation and marginal real-world experience is not considered “qualified” to be POTUS.  Unless, it seems, you’re a woman (or half-black), then you’re bumped to the head of the list, past truly qualified candidates.

In 2010, TNA lamented the low percentage of female candidates, but gushed giddily about how the GOP was “quietly filling its ranks with women.”  But as I pointed out following the midterms, in 2010 the Democrats still lapped the GOP 2-to-1 when it came to running women.  Yet for some unexplained reason, TNA displays an undue fondness for the GOP.

“I luuuv Susana Martinez!” Siskind exclaimed on Talking With.  And what’s not to love?  She’s got tits and a snatch, thus meeting all of Siskind’s rigorous requirements for public office.  It’s just icing on the cake that Martinez also:

• Opposes federally-funded abortions;
• Opposes any form of gun control;
• Supports an amendment banning same-sex marriage;
• Supports school vouchers;
• Vetoed $56 million in education funding;
• Opposes any tax increases; advocates reducing corporate taxes to ‘create jobs’.

Not to mention that Martinez is a rabid global warming denier and anti-environmentalist who:

• Accepted $220,000 in contributions from gas & oil donors;
• Moved to gut state pollution regulations;
• Named a conspiracy crackpot as environmental chief;
• Violated the state constitution by ordering that new environmental rules adopted by the state not be published.

TNA had declared the 2010 New Mexico gubernatorial race a “guaranteed win for our side“ because Martinez’ opponent, Lt. Governor Diane Denish, was also female.  Yet Siskind and TNA displayed an unmistakable preference for the Republican.

Why was TNA so lukewarm about Denish?  She had a track record of helping families and young children, and advocated expanding early education funding and nutrition programs.  She was pro-environment with a plan for creating green jobs.  She supported single-payer healthcare with universal coverage for every child. Denish was heartily endorsed by the pro-choice Emily’s List.  As Lt. Governor, Denish lobbied for the passage of DNA sampling known as Katie’s Law — the same Katie’s Law TNA wrongly credits then-county DA Martinez with introducing.

Goodbye, Earl

The real reason behind TNA’s embrace of the GOP?  Revenge, ‘plain & simple.’`  In the minds of these women, the Democratic party was their loser husband, Earl, his rejection of Hillary the last straw in a long and abusive relationship.

When will the women of this nation stop accepting “guilt gifts” from the men in their lives who act abusively?

So these ladies worked out a plan, and didn’t take long to decide that Earl had to die.

When will we finally deliver the tough love and consequences for improper behavior?

Enter the dapper, older gentleman, McCain, to whisper the sweet nothings that these jilted pumettes craved.  Yes, we care about you.  I sooo want a woman as my running mate!  I value your input and your support.   Thelma and Louise  Siskind and co. fell for it hook, line and sinker.  It meant abandoning every liberal principle that fosters women’s rights and real gender equality, but the sweet taste of revenge (maybe with some fried green tomatoes on the side?) was worth it.

Disgusted with Earl’s  the Democratic Party’s sophomoric and sexist “Liberal Dude Nation” antics, TNA has decided to get back by throwing themselves into the arms of another man Party:   “Democratic (and newly Independent) women are finally saying: Enough!  If this keeps up, in 2012, former and current Democratic women might just be pulling the ‘R’ lever.”

And there we have it:  the sad, embarrassing spectacle of alleged modern woman, Amy Siskind, displaying the archetypical, emotional, irrational fury of a woman scorned.

Sexual Apartheid

TNA’s home page prominently features this definition:

sex•ism

Prejudice, stereotyping or discrimination on the basis of sex.

Yet selecting candidates solely on the basis of their their gender — the very agenda of The New Agenda — is sexism in its most raw and ugly manifestation.  “Sexism has no place in this great country,” insists Siskind. Yet, on Talking With, out of the other side of Siskind’s mouth came “voting on gender is a relevant criteria.”

“How did we allow such a high level of acceptable sexism to exist and flourish?” asks Siskind.  That query is a bit of joke from “a lifelong Democrat” who admits she voted GOP for the first time ever “for one reason: McCain selected a woman as his running mate.”

TNA’s smug pride in removing the “divisive” Choice issue is overshadowed by the far greater divide they create by pitting one half of the population against the other.  Is the goal is to establish a political landscape where men & woman are treated equally?  Where, as Siskind claims to seek, “all the candidates are put on equal footing” regardless of gender?  If so, then TNA is heading in the absolute wrong direction by prioritizing gender in its selection and treatment of politicians.

Two wrongs don’t make a right.  The New Agenda is wrong, very wrong.

(c) 2011 by ‘tamerlane.’  All rights reserved.

A Bipartisan Approach to Strengthening the Economy

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release

July 23, 2011

WEEKLY ADDRESS: A Bipartisan Approach to Strengthening the Economy

(Note: True Liberal Nexus has acquired the unabridged version of this speech.  Sections deleted from the version released by the White House appear in italics.)

For years, the government has spent more money than it takes in.  The result is a lot of debt on our nation’s credit card – debt that unless we act will weaken our economy, cause higher interest rates for families, and force us to scale back things like education and Medicare.

Now, folks in Washington like to blame one another for this problem.  But the truth is, neither party is blameless.

Democrats, like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, are just much to blame as Republicans like John Boener and myself.

And both parties have a responsibility to do something about it.

Every day, families are figuring out how stretch their paychecks – struggling to cut what they can’t afford so they can pay for what’s really important.  It’s time for Washington to do the same thing.

Because, just like a family, the government has no way to raise extra cash by selling bonds, printing money, or simply raising the debt ceiling every few months.

But for that to happen, it means that Democrats and Republicans have to work together to do what’s right for the country.  Everyone is going to have to be willing to compromise.  That’s why we need a balanced approach to cutting the deficit.

And by balanced, I mean making all the cuts the Right insists on, without any of the revenue proposals from the Left.

We need an approach that goes after waste in the budget and gets rid of pet projects that cost billions of dollars.

Like my wars. Except we’re not touching any of those.

We need an approach that makes some serious cuts to worthy programs – cuts I wouldn’t make under normal circumstances

– unless I had this debt limit crisis as a smoke screen.

And we need an approach that asks everybody to do their part.

Everyone except the wealthiest 2% of the population.  They’re better than the rest of you, and shouldn’t be imposed upon to give up a penny more of their well-deserved fortunes. 

So that means, yes, we have to make serious budget cuts; but that it’s not right to ask middle class families to pay more for college before we ask the biggest corporations to pay their fair share of taxes.

Which is why the proposal includes a lowering of the top corporate tax bracket. 

It means that before we stop funding clean energy, we should ask oil companies and corporate jet owners to give up the tax breaks that other companies don’t get.

Don’t get me wrong, we will be killing clean energy funding.  But that jet thing alone will cover a whopping .075 % of the deficit reductions.

Before we cut medical research, we should ask hedge fund managers to stop paying taxes at a lower rate than their secretaries.  Before we ask seniors to pay more for Medicare, we should ask the wealthiest taxpayers to give up tax breaks we simply cannot afford under these circumstances.

This assumes that the Republican-dominated congress will allow those tax breaks to expire next year, but I’m going to get the ball rolling by cutting Medicare today.  There’s also a clause that ensures that Social Security, even though it’s self-funding, will be gutted as well.

That’s the heart of this approach: serious cuts, balanced by some new revenues.

To be specific, 74% cuts balanced equally by 26% revenues.

And it’s been the position of every Democratic and Republican leader who has worked to reduce the deficit, from Bill Clinton to Ronald Reagan.

Following in the footsteps of those two presidents, I intend on standing firm and giving my opponents every single thing they demand.

In fact, earlier this week, one of the most conservative members of the Senate, Tom Coburn, announced his support for a balanced, bipartisan plan that shows promise.

That’s no surprise, considering that plan is a conservative’s wet dream co-authored by Coburn.

And then a funny thing happened.  He received a round of applause – from a group of Republican and Democratic senators.

A group known as the “Gang of Six”, the other co-authors of that plan.

That’s a rare event in Washington.

See, I told you my mojo would transform politics.

So there will be plenty of haggling over the details in the days ahead.

But don’t worry — anyone who opposes my plan will be labeled a racist.

But this debate boils down to a simple choice.  We can come together for the good of the country and reach a compromise; we can strengthen our economy and leave for our children a more secure future.

Or we can sell our country down the river, complete the destruction of our economy, leave our seniors out in the cold, and ruin the future for our children.

Well, we know the right thing to do.  And we know what the American people expect us to do.

But the corporate donors to our re-election campaigns expect us to do the opposite.  And they’re the ones running the show, not you sorry dupes.

So, fuck you, America, up the ass, and goodnight.

– Barack

(c) 2011 by True Liberal Nexus.  All rights reserved.

A.B.O.

It seems to me a strange thing, mystifying, that the Democratic Party’s incumbent president, who has extended & expanded every odious bush administration policy, has betrayed every liberal principle, has broken every campaign promise, is in brazen contempt of the Constitution and several Federal laws, and has now unilaterally offered to cut Social Security, will be running unopposed in the 2012 primary.

Yes, he entered office inexperienced, but that’s because the king-makers ignored the will of the majority of voters in 2012 to pick a neophyte and incorrigible loafer, a con man selling rainbows and unicorns.

Yes, he’s faced tough opposition from Republicans.  But hey, they are the “opposition” party after all.  And he has only himself to blame for stinking up the joint so bad in his first two years that it cost the Dems the House in the mid-terms.

Even if his administration had in any way resembled a Democratic one, your incumbent is embarrassingly down in the polls vs. a generic GOP candidate, has sunk to 39% in pivotal Florida, and has shown no wherewithal to to turn thing around in the next 18 months.  The fat lady is already clearing her throat.


Change Horses Before You Get Bucked Off

Surely, many Democrats, while gravely disappointed in their hopeless-changeless incumbent, are still fearful of ‘changing horses midstream’ or weakening party unity with a primary fight.   But it’s a wives’ tale that strong primary challenges weaken the incumbent.  The reverse is true:  weak incumbents attract strong primary challenges.  In barry, the Dems easily have the weakest incumbent in American history.  Nobody — I mean nobody — likes him!   Not to mention that he’s not really a Democrat, rather a moderate Republican / corporatist whore.

Cowardly Lions

So where are the all the vultures?  The usual suspects have all declared themselves not interested.  Dennis Kucinich, that quadrennial protest candidate, is confining his protests to the sidelines this time.  Hillary swears she’s done with politics.  Feingold insists he’s not interested.  Every other potential challenger is laying low, protecting their careers’ futures.

Honestly, it’s not hard to see why.  Barry and his droogs fight dirty and nasty.  The first challenger to toss their hat into the ring would be skewered, roasted, drawn and quartered before that hat hit the ground.  It would be ugly. Medieval.

Just look at how barry won his four election battles:

1. Midnight procedural challenge disqualifying all of his primary opponents;
2. Leaked opponent’s unsavory divorce records;
3. Leaked opponent’s unsavory divorce records;
4. Massive voter fraud & rigging of caucuses, vicious personal attacks driven in to the hilt, race card played to the max; rigged convention.

The barry political-crime machine is masterful at raising huge sums of cash from the corporate tyrants he serves.  (Not to mention airhead bimbos like George Clooney and Tom Hanks.)  While doubts exist his 2012 campaign can match the ocean of money raised in 2008, barry is already way ahead of any potential primary opponents, who’ve raised exactly zero to date.

Since no one Democrat is brave enough to take on barry and his Chicago boys, is there no way to stop the obama juggernaut?

The A.B.O. Slate 

There is a way.  It’s a bit tricky, but is surely worth trying.

Most people aren’t aware that, when you vote for a candidate in a primary, you’re really voting for a slate of delegates pledged to vote for that candidate at the convention.  “Undeclared” delegates are occasionally chosen, seen most recently in Michigan in 2008. (though barry ended up stealing all of those, as well as a few of Clinton’s Michigan delegates for good measure.)

Just writing-in “none of the above” won’t count without a pre-designated slate to receive that vote.  The same goes for writing in a specific person’s name — if no slate of delegates exists pledged to that person, those write-in votes get tallied … then tossed.

What’s required is to run an A.B.O. — Anyone But Obama — slate in each state, delegates pledged to vote at the Democratic national convention for any candidate they like, so long as it’s not obama.

It really doesn’t matter who they nominate, or even whether the ABO slates from the several states chose the same person.  With enough ABO delegates in Charlotte, barry coudn’t receive an outright majority on the first ballot, opening up a floor fight of epic proportions and a brokered convention.  At that point, the cowardly lions might find the nerve to enter the fray and attempt to seize the nomination.   barry’s one billion dollars would be useless.  And if his droogs attempted to rig the convention like they did in 2008, our ABO delegates would simply  burn down the convention hall  march out and hold the vote in a bar across the street.

Who would prevail in this scenario?  Who knows.  Who cares, so long as it is Anyone But Obama.

Getting to Charlotte

Steve Martin once told a joke:  “How to earn a million dollars and not pay any taxes:  1. Earn a million dollars;  2. Don’t pay any taxes.”

Like Martin’s scheme, the devil is in the details of our ABO plan.  For many of us, it’ll require re-joining a discredited party we left in disgust.  However emotionally or ethically unsettling, it’s physically easy.

Far more tricky is getting to Charlotte.  A trip to the national convention is a plum reserved for long-time party loyalists and hacks of individual candidates.  The entire party machinery is in the hands of the obot apparatchiks.  In theory, however, the Democratic Party is the people’s party, and any registered Democrat is eligible to serve as an “undeclared” delegate.  And you, dear reader, are going to be that delegate.

The rules for selecting delegates vary from state to state — in the ones that assign delegates only after the primary, our ABO strategy may need to be modified. Caucus rules are particularly convoluted.

Here’ what you do. Tomorrow, call or visit your local democratic HQ and tell them you’d like to become a delegate, and ask how that works.  They’ll give you the run-around.  Be persistent.  Try not to mention that you oppose obama for as long as possible.  Ask if it’s possible to be an “undeclared” delegate.  Take down the name of the person you speak to.  If they give you information you later find out is false, report them, as they’ve just committed elections fraud.  Report back here in the comments section with what you’ve discovered.

The ABO slate might not succeed, but in trying, we can at least can send a wake-up call to the saner elements of the Democratic Party.  Please — pick Anyone But Obama!

(c) 2011 by True Liberal Nexus.  All rights reserved.

Remarks by the President on the Monthly Jobs Report

My fellow Americans,

I’m happy to report that I’ve finally found a solution to the jobs crisis — I’m blaming it on Congress.

You see, while I’m ready to roll up my sleeves over the next several weeks and next several months, Congress is lollygagging.  This is so frustrating!  I’ve urged Congress not to wait, but to act right now on some brilliant proposals of mine:

• Invest in rebuilding our roads and our bridges and our railways and our infrastructure.  (I came up with this one);
• Streamline our patent process.  Widgets & wangdoodles would already be pouring out of American factories, if Congress would only vote on the patent bill sitting there right now;
• Advance trade agreements that will help businesses sell more American-made goods and services to Asia and South America.  Congress could do that today. That could be done right now.

There are all sorts of bills and trade agreements before Congress right now that could get all these ideas moving. All of them have bipartisan support. All of them could pass immediately. And I urge Congress not to wait.

It’s really not fair that Congress’ inaction is forcing me to work on this, because I’ve already done so much.  In December, I boosted the economy by signing a tax cut that put a thousand dollars in the pockets of American families, which is nothing to sneeze at when you’ve been out of work for over a year.

A lot of middle-class families sure would feel more secure if they knew that tax cut will still be around next year. That’s a change that we could make right now, by making cuts to Social Security.  But Congress is too lazy.

I admit, it’s not entirely Congress’ fault that our economy sucks so bad.   There are many other things I can blame, from natural disasters and spikes in gas prices, to state and local budget cuts.  And those Greeks and Europeans had to go and ruin everything by giving investors the jitters.

These economic challenges weren’t created overnight — they’re W’s fault.  So don’t expect me to solve them overnight — I’ll need another four years at the least.

I get letters from folks hit hard by this economy.  Some of them pour their guts out in these letters. They feel that leaders in Washington have let them down.  To them, I say:  yes, Congress has let you down.

You can see how I’m busting my butt.  But I can only concentrate on one thing at a time, and we can’t solve the jobs crisis until we solve the debt ceiling crisis first. To put our economy on a sounder footing, we’ve got to rein in our deficits and get the government to live within its means, while still making the investments to make us more competitive in the future.  I’ve urged Congress to quickly move in both these contradictory directions, but they refuse to budge.

Still, we’ve had some good meetings with Congress.  We had a good meeting yesterday, and we’re gonna meet again today.  We’re gonna work through the weekend to solve this crisis with as many meetings as it takes.

Once the markets know that we have a serious plan to deal with our debt and deficit, they’ll start investing to grow and hire.  That’ll provide more confidence to the rest of the world as well, so that they are committed to investing in America.  And then — Presto! — the economy will be fixed, and I can go back to my real job, running for re-election.

I’ll keep you updated on my progress.

– Barack

(c) 2011 by True Liberal Nexus.  All rights reserved.

How to Fix the American Economy in Nine Simple Steps

 - by ‘tamerlane’

Get off the Pot

It’s going on eleven years since the American economy last didn’t suck. Bush spent eight years

F.P.O. Insert kitchy patriotic image here.

trashing it; barry’s spent another 2 1/2 years fiddling while Rome burns. In desperation, the American people are open to anyone offering a solution, however drastic.

From the Right, Rep. Paul Ryan offered a suitably draconion budget with cuts to the bone across the board, but especially on social services. From the lunatic fringe, Rep. Ron Paul suggested the federal government declare bankruptcy. The moderate republican obama administration, they of the “transformative change” — have been content with a few tweaks — a bailout here, a quantitative easing there, with a smokescreen of serious speeches pledging to seriously do something serious one of these days. From the left have come no comprehensive plans, only shrill warnings not to touch Medicare or Social Security.

Such “plans” are drivel.  Most are just fiddling with the knobs on a broken machine. Proposals like Ryan’s are on par with the medieval surgeon’s bleeding of the patient to dispel bad humours. We sent these people to Washington to get things done, specifically to fix the economy. Since they refuse to piss, it’s time for them to get off the pot. Time for the common folks to take charge.

A Simple Plan

Once you identify the real problem, great or small, the solution turns out to be fairly simple.  While the baboons in Washington sit around scratching their monkey butts, this ordinary American citizen decided to work out a real plan.  You may reject it on principle, or quibble with its details. But it’s comprehensive, is strengthened by synergies, is straightforward, and it’s bold.

Right now, we need bold. The patient that is the American economy has flat-lined, the EMTs need to crank up the defibrillator and quick. In contrast, the prescriptions coming from Washington are about as useful to our patient as “get more exercise” or “try to cut fats from your diet.”

Most of all, I’m convinced my plan will work.

1) “First Thing We Do, Let’s Kill All The Economists”
For the past 30 years, our nation’s economy has suffered the ministrations of members of a bizarre religious cult known as “Economics.” Many splinter sects of this cult exist, each decrying the others as heresies. But all the cults of economics share one trait — they don’t work. All economics is voodoo. Astrology. Tarot reading.

Some sects are not as bad as others, but none have anything at all to do with the real world, and consequently, none have any predictive powers whatsoever. The great scientific thinker, E.O. Wilson, who considers economics “folk psychology” and “mostly irrelevant”, notes that it

“… cannot answer definitely most of the key macro-economic questions that concern society…. The world economy is a ship speeding through uncharted waters strewn with dangerous shoals. There is no general agreement on how it works. The esteem that economists enjoy arises not so much from their record of successes as from the fact that business and government have nowhere else to turn.”

Since Reagan, the United States has fallen victim to the most deluded and destructive sect of the cult, “Libertarian/Anarchist” economics. Known variously as the “Chicago School” or “Austrian School”, its witch doctors included Milton Friedman and Alan Greenspan, both former acolytes of that psychotic priestess of greed, Ayn Rand.

Thanks to their gris-gris, the once mighty bodybuilder of American industry has been transformed into an emaciated heroin junkie. Admittedly, some modern economists, realizing that (again, from Wilson)

“[s]eldom are the premises of [economic] models examines closely. Seldom are their conclusions tested to any depth with quantitative field data. Their appeal is in the chrome and roar of the engine, not the velocity or destination”

are earnestly trying to take a more scientific approach that offers real predictive power.

Ultimately, though, all economists make the same fundamental error of placing the cart before the horse. They tweak our society to fix the economy, when it should be the other way around.

‘But tamerlane,’ you’re surely saying, ‘is it really necessary to actually kill them?’  It sure would be fun, and, one might argue, deserved. But no, all we need to do is ignore whatever they say. That’ll be hard at first, because, like the fortune tellers they are, economists lure us with vague prognostications of the tall, dark stranger we’ll meet in the next quarter with half a million new jobs, or the exotic destination we’ll visit, where housing starts are up 11%.

In place of such gibberish, we’ll rely instead on our own common sense:

1. Where do we want to go?
2. What’ll get us there?
3. Do that, and to hell with the rest.

2) Put Most Bankers in Chains; Put a Leash on the Rest
There’s a colony of parasites lviing in the bowels of our nation’s economy. These parasites produce nothing, provide no real services, yet makes obscene mountains of money just by shuffling around other people’s money. They’re called the financial “industry”, and they need a smack-down.
First off, the up & downs of the stock market are essentially meaningless. Unlike the current Washington baboons who fixate on Wall Street, we’re gonna ignore it. Sure, the stock market is essential in providing investment money for business. But mostly it’s just a pack of gamblers who bet on the success of other people’s businesses. Many now bet on the success or failure of the other broker’s bets. Heck, we’d do no worse aligning our economy to a Vegas sports book.

We’ll let the gamblers play, and even get rich now and again. There will, however, be strict regulations and oversight to prevent the abuses so prevalent on Wall Street that damage our economy. I know what you’re thinking, but that’s how other countries with healthier economies handle things, so put a sock in it. We’ll also be throwing into jail anyone who engages in things like predatory lending. Long sentences. In nasty, rat-infested jails. Filled with mother rapers and father rapers.

3) Create Jobs (Duh)

Every politician chants the same mantra: “Jobs, Jobs, Jobs!” By which they mean, ‘in this economy, you’re gonna need three jobs to make ends meet.’ These baboons do nothing tangible to create a base that’d generate real job growth, yet upon the latest report of 100,000 McJobs, they preen like a toddler proudly displaying their first potty.

It’s stupid to promise jobs to people if there’s nothing for them to do. Since we’re not stupid like, say, an economist or a politician, we’ll move right along to the things that’ll create not thousands, but millions, of jobs, and damn good ones, too.

4) Resurrect American Industry

I say “resurrect’ because, let’s face it: we spent the past 30 years intentionally killing off the largest industrial base the World had ever known. The economists clamored for the “World Economy”, then the corporate tapeworms shipped everything off to other parts of the world, mostly China. Now, everyone in Washington says we’ve got to “get competitive” to win back the jobs and manufacturing we so recklessly gave away. But in the Brave New World Economy, “competitive” means working 14-hour shifts for 59¢ an hour without bennies, in dangerous, polluting factories churning out shoddy crap that breaks.

This brew the economist witch doctors cooked up has been great for the world, and great for about 2% of Americans. But it’s sucked big time for the other 98% of us. So guess what, people — “World Economy” has just been cancelled.

There are a few American manufacturers clinging to life, But We’re gonna have to pretty much rebuild a manufacturing base from scratch. Our solution will be bold and it will be broad. The Federal government will:

1. Invest properly in R&D, the way nations with strong economies — Japan, China, Germany — do;
2. Kill the sham R&D subsidies (corporate welfare, really) to industries like mega-agriculture and fossil fuels;
3. Undertake large-scale infrastructure projects that require heaps of both manpower and stuff made in America;
4. Provide concrete assistance — not just lip service — to innovative & small business start-ups in the forms of loans, support programs, contracts, and tax incentives;
5. Levy tariffs on foreign imports equaling the cost savings those countries enjoy from exploiting their workers and destroying the environment. The stuff we still make is already of better quality, but now we’re talking honest “competitiveness”!
6. Close the loopholes in the corporate tax code that allow nominally “international” corporations to enjoy all the advantages of doing business in the US., while shielding their assets abroad from US taxes.

5) Get Cracking on That Green Economy, Already!

To win the latte liberal vote, obama made sweeping promises to create a “Green Economy” that would at once revitalize our economy while saving the environment. Like any good compulsive liar, once elected, barry did squat to fulfill his promise.

Yet the concept is still a sound one. It offers the best hope, in fact, to cure a host of ills. To make any real impact, though, the creation of our Green Economy has to be implemented on a massive, national scale. It’ll be like a 21st century version of the Tennessee Valley Authority, but on steroids.

Like the TVA and its hydro-electric power, our Green Economy will rely on already existing energy technologies. Also like the TVA, Federal underwriting will break the logjam by providing the capital investment the insipid “free market” is unable to muster.

The various elements will range in scale from private households to large power plants:

1. Provide seed money and investment for large solar-mirror turbines and next-generation wind turbines that truly are “shovel ready”;
2. Support and expand the military’s initiative toward becoming 50% self-sufficient from renewable energy by 2020;
3. Rescue the few remaining domestic renewables makers by placing orders for solar panels atop the roof of every federal building in the nation. The resulting economies of scale will make renewable energy affordable for everyone;
4. Make a “Solar Mortgage” available to every household and business in America. This is a simple yet brilliant idea already being implemented by private local vendors to remove the roadblock of prohibitive initial costs of these systems. Any participating household or business will have a renewable (usually PV panel) system installed that meets their energy needs. The Federal program will pick up the tab. The participant then makes a monthly “mortgage” payment equal to their average monthly utility bill. The term of the mortgage is flexible & based on that payment. Like a bank does with a house, the government covers the upfront cost, then gets paid back over time with interest. As the Solar Mortgage Program would only contract from American vendors, and employ American workers, it helps meet several goals of our overall plan.

Many other innovative programs will be part of the Green Economy initiave. All of them represent an investment in our industry, and our future. The advantages of going green vs. buying fossil fuels — either abroad or at home, is the same as paying a mortgage on a house you own vs. giving rent to someone else.

6) Make-Work Projects
When the previous great depression hit America, Hoover sat idly while millions suffered, waiting for “the market” to eventually sort things out. FDR actually did something — he created jobs through programs like the WPA and CCC. The suffering was ameliorated, while the workers’ paychecks helped spur more economic growth. And some very useful things got built, too — roads, bridges, national parks.

Today, our nation is falling apart at the seams. Our transportation network is crumbling, our large cities rotting. Out West, forests overgrown with brush lead to devastating mega-fires. Let’s tackle all these problems, and more. We’ll employ people — the young, those undesirable 40- & 50-somethings — who’d have no other hope of getting a job. Their paychecks will create other jobs, and we’ll fix up our nation in the process. Yes, this is government fiddling with “the market.” No, this may not force people to “take personal responsibility.” Yes, this is “socialism.” But guess what — Socialism Works.


7) Take Back Jobs Given to Foreigners

The tariffs in #4 above will reverse the ruinous practice of outsourcing jobs. Yet even at home, jobs that should go to Americans are instead taken by foreigners.

1. Crack Down on Unfair Work Visa Practices — When not shipping jobs oversees, corporate tapeworms import ever-increasing numbers of foreign workers to the US. Arriving on work visas intended only for when a company can’t find a qualified American applicant, these foreign employees are willing to work killer hours for less pay than Americans. Not only do the tapeworms reap the direct payroll savings, the presence of the foreigners allow them to squeeze their American employees on wages and benefits. This practice is not only bogus, it’s unethical and un-American. Under our common sense plan, the INS will be directed to implement a new policy that only issues work visas in the rare instances when truly no suitable American worker can be found. Any corporate tapeworm caught trying to get around this policy will find themselves sharing a cell in that nasty jail mentioned above.
2. Stop Illegal, & Curb Legal, Immigration — This may be too controversial for some, but it’s worth putting on the table. Fact: There are as many as 30 million illegal immigrants in this country; Fact: That represents 10% of the population; Fact: Unemployment is around 10% OK, it may not be that simple. But let’s dispense once and for all with the canard ‘illegals are willing to take jobs that Americans don’t want.’ No, illegals are willing to work for wages that Americans won’t accept.

The Saga of the Georgia Peaches highlights our muddled thinking on this subject. Following the passage of a strict anti-illegal worker law in Georgia, peach-growers suddenly found themselves at harvest time without their usual work force of illegals. ‘See why stopping illegal immigration is a bad idea,’ they all sung, ‘now y’all are gonna have to pay more for peaches at the supermarket!’  Ignoring for a moment that all these growers had been committing a federal offense, the sky isn’t really falling.

They’ll just have to buck up and hire Americans, pay them (at least) minimum wage, and pass the cost onto us. Yeah, the price of peaches will jump to $6 a pound, but we’ve been paying the real cost all along, only not at the checkout counter. And what we’ll get for that $6 is nothing to sneeze at: unemployment in Georgia goes down, bigger paychecks spread the wealth around, and the State’s social services will be relieved of the departed illegal workers. If that all seems too draconian to you, then pass a goddamn bill naturalizing the illegals who are currently dragging down wages.

8) Kill the Minimum Wage; Institute a Minimum Income
We Americans take strange pride in our byzantine approach to regulations. We have a federal minimum wage, but individual states have their own minimum wages, sometimes special minimum wages for teenagers or part-time workers. One teensy-weensy flaw in our system is that even the federal minimum wage is not a living wage — for anyone not living on their sister’s couch, it leaves you about $6,000 p/a short of what you need to survive.

Just raising the figure isn’t sufficient, so long as there are corporate slaveholders like Walmart who make everyone “casual” employees. Even when the baboons in Washington rouse themselves to belatedly raise the minimum wage, they stupidly enter a fixed figure in the bill, which quickly falls behind inflation. Under our plan, we will create a minimum wage law that sets the wage as a variable linked to inflation, price indexes, etc. Presto! No need to ever pass another bill!

Going further, we’ll establish a Minimum Income (“M.I.”), also a variable linked to indicators. This will be the minimum amount of money a person/household needs to survive. Can’t find a full-time job? No problem! The government will cover the gap between your wages and the M.I. Oh, we’ll also be assigning you to a job, maybe something you’re skilled at, but also maybe sweeping streets or in the kitchen of a retirement home. We’ll also train you for some steady job. Once the M.I. program is in place, we can terminate the various welfare and workfare programs that are so costly and utterly worthless.

9) Damn the Deficit – Full Speed Ahead!

Yo! All you babbling baboons in Washington — sit down, shut up, and pay attention: The federal deficit is not the problem; it’s but a symptom of the problem. Stop trying to fix the deficit — sucking on cough drops won’t cure pneumonia. If you fix the core problem, then the deficit will eventually go away on its own.

Those politicians most eager to cut the federal budget also usually urge that the government “be run more like a business.” I agree. A business in trouble can either react by cutting things like promotion, shutting plants, and laying off workers. Those ones almost always end up closed. Other business respond by taking out loans and expanding operations. They bravely invest, in anticipation of an eventual Return on Investment. These are businesses that usually persevere. Let’s apply this winning business strategy to our nation’s current woes:

Problem: Expenditures are up.
Solution: Cut non-essential costs. The only area where sizable savings can be realized is the military. We operate several wars in branch locations that have yielded zero ROI. We should shut down these operations ASAP, and assign the employees to other departments. There’s also some room to cut our Medicare line of products, but it’s very popular with our customers. All other potential savings combined are relatively minor. Social Security is a wholly self-funded subsidiary which actually extends loans to other departments. Shutting it down it would be counter-productive.

Problem: Revenues are down.
Solution: We have two remedies available to us. First, we should increase taxes — or more accurately, return to previous levels on the upper tax bracket. Earlier reductions of this income stream account for nearly all our current shortfalls. Second, we can take out a loan to cover the difference. Fortunately, as we ourselves print money, we can do this as needed.

Problem: Our plant operations are inadequate.
Solution: The previous management foolishly shut down profitable factories and branches. We need to reverse that by investing in new factories, new markets, and hire the necessary employees. We’ll print some money to cover the start-up costs, but are confident that the ROI will begin to be realized early, and will eventually be significant.

A Simple Plan?

‘Can it really be that simple?’ you ask. My plan is a good one, or at least a good starting point for a serious discussion. But simple and easy are not the same. Too many people with power & influence have too much personally to lose. They’ll make it hard to implement this simple plan.

The question then is, do we let them keep that power, and let them continue destroying our economy and our nation? Or do we wrest that power away, and do what needs to be done to save our country?

(c) 2011 by True Liberal Nexus. All rights reserved.