mswogger's Blogtag:tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com,2010:/talk/blogs/mswogger//29412010-06-19T17:05:28ZMovable Type Pro 4.21-enBP Using Paper Towels!tag:tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com,2010:/talk/blogs/mswogger//2941.3405682010-06-19T17:03:39Z2010-06-19T17:05:28ZMother Jones' Mac McClelland reports on BP's feeble oil cleanup efforts, including using some fancy paper towels to sop up the oiled beaches! Yes, paper towels....MJS
reports on BP's feeble oil cleanup efforts, including using some fancy paper towels to sop up the oiled beaches! Yes, paper towels. ]]>
BP Stifling Access to Informationtag:tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com,2010:/talk/blogs/mswogger//2941.3391242010-06-09T12:34:49Z2010-06-09T12:39:00ZThey're buying up search terms in Google and Yahoo to, well, help cover their asses....MJS
buying up search terms in Google and Yahoo to, well, help cover their asses.
]]>
AZ Law In Actiontag:tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com,2010:/talk/blogs/mswogger//2941.3382852010-06-03T00:45:23Z2010-06-03T00:47:51ZA brief recent anecdote: A colleague and good friend of mine's husband has an old Irish as can be college roommate who, while sitting in a park in Arizona eating a burrito, was approached by police and asked for her...MJS
A brief recent anecdote: A colleague and good friend of mine's husband has an old Irish as can be college roommate who, while sitting in a park in Arizona eating a burrito, was approached by police and asked for her papers. Seriously. I'm not kidding.
"Defense" Budgettag:tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com,2010:/talk/blogs/mswogger//2941.3172782010-02-02T17:21:10Z2010-02-02T17:23:56ZMJSBooing Obamatag:www.talkingpointsmemo.com,2008:/talk/blogs/mswogger//2941.2430062008-11-05T15:29:43Z2008-11-05T15:34:13ZMJS Anyone have access to other concession speeches to look for the same thing? Comments welcome.]]>
Booing Obamatag:www.talkingpointsmemo.com,2008:/talk/blogs/mswogger//2941.2430042008-11-05T15:29:43Z2008-11-05T15:34:00ZMJS Anyone have access to other concession speeches to look for the same thing? Comments welcome.]]>
Blackmailing Iraqtag:www.talkingpointsmemo.com,2008:/talk/blogs/mswogger//2941.2402582008-10-27T18:07:23Z2008-10-27T18:20:06ZMJS
wrote a few days ago that the United States is quite contemptuous of real democracy, as evidenced by its reaction to the most recent troubles in ramming through a status of forces agreement in Iraq. Well, now the United States is engaging in behavior tantamount to political blackmail. A long list of services being provided or supported by the United States has been submitted to the Iraqi government as in being in danger of discontinuation if the status agreement is not reached.
Some might call this political positioning or tit-for-tat. But the reality of the matter is much different. That the U.S. invasion was a war-crime under the U.N. Charter and the Nuremberg Doctrine seems to be sidestepped by the mainstream press and, of course, American politicians from McCain and Obama on down. What should justly accompany such a crime are not only punitive measures against the perpetrators but also massive reparations paid to the victims.
The victims in this case are of course the Iraqi people. Independent of any status of forces agreement should be clear recognition that the United States owes the Iraqi people much more than it has given, starting with a real democracy. The border protection, the schools, the infrastructure, all the services the US military is threatening to take away if an agreement is not reached, are all at their base what should be considered the starting point for reparations so long as the Iraqi people, and not the US government, have control over their implementation. To take them away at this point will simply yet another example of the United States not living up to its obligations under the UN Charter. ]]>
McCain, Make-Up, and Spreading the Wealthtag:www.talkingpointsmemo.com,2008:/talk/blogs/mswogger//2941.2396482008-10-24T14:43:39Z2008-10-24T14:48:35ZMJS
Holy shit! Talk about spreading the wealth around. Taking campaign donations from everyday Americans and giving $23K to a make-up artist over a two-week period! That's more than the annual salary of your average social worker, who, by the way, probably isn't giving McCain many donations! I didn't think Palin was so ugly as to need that much work, unless the make-up artist can work on her insides too. ]]>
America's Preferred "Democracy" Failing in Iraqtag:www.talkingpointsmemo.com,2008:/talk/blogs/mswogger//2941.2396402008-10-24T13:57:00Z2008-10-24T14:18:32ZMJS Of course, if American history is any guide, democracy promotion only goes as far as the new regime's willingness to cooperate with and adhere to U.S. demands. Disobedience has long been the greatest sin among U.S. clients. In other words, let the people decide so long as they decide the correct way. This has been America's preffered style of democracy throughout the world. Iraq is no exception.
But that democracy in Iraq is failing and perhaps real self-determination is sprouting, much to the dismay of the Bush Administration. The latest news concerning the US-Iraqi Status of Forces agreement seems to indicate that the Bush Administration's initial plans for a permanent military presence in Iraq are being undermined by the will of the Iraqi government and by extension the Iraqi people. Bush has long insisted that a fair reward for our 'rescuing' the Iraqi people from tyranny is a permanent U.S. military and economic presence in Iraq. But the latest agreement to come out of negotiations, even with watered-down U.S. demands and concessions, doesn't seem like it will go too far due to Shiite opposition.
The Iraqi people have long wanted the United States out of Iraq. Reliable polls taken since the fall of Hussein have clearly indicated as much. And the Iraqi government's overall positions seems to reflect that opposition to the American presence. That's not what the Bush Administration was hoping for. The U.S. is used to getting what it wants when it intervenes in the affairs of another state. As time goes on and a new administration enters the White House, it will be interesting to see if total withdrawal, military and economic, is what truly happens if the Iraqi people wish it to be. Or, will a new (real or imagines) pretext for continued American intervention in the affairs of that soveriegn state surface?
If we actually listen to the Iraqi government and people, giving up all rights of intervention and presence in Iraq while the country goes on its own self-chosen course, it would be a first for the United States. And the preferred style of "democracy" will have been overthrown by a legitimate attempt at self-government. Will we let that happen? One can only wait and see. But I hope so. It's their country, and has been since before the invasion. ]]>
Another 5 Million Not Allowed to Votetag:www.talkingpointsmemo.com,2008:/talk/blogs/mswogger//2941.2393102008-10-23T13:37:04Z2008-10-23T13:38:53ZMJS
]]>
REAL Voter Fraudtag:www.talkingpointsmemo.com,2008:/talk/blogs/mswogger//2941.2389932008-10-22T13:12:11Z2008-10-22T13:13:41ZMJS
Read this article, tell people, and be vigilant. This isn't ACORN. It's real and dangerous. A repeat of 2004.
]]>
Is Racism the Last Hurdle?tag:www.talkingpointsmemo.com,2008:/talk/blogs/mswogger//2941.2389872008-10-22T12:42:18Z2008-10-22T13:10:39ZMJS But as a Pennsylvanian, as an American, I worry about racism. The Bradley effect, as it is called, is still a very real possibility in states that have a long history of clandestine racism, that is, the kind of racial antipathy that looms beneath the surface and manifests itself in more hidden, more seemingly innocuous ways. When many think of racism the first thought often turns to slavery in the South, Jim Crow in the South. After all, those were the most obvious examples of this great scourge because they were always so apparent and in-your-face. But historically many regions outside the American South have been no less racist in mind and in deed. And because that racism has to the casual observer seemed more subtle, it has often been more dangerous.
I come from one of those "secretly" racist states. Yes, Pennsylvania has a long history of anti-racism, from the birth of the movement for abolition among Quakers after the American Revolution to the fiery Radical Republican Thaddeus Stevens, who, in the 1860s, fought hard to help redefine the meaning of American freedom and to accord African Americans full citizenship and civil rights. That history, however, is overshadowed by the fact that southcentral PA has the largest concentration of hate groups in the nation. Pennsylvania, according to sociologist James Loewen, has the largest number of suspected "sundown towns" in the nation, more than the over 400 confirmed such towns in Illinois.
(Sundown towns are communities outside the traditional South that between the years 1880 and 1920 used numerous pretexts to justify the expulsion of their African American citizens. Black Americans were not permitted in these towns after sundown. Many of these communities still have few if any African Americans living within their town limits.)
Many of you watched the video clip of Palin supporters in Johnstown, PA posted here at TPM. That's just the tip of the iceberg here in Pennsylvania, in Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and elsewhere. I currently reside in southcentral PA where the communities west of Harrisburg, on the West Shore of the Susquehanna, are commonly referred to as being located on the "white shore." My father, who has done some consulting work for a local union in western PA, relates that even though the union itself has endorsed Obama every person - and these are decent people too - he has talked to in that union has said openly that they simply cannot bring themselves to vote for a black man. His neighbors have expressed the same sentiment. Governor Rendell attested to the same phenomonon during the primary season, as did Congressman Jack Murtha just last week. Many of these people would get upset if they were called racist, but nonetheless harbor racist attitudes even if they're ashamed of the label.
When voters go into the voting booth, will the Bradley Effect come into play? This is the unknown of this election. Take race out of the equation and I am convinced Obama wins and wins big. Add racism and I'm a little less sure but just as hopeful. And if Obama loses, we can certainly look at voter registration purges and other real voter fraud going on throughout the country. But it would be naive and a big mistake to assume race had nothing to do with it. I pray that Obama is able to jump this last hurdle and land safely on the other side. If he does, it will be one more small but significant step towards marginalizing the racists of this country.
]]>
Our Biggest Mistaketag:tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com,2008:/talk//17.2211222008-10-01T15:07:31Z2008-10-01T15:07:31ZI've been paying attention to presidential elections since I was in eighth grade. There's a common refrain one hears every election cycle. We heard it in 2000 and again in 2004. We're hearing it again now in 2008:This is the...MJS This is the most important election we've had in years.
No doubt this is probably true. Elections such as this one can be quite important, especially when the country has been guided in such a terrible and dangerous direction as it has in the last seven years. The significance of this year's presidential election cannot be understated. The stakes are too great. The future is too important to simply cast this off as just another election between, in the words of Helen Keller, Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee.
Quite often we place many of our hopes and dreams into one individual. This year for many of us that individual is Barack Obama. Many of us also pray that President Obama will also be fortunate enough to have a strong Democratic majority in both houses of Congress. If this happens, the country's tragic economic, social, and political trajectory will hopefully be reversed.
But putting too much hope in one person (or a group of people) in government is our biggest mistake. There are too many things that we should have no reason to believe will change under an Obama presidency (see my previous post on that issue). We must remember that, in the words of Frederick Douglass, "If there is no struggle, there is no progress.... Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will...." Douglass was speaking about the abolition of the vile institution of slavery in the United States. His argument has been echoed by participants and leaders of radical movements throughout history: The demand for change must come from the people through constant and vigilant struggle.
Voting is not what has made the greatest positive impact on the daily lives of Americans. It has not been the government or its leading officials taking the reins of leadership and directing the country toward a better, more humane course.
No, it has been the people, the very heart and soul and morale voice of the nation. Slavery was abolished not because Abraham Lincoln all of a sudden saw the light but because of the tireless and unpopular struggle of black and white abolitionists and the slaves themselves urging and fighting for America to live up to its ideals. It was not FDR and the national government, in the grips of the Great Depression, who led the charge for the right of workers to unionize, for a minimum wage, for safer working conditions. It was the labor movement, the people who put their livelihood and lives at risk to obtain the most basic of human rights. It was not President Woodrow Wilson or any one political party that led the way in granting women the right to vote but instead the over 100-year struggle among women who engaged in protests, petition drives, and acts of civil disobedience to show that women were equal to men and that they deserved the most fundamental of political rights in America. And in the 1950s and 60s, the people's movements beginning with the Civil Rights Movement and leading to the movements for women's liberation, American Indian emancipation, Chicano rights, and the end to a brutal and illegal war that propelled the government into action.
Yes, let us vote and be proud to do it. Let us hope and pray that a president Barack Obama (or John McCain, if you're so inclined) can help usher in a significant of positive change and transformation in this nation. But let us not forget that the real, deep, impacting changes we seek must be borne in our own desire to make a better world for our children and must translate into patient but vigiliant action. But be sure, once we leave that voting booth, the president-elect and the rest of the government must be held accountable. The people must lead in the direction we want this country to go, not the other way around. Otherwise, we may as well not vote at all. ]]>
Fascism is the Name for What's Happeningtag:tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com,2008:/talk//17.2192642008-09-24T14:37:51Z2008-09-24T14:37:51ZMJS A second reader pointed to my use of the word socialism. Indeed, I only referred to socialism because it is the word "conservatives" often use when opposing "liberal" domestic programs like national health care (i.e. socialized medicine). The reader reminded me that was is happening with the corporate bailout is not socialism, that there is another word for it.
Frankly, that word is fascism. It's no secret that corporations are fascist entities themselves, where decisions are made by a select few that can affect millions of people who have no say in the matter. But this government-corporate "partnership" (for lack of a better term) is the epitome of fascism. As Mussolini and his partner Giovanni Gentile wrote in 1932,
We are, in other words, a state which controls all forces acting
in nature. We control political
forces, we control moral forces we
control economic forces, therefore we are a full-blown Corporative
state (emphasis added).
Decisions (and their tax dollars) are being taken out of the hands of the people and given to the corporate criminals who created this whole mess, no doubt something that will further enrich them if the proper safeguards and oversight are not imposed.
We are on the precipice of something quite dangerous. Which direction will our government go? What will the people, the governed who give their consent, do about it? ]]>
Republicans Oppose Socialism? Hardly.tag:tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com,2008:/talk//17.2189442008-09-23T12:38:57Z2008-09-23T12:38:57ZMJS So-called "conservatives," the ones who dominate the Republican Party and have creeped their way into Democratic circles as well, have a habit of insisting that they are fiscally responsible and for full, free, and unfettered capitalism. The market knows best, they say. Let the market fix things. Don't give aid to the poor, the unemployed, the down-trodden. They are where they are by way of their own faulty decisions. If they are to succeed, they should have to compete in the free market like everyone else.
Oh, if this conservative mantra only applied to their rich voting bloc, their corporate lackeys. But it does not. It never has. It's free markets for the poor, but socialism for the rich. And this banking crisis and the proposed bailout is but one more powerful example of this.
What? You want more money for education? For jobs programs? For clean water? There is no money for those things, we are told. We're mired in debt and can't afford to be spending like a 10-year-old whose just been given his allowance.
But if a bank fails, if a corporation goes belly-up (for making preadolescent-like decisions), suddenly the heavens open and money comes pouring from the sky. It's the same money it's always been: taxpayer money. That money, the very wealth of America, is what gets redistributed on a daily basis. (Psssst. Don't say redistribution of wealth too loudly or you'll be labled a commie and that will be the end of the discussion.) But this wealth doesn't usually get redistributed from the top down, anathema to any lover of so-called free markets, but rather the bottom up, which is precisely what is about to happen with these bank bailouts. It's the same thing that happens with defense contracts and health research: Tax dollars get funneled in, profits go to a few. Socialize the cost, privatize the gain. Take $700 billion of taxpayer money to pour into the banking system so that their CEOs and higher ups can get rich again.
That's not free-market capitalism folks. That's robbery. Criminal.
So the next time a "conservative" extols the virtues of the free market, be sure (s)he's at least consistent. What's good for the rich is good for the poor, or (not and) vice-versa. ]]>