No Liz Warren = Last Straw.

Middle Class is doomed. 

Nothing left to do now, but duck and cover.  Hope they don't trap you into unending debt.

I got to thinking about this b/c of MJ's piece and the Cafe comments about Bob Herbert's editorial today...  And this may just be me hoping against hope (or me not fully understanding the politics), but it seems to me that the Congressional Black Caucus will have to start taking a stand against President Obama soon.  I called them today asking their stance on the "Spending Freeze (From Hell)", and they said they didn't issue a Press Release on it yet.  So I registered my discontent with this economically insane policy.

Brad Delong says 700,000 net jobs will be lost in the "Spending Freeze (From Hell)", so I've got to imagine that a lot of those jobs will be African American workers in municipal jobs across the country. 

Obama's capitulation to Republicans and Wall Street seems to be complete, yet he doesn't seem to be on the verge of losing African-Americans.  I'm deeply surprised.  I hope they deal him an embarrassing and costly blow ASAP.

This is it.  The only way Obama gets his groove back.

Has anyone heard of any talk of Liz Warren getting the nod to replace Geitner?  It seems like the brilliant masterstroke that Obama needs right now to re-gain his mojo.  He really needs to pull a rabbit out of his hat at Wednesday's SOTU, and having a week of Liz Warren coverage would be precisely the signal that would show that "he gets what the tizzy is about."  (BTW, I know Simon Johnson & HuffPo is pushing Krugman, but that doesn't seem too plausible to me.  But Joe Stiglitz makes sense...)
 
God, Prof. Warren is good.  
 
If it was Warren vs Brown last Tuesday, instead of Marsha* Coakley, we wouldn't have had this massive failure. 

From Today's Boston Globe:

ETHAN PORTER
The Woman Democrats Need
By Ethan Porter  |  January 24, 2010
...

Warren and the Democratic Party need to think seriously about her prospects for higher office. Going into 2012, Massachusetts Democrats will have no shortage of candidates to choose from, eager, party-trained politicians ready to take a run. Republican Scott Brown's victory to the US Senate last week made clear that voters crave something besides the norm: someone from outside the traditional political structure who can speak to their everyday, bread-and-butter concerns in a credible way. Warren fits the bill.

Warren has spent her career laying the groundwork for what might be called progressive populism. From her perch in Cambridge, she's excoriated the unfair credit and lending practices that, in part, gave rise to the current crisis. She was the architect of the Consumer Financial Protection Agency, which, if created, would regulate credit cards and mortgages in the same way home appliances are regulated now. (Full disclosure: Warren once wrote about the agency in the publication I help edit.) And well before the bubble broke in the summer of 2007, when America was still riding high on George W. Bush's economy, Warren was speaking out against the incredible pressure the 21st century economy was putting on the middle class. She was derided as a Cassandra, but she was right.

Dear TPM Friends,

My 401(k) finally went back up to pre-crash levels. So I sold everything and parked it in cash until I can find a good, solid Socially Responsible Mutual Fund to park it in for the next 30 years. I am i) pissed at Wall Street in general and don't trust the culture, the accounting, debt levels or their rating systems, and ii) in particular, I'm absolutely livid that firing people has largely lead to this short-term rise in stock prices (See the example of Caterpillar in Sec. Reich's piece "The Great Disconnect Between Stocks and Jobs").

Michael Moore is right - to the extent that the market "forces" executives to cut expenses at all costs (ie, "fire people"), then it is in fact evil. I can't give Jim Cramer and the others my money to play with anymore.

I've talked to Fidelity and my friends, and they all look at me with pity when I say that I'm looking to get into Socially Responsible Funds. One friend said: "They're great, it you don't like to make money." The phone rep from Fidelity said: "Oh, I see... Are you sure you want to do that? You're really limiting your options you know..." But he was cool about it, and gave me a list of Mutual Fund families to consider:

1. Ariel

2. Citizen Funds (n/k/a - Sentinel Funds)

3. Domini (Catholic?)

4. Parnassus

5. Neuberger Berman

6. TIAA-CREF

7. Winslow

If any group of people know about these funds and have good/bad/indifferent experiences to share about them, it would be the TPM-aholics here in the Café. Thank you in advance for your time & responses.

[Please feel free to recommend - it would be nice to get many responses... Also, perhaps others will move their money out of mainstream funds into something more in line with progressive values...]

StephPo's This Week was quickly becoming my favorite show on Sunday Mornings.  Somehow, despite all the pressures of working in the modern corporate media, they managed to have pretty high-level & serious discussions about serious topics.  The wingnuts were laughed at and discarded.  Even David Brooks ("[Sarah Palin] represents a fatal cancer to the Republican party") and Peggy Noonan ("[Sarah Palin is] Horrifying") acted like responsible adults on the set of This Week. 

Granted, George F. Will was unable to stop acting like a pretentious mega-weenie, but I can't expect miracles.  (It was enough that he didn't hold his breath and turn blue each time Paul Krugman humiliated him with facts & knowledge.)

Anyway, Stephanopoulos really screwed the pooch today. 

Michelle Malkin -- who's famous for her scholarly cheerleading routine -- was invited on the show because she has a "book" out.  And, I suppose, it's important to listen to "all sides of the argument."  Nevermind that she's not engaged in the actual public debate on these serious issues.  Nevermind that she spreads vitriol on a daily basis and "hopes the President fails."  Was Orly Taitz -- the attorney/dentist/real-estate-agent/conspiracy-theorist unavailable?  (I doubt it, because Colbert had her on last week...  [No Link...  :(  ]) 

Krugman was polite about this whole situation on his blog today, so let me say what I imagine he wishes he could say: "George, you may have just ruined your show.  You caved to Hannity yet again with this sort of "equal-time to wingnuts" garbage.  Think about it - why would anyone with half-a-brain -- let alone a Nobel Prize -- want to go on your show again in the future? ...

Michelle Malkin represents a fatal cancer to This Week with George Stephanopoulos."

Seriously folks:  We have to start calling b#llshit on this kind of legitimization of radical fringe-dwellers.  As Bill Maher pointed out Friday July 31 [No Link...  :(  ], ignoring the birthers and the Michelle Malkins won't make them go away.  Vocal and immediate opposition to the fringe liars on whats left of our legitimate forums is the only way to stop their lies. 

E-Mail ABCNews here.

"McCains Rack Up At Least $295K In Credit Card Debt"

Is it really "debt", if the oligarch "pays" 0.00% on their $295,000 AmEx Black Card revolving credit lines?

"The three American Express cards credited to McCain's spouse and his child all had a zero percent interest rate."

  vs.

Just another example of the two sets of books in this country.  One set of suggested rules for the oligarchs, and one set of strict rules for the public.  These aren't perks that certain fortunate folks pay for or deserve.  These are payoffs.  Bribes so the lawmakers enact "Bankruptcy Reform" and to ensure soft legislative treatment.  The rich & famous receive these payoffs in order to prevent them from speaking out against the way the public is treated.  Indeed, over at FICO there are separate databases for the politicians, the rich, and the famous so they don't publicize any problems with the deeply flawed credit score system (Source: The movie "Maxed Out").

The only solution is to stop doing business with these people.  Let's cut the frickin' cards and help out friends and family fill out https://www.optoutprescreen.com/ to stop all credit card offers.  Let's cut these banks off at the knees.

Rush & Newt Are Winning, and Adam Davidson is still holding down the fort for the bellicose right over at NPR. 

As a follow up to my May 15th post, I wanted to point out that NPR's Ombudswoman Alicia C. Shepard has written a complete dressing-down of Adam Davidson's malpractice (I mean interview) committed on Elizabeth Warren ("Planet Money Meltdown").

Many listeners said they were deeply disappointed in Davidson. Some threatened to never donate again to NPR. Others have demanded that Davidson be sanctioned or fired. It's not necessary. He is contrite. He knows how unprofessionally he behaved. And NPR supervisors probably will be watching his work more carefully in the future.

Planet Money is far too valuable a resource for explaining today's strange and hard-to-fathom financial information to let one botched interview derail it. But judging by the volume of criticism, it will take some time for Davidson to earn back the trust and respect initially (and deservedly) showered on him.

It is nice to see NPR kinda apologize for him, but I'm not feeling like he deserves much benefit of the doubt going forward.  And, IMO, Planet Money is unlistenable with him around.

In fact, his non-apology needs an apology as well.  In this follow-up post-mortem that Shepard links to, Davidson never apologizes.  Instead, he attacks Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi for picking an "obvious partisan" (paraphrase) like Liz Warren for the TARP overseer post in the first place.  Honestly, this follow up interview sounds to me like Davidson thinks family economics & personal finance is still merely a "trivial, woman's issue" (my words).  Warren's "pet issue" (his words) that should remain in her academic work where it belongs, not on Wall Street - where all the men are oh-so-serious, apparently.  (Aside: Dave Ramsey is a huge conservative.  His Achilles heel is that he can't help himself from spouting FauxNews talking points, but he is 1000% in Warren's camp.  Family economic health is bi-partisan.)

Clearly, IMHO, Planet Money can't rehabilitate itself with Davidson still spitting his Andrew Ross Sorkin-like, CEO brown-nosing, Reaganomics stock phrases.

This whole episode illustrates E.J. Dionne's brilliant Op/Ed today.  It's the anatomy of how the business right dominates the public discussion, and silences intelligent people for "appearing liberal".  I don't think they succeeded in this case, but Davidson was trying to radicalize Professor Warren's image.

I took a break from ripping on the Young Cons Anthem on youtube to read some NPR.  All of a sudden I see this headline: 

All Aren't Happy With Health Insurance For All
by Karen Brown

OK, fine, I think this is a counterpoint piece to Universal Health Care, because NPR is afraid of appearing biased by reporting on reality.  A typical insurance industry / GOP news plant.  But then I noticed that this content was provided to NPR (!) directly from a group called Kaiser Health News.  They provide this disclosure at the end:

Karen Brown is a reporter for member station WFCR in Amherst, Mass. This story was produced through a collaboration between NPR and Kaiser Health News. KHN is an editorially independent news service and is a program of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan health care policy research organization. Neither KFF nor KHN is affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.

WTF?!  I'm calling bull$hit.  That's like starting a MacDonald's Foundation to Cure Obesity or the FoxNews Trust to Fight Illiteracy.

In what universe is this appropriate work by NPR?  If they don't have the budget to provide new reporting and original content, remain silent.  Silence should always win against corporate infiltration.

I'm not saying Massachusetts' plan isn't totally screwed up (Universal Single Payer on a national level is the only solution), but this seems to be a think tank bamboozlement.

I'm 100% open to be proven wrong.  Is Kaiser Health News legitimate?

  (Prof. Warren demonstrating Adam Davidson's level of understanding of the economy...)

HuffPo's Jason Linkins pointed everyone today to Ryan Chittum's Columbia Journalism Review piece on Planet Money's interview of Professor Warren.  Here's the Full Interview.  (The second half is where they start screaming...) 

Adam Davidson commits Journalism Malpractice in this train wreck interview (i.e., "the middle class is Warren's 'pet' issue" (paraphrased)).  I'm not saying this because she's one of my Top 3 heroes of all-time - right next to Bruce Springsteen and David Ortiz.  No, NPR's Davidson truly exposed himself as a complete and utter failure as an economics & finance reporter.  He's lost all credibility in my book.  She should have just called him "stunningly superficial" and walked out, but she's too smart and classy.

There are too many quotes documenting his superficial knowledge to list here.  Overall, Davidson simply doesn't understand economics.  Specifically, he thinks the banking crisis exists in a vacuum.  Fix it first, then move on to other lesser things.  You know, silly things, like families.

He's wrong, of course.  The very term "economics" means ""household management," from L. oeconomia, from Gk. oikonomia "household management," from oikonomos "manager, steward," from oikos "house".  And in this highly complex world of haute finance that we now all have to obsess over for the next 5-10 years, he doesn't realize that the American family has itself been securitized.  The work of the American family is precisely the underlying asset of all securities -- especially the Residential Mortgage Backed Securities (RMBS) that exploded.

Perhaps he's a self-flagellating liberal journalist that needs to kowtow to the riotous-right to prove he's not a bleeding heart? Or perhaps he's recently read Atlas Shrugged and has decided to hate the middle class.  Either way, this interview should heard by everyone because:

1) It illustrates the deeply entrenched rightwing bias in media and the mainstream "serious" discussions -- they've infiltrated NPR (!) for crying out loud.  (Does anyone remember's Josh's term for this?  Something about the "Pull" or "Gravity" or "Structure" or "Embeddedness" of Washington's Rightwing Insiderism?),

and...

2) Liz Warren  b e a t s  h i m  t o  a  b l o o d y  p u l p . . .

I've been listening through Bill Moyer's archives all day while cleaning the house...  This clip of his interview with Benjamin Barber really caught my attention.  I said to myself, "Oh yeah, he's talking about Privatized Gains (ie, Greenwich, CT) and Socialized Risk (ie, the Cross-Bronx Expressway in the South Bronx) -- very true, of course, as we've all learned with AIG, Bear Stearns, etc..."  Then I noticed the date of the interview:

December 21, 2007.

After the Credit Collapse in August 2007, but before even some of the most pessimistic economists...  But he's not an oracle or a prophet -- he's "just" a social scientist/theorist!  :)  And a good citizen because he's paying attention, and asking the right questions.  (Man, I appreciate insights like this...)

BILL MOYERS: But isn't all of this [Rampant Consumerism/Debt] part of what keeps the hamster running? I mean, it--

BENJAMIN BARBER: -- It is. But part of the problem here is that the capitalist companies have figured out that the best way to do their job is to privatize profit, but socialize risk. That is to say--

BILL MOYERS: What do you mean?

BENJAMIN BARBER: --ask the taxpayer to pay for it--

BILL MOYERS: Yes.

BENJAMIN BARBER: --when things go down. The banks now that have just screwed up so big, not one of those banks is going to go under because they'll be bailed out by the feds. 'Cause the feds, the federal government will say we can't afford this gigantic multi billion dollar bank to go under. Happened with Chrysler 20, 30 years ago.  [Barack put an end to this last week, as long as the Chapter 11 process goes quickly, that is...]

BILL MOYERS: Got to keep the wheel going.

BENJAMIN BARBER: And, therefore, it's impossible to fail if you're a business. You never get punished. Now the whole point of profit is to reward risk. But what we've done today is socialize risk. You and I, and all of your listeners out there, pay when companies like sub-prime market mortgage companies and the banks go bad. We pay for it. They don't.

Here they are.  All 12 of the below-listed Democrats took bailout funds (by way of Bank Lobbyist "legalized bribes", that is) and voted against Foreclosure Relief this week:

Baucus (D-MT)
Bennet (D-CO)
Byrd (D-WV)
Carper (D-DE)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Johnson (D-SD)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Specter (D-PA)
Tester (D-MT) 

Bill Moyer's reported last night about President Obama's good buddy Dick Durbin's losing effort at desperately needed reform:

"On Monday an exasperated Senator Durbin told an interviewer that although, quote, "We're facing a banking crisis that many of the banks created, the banks are still the most powerful lobby on Capitol Hill, and they frankly own the place." Let me repeat that: one of the Senate's own leaders says the banks own the place. And just yesterday, as if to prove Durbin's point, bankers killed the Senate's latest effort to staunch that wave of foreclosures, squashing a measure Durbin says would help one million seven hundred thousand [1,700,000] Americans save their homes."

But I agree with Dave Ramsey (a huge Republican, that I love despite his anti-Obama hints) when he says we can't wait for Washington to fix our problems.  These "12 Democrats" show us this week that they're going to protect the banks, despite the disruptive and stultifying upheaval that foreclosure will cause to 1,700,000 Americans and their children.  Bill Moyers goes on to profile Steve Meacham of City Life/Vida Urbana of Dorchester, MA.  The profile of Meacham is one of the best profiles I've ever seen.  I'm not kidding.  Please do watch it if you get a chance.  This guy is for real, and he's been doing it for years.  He knows the true effects of the Bank's financial "innovation" in the past 30 years.

As Moyer's website says, Meacham:

...is fighting on the frontlines of the foreclosure crisis. Meacham and his colleagues at City Life employ a community organizing strategy they call the The "shield" is a strategy of legal defense: teaching City Life members about their rights under the law, plus providing access to volunteer legal assistance. The "sword" is a public relations strategy, where City Life organizes protests in front of banks, and eviction blockades in front of people's homes.

Let's face it, Washington Democrats are not going to help us or our neighbors.  Spiking the Anti-Foreclosure Amendment this week proves it once and for all.  The rarest thing in American politics is a Republican or other entrenched power (the Banks) admitting to a mistake.  It's just never going to happen.  Funny how "Moral Hazards" only apply to the public, and not to their actions or governance decisions.

So let's stop paying into the banker's system, and resist their strong-arm evictions in the name of "market forces."  We can all start by cutting up our credit cards.  But if you know of someone about to be foreclosed on, help them RESIST and STAY in their home.  As Mecaham's group does on a daily basis, let's help them "create the moral space for people to feel like they have the right to resist, because they're told by almost everybody that they don't. You know, their first reaction is, "There's nothing I can do because the bank owns the building now." And that is part of a disempowerment that goes far beyond that situation.  And part of the reason that people love to come here I think is that not only are we giving them solidarity and support in fighting the bank, but in so doing, it's like a, kind of upsetting this whole apple cart of disempowerment that they've been fed for years and years and years."

My point:  We have to help create the moral space to fight banks:  "IT IS OK TO STAY IN YOUR HOME AND OK TO DEMAND LEGAL PROTECTION FROM PREDATORY LENDING."  Until the public gets that legal protection, we must help our neighbors fight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBb4cjjj1gI

The Katie Couric rhymes at 1:21 is wicked tight! 

Enjoy!  :)

 Sudhir Venkatesh nails it in the Sunday Times.  I'm not saying it should happen here in the same way, but at least the Europeans are loudly and publicly protesting the bailouts.  Executives are held hostage in France.  But what about us Americans?  Why are we so docile?

We aren't protesting like we should right now because of our personal household debt.  Crushing debts kill individuals, families, companies and nations, as John Perkins showed us about the 3rd World in Confessions of an Economic Hitman and we're now seeing in the United States.  

Debt also appears to kill the drive to be active citizens.  There is a psychology to money and how we handle money that is deeply personal but it has a profound effect on the way power is exerted in our society.  If we're in debt, we're told, "there's something wrong with you, and you should take care of your own business before complaining about politics".  And if you're worried about losing your house or job, you won't protest or form a union even though our wages have stagnated for the last 30 years under Reaganomics bubbles.  They've trapped us into peonage with usurious lending terms, and they now own and control our politics.

Venkatesh says it better than me:

Ultimately, however, what could keep the lid on unrest is the very issue that has pushed us toward the cliff: our high levels of personal and household debt. The average American owes about $9,000 on credit cards alone. Indebtedness redirects an individual's energies inward: failing to pay the mortgage and college tuition can bring up feelings of anxiety, shame and a sense of personal failure.

It's easy to feel that one isn't working hard enough, that one should try harder to save money or take on additional work. To rebel publicly, even to engage politically, would mean exposing your own inadequacies, so most people just hunker down and keep plugging away at those monthly payments.

As our shame grows, we shutter ourselves inside. Afraid of acknowledging our anger and unable to join those similarly suffering, we grow distant. Worse, we judge quickly and harshly the actions of others; we devolve into snark, which will never lead to meaningful change.

Is there hope? 

To restore our social bonds, each one of us must overcome our isolating feelings of embarrassment and humiliation and understand that this is a shared plight. We'll also have to accept that anger, real anger, has a role to play in producing collective catharsis and fostering healing.

Well, I say to my fellow American citizens in debt:  You are not alone, and it's not your fault!  The Credit Card contract is unconstitutional in its incomprehensibility.  Cut your cards, stop doing business with these banks, and let's protest!

"... We love you Mr. President, but you don't have it right yet. And we're going to bang on your door until you get it right." --William Greider

William Greider showed us how to criticize President Obama's economic team on Bill Moyers Friday night. There was no baggage or snide remarks that people (understandably) can't seem to let go regarding Paul Krugman and others. If TPM's blogs (Candide, I'm looking in your direction... =) ) and Newsweek's cover story is any indication, the left is having one hell of a brawl right now between Krugman & other liberal commentators/economists and the Obama Economic team led by Summers & Geithner. I like it, and I think this dissent will help President Obama be more progressive.

Greider simply says: President Obama [is] "trapped between the governing elites who decide things and the people who are governed."

The way to get POTUS unstuck, is to protest loudly and very publicly. If we reject what's "good for Wall Street" as good for America, he can use that power to begin to break up the oligarchy that has bought and pocketed our politics. Indeed, the NYTimes says their new currency is political power (since they've already got most of the actual money currency). President Obama needs us in the streets -- loud & angry, and NOW. (April 3 & 4 - National March on Wall St.)

CEO's and executives must get scared, or they'll never change.

P.S. - Bill Moyers has been on an absolute tear lately. This is really in his wheelhouse. Each of his shows for the past 4 weeks has been incredibly enlightening on the anger that we're all feeling, without being angry itself. Here are links to the other programs with a quick synopsis:

1. "Robert Johnson, former managing director of Soros Fund Management and an expert in emerging markets, believes the government's approach -- which he calls "drip intravenous capital injection" -- wastes taxpayer money and won't solve the financial crisis."

2. Parker Palmer -- "Would it be possible to re-image depression [both individual clinical depression and the Depression in our economy] as the hand of a friend trying to press you down to ground on which it's safe to stand?"

3. Mike Davis -- "We need more protests. We need more noise in the street. At the end of the day, political parties tend to legislate what social movements and social voices have already achieved in the factories or the streets or in the civil rights demonstration."

Please do Recommend this post if you liked these links -- would love to make sure more people see these Bill Moyers interviews...

Quoted from the great "Agrarian Philosopher" Wendell Berry on NPR today. 

When I hear the stock market has fallen,
I say, "Long live gravity! Long live
stupidity, error and greed in the palaces
of fantasy capitalism!" I think
an economy should be based on thrift,
on taking care of things, not on theft,
usury, seduction, waste, and ruin.
My purpose is a language that can make us whole,
Though mortal, ignorant, and small.
The world is whole beyond human knowing.