From www.commondreams.org
Wal-Mart Defender To Direct Obama’s Economic Policy
"Just days after clinching the Democratic presidential nomination, Senator Obama is naming as his economic policy director an economist who has clashed with critics of Wal-Mart by defending the company as a boon to poor Americans."
------------
I can't say I'm surprised by this. We've known that Obama was being heavily funded by Wall Street and corporate America (see the Pam Martens articles
And we've known that the pattern of Democratic Party politics for the last twenty years is for the nominee to lie to the party voters during the primary season. Then they always swerve hard to the right as soon as they get the nomination never to return to the pseudo-progressive lines they used in the primaries.
And, what does it say for Obama's character that he only does this after he has the nomination sewn up? When he needs to talk to Democrats about the President he'll be he tries to sound progressive and chants 'change' like a mantra. Then as soon as he's got the nomination he reveals that his campaign's economic adviser is someone who's been promoting and defending Wal-Mart? Any Democrat should be insulted by this.
There's also been this strange meme where we were supposed to believe that Obama wasn't really the candidate he pretended to be when he makes awful anti-progressive speeches like the ones to the Cuban lobby in Miami or the AIPAC lobby in DC. There's been this bizarre notion that he's really a secret revolutionary whom we have to support on faith.
Well, I guess half of that was true. He wasn't the candidate he was pretending to be in the primaries. Instead he's much worse. The guy who's been defending Wal-mart now has charge of Obama's economic policies. That's Wal-mart, the company that hate unions and doesn't allow any employee organizing, the company that destroys locallly owned small businesses, the company that has helped destroy American manufacturing and good jobs by importing all the made-in-China crap.
Now Obama wants to tell us that what's good for Wal-mart is the 'change' we can expect?
BTW, does anyone notice that the Democrats just gave everyone a stirring choice between a former Wal-mart board member and someone who picks a Wal-mart ally as economic advisor? That's the Democrats idea of a debate. And they worked hard to kick everyone else off the stage.
Green Party of the USA
---------------------
Another article on Obama from today's news. This one about his recent speech to AIPAC. From www.counterpunch.org
Deadly Fallout From Obama's Groveling Before Israel Lobby, By JAMES G. ABOUREZK
"It was left to Barack Obama, a candidate who at one time brought a great deal of hope to many Americans, including this writer, to complete the round robin of pandering to AIPAC, first by wearing not only an American flag pin, but one conjoined with an Israeli flag pin as well. Obama’s nomination has improved America’s image around the world, with the realization that, “everyone has a chance in America,” as the saying used to go. But that is what makes his pandering so painful.
Obama declared Jerusalem indivisible, presumably for the Israelis only, in contrast to the United Nations’ holding that Jerusalem was, and is, an international city, belonging to neither side."
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Words from a founding father
“Nothing could be more irrational than to give the people power, and to withhold from them information without which power is abused. A people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with power which knowledge gives. A popular government without popular information or the means of acquiring it is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy, or perhaps both.”
James Madison
[1751-1836]
(From this page that a google found … http://www.naafoundation.org/pdf/Speaking_of_a_Free_Press.pdf )
---------
I wonder what Mr. Madison would have thought of today's corporate controlled press? About a press that is at best more concerned with profit than in providing citizens a means of acquiring popular information? Or that at worst is promoting the agenda of its corporate owners to the deliberate destruction of our democracy?
James Madison
[1751-1836]
(From this page that a google found … http://www.naafoundation.org/pdf/Speaking_of_a_Free_Press.pdf )
---------
I wonder what Mr. Madison would have thought of today's corporate controlled press? About a press that is at best more concerned with profit than in providing citizens a means of acquiring popular information? Or that at worst is promoting the agenda of its corporate owners to the deliberate destruction of our democracy?
Friday, June 06, 2008
Important Obama articles
For me, these are the most important articles about Obama.
Part 1
Obama's Money Cartel, by Pam Martens
Part 2
The Obama Bubble Agenda, by Pam Martens
One thing that always struck me about the Obama campaign was how it attracted money early, and especially Wall St money. The Bill Clinton Administration was very closely tied to Wall St. After the '92 election, 'its the economy stupid' and making the economy work for ordinary Americans went out the window fast. Robert Rubin came straight from Wall St and became first a key economic adviser and then Treasury Secretary. Add to this the fact that Hillary Clinton was NY's Senator, and you'd think that's where the Wall St money would go. Seeing Obama pull in lots of Wall Street money was always very surprising.
Part 1
Obama's Money Cartel, by Pam Martens
Part 2
The Obama Bubble Agenda, by Pam Martens
One thing that always struck me about the Obama campaign was how it attracted money early, and especially Wall St money. The Bill Clinton Administration was very closely tied to Wall St. After the '92 election, 'its the economy stupid' and making the economy work for ordinary Americans went out the window fast. Robert Rubin came straight from Wall St and became first a key economic adviser and then Treasury Secretary. Add to this the fact that Hillary Clinton was NY's Senator, and you'd think that's where the Wall St money would go. Seeing Obama pull in lots of Wall Street money was always very surprising.
Monday, June 02, 2008
Protection from a Pain Ray
Article from a physicist on how to defend against a pain ray.
Don't Bet Burned! By MANUEL GARCIA, Jr. courtesy of CounterPunch.org
"Fine, but how do you thwart it? The best protection is distance, just don't be the target! However, if one wishes to engage in a demonstration and be protected from this device, the best protection would be your own electromagnetic shielding or "Faraday cage." If you are within a conducting mesh (a Faraday cage), where the mesh openings are small with respect to the incident radiation, and with a ground wire that leads intercepted electromagnetic energy away from you, then you are safe. This remedy is not likely to be convenient, but then, perhaps creative talents can find effective refinements of this concept. A suit of armor with chains trailing from your ankles to leak currents into the ground may not be ideal protection. However, plastic shields with embedded meshing, even aluminum foil or aluminized mylar (shiny garbage bags?), behind which individuals could stand (huddle?, crouch?) might allow people to thwart the intent of the device. Once people understand the physics being used against them, they may be able to to fashion materials readily available to them into effective countermeasures; this requires some planning."
Don't Bet Burned! By MANUEL GARCIA, Jr. courtesy of CounterPunch.org
"Fine, but how do you thwart it? The best protection is distance, just don't be the target! However, if one wishes to engage in a demonstration and be protected from this device, the best protection would be your own electromagnetic shielding or "Faraday cage." If you are within a conducting mesh (a Faraday cage), where the mesh openings are small with respect to the incident radiation, and with a ground wire that leads intercepted electromagnetic energy away from you, then you are safe. This remedy is not likely to be convenient, but then, perhaps creative talents can find effective refinements of this concept. A suit of armor with chains trailing from your ankles to leak currents into the ground may not be ideal protection. However, plastic shields with embedded meshing, even aluminum foil or aluminized mylar (shiny garbage bags?), behind which individuals could stand (huddle?, crouch?) might allow people to thwart the intent of the device. Once people understand the physics being used against them, they may be able to to fashion materials readily available to them into effective countermeasures; this requires some planning."
Community
I was over at www.johnpilger.com today. After posting the story below, I decided to go have a look at what else he might have written recently. What I found was this article, Destroying the best of Britain.
Its an article about how the British government is closing lots of local post offices. And its an article about how such local post offices have long been the center of communities. Its an article on how the people who work there help their neighbors. So, despite the fact that this is an article about a local issue in a foreign land, it got me thinking a bit about community and profit.
The theory we are constantly bombarded with here in the US is that everything should be decided by the market. That everything must justify itself by paying for itself. That whenever possible government services should be privatized, and that the government should not provide a service that would compete with what a private company can offer.
Of course, I think that's just dead wrong. There are some things that simply can not have their value determined by the marketplace. And this notion of 'community' is one of these.
We know that community is vital for a healthy life. We either know this from reading academic studies, or we know it from having experienced it. Or maybe we know it from living in the modern American city where 'community' can be so hard to find.
There would seem to be a strong value in creating and building community. It leads to less stress, or at least people to talk to and be with to help relieve the stress we get from other parts of life. It leads to a safer place to live. It leads generally to higher property values. Has anyone ever noticed that all the 'communities' that the rightwingers refer to as the "People's Republic of ___________" all have very high property values?
As such, there are some decisions that should not be taken on the pure basis of profit and loss. The local post offices described by Mr. Pilger in this article would seem to be one. The notion of putting local libraries and community centers and recreation centers in the communities is another. These provide a place for people to come together. They provide a place for a 'community' to form and grow.
As such, these sorts of services can't be judged entirely by the monetary bottom line. They provide value to the society as a whole that doesn't show up on an accountant's ledger sheet. They are therefore well worth the investment even if the accountants complain that they are losing money.
Sometimes, one gets the impression that there's been a deliberate attempt to destroy 'community' in America. Maybe its just the free market gone wild. Maybe its just collateral damage from the drive to make a buck anywhere a buck can be made. But, sometimes you get the sense its something more. That the goal is to destroy 'community' itself.
Why? Because only from collective action can we stand and defend ourselves against the corporate predators that stalk our streets. Only by standing together can we defend our rights and our livlihoods. And, its 'community' where we learn to stand together. Its 'community' that forms the bonds that let us stand together. Its 'community' that teaches us that what happens to our neighbor is important to us, so its well worth it to go stand with your neighbor when they face trouble. Because you'll damn well want someone standing with you when you face trouble.
There seems to be a goal to make us all individuals. To make us all solitary people who see the world through our TV sets or through our computer screens as individuals and not as groups. There seems to be a goal to shatter all the bonds of family and friends and neighbors that tie us to others.
When we stand alone, we fell powerless. We know ther's nothing we can do. We can't stand against a corporation that cares only for its own profit. We can't stand against a government that does not represent us. Alone, we are powerless.
So much has been destroyed that sometimes it feels like its hard to find anything like this. That just means we need to find a way to rebuild 'community'. That's harder than just joining in on something that's already there. Its too bad that we've allowed it to be so battered and torn apart. But that just means we need to do more work to build it.
But it can be hard to know exactly how. I guess just go down to the street all alone and see if you can meet someone kind. :)
Its an article about how the British government is closing lots of local post offices. And its an article about how such local post offices have long been the center of communities. Its an article on how the people who work there help their neighbors. So, despite the fact that this is an article about a local issue in a foreign land, it got me thinking a bit about community and profit.
The theory we are constantly bombarded with here in the US is that everything should be decided by the market. That everything must justify itself by paying for itself. That whenever possible government services should be privatized, and that the government should not provide a service that would compete with what a private company can offer.
Of course, I think that's just dead wrong. There are some things that simply can not have their value determined by the marketplace. And this notion of 'community' is one of these.
We know that community is vital for a healthy life. We either know this from reading academic studies, or we know it from having experienced it. Or maybe we know it from living in the modern American city where 'community' can be so hard to find.
There would seem to be a strong value in creating and building community. It leads to less stress, or at least people to talk to and be with to help relieve the stress we get from other parts of life. It leads to a safer place to live. It leads generally to higher property values. Has anyone ever noticed that all the 'communities' that the rightwingers refer to as the "People's Republic of ___________" all have very high property values?
As such, there are some decisions that should not be taken on the pure basis of profit and loss. The local post offices described by Mr. Pilger in this article would seem to be one. The notion of putting local libraries and community centers and recreation centers in the communities is another. These provide a place for people to come together. They provide a place for a 'community' to form and grow.
As such, these sorts of services can't be judged entirely by the monetary bottom line. They provide value to the society as a whole that doesn't show up on an accountant's ledger sheet. They are therefore well worth the investment even if the accountants complain that they are losing money.
Sometimes, one gets the impression that there's been a deliberate attempt to destroy 'community' in America. Maybe its just the free market gone wild. Maybe its just collateral damage from the drive to make a buck anywhere a buck can be made. But, sometimes you get the sense its something more. That the goal is to destroy 'community' itself.
Why? Because only from collective action can we stand and defend ourselves against the corporate predators that stalk our streets. Only by standing together can we defend our rights and our livlihoods. And, its 'community' where we learn to stand together. Its 'community' that forms the bonds that let us stand together. Its 'community' that teaches us that what happens to our neighbor is important to us, so its well worth it to go stand with your neighbor when they face trouble. Because you'll damn well want someone standing with you when you face trouble.
There seems to be a goal to make us all individuals. To make us all solitary people who see the world through our TV sets or through our computer screens as individuals and not as groups. There seems to be a goal to shatter all the bonds of family and friends and neighbors that tie us to others.
When we stand alone, we fell powerless. We know ther's nothing we can do. We can't stand against a corporation that cares only for its own profit. We can't stand against a government that does not represent us. Alone, we are powerless.
So much has been destroyed that sometimes it feels like its hard to find anything like this. That just means we need to find a way to rebuild 'community'. That's harder than just joining in on something that's already there. Its too bad that we've allowed it to be so battered and torn apart. But that just means we need to do more work to build it.
But it can be hard to know exactly how. I guess just go down to the street all alone and see if you can meet someone kind. :)