Lack of care about our country

A brief memo, reported by the L.A. Times, circulated among Senate Republicans, outlines internal political strategy on the bailout. It says

Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 9:12 AM
To: Subject: Action Alert -- Auto Bailout

Today at noon, Senators Ensign, Shelby, Coburn and DeMint will hold a press conference in the Senate Radio/TV Gallery. They would appreciate our support through messaging and attending the press conference, if possible. The message they want us to deliver is:

1. This is the democrats first opportunity to payoff organized labor after the election. This is a precursor to card check and other items. Republicans should stand firm and take their first shot against organized labor, instead of taking their first blow from it.

2. This rush to judgment is the same thing that happened with the TARP. Members did not have an opportunity to read or digest the legislation and therefore could not understand the consequences of it. We should not rush to pass this because Detroit says the sky is falling.

The sooner you can have press releases and documents like this in the hands of members and the press, the better. Please contact me if you need additional information. Again, the hardest thing for the democrats to do is get 60 votes. If we can hold the Republicans, we can beat this.

Senate Republicans blocked passage of the bailout late Thursday night, over its insistence on an immediate union pay cut. I would say it shows how the Republicans now are putting politics, and the destruction of labor / unions over the continued health of our total economy. Seen on video, my conclusion this is a group of bitter older white men who have driven the Republican Party, and our country, to the brink of devastation.

(As anyone can tell, I have become very discontented with the Republicans and their lack of morality or their care about our country's survival.)

Suggested Readings

Here's a list of suggested readings for those who want to get an idea of what happened to bring us to this lousy place:

In MarketWatch by Paul B Farrell. http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/eleven-reasons-america-new-top/story.aspx?guid={D23E1901-728E-4A3C-99D1-7E80F74C3AE3}

Pam Martens How Wall Street Blew Itself Up. http://www.counterpunch.org/martens01212008.html

Henry Blodget Why Wall St Always Blows It. http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200812/blodget-wall-street

Peter Drier: The Mortgage Mess... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-dreier/the-mortgage-mess-and-the_b_93289.html

http://artnews.posterous.com/economic-meltdown-101-how-we-g

Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/2009/01/stiglitz200901

What are they thinking?

Because of their blocking the auto bailout bill, it would appear that the Republican GOP, which by its actions has pretty much written off New England and the Mid-Atlantic, has now ceded the Midwest. They used to consider Indiana as a given, Ohio a must, and Michigan as something they wanted to have. By their actions, now, all three are gone, along with Wisconsin and Minnesota. Some "big tent", right? I guess until a strong leader arises, sometime down the line, they will continue their contractive stance and try to discredit Obama and his government and will stick to local state principles against the general good.

Letter Sent To PowerLine

Dear Mr John H. Hinderaker , Scott W. Johnson , and Paul Mirengoff :

One of the problems the Republican Party (and Conservatism) faces is restoring peoples' faith. By this I mean the Republican Party supposedly stood for the principles of fiscal responsibility, minimum interference in individuals' lives, limited government (not the same as minimum interference in people's lives), prosperity and the restoration of morality in government. The Republican Party has failed on all of these accounts. It is easy to blame George W. Bush for this, but the Party went along with him for two terms without protest. This has brought us to the brink of disaster as a country.

Fiscal responsibility has been abandoned and our country's debt is the highest it's ever been. We see meddling in peoples' lives on a regular basis, including adopting the right-to-life position and the Proposition 8 ban on gay marriage. Limited government has been a joke since Reagan, with the current government being the largest ever. Prosperity is another joke with even the richest people I know wondering where the bottom is. As for morality in government, the Republicans certainly racked up a majority of the criminal and moral infringements in the last two terms. Not that the Democrats haven't had their faults.

Neil Gabler has written that the true Republican tradition is McCarthyism, scaring people, and he makes a good case of it. The concomitant of this is that, instead of criticizing everything the Democrats do, presenting positive believable programs would make the Republicans believable once more. Instead, from McCain to Palin, to your own blog, you harp on the negatives, nitpicking everything the Democrats do (the latest contretemps being what Obama said or didn't to the Governor of Illinois when it's obvious he wouldn't "pay to play", as caught on the quote from the wire that Obama was a "F-blanker." It's easy to criticize when you're not really doing deep thinking about this great country of ours; it's too easy to blame it all, and I mean everything wrong, on the Democrats and not assume any responsibility for the Republicans.

I urge you to abandon the McCarthy scare tactics, trying to besmirch the Democratic Party as it tries to fix our country, which is why they were voted in, because you ought to face it, by being negative you border on being self-destructive, and if you want to face more economic loss and more fiscal destruction of our country, just keep it up, forget about really helping, and find you're losing everybody but the ignorant and the truly angry.

I think Republican and Conservative principles, if truly enforced, can be a fine moral structure to run a country on; but you have to mean it, not just propagandize it; and you have to make it believable and workable.

Foreign Cars

At a recent gathering, three of us stood around discussing bailouts for the auto industry in Detroit.

One person, a dyed-in-the-wool Republican, blamed the unions for the current mess; the other two believed it was more complicated than that. But one of the people, inspired, looked around and said, "How many people in this room has an American car? How many of you bought an American car?"

Silence. Silence greeted him. Everyone, including the ditw-Republican, owned foreign cars, Japanese or German.

Yet all pretty much considered the idea of a bailout to be feasible. For the jobs, of course. For the economy.

Republicans want to destroy unions

The Republicans have been very focused on bringing down the unions. They will use any excuse to do so. For example, in this recent round, they blame the unions for the cost of medical insurance and pensions. As if the management of the automakers didn’t acquiesce and enable the unions. And isn’t it the job of the unions to get the best, the most, for their membership? Are the workers supposed to get only what management wants? At any rate, being surprised by all the attempts to break the unions is kinda naive. This has been going on a long time. The important thing is to separate out the facts from the BS and propaganda. A friend of mine, staunchly Republican, blames all of the problems the auto industry is facing on the unions and the health plan and pensions; when, actually, the German automakers, who have equally good plans for their workers, perhaps even better, seem to make a profit, perhaps because their government finances these plans. At any rate, why is anybody surprised at this Republican tactic? It seems to me this kind of naivete was rampant when the Democrats were the minority and people were wringing their hands at those awful Republicans doing such terrible things.

Second thoughts on "shadow government"

After letting the words used by Jeb Bush sink in, "shadow government" doesn't sit too well with me. It sounds vaguely threatening, like "You're shadowing me." It has an element of menace in it. It isn't openly an "opposition" government; no, nor is it concilatory; it's there to criticize. The consistent thing about guys like Jeb Bush, in line with the old Republican philosophy, is to be against something, not for it; to be in a position to scare people, not to advocate good positive things. Putting people and ideas down is the tack they have taken; witness McCain's whole campaign; witness Sarah's natural proclivities. So Jeb Bush starts off by surfacing and proposing that the Republicans start a "shadow government" to watch, and criticize, and follow what Obama's Administration does closely. What bothers me about this, deeply, I might add, is the fact that it is not being supportive in any way. No one is saying, if we want to survive, we have to work together, guys. No, the implication is that "they" (Democrats) are the enemy. And in this terrible time, when the country is literally falling apart, and everybody is unsettled, these isolated Republicans are settling in to be critical. As if they aren't losing their savings, too; as if they are exempt; as if, should the country really fail, they wouldn't be affected. Quite a blind spot. isn't it. They aren't even pretending to help, to support, to work with their counterparts to make things better for everybody, themselves included. How antedeluvian, how "old school", how traditional, how like McCarthy and all of the Republican demogogues, to stand back and continue criticizing the Democrats who are working very hard, very earnestly, to fix what went wrong with this country. So Jeb Bush is nothing more than another toxic Republican, joining in the long line of negative right-wing naysayers and destroyers, no better than Limbaugh and Hannity and O'Reilly. Pretty disgusting, I'd say. Stand on the sidelines and criticize while the Titanic goes down; criticize everything the crew and captain does. Disgusting, guys, absolutely disgusting.

We stood back and criticized, and watched them make mistakes, as well as successes. We criticized them for their mistakes, made fun of them, and trampled on them when we could. And when the wave came and engulfed us all, Republican and Democrat, Independent and Libertarian, it all became real and they were weakened, and we knew we had plenty to atone for. But it was too late. The damage had been done.

Jeb Bush Surfaces, Finally

At last. For sometime now I've been waiting for Jeb to surface and now he has with the wonderful catch phrase of setting up a "shadow government." Jeb, you may remember, was the popular Governor of Florida and the heir apparent before his brother beat him to the Presidency. Jeb was the smart brother. He wants to lead the opposition, of course. He's already denigrating Obama's victory by saying that OBama had a significant advantage because of his fundraising warchest; yet he's also saying in the next breath, so to speak, that the Republicans can't be “the old white-guy party,” and need to reach out, especially to Hispanics. He told NewsMax.com, “We have to actually be proposing solutions to what appear to be intractable problems as it relates to education, healthcare, infrastructure. Across the board there are ways that we can show that we are truly on the side of the people that are concerned about the future of the country, without abandoning our principles.” And what are those principles? Some of the Republican staples, such as lowering taxes, reforming education, and reform in general. It's only the beginning, folks, of a long and sustained campaign and it will be interesting to see him cross paths with Sara Palin in times to come. I still believe Jeb Bush is the man to watch.

Fear is the key

In today's L.A. Times, Neal Gabler has an article that analyzes exactly what "conservative" Republicans have been doing, tracing their strategy back to Senator McCarthy, not to Senator Goldwater, who in 1964 lost in one of the biggest landslides in American electoral history and wrested the party from its Eastern establishment wing.

According to Gabler, the myth tells how Nixon co-opted conservatism, talking like a conservative while governing like a moderate, disenchanting true believers. Ronald Reagan, next, embraced it wholeheartedly, becoming the patron saint of conservatism and making it the dominant ideology in the country, even though he didn't practice it in terms of fiscal responsibility or size of government. George W. Bush picked up Reagan's fallen standard and "conservatized" government even more thoroughly than Reagan had, cheering conservatives until his presidency came crashing down around him. That's how Gabler believes the mythology tells it.

Gabler's thesis is that the real connection is from Sen. Joe McCarthy, to Nixon to Bush and possibly now to Sarah Palin. McCarthy attacked alleged communists and the Democrats whom he accused of shielding them, as well as the centrist American establishment, Eastern intellectuals and the power class, many of whom were Republicans, including moderate ones. McCarthyism became a means to play on the anxieties of Americans, convincing them of danger and conspiracy even when they didn't exist, which he used to build power and support. George H.W. Bush used it to get himself elected, terrifying voters with Willie Horton (and denigrating Dukakis as a commander-in-chief). His son used fear of 9/11 and convincing voters that John Kerry was a coward and a liar and would hand the nation over to terrorists, tried and true McCarthy tactics used very aggressively, and W. then used fear and stealth in pushing through totalitarian unconstitutional measures. The thread continued through McCain and then Palin, probably through Rove (who also coached W.), and I quote from Gabler, "That's why John McCain kept describing Barack Obama as some sort of alien and why Palin, taking a page right out of the McCarthy playbook, kept pushing Obama's relationship with onetime radical William Ayers."

What Gabler believes is that, because of this tradition, the Republican Party will continue to move rightward. Fear and blame; rabble-rousing; the Rush Limbaughs and Sean Hannitys and Bill O'Reillys; and now Palin. This is the direction the Party will take. Probably because it cannot be believed as the party of small government or fiscal responsibility or moral integrity; all credibility lost in the harsh reality of events; at least not until people forget and these actualities become memories and fade. It is a dangerous approach because it incites people to do violent things, especially as times become more stringent.

It is, I believe a shame, because some of the original precepts of fiscal responsibility and keeping government out of peoples' lives and moral integrity are well worth preserving. The Republican Party which stood for those princples was a Grand Old Party. But, I hate to say it, those are all too easily trumped by fear-mongering and, I might add, difficult to achieve. I would nominate the Republican Party today as the Party of Fear, as opposed to the Party of Solutions. And, if that's the direction it's going in, yes, it's a shame.

Bush didn't like to think; used his gut

On Chris Matthews' Show today, Matthews argued that one of the major differences between President Bush and President-elect Barack Obama is the fact that Obama is intellectually curious while Bush never liked to do "homework."  Bush made decisions based on "gut".

Everybody seems to forget that a President like Bush, who doesn't really like to think but only acts on "gut" feelings, was therefore easily manipulated by other, stronger people with real convictions (not that we agree with them) like Cheney and Rumsfeld. Bush was led around by the nose by Cheney and Rumsfeld and the neocons; he basically never questioned them; so they had a field day with him.

Bush also turned, like Circe, people who worked for his Administration and disagreed with his acts, into beasts or swine by playing on their ambition and loyalty: one example is the greatness that once was Powell and the smartness that once was Rice, as well as so many others now departed. So Bush was the figurehead and people behind him like Cheney and Rumsfeld called the shots, and the Republican Congress went along with it and destroyed their party, and the Democrats, fearing to look soft on terrorism, went along as well.

What a sorry mess was made of the whole thing. If Bush were to try to confront what he had wrought, he would probably be fit for a padded cell.  No way it could sink in.  He must still feel invulnerable; his Dad will bail him out as he always has if he runs into any trouble.

A Plan in the back pocket

I once did business with a number of General Motors divisions. This was some time ago. At one meeting, in Saginaw, I believe, I ran into a young man who was headed to executive status; he told me, proudly, that he was going to go to G.M. University. I blinked; I'd never heard of it. Afterwards, the more I thought about it, the more I began to realize how incestuous G.M. was when someone went to their university instead of being sent to Harvard, or M.I.T. or U.C.L.A. or Carnegie Mellon or any one of the major schools outside of the G.M. universe, so they could absorb new and different ideas about how G.M. should be run.

Alas, G.M. still seems to be caught in that incestuous, inwardly-looking mode. I would have thought, when they confronted that Congressional Committee recently, and they were asked for a "Plan", one of them might have reached in his back pocket, and pulled one out, and said, "Here it is. We've been working on it feverishly. Happy to share it with you. Any improvements or suggestions are welcome." But no, all these auto executives could do was slink off in shame and go back on their jets to the cocoon that they live in in Detroit.

Maybe they'll come up with something; maybe not. But I kind of wish they had had a Plan in their back pocket, happy that someone asked for what they had been working on so hard to make things right.

Foolish me.

Disgusted with Congress, Aren't You?

The stock market slips and falls and careens downhill, and the stories out of Congress (OK, in this case the Senate) are filled with indignation about how they broke their own rules applauding cconvicted felon ex-Senator Stevens and lauded him, like the tight, ineffective, incestuous, elitest club they are, while afterwards they leave and won't be back to even acknowledge the crisis in the downward spiral of stocks or to attempt to do something about it. No wonder they have such low rating.

"Do-Nothing" is a mild epithet for this pitiful group of Senators and Representatives. The media has no story about it; no indignation; only stories about their treatment of the Big Three Automakers. I, for one, am angry at how indifferent they all are, what a bunch of sheep they are, when it comes to the fundamentals of our economy. The stocks and mutual funds are part and parcel of most Americans' savings, their 401Ks, their IRAs, and the Congress walks out and doesn't even pay attention while Rome (in this case, the U.S.A.) burns.

For those who think government programs are ineffective

Why haven't I seen this mentioned anywhere?

Those Republicans, Conservatives, Libertarians who still believe in less government involvement and regulation need to be confronted with how stupid was their push for private Social Security Accounts. If that had happened, more than 55 million people would have lost, at a rough guess, 40% of their benefit payments or the entire Social Security Program would be at grave risk. This points out:

. That government programs, like Social Security, are always badly administered as contrasted with private investment accounts or IRAs

. Investing in the stock market pays huge dividends in comparison to the stupid, badly-run government-administered social programs

. The enormous funds that investment houses, like Bear Stearns (remember them?), would have earned would have sustained them through the current crises

. The resultant revolution by those over 65 would not have serious social consequences in our country.

(Of course I'm being sarcastic by listing these points here.)

But the point is well-taken and no respectable Republican, Conservative or Libertarian would dare to mention privatization of Social Security today. At least until we've all forgotten the trauma that has been on-going as the stock market has tanked and continues to do so. Or, for that matter, letting investment companies alone as good ole Phil Gramm and Rush Limbaugh recommend, without any regulation or over-sight.

Are the Republicans really that stupid?

Senator Chuck Hagel, obvious unfettered, lashed out at the Republican Party at a talk he gave at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies.

I happen to agree with two of his points.

The Republican Party has been led around by their noses by such so-called conservative windbags as Rush Limbaugh and by fear of criticizing the current Administration of Bush and Cheney, whose policies have been disastrous, not to mention such players as Karl Rove and Tom DeLay. So as long as these players continue to determine the direction the Republican Party takes, they will continue to go down the path to oblivion.

The other stupid thing the Republicans have been doing, in direct contravention of what the majority of Americans want, is to continue to criticize, grouse, complain and predict dire doom as a result of Obama and the Democrats taking over the reins of government. No reconciliation; no spirit of "We'll work together!"; just "doom and gloom" at what Obama will do. No offering, as Hagel points out, of solutions or alternatives to help lift our country out of the morass Bush and Cheney have created.

It seems there are very few intelligent, positive Republicans. They sound too much like angry old men, who don't know how to do anything except complain. I know I'm generalizing, but my starting point was Chuck Hagel, if you recall, and his blistering speech.

Obama's TV Interview

Saw Obama's TV interview on Sixty Minutes and was personally blown away by how calm, how relaxed, he seemed. I was joking that he must be on something. But, no, it's his style, and I find it reassuring, but, even more than that, I find it to be exactly what's called for in these upsetting, traumatizing, chaotic times. The guy sounds and acts normal, without the usual politicians' sloganeering and over-blown calls to emotionally tug at our heart-strings. He isn't trying to be relaxed; he is relaxed.

I guess my feeling is that Obama will attempt to assemble (I hate to use the words because that turned out to be such a disaster) the "best and the brightest" of the people out there. And, if they can't begin to right this ship that has been so thoroughly wrecked by Bush / Cheney & Co., then perhaps nobody can. Obama's refreshingly candid, relaxed yet disciplined attitude will trickle down to thoese chosen to work in his Administration, and we can all, Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Independents, Right- and Left-Wingers, hope for the best because that's what we have going for us.

Remember, Obama's reaching out to McCain, meeting with him, to talk about working together. No sniping or back-biting, just a joint mutual private conversation about how they can cooperate. Who can fault that at this early stage of the game? (I exempt the Right Wing Nuts like Limbaugh from this remark, and leave them to flounder and excorate anything that sounds like bi-partisanship.)

Response to Dick Cavett's "Wordsmith of Wasilla"

Cavett's piece in the NYTimes, complaining about Sarah Palin's pushy appearances on TV, is epitomized by this explanation of how she talks, "...frayed syntax, bungled grammar and run-on sentences that ramble on long after thought has given out..." He wonders at the people who praise her and find her refreshing and appealing.

I am reminded of the line from that wonderful radio show, "Many years ago, in the Orient, Lamont Cranston, the Shadow, learned how to cloud men's minds..." To paraphrase, "Many years ago, in Alaska, Sarah Palin, the Governor, learned how to cloud men's minds..."

She's like that person in the movie by Truffaut, The Wild Child. All she knows is controlled aggression. Her feedback loop, except for delivery of one-liners, has apparently been disabled and it doesn't seem that she is capable of learning anything subtle or even substantial.

But, I submit, what is striking about Sarah Palin, and frightening, is the relish with which she rouses the rabble. When people yell epithets at rallies, when they spew out such emotionally-charged words as "Kill!" and "Traitor!", she evokes the darkest, most base part of the American psyche. That is how she seems at times to be most energized, and it is what we all need to be mindful of, because, if the situation gets bad enough, it can happen here. Some of it already has.

Notable Quote

Something that caught my eye from The Huffington Post, a comment from biotechwoman:

If Republican Governors can offer solutions that WORK, as Palin says, where have they been for the past 8 years? Why is it that we have socialized the banks, insurance companies, and soon to be auto industry, under the Republican watch? Why has America committed war crimes under the Republican administration. And, why do the poorest, most uneducated and unhealthy people in the US, come from Republican states?

Consequences of our acts

According to the blog Pandagon, the manager of eatery El Coyote in Los Angeles is a Mormon who donated to “Yes on 8.” With a large gay clientele, the owner should not have been surprised when they decided to boycott the establishment.

I guess I believe that, if you are a good Mormon, and your Church asks you to support a bill that denies the marriage of gay couples, you need to be proud to follow their precepts. They are against the marriage of gays. They ask you to support them in that. Period. If you however do not believe in that, you tell your religion that. But you don’t complain if the gay people boycott your restaurant and hurt you financially, pretending that you didn’t do something they find offensive, because you did. You simply cannot have it both ways. Sorry.

The only way out, if you truly like the gays and their rights, is to disavow your Church on that particular issue. If they don’t like it, tough. It all boils down to who has power over you; do you have power over yourself or does your Church have power over you? That’s a decision you must make for yourself. You cannot evade the consequences of your acts. 

I mention this because it seems to me McCain has been guilty of this double standard, and he now has to face up to the consequences of his acts.  Pretending it was all fun and games is a favorite ploy.  Denial is another.  Sometimes evil is punished, sometimes it goes unnoticed.  But standing up tall for what you believe in is a real virtue.

The quote by  Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) really makes sense here:

"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;
  And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
  And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
  And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up." 

Letter to local editor

Dear Editor:
The Register's "Opinion" Page on Wednesday featured two columns ("How left will Obama go?" by David Boaz of the Cato Institute and "Obama and an intellectual renaissance" by Thomas Sowell), both of which are "downers."
By running these columns, The Register has begun to adopt the current Republican strategy of solving our national crisis by putting the new party in power down, criticizing the new government before it does anything, from not moving far left enough to lambasting intellectuals. Sowel, especially, who is now almost universally negative, needs to go.
What the Republicans and Conservatives need is a constructive, positive approach to preserve some credibility with the public - and this goes for the Libertarian viewpoint also - to lay out in
detail, point by point, a forward-looking program to show what can be done to improve our country. It is not enough to talk in hifalutin' terms about smaller government and minimal taxes and personal freedom because, frankly, Republicans and Conservatives haven't stood up for any of that.
Frankly, the negativity is getting tiresome.

Class Acts Abound

Everybody, for public consumption, is trying to be a class act. I find it amusing that Bush is so cordial to Obama when meeting with him at the White House, yet it is the right thing to do and we can admire it. McCain of course can't say one bad thing about Palin in his appearance tonight on the Jay Leno Show. The sniping comes from people who don't want to be named.
On the Republican side, it is suspect that no one wants to speak the truth and really look at what happened and, more importantly, why it happened. Blaming "headwinds" and "economic forces" is the easy way out right now, even for McCain. Bush, of course, wants to go out in style as a prelude to being remembered as a "great" President, even though he and Obama disagree on the most fundamental issues.
On the Democratic side, it is part of a planned strategy to not ruffle the feathers of anybody at this time. Lieberman is part of this strategy. Obama is not into playing the blame-game in any way, shape or form. What Obama apparently wants is to transition into the Office of the President with a minimum of infighting or trauma. He wants to keep things positive because he knows that, if they go south early on, he will have an even greater mess, and an even steeper uphill battle, on his hands. He has bigger fish to fry, once he gets in, and I believe he knows it.
Washing their dirty linen in public may be theraputic for the Republicans, but it could hurt and easily turn ugly. My prediction is that it will take place, sooner or later, as the factions grapple for the leadership of what remains of the GOP.
I suspect we're going to see more of this "We have work to do and we're rolling up our sleeves and doing it" attitude on Obama's part and, under his leadership, none of the public blaming or retribution, at least publicly. It might even be refreshing as people understand more of what he wants to accomplish.