The Forkes Report - NEWS and POLITICS

Maybe a Raffle, Mr. President!

nospam@example.com (Tim Forkes) — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 14:18:38 -0700

In December, one in ten privately owned homes is in foreclosure. That’s about eight million homes. Eight million times $380,000.00, the median price of homes in the U.S. … doing the math … WOW! That’s $3,040,000,000,000 in loans going bad. That’s $3.04 quadrillion if you’re wondering.

And Republicans in Congress are bitching about the one trillion-dollar stimulus package President-Elect Obama is proposing. After voting for a trillion dollars for their pals in the banking business.

So it breaks down like this: a trillion for their banking buddies — without any strings attached — but nothing, not even the paltry $25 billion, for the U.S. auto industry because they don’t like the union — the workers. Now, the Republicans want to deny any stimulus to average Americans who might be struggling under individual financial problems.

It really didn’t need to be restated here. The Republicans haven’t been pro-American, certainly not in my lifetime. They’ve been pro-business, which some say is pro-American because, in their fantasy world, business stimulates the economy.

Well, during the Bush Administration, when government was effectively controlled by the Republican Party, business was rewarded with removal of restrictions, regulations and of course enforcement of what few regulations remain, not to mention tax breaks like no private, individual taxpayer making under $250,000.00 per year saw, including tax breaks to companies who closed their U.S. operations, putting millions out of work, to open up sweat shops in foreign countries.

Not to mention the taxpayer financed auto plants opened for foreign carmakers in the states represented by the most vociferous opponents of the auto industry bailout.

That doesn’t sound pro-American to me, that’s downright UN[American. For the contemporary Republican Party, “patriotism” is defined by A) your party affiliation, B) how much of a screwing you’re willing to take so the wealthiest can accumulate more wealth and C) Are you willing to serve, or encourage your children to serve, in the Armed Forces so the Republicans can start their wars of convenience.

Of course “C” doesn’t apply to them, although a few have served and even one I dislike a lot, Duncan Hunter, has kids serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, so on that point, they not only talk the talk, they walk the walk.

There are a couple of Republicans who don’t fit that entire description of course. Senator Chuck Hagel comes to mind. Too bad he is retiring once this Congress is officially over. He served in the military as well.
•••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• ••••
Here’s an interesting opportunity, if you’re looking to buy a house on the cheap. You’d have to move to Maryland if you don’t live there already, if you’re buying it as a residence, as opposed to turning around and selling it.

A company is holding a raffle to give away a house. Buy-in is $50.00 per raffle ticket, buy as many as you want. Apparently, it’s an old historical home on the verge of going into foreclosure so the owners have decided to raise a little money buy holding a raffle. Actually, they want to raise about 2 million.

A brief description: it’s a 6000 square-foot custom home with 6 bedrooms, 4 ½ baths and 2 kitchens on a level, grassy 2 acre parcel just outside of Annapolis, MD, a short drive from Baltimore, MD and Washington, DC.

Over 21,000 entries have been paid, that’s … doing the math … that’s just over a million dollars and they would like to have another 29,000 entries.

“The winner will receive the home free of any mortgages or liens, and will not be required to pay any closing costs!” The web site says. But you’ll have to pay the taxes and depending on what the property is assessed at, that could be considerable.

The group holding the raffle is the We Care and Friends, a group dedicated to helping those in the Baltimore area addicted to alcohol and drugs. That’s a non-profit I could get behind.

Gotta wonder, if this works for them, will others try to raffle off their homes in similar fashion? These are crazy days we live in and I haven’t even mentioned Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich who just appointed Roland Burris, the former Illinois Attorney General, to take over Barack Obama’s vacated Senate seat.

Gotta hand it to the governor; appointing a well-respected African-American to fill the seat after the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, vowed he would not seat anyone appointed by Blagojevich.

The balls’s in your court, Harry … and let’s start fixing the economy already.

Given the Opportunity

nospam@example.com (Tim Forkes) — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 12:01:00 -0700

Monday, on ABC News, Vice President Dick Cheney admitted he authorized the use of torture against Al Qa’ida suspect, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Earth shattering. Just a week ago a Senate Armed Services Committee report confirmed that U.S. personnel used torture on detainees at Guantanamo Bay, putting former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in the crosshairs of who was responsible for authorizing it. Not just authorizing it, but crafting the plan on what tortures to use and how to use them.

What kind of sick and twisted people do we have running government? The whole point of declaring these people “enemy combatants,” instead of “prisoners of war,” was designed specifically to skirt the Geneva Conventions specifically so they could torture the detainees. In other words, these twisted motherfuckers knew, going into this — maybe had decided years before they even found themselves at the helm of government — that torture is okay and they were going to use it if given the opportunity.

The report, which came out December 11, said a panel of top officials crafted the plan after a series of meetings about the use of torture and on February 7, 2002 the president signed a “memo” officially authorizing the policy. The report also says that our current Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, participated in the meetings and signed off on the policy as well.

What does it do to our diplomatic integrity when we cite our own top diplomat as being in favor of torture? And now, the man sitting at the center of power — not the president, but the real power — admits he personally authorized the use of torture?

Obviously, Cheney, Rumsfeld and their PNAC brethren had torture in mind long before Al Qa’ida brought down the World Trade Center. These guys, who had once been on the inside of power with Presidents Reagan and Bush (41), had a vision of how America should carry itself in the world as the sole superpower and in 1997 they formally put that philosophy on paper.

Lucky for them, a dimwit from Texas, whose only goal in life at the time was to be president, whose only policy ambition if elected was to reform immigration, was at the top of the Republican ticket and their man, Dick Cheney, former Secretary of Defense, had put himself in the chair of the vice president.

With the philosophy and plan of the neo-con vision already crafted, Dick Cheney could implement it if elected. The dimwit from Texas relied on other people to do his job, making it a slam-dunk for their man Cheney to be the true power in the White House and then the Supreme Court, in December of 2000, gave them the White House.

Once that occurred, the abuse of power and the destruction of American values could begin.

Dick Cheney openly controlled energy policy. He held a series of secret meetings at the White House with energy industry executives whose names — to this day — were withheld from the public. Today, we find ourselves so dependent on foreign oil — and as a result, in hock to a variety of foreign nations, most notably China — we are on the verge of collapse.
 I remember in 2003-04 when Michael Moore’s movie, Fahrenheit 911 came out, he was rebuked from all sides for the “allegations” he made in the film. There were charges of lies, yet no one would ever pinpoint what were the lies — other than the lies the Bush Administration (and campaign) were telling, that Moore brought to light. The neo-cons so effectively marginalized Michael Moore that by the time the 2004 Democratic National Convention rolled around in August of that year, he was not welcome.
 Newspapers echoed the neo-con message, even the New York Times and the Washington Post derided Michael Moore. The filmmaker and his film had been, in essence, removed from the debate.
 Four years later, who’s been caught lying now?

The Bush Administration made torture official policy, one that includes forced nudity, painful stress positions, sleep deprivation, extreme temperatures and use of dogs and water boarding, what we thought of as criminal when we tried Japanese soldiers for war crimes after WWII because they used it on American fliers. Sound familiar?

Oh yeah, the Senate report said the abuse and torture at Abu Ghraib wasn’t the activity of “a few bad apples” as the Bush Administration claimed when the soldiers went on trial for those crimes. Instead, it was a policy created at the very highest levels of government, directed by those at the very highest levels of government, leading to the conclusion that it was all a part of the effort to create a “New American Century.”

Let’s not forget extraordinary rendition, the policy of capturing suspected enemies and secretly sending them to countries that have no qualms about torture, the C.I.A.’s own secret interrogation camps in countries formerly a part of the Soviet Union, Guantanamo Bay and of course Abu Ghraib Prison in Baghdad — all of that started with the PNAC members in control of government waiting for their “Pearl Harbor Moment.”

Well, welcome to the New American Century my fellow Americans! How do you like it now?

The Bush Administration has so diminished our standing in the world, no one could ever take us seriously, not with this bunch in power. General David Petraeus, the “hero” who saved Iraq, every Republican’s favorite general, said in 2007, “Our values and the laws governing warfare teach us to respect human dignity, maintain our integrity, and do what is right. Adherence to our values distinguishes us from our enemy.”

At this moment, we are not distinguished from our enemies; we do not have the moral high ground; we are not the shining beacon of truth, liberty, justice and decency we tell our school children. We are just another second rate power ruled by despots who have no regard for human life.

The saddest truth of all is this: in November 2004 nearly 51% of my fellow voters chose this crowd to run the country for a second term. What does it say about us, as a people, that we authorized the use of torture when we elected George W. Bush and Dick Cheney to serve another four years?

Just because the Senate report was released only a week ago doesn’t mean this wasn’t already public knowledge. No, we began to learn of it long before the election and the Administration was calling those who brought it to light “traitors” for betraying those who betrayed our values. Even today there are people who think torture of our enemies is okay.

Nope, Cheney, Bush, Rice, Rumsfeld, et. al, aren’t the only ones responsible, we as a Nation must accept our share of responsibility. We gave them the green light, after the fact in 2004, but nonetheless told the ones in power they had our permission. For that, we are responsible.

From Shoes to Sweet Caroline

nospam@example.com (Tim Forkes) — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 00:01:00 -0700

Is the funniest thing to happen to President Bush getting, not one, but two shoes thrown at him? My friend Lisa in Canada doesn’t think it’s funny, she thinks it’s horrifying and she doesn’t even like Bush — one of her many admirable qualities!

The year is winding down, Bush’s administration has left the building, all that remains is a cowering ghost, too afraid really to do anything. Not entirely true of course. He went to Iraq to say “farewell” to the troops, hence the two shoes thrown at his pie hole. Okay, he’s the worst president in U.S. history, but I gotta hand it to the guy, he’s pretty quick on his feet! He managed to duck both shoes and he shrugged it off as a sign of a free society — three cheers for our president!
 Oh shit! I’m giving Kudos to the President!

One great thing Bush has done is give some of that TARP money to the Big Three, undercutting Senator Bob Corker, whom the Financial Times praises for what they consider an even-handed treatment of the bailout. You gotta be shittin’ me! What he wants is the Big Three to declare bankruptcy so the union, the UAW, can be broken, the reason why he lays out conditions he knows UAW president Ron Gettelfinger — and the union — won’t accept.

Corker and his Republican confederates want the Big Three to dump the “legacy” benefits; i.e. the pension and pension benefits for Big Three retirees. They just don’t believe working people deserve to have something set aside for their retirement years.

As for the health benefits for retirees, they want the Big Three to stop paying those costs and yet, when it comes to entitlement programs like Medicare, which many seniors rely on for their health care — especially for pharmaceuticals — the Republicans say that has to be “fixed,” meaning, in Republican-speak, slashed at the very least, if not closed altogether.

Senator Bob Corker, the man who used a racist ad to win his Senate seat in 2006. At least he’s starting to get honest about it though. In the same Financial Times article Corker admitted it was a battle between union and non-union labor, hoping to make Detroit a non-union town. Bet if the union was giving Corker campaign contributions he wouldn’t be out front on this issue.

•••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• ••••
Caroline Kennedy: got drunk with the cousins one night and woke up the next day with a tattoo of a butterfly on her arm. There are many reasons to fear getting drunk — getting tattooed is one of them. For some.

I’d get more tats myself, but since they’ve become so … so … fashionable … it’s an expensive hobby. I have one: a Satanic looking goat head with the Sumerian symbol for Capricorn. Most of the time I tell people it is what it is, a symbol of my astrological sign, but when someone gets too religious on me, I tell them it’s a symbol of my devotion to Mephistopheles, the Prince of Darkness.

Don’t do it too often, but a religious woman on a bus in Fashion Valley asked me about the tattoo a few months back so I gave her the entire Mephistopheles Spiel. She wasn’t impressed, but she didn’t talk to me again for the rest of the bus trip either. The regret is, when she got on the bus, wearing nice shorts and a tank top, my first thought was to make her acquaintance and … err … do what men do …

Anyway, Caroline Kennedy wants to replace Hillary Clinton as New York’s Junior Senator. It’s about effin’ time Caroline! She’s universally admired … well, that is, except for the Clinton supporters who still harbor a grudge over the primaries. As we might recall, Caroline and her Uncle Ted most vociferously came out in support of Illinois’ Junior Senator.

No love lost between the Clintons and Kennedy clan, which is too bad. The two most popular names in the Democratic Party can’t get along.

Here’s the hypocrisy though. Those opposed to Caroline Kennedy getting the appointment point to her lack of experience in politics and the fact that she isn’t a native New Yorker. The same criticism people had of Hillary Clinton when she ran for the New York Senate seat in 2000.

Her experience: she’s a Constitutional Lawyer and even wrote a book on the subject, In Our Defense, said by many as one of the best on the subject. I’ve never read it but I’m about to order it. New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg said she is infinitely qualified due to all of the work — gratis for the most part — she has done to improve the New York City school system and Hizzoner, along with many of their peers, consider Caroline Kennedy an expert on the topic.

Not to mention all the other philanthropic boards and committees she’s either a part of or directs: this woman has a lot of leadership experience — just none of it directly as a legislator.

Of course, there are a few Republicans who think they have a chance of beating a Kennedy in the election in 2010, like New York Congressman Peter King. Good luck Pete! As Republicans go, you’re not such a bad fellow, but it’s doubtful you can beat a Kennedy — or even a Cuomo — in a statewide election for Senator. Not in New York anyway, which is second only to Massachusetts when it comes to adoring the Kennedys.

The peccadilloes aside, the Kennedy Family has been one of the shining examples of public service. Caroline herself, while, not in politics, has always put much of her time — and I would suspect money — into giving back to her community and country. That’s great experience for someone looking to become a senator.

Anti-Middle Class, Anti-American

nospam@example.com (Tim Forkes) — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 06:01:00 -0700

The Republicans, especially those in the South, have shown their true colors and — finally — the media is beginning to note them.

They are trying to bust a union and even more egregious, they have put the bottom line of foreign carmakers ahead of the health of this country and the middle class that supports the economy. For the congressional members in the states of Georgia, Kentucky, Alabama and Tennessee, it’s all about the taxpayer subsidized foreign auto factories in their states. And in 2009, taxpayers will be subsidizing 12 new foreign auto plants in those states.

Everyone — other than the Republicans in those states — admits that labor costs make up no more than 10% of the cost of American autos, so the problem isn’t labor costs. Every economist will tell you the problem is the lack of credit and the poor economy; people can’t get loans to buy new cars — or used ones for that matter.

But the Southern Republicans won’t let the facts get in the way of making money for themselves, especially when it comes to putting money in their campaign coffers. They use the lie that the employees of the Big 3 make over $70.00 an hour when the reality is, the wages of the union and non-union workers are fairly comparable.

What is it the Republicans don’t like about the Middle Class making a decent wage, having decent health care and a pension? That’s what the Republicans were demanding the union workers give up before they would agree to the $15 billion bailout.

Which isn’t exactly a bailout, these are “bridge loans” the automakers will be required to repay or be forced into Chapter 11 Bankruptcy, which, everyone agrees, will turn into a Chapter 7 Liquidation — the end of the U.S. auto industry, the backbone of American industry.

The lie the anti-Middle Class forces trot out to counter that is comparing the auto industry to the airline industry: “When the airlines declared bankruptcy, people still flew on their planes,” as if buying a plane ticket is the same as buying $30,000.00 automobile.

The Southern Republicans, especially those in the Senate, won’t give 15 billion dollars to the Detroit Big 3 automakers, but they’ll subsidize foreign carmakers in their states for billions of dollars. Isn’t that just a little un-American?

Blago ... Nice Name!

nospam@example.com (Tim Forkes) — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 00:01:00 -0700

Chicago politics … McCain almost got in trouble for his reference to it during the general election. He’s probably smiling right about now. Governor Rod Blagojevich was arrested and indicted for a variety of corruption charges, including an allegation he was trying to sell the recently vacated Senate seat once held by the president-elect.

On one hand, you have to admire the guy’s balls, the audacity of not just flauntingly, stupidly, trying to sell a Senate appointment almost openly, but daring the authorities, who have been investigating him for some time now, to record his conversations.

Well, the F.B.I. was recording his telephone conversations and well, they think they have a solid case. The F.B.I. and prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald. He’s the guy who prosecuted Scooter Libby in the Valerie Plame-Wilson case. And won.

Blagojevich is the man who took the governor’s mansion in Illinois after Republican George Ryan stepped down as governor—so he could serve his term in prison for being indicted and convicted — by Patrick Fitzgerald — for his own corruption. Ryan sold his office for political favors and money, most egregiously by letting truck drivers get licenses illegally. Ryan pleaded out and only got six years. He had been facing 99 years.

Blagojevich’s alleged crimes are far greater than Ryan’s. He’s looking at the possibility of spending the rest of his life behind bars and yet, ballsy mofo that he is, Blago, as the media is calling him, is defiantly thumbing his nose at not only the prosecutor, but all the Democrats calling for the governor to resign his office before he appoints the person to replace Barack Obama in the Senate. Blagojevich is a Democrat himself.

On the first hand, Blagojevich is just blatantly stupid — and possibly corrupt.

He’s innocent until proven guilty of course, but that isn’t making any difference to the anti-Obama crowd who see this as their first club with which to beat the incoming president. Already the new Chairman of the National Republican Party, Robert M. “Mike” Duncan has already come out demanding President-elect Obama tell everyone what he knew and when did he know it.

Mike Duncan is the same guy who has his party pushing the fantasy that the country collectively hasn’t moved to the left of where it once was when the Republicans controlled the federal government. The proof? Saxby Chambliss, the Senatorial candidate who equated triple amputee Vietnam veteran Max Cleland to terrorist Usama bin Laden, won the run-off election a few days ago against Democrat Jim Martin.

Mike, the Democrats are solidly in control of the Federal government, that pretty much means the country has moved at least to the left of center. But Ole’ Mike is the chairman of the party, he has to put a good spin on it for the party faithful. Duncan actually called the run-off election “the first race of the 2010 cycle.”

The rest of us call it a run-off election as a result of no Georgia Senatorial candidate gaining more than 50% of the vote during the general election on November 4.

Duncan said, “Given the President-elect's history of supporting and advising Gov. Blagojevich, he has a responsibility to speak out and fully address the issue.”

Obama did come out and condemn the charges and called for Blagojevich to resign, but that of course isn’t enough. The Republicans really won’t accept any answer as satisfactory, they want that club, just like the various clubs they used to pound President Bill Clinton for eight years.

Obama, for the record, had supported Blagojevich when Blago ran for re-election as governor in 2006 and that is the basis for tying Obama to Blago. Begs the question: Did Duncan and his fellow Republicans support former Senator and convicted felon Ted Stevens all those times Stevens ran for re-election?
 Here’s a funny tangent. Sean Hannity, the wagging tail of a dying dog, was claiming the Democrats were getting treatment not given Republicans. Hannity’s proof? The Democrats rushed to try and convict then Senator Stevens quickly to influence the election. Stevens was indicted and convicted in the space of about six months.
 The truth: Stevens, through his lawyer, asked for his trial to be “fast-tracked” so Stevens could exonerate himself before the election. Didn’t quite work out that way. The lead prosecutor, Brenda Morris, is a career prosecutor and really has no taint of political affiliation either way.

Although not a target of the government, Obama is and forever will be a target of the fringe Republicans. As will Congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr. He was actually mentioned in the indictment, although referred to as “senate candidate #5.” According to the indictment, Blagojevich claims an emissary from “Senate candidate #5” (Jackson) went to see the governor and offered Blago as much as a million dollars if Jackson were appointed.

Jackson came out and denied any such arrangement and went so far as to remind everyone that his meeting with the indicted governor on Monday (December 8th) was the first they had in over four years. But that won’t be enough for the Fringe Right that has hated everything and anything connected to the Rev. Jesse Jackson. They will be going after the junior Jackson with glee.

Think about it: with one corruption trial they can throw stones at two politicians they positively hate for four years, maybe eight! NewsMaxDotCom is already going after Obama. “What did he know and when did he know it!” The Republicans will be chanting that for the next … four years?

Man! We on the left had George Bush to kick around, but Dubya is the worst president in our history. He lied to us to start a war. He lied to us so he could wiretap U.S. citizens without warrant. He let the oil industry run wild with their “energy policy.” He authorized his subordinates to out a covert C.I.A spy. He ignored real intelligence that predicted the attacks on 9/11 because he and his then National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice, wanted to concentrate on the old Star Wars missile defense system first start by Reagan 27 years ago.

 But to his credit, Bush wants to bail out the Big Three, unlike his fellow Republicans.

Obama, on the other hand, has already shown us he takes the job seriously and actually wants to be president. It’s become apparent George W. Bush can hardly stand being in the White House. You might remember, after he was first given the 2000 election, Bush said he really couldn’t stand being in Washington, D.C. That should have been a clue.

So, let the Republicans throw stones, the panes in their glass house are already broken. Besides, Obama’s approval rating is now at 66%. The American people aren’t even listening to the Right at the moment.

Yeah, tell us again, Mike Duncan, how the American populace is still center-right. And I’m Carlotta Champagne’s boyfriend!

The Big Three Continued

nospam@example.com (Tim Forkes) — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 00:01:00 -0700

Well, the new sport in Washington and talk radio is to bash the management of the Detroit Big Three—as well as the United Autoworkers Union. And the bashers are doing it with such indignation!

Dylan Radigan on Morning Joe, MSNBC’s morning program, got puffed up and with all the “I’m smarter than you” bluster he could muster, told us definitively the answer to why the Big Three are in the position they are now: BAD MANAGEMENT!

Get rid the management of the Big Three! They are all bad!

Not once did Radigan mention the crisis with the financial institutions that have stopped giving credit to the consumers who buy the cars, didn’t mention the economy that has made the decision to buy cars more difficult even if there was credit available.

They did have UAW president Ron Gettelfinger on, and Joe Scarborough, a man I see as a closet liberal, asked the question I and may others have written about in previous weeks: “Isn’t this just code for busting the contracts?”

Joe was referring to the automakers being forced to file for chapter 11 bankruptcy, which would break the contracts with not only the UAW, but contracts with dealers and many of the Big Three’s vendors.

One of the arguments, used by the proponents of forcing the automakers into bankruptcy, is to compare the automakers to the airlines. They like to cite how people continued to fly on the major airlines after they had declared bankruptcy. But it’s apples and oranges. We don’t pay tens of thousands of dollars per flight as we do for automobiles.

If and when I buy my next automobile, it will be a big part of the decision whether or not the dealer and the automaker will be there to honor the warranty if and when repairs or maintenance are required.

People do fly on airlines when the companies file for bankruptcy, but they’re not likely to spend thousands of dollars on an automobile if the solvency of the automaker is in question. Recent polls bear this out.

One of the great hypocrisies in this debate though, comes from Alabama’s senators, Richard Shelby and Jeff Sessions, both Republicans. What a surprise. Both advocate forcing the Big Three into bankruptcy, Shelby even going so far as to call the Detroit automakers “dinosaurs” that ought to be extinct.

The hypocrisy, Alabama lured European and Japanese automakers to build plants there, based on the facilities and infrastructure being paid for with tax dollars! The truth is, this isn’t about throwing good money after bad, as the Republicans portray it, this is about busting the union, short and simple. It doesn’t matter that millions of people will be thrown into unemployment, what matters is rolling back the New Deal, as represented by unions and collective bargaining.

That’s just what we need right now, after a recent report from the Department of Labor which says over a half million people filed for unemployment in November. Economists called the disappearing jobs a “flash,” the worst mass lay-off in over three decades.

In the past years, nearly two million jobs have been lost and the number of people unemployed is over 10 million — and that’s not even counting the number of people who have given up on looking for a job. Economists predict that number will likely double before this depression bottoms out.

General Motors, part of the Big Three asking for government help, will lay off even more employees even if they get the money from Congress. And Republicans like Richard Shelby and Jeff Sessions think this is a good thing. Makes your head spin.

We are heading into another Great Depression, a time when, as Franklin D. Roosevelt proved, government can bring help and hope to the nation, and we have people who are absolutely content to let it happen. Not just let it happen, but hasten it along with more policies like the ones that helped get us here in the first place.

All through his administration, Roosevelt, or 32nd president, had people strongly opposing his policies to get America working again and today, there are those who are rewriting history to support the Republican push to end the New Deal once and for all, regardless of the consequences.

Obama won the election, but he will have a tough row to hoe, as Roosevelt did 75 years ago, trying to put America back to work. His opponents won’t even admit we are in a recession. It’s too bad Obama didn’t get a filibuster-proof Senate to work with, the job will be tough enough regardless.

Congress has a proposal for Detroit, far less than what the automakers are asking for, but it’s start. Republicans, including the president, are opposed to it. No surprise, although now, the Republicans close ranks? If it means union-busting and rolling back the New Deal, bygones can be bygones.

Democrats have stepped up to the plate, holding the automakers’ feet to the fire like they didn’t do for the financial institution bailout, the irony being, banks, like Bank of America, have closed their lines of credit forcing one Chicago company, Republic Windows and Doors, to close its doors, giving the employees just three days notice and hopefully avoiding the requirement to pay the employees vacation pay and other benefits. The employees are demonstrating.

President-Elect Obama expressed his support for the employees, so they have a glimmer of hope, but the closing of a company, building a “green” product — vinyl windows and doors — is just one more in a long list of business failures that will continue for some time in this current recession.

Don’t bet on the Republicans going along with the Democratic plan for helping the U.S. automakers, they’re willing to break the back of the Middle Class in their quest to end the UAW.

Remember when the Republicans were the ones thought to be so pro-American? I never believed it, but they won enough elections on that lie, but here they are, ready and willing to let the cornerstone of the U.S. industrial base fail, willing to let the country fall deeper into a depression, ceding the automobile industry to America’s foreign competitors. I’m betting neither Richard Shelby nor Jeff Sessions drive American automobiles. Real Americans, those two.

•••• •••• •••• •••• •••• ••••
Yesterday, December 8, marked the day, 28 years ago, when John Lennon was gunned down by Mark Chapman. One of the sad chapters in American history. I suggest, we celebrate his life and music.

A Bridge to Detroit

nospam@example.com (Tim Forkes) — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:01:00 -0700

For the better part of the morning the Senate hearings on the Big Three Bridge Loan, which has now grown from 25 billion to 34 billion, has been glued on the two TV’s in my sight lines. Got it on MSNBC and C-SPAN. And this is a farce of great proportions.

The first observation, and it’s so clear even the talking heads had to comment on it, when the financial sector was collapsing and companies like Lehman Brothers were coming for over four times the amount the entire auto industry is asking for, they didn’t have to beg, weren’t turned away and weren’t asked if they would sell their private jets. The people who testified before the Senate didn’t have to ride to Washington in a convoy of hybrid vehicles.

Unlike the hearings for the automakers, when the financial crisis was being debated in Congress three months ago, members of the Bush Administration came before Congress to convince that body foisting a trillion dollars — that’s $1,000,000,000,0000 — into their coffers was the right thing to do. Ben Bernanke and Hank Paulson lobbied passionately for it and when the House of Representatives rejected the plan, Bernanke and Paulson came back and lobbied even more passionately.

Not so with the Big Three automakers.

And the financial companies, who don’t create anything in America, in fact, they don’t create wealth, other than to move it from one pocket to another, weren’t subject to the same scrutiny as the Big Three automakers and now, the UAW. This is the farce. Three companies, that directly and indirectly, support the jobs of over three million people in this country and actually manufacture tangible goods, are subject to a public flogging no business has had to tolerate when asking the federal government for help.

It’s a double standard that chills the soul because it punishes the middle class. What’s the difference? There are many, but they don’t really speak to the financial problems. The big difference — the only difference that Republicans are concerned with — is the influence of the United Autoworkers Union, the UAW.

One of the strongest, most influential unions in America, the UAW almost always supports Democrats in national elections and this angers the Republican Party. If there were no unions involved, or at least not the UAW, this hearing would not be taking place and the Big Three would have received the original 25 billion when they first asked for it.

Republicans won’t admit it though, there are millions of UAW members spread across the United States, but they would like nothing better than to see the Big Three go into Chapter 11 bankruptcy for the simple reason that if they did, the labor contracts with the union could be abrogated, broken and if that took place, it would diffuse the power of the UAW, if not dissolve the union altogether.

That’s why opponents of the Big Three Bridge Loan keep spouting the lie that the average UAW worker has an average salary of $70 per hour or higher, depending on which liar is selling the lie. The average salary, with benefits included, is actually about half that amount.

Senator Bob Corker, Republican from Tennessee, brought it up in the hearings. Corker specifically brought up cutting out the benefits UAW members enjoy. Corker doesn’t say, “Let’s get rid of the union,” he asked UAW President Ron Gettelfinger would he cut 50% of the benefits the people he represents receive.

Fifty-per cent. Corker really wasn’t too concerned with the testimony of the companies themselves; in fact he praised two of them, Robert Nardelli of Chrysler and Alan Mulally of Ford, for being “honest brokers.” Then he ripped into the union representative.

The Right likes to call the benefits “legacy costs,” as in benefits to people who no longer work for the automakers — retirees. Here’s the skinny on pension benefits and why the call for the automakers to eliminate them is bullshit. When the contracts that created the pensions were first drawn up and agreed upon, the automakers were supposed to be matching the employee contributions as the employee was making the contributions. So, when (fictional) Bob Smith put in his 50 bucks, Big Three Auto Company matched it with their contribution at the same time.

As it happens, when (fictional) Bob Smith and his fellow employees were making their contributions to their pensions — that they earned — the automakers were … err … putting off their contributions for another day. Well, now that day, today, is here and they are in Washington, cap in hand, asking for handouts.

Kudos to the CEO’s of the Big Three though for not blaming the current crisis on the union or “legacy costs.” No, squarely, they put this current crisis on the fact that people stopped buying cars once the credit crisis hit. Their sales are down over 30% from the same time last year — General Motors is down 45% — due, not because employees are getting health care and pension benefits, but because the economy has gone south and car buyers cannot get car loans. That’s why the Big Three are in trouble and nearly every economist has said as much, including a rather influential man by the name of Dr. Mark Zandi.

He gave no kudos to the Big Three, but did say that A) not giving the U.S. automakers the loans would spell disaster; B) the European and Asian nations are bailing out their automakers; C) the problem isn’t “legacy costs” or even the CEO’s flying to Washington in private jets: it’s the economy.
 I’ll give Chrysler Chairman Robert Nardelli kudos though. He went on Hardball With Chris Matthews and said unequivocally labor costs were not the problem, not for current employees or “legacy costs.”

Senator Bob Casey, Democrat from Pennsylvania, finally told, on the record, what this hearing was all about for the Republican Party, the dissolution of the United Autoworkers Union. Casey brought up the 150,000 auto workers who have already lost their jobs in the past eight years, reminded everyone the union members had already made many concessions in the past eight years and reminded everyone the financial industry wasn’t subjected to the same number of questions and scrutiny when it was before Congress asking for a bailout.

More importantly, Casey pointed out it was a lie that the average union auto worker made $70-plus per hour.

Senator Jon Tester, the farmer from Montana, took Casey’s indignation even further, ripping the financial institutions that took the hundreds of billions of dollars, meant to shore up the nation’s lenders, and used that money to buy up other financial institutions and making it even more difficult for anyone to get a loan, calling the leaders of the financial institutions, “those birds.”

Gives me a smile to see at least two Democrats get up and tell it like it is: It’s a joke!

And I’ll just leave it right there, despite all that could still be said on the subject. Bottom line, the middle class — the working class, the people who don’t wear ties to work everyday — are being told, by the Republicans, they need to take it on the chin — again.

From Nixon to Bush

nospam@example.com (Tim Forkes) — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 00:01:00 -0700

You know what I would like to see on TV again? The David Frost interview with Richard Nixon, some of the most compelling television of my lifetime. Frost’s talk show had been cancelled and he seemed like the most unlikely of people to interview Nixon, the most infamous person of the day.

Some three years earlier Nixon resigned the presidency in disgrace to avoid the coming impeachment over his role in the cover-up of the Watergate break-in.

Nine months before he resigned in August 1974, Nixon sat down with editors from the Associated Press to declare, “People have got to know whether or not their president is a crook. Well, I’m not a crook.”

There were allegations, dug up during the Watergate hearings, that Nixon had received money from the dairy lobby for raising the price supports on milk. He vigorously denied it, telling the editors key Democrats in Congress had forced him to raise the price supports, that it was their doing, not his.

Nixon never wanted to accept blame for Watergate; in fact, he didn’t want to admit anything immoral or even illegal had occurred. What had taken place was for the good of the country, for national security: the bugging, the surveillance, the secrecy.

Tellingly, after winning a landslide election against Senator George McGovern in 1972, Nixon had his Chief of Staff, H.R. Haldeman, ask all of his cabinet for their resignations. Nixon was angry for what he considered their complicity with the enemy and the enemy was just about everyone. In this case, it was the press (of course) and the “East Coast Ivy League Elite.”

The central force of Nixon’s personality, at least his public, political side, was paranoia. It was a bitterness that burned like phosphorous and it eventually torched his presidency. The Nixon White House was an embattled outpost, besieged not only from all sides, but from traitorous people on the inside as well, like members of his cabinet who had the temerity to attend social functions with members of that unholy alliance known as the Ivy League.

Most people who remember the Nixon-Frost interview think the landmark moment came when Nixon admitted he had let down the country. It was, in fact, as close as Nixon ever got, before or since, to an apology for Watergate and everything that happened as a result.

But what I found even more of a revelation — a shocking disclosure — was that Nixon believed that no matter the law, if the president broke that law, it didn’t apply to the president because the president is above the law. “Well, when the President does it, that means that it’s not illegal.”
 Sound familiar in today’s White House? How many times has President Bush been given a pass and now, how many of those once in his inner circle of aids are facing the possibility of jail for allegedly breaking the law?

Wow. The framers of the Constitution had constructed that legal document to ensure no one was above the law and yet, this man, whom everyone agrees was an astute, highly intelligent individual, decided he was not subject to the laws of our nation.

There’s some relevance in the coming film, Nixon-Frost and its subject, to the current administration, the most secretive since Nixon and maybe even more so than the Nixon White House. Seven and a half years later we still don’t know who attended Cheney’s secret energy conclave to decide the still secret energy policy for the United States.

It’s irrelevant now, considering how events have unfolded in the past two years, but we do know the big oil companies have had record profits for years now, the biggest being Exxon. The disaster of the Exxon Valdez didn’t hurt the business a bit. Obliterated an entire coastline for hundreds of miles, killing off wildlife of hundreds of species, but for Exxon, just a forgotten blip on an unneeded radar.
 They had a scapegoat for that anyway, Captain Joseph Hazelwood.

Then there was the degradation of the Justice Department, from one that safeguarded the laws of the land, to one that bent the rules to make the Justice Department just another political arm of Bush’s White House. Nine U.S. Attorneys General were fired without cause in 2006, all of whom were caught up in White House disfavor for not going after political cases, like alleged campaign fraud that could have benefited Republican candidates friendly with the president.

Or, in the case of Carol Lam, the U.S. Attorney General in San Diego, for going after and convicting a Bush Congressional ally, Randy “Duke” Cunningham. The prototype Top Gun ace who became the inspiration for the Tom Cruise classic, Top Gun.

Well, San Diego County Congressman Daryl Issa said it had nothing to do with Lam’s investigation of Cunningham and retiring Congressman Duncan Hunter, but because Lam wasn’t prosecuting enough illegal immigration cases. Huh? And Issa said it with a straight face.

But according to Adele Fasano, San Diego director of field operations for U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Lam’s office was instrumental in putting more smugglers of illegal aliens behind bars, putting violent immigrants behind bars and reducing the crime rate in Southern California.

So far, no one in the Bush White House, or any official from the Alberto Gonzalez Justice Department, has stepped forward to tell us why Lam was asked to resign from her position, a polite way of getting fired.

Just over two months ago Attorney General Michael Mukasey appointed Nora Dannehy to investigate the firings after a Justice Department investigation found illegalities in the removals of the nine U.S. attorneys.

Earlier this week Dannehy announced she would be going forward with the investigation and would be demanding documents held and written by the principles, including Karl Rove, Harriet Myers and Alberto Gonzalez himself. And that could lead to depositions from them and others involved.
 Maybe we’ll get to see Monica Goodling again, the cute little blonde graduate of the Liberty University Law School. She was instrumental in the affair.

The Senate Judiciary Committee has warned Bush against any pardons of those involved, saying it would confirm that illegal actions had taken place in the firing of the nine prosecutors — all of whom had been appointed by President Bush in the first place.

Yeah, this is the right time for the Ron Howard film, Nixon-Frost, it will shed a lot of light on the abuse of power and, hopefully, prove no one, including the president is above the law.

And maybe, just maybe, it will spur Bush to take some responsibility for all the criminal activity that has occurred on his watch.

•••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• ••••
Has President Bush checked out? This just in: it was reported today that President-Elect Obama is now receiving more national security briefings than the president. That’s a good thing, isn’t it? I’m kinda conflicted; isn’t the Commander-in-Chief supposed to be — required to be — the Commander-in-Chief until the end of his term? The implications are horrifying.

Checked Out-2

nospam@example.com (Tim Forkes) — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 00:01:00 -0700

Yesterday was meant for a commentary on the Bush interview with Charlie Gibson, the first, we found out, of what the president called a series of farewell interviews. But I got side-tracked with tangents.

Bush started his “farewell tour” with Gibson no doubt because Charlie just doesn’t have that hard nose attitude of the other nightly news anchors or any of the real tough bastards found on CNN or MSNBC. Got that impression from the interviews, although Gibson didn’t lob softball questions; he just doesn’t have the knack for follow-up questions.

On the question of why he started his war in Iraq, Bush completely evaded the question and frankly, Gibson didn’t really ask, leaving wiggle room for Bush to pull out the long since discredited reason of WMD. Even on that point, Bush dithered, calling it a “do over” he couldn’t do over.

It was boggling when Gibson asked the president that if the intelligence had been right, would he have still started the war. Bush, thinking that “right” meant WMD had been found, said “yes.” Gibson, taken aback a bit, had to clarify the question, “right” meaning, had the pre-war intelligence said there wasn’t any WMD, would the president have started the war. That’s when we got the child-like “do over” answer.

The real answer, the real question of course, had to do with the manufactured intelligence to start the war. There was intelligence pointing to WMD, and quite a bit more indicating there weren’t any Weapons of Mass Destruction. Vice President Dick Cheney cherry-picked the intelligence he needed to make his case to start the war.

That’s the question that wasn’t asked: was this all orchestrated by Cheney and Bush just the puppet? Actually, I doubt any interviewer would ask the president that question directly or even in a softer way. Through the first six years of his presidency, Bush prided himself on being the guy in charge, or at least having the perception he was in charge — the “decider.” Strangely, that macho bravado was absent during the interview and the president looked weary.

Yet Bush’s answer gets to an even deeper revelation about the prewar intelligence, something many have written about in the six years since Bush first said he was going to start his war, bullied Congress (cowards as the Democrats were) into giving him the authorization to start the war: the decision was made to invade Iraq and all they were looking for was a reason. WMD was the reason, but they, Cheney and his PNAC brethren, had to provide evidence to support their plans.

When asked the question, Bush had it in his mind that the “right” intelligence was defined as supporting the assertion Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, instead of what did the intelligence suggest and where did it lead. For Bush, invading Iraq was the “right” thing to do and evidence — the intelligence — supporting that decision was the only “right” intelligence.

If anyone still wants to give Bush the benefit of the doubt about whether or not he was determined to start war with Iraq regardless of the consequences, that reply to Gibson should be an answer.

But really, many of us have known that for six years. Bush’s revelations now just confirm what we’ve been trying to tell the country all these years. Bush couldn’t have started his war without the consent of the people though and in 2002-03, while the ruins of the World Trade Center still smoldered in our hearts and memories, all Bush, Cheney and their cohorts had to do was present the proof and browbeat those who opposed the war with the club of public opinion and at the time, President Bush had an 80% approval rating.
 Even today, noted Bush apologist Christopher Hitchens contends that there was an operational connection between Saddam Hussein’s government and Al Qa’ida — based solely on Abu Musab al-Zarqawi being in Iraq before the war started — and that the threat of WMD was very real. Boggles the mind.
 Zarqawi didn’t join Al Qa’ida until 2004, after he had proven his skill at killing and organizing killers.

Nearly 700 words into this and only one small question of that interview analyzed, but it is typical of Bush, who thinks in small circles, never more than one and never with opposing views. His is a world of “group-think,” where everyone has to be on the same, pre-determined page so that he, the president, doesn’t have to do too much, doesn’t have to think too much — doesn’t have to do the math.

In his political career, that really only started recently when he was sworn in as governor of Texas in 1995 (he had an unsuccessful run for Congress in the 1970’s), Bush has had a distain for government, an entity he saw as hindering his business and the business of his friends and family in the oil industry. He never had any idea of how to govern, let alone what to do when given the reins of government, he only wanted to be the guy in charge, to show his daddy he could not only do what daddy did, but do it better, which meant winning a second term.

Bush never had a legislative agenda, no real political or social philosophy, other than to get elected president. He left everything up to others, from the election, to winning the court decisions, to creating a legislative agenda — that was provided by the Project for a New American Century and all they needed was their “Pearl Harbor Moment.”

Once in the Oval Office, all Bush really wanted to do was look like a president, the guy in charge and as long as he had capable people, all on the same page, he just had to look presidential. How hard could it be?

September 11, 2001 started the process of proving just how hard it would be. Now, Bush had to make war decisions and as he pointed out in the Charlie Gibson interviews, he was unprepared for that most solemn and heavy of responsibilities. In other words, Bush said he was not prepared to be the Commander-in-Chief.

In December 2000 the Supreme Court put into the White House a man who knew he was not prepared to be the leader of the Free World, was not prepared to be president. For eight years this nation — and the world — has suffered for that decision. The saddest part, the worst Bush had to say for himself in that interview: none of it was his fault, he was just a victim of circumstance.

Makes you wonder: did he ever check in?

Early Check Out

nospam@example.com (Tim Forkes) — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 06:01:00 -0700

Does anyone remember George W. Bush? He’s the current president. Hard to remember that as the Treasury Secretary, the Chairman of the Fed and the incoming administration-in-waiting are making all the decisions and the focus is on them, not the current occupant of the White House.

Next year, no doubt, when Merriam-Webster’s publishes their latest dictionary, there will be a new picture along side the definition of “lame duck.” And it won’t be the Aflak character with a broken foot.
 Well, it could be, anything’s possible.

Other than give his okay for the $700 billion bailout of the financial sector, President has done very little, if anything, relating to his job in the past 11 months. Oh, last Wednesday he pardoned a couple turkeys, but other than that, Bush has been remarkably silent. Some might actually applaud this, but what does it say about a president who at the very least isn’t trying to buoy the spirits of the nation with words of encouragement.

Three months ago there was some serious speculation about what Bush might do, in the form of Executive Orders, to undermine an Obama presidency. Yeah, three months ago we were already expecting an Obama presidency, not so much McCain.

Then, just a couple weeks ago, we found out Bush had “checked out,” according to anonymous White House sources and was leaving the trouble of governing to his staff. Makes your head spin just thinking of it. Hell, with the automatic signature machine, Bush doesn’t even have to sign anything, just have his staff run whatever it is through the machine and voila! A new policy is set to take effect!

On the other hand, with 80% of the populace convinced you are the worst president in history, why not just say, “fuck it” and let someone else take care of business? Ya have that big house with the nice yard for the dogs to run around in, a staff attuned to satisfy your every whim … damn, I’d be a most immoral president … and a kitchen staffed with Michelin three star chefs who like nothing better than to show off their skills without taking any public bows. Damn! I could have … I’m getting dizzy just fantasizing about it!
 Ever wonder: does the White House kitchen staff ever cook on a bunch of Webers for an outdoor barbeque? Throw a hundred pounds of rib eyes on, with about 20 pounds of chicken, maybe a couple lobster tails for every attendee to the soirée, not to mention skewers of some tasty veggies, finished off with toasted marshmallows on sticks.
 And some Ben and Jerry’s Cherry Garcia.
 We know he had barbeque when he visited Germany in the summer of 2006.

Yeah, if I was not thought of in at least lukewarm terms by the populace, I’d check out too and leave the heavy lifting to the fuckin’ aids who got me into this mess — except for Cheney. “He started all this and who knows what he could do if given unfettered power. We’ve already been down that road and now look where we are — being compared to Herbert Hoover! Laura, who’s Herbert Hoover?”

According to Congressional records, the lame duck administration has over 100 of these “midnight” orders set to go, some have already been put in motion. Like the decision to open up public land in Utah to energy exploration — within spitting distance of three very sensitive national parks: Canyonlands, Arches and Dinosaur National Monument. Places like Desolation Canyon and Nine Mile Canyon that have some of the most spectacular vistas in America as well as ancient petroglyphs.

The Bureau of Land Management put the tracts of land up for auction on December 19, just 17 days away now, bypassing the usual review given by the Park Service. The problem with this decision is that if any of the tracts are sold, neither the incoming president nor Congress will be in a position to reverse the sales.

Utah was chosen because the populace, or at least their elected representatives, have always looked for ways to exploit whatever natural resources might be in the state and in 1999, when President Clinton set aside about three million acres as being wilderness, they got a little upset. Lucky for those who opposed it, Bush reversed that Clinton regulation in 2003. They had a war to start so what better time to hide it.

The question is, can Congress or the incoming president reverse some of the most damaging Bush policies? Back when Clinton was president, the Republican majority in Congress passed a law that would give Congress the authority to reverse any midnight proposals, primarily so they could reverse Clinton’s policies that put new rules in place to force employers to mitigate repetitive motion injuries. Wouldn’t it be funny if it were used to reverse a Republican’s midnight regulations!

So, Bush has checked out, his aids are pushing through executive orders quickly enough so they can’t be reversed in the 60 day time period authorized in the Congressional Review Act … and Bush gave an interview to Charlie Gibson on ABC News. What does the do-nothing lame duck president regret about his eight years? That the intelligence on Saddam Hussein’s WMD was wrong. Would he go to war anyway if he knew Hussein didn’t have WMD? He wouldn’t say, it’s a “do-over” he can’t do over.

We as a nation are so ready to be done with Dubya. Just wish his aids would check out too; they can still do a lot of damage.

The Team

nospam@example.com (Tim Forkes) — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 12:01:00 -0700

President-Elect Obama has officially announced his foreign policy and national security team. We knew all of them already, since the week of the election, but now it’s official.

Topping the list, New York’s junior senator, presidential candidate and former First Lady, Hillary Rodham Clinton. What’s the biggest news about Clinton? Not so much the differences of opinions between Obama and Clinton, no, the big news is all the concessions her husband, President Bill Clinton made to pave the way for his wife to be Secretary of State.

Bill had to give up the list of donors to his foundation and library! Not to mention, when Clinton speaks (he’s one of the highest paid speakers on the speaking circuit) he has to submit his speeches to the State Department, divulge who is donating money and how much and what he will be saying in his speech.

See why I never got married! The things a man has to do to please his wife! Bill said of his wife, “She is the right person for the job of helping to restore America's image abroad, end the war in Iraq, advance peace and increase our security, by building a future for our children with more partners and fewer adversaries, one of shared responsibilities and opportunities.”
 Okay, I gotta wonder … naah, everyone knows Bill’s predilections.

It was clear throughout the primary elections Obama and Senator Clinton were not that far apart on foreign policy, although she hammered the president-elect when he said it would be appropriate to invade Pakistan to go after Al Qa’ida. Clinton actually agrees with that in principle, but she always qualifies it by saying it would be appropriate if the Pakistanis didn’t go after Al Qa’ida — which is pretty much the case today.

Senator Clinton was quite gracious though, the rancor of the campaign long past and said she was proud to join the Obama team. Well, if not the Vice presidency, Secretary of State is pretty good too! She will be the third woman to have the post and the first “First Lady” to do so.

During the Clinton Administration it was no secret Hillary was as much a policy wonk as her hubby and for many of us, we thought she was the policy guru in the marriage. Bill may be a great speaker and Rhodes Scholar, but Hillary Clinton was the one who did the homework, filled in the details. She knows how to get the job done.

Except for that horrible failure with health care. That was a disaster.

The other major post in foreign policy: Secretary of Defense. Robert Gates agreed to stay on to shepherd the war in Iraq to a close. He’s been there for two years, appointed shortly after Donald Rumsfeld was run out of the job.

Gates has often said he wants to shut down the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay and with Obama as president, we will no doubt see that happen before the summer, 2009 is over. A new agreement with Iraq has been approved allowing U.S. troops to stay in Iraq through 2011. That gives the U.S. enough time for Obama to adhere to his withdrawal policy — within 16 months — and allows wiggle room if it takes a little more time.

Gates had been a member of that Iraq Advisory Group Bush appointed shortly after the tide of Iraq was becoming clear to the public. It was a failure, bore no resemblance to the bromides Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld had spouted in promoting the fiasco and the IAG basically affirmed it officially. And, it determined that the best course of action was to get U.S. troops out of Iraq as expeditiously as possible.

Well, that didn’t happen, but when it came time to replace Donald Rumsfeld, who promised our troops would not be in Iraq for more than five months, Gates was the obvious choice of everyone to replace Rummy. A true soldier, Gates said he was, “Honored to serve President-Elect Obama,” and of the extension of his post: “I must do my duty as they do theirs,” Gates said, speaking of the troops still engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan, “How could I do otherwise?”

Gotta admire Gates and his sense of duty. He’s the only Republican in the top tier of Obama’s cabinet, but there are rumors more will be in the lower echelons of the Obama Administration.

For his National Security Advisor, Obama picked retired Marine Corps General James Jones, the 32nd Commandant of the Marine Corps, former Supreme Allied Commander Europe and the Commander of the U.S. Forces-Europe, and most importantly, when he started his military career, platoon and company commander for Golf Company, 2nd battalion, 3rd Marines. He’s a grunt, through-and-through.

When people speak of “boots on the ground,” during Vietnam James Jones’s boots were on the ground. He’s a Marine’s Marine. I, on the other hand, was but an engineer, keeping the beer cold and the lights on.

In the key post of Attorney General, Obama appointed Eric Holder, a former #2 in the Justice Department under President Clinton. Holder has much talked about baggage, but he has great knowledge of the department and more importantly, the letter of the law as dictated by the Constitution.

For Secretary of Homeland Security, Obama chose Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano, an expert, we’re told, on border security and immigration. Good luck with that regardless of her credentials. You can’t please everyone and most likely, they’ll piss off everyone with the compromises and accommodations that will take place in the controversy that is immigration.

If there is a surprise in the latest list of Obama appointees, is that long-time foreign policy expert and former Clinton Administration official Susan Rice will be the Ambassador to the United Nations, a stark improvement over the mustachioed one (John Bolton). The surprise though is that Obama will make that ambassadorship a cabinet post.

Already appointed, but not so … dramatic … New Mexico governor and former Clinton Administration cabinet member, Bill Richardson as Commerce Secretary. He really has no issues and is widely considered one of Obama’s best picks for a cabinet post. Unlike former Senator Tom Daschle, chosen as Obama’s Secretary of Health and Human Services. Daschle has been on the board of the Mayo Clinic and worked for a lobbying firm involved in medical and health-related issues.

If there will be bumpy confirmations, it will be with Daschle and Holder.

President-Elect Obama has officially announced his foreign policy and national security team. We knew all of them already, since the week of the election, but now it’s official.

Topping the list, New York’s junior senator, presidential candidate and former First Lady, Hillary Rodham Clinton. What’s the biggest news about Clinton? Not so much the differences of opinions between Obama and Clinton, no, the big news is all the concessions her husband, President Bill Clinton made to pave the way for his wife to be Secretary of State.

Bill had to give up the list of donors to his foundation and library! Not to mention, when Clinton speaks (he’s one of the highest paid speakers on the speaking circuit) he has to submit his speeches to the State Department, divulge who is donating money and how much and what he will be saying in his speech.

See why I never got married! The things a man has to do to please his wife! Bill said of his wife, “She is the right person for the job of helping to restore America's image abroad, end the war in Iraq, advance peace and increase our security, by building a future for our children with more partners and fewer adversaries, one of shared responsibilities and opportunities.”
 Okay, I gotta wonder … naah, everyone knows Bill’s predilections.

It was clear throughout the primary elections Obama and Senator Clinton were not that far apart on foreign policy, although she hammered the president-elect when he said it would be appropriate to invade Pakistan to go after Al Qa’ida. Clinton actually agrees with that in principle, but she always qualifies it by saying it would be appropriate if the Pakistanis didn’t go after Al Qa’ida — which is pretty much the case today.

Senator Clinton was quite gracious though, the rancor of the campaign long past and said she was proud to join the Obama team. Well, if not the Vice presidency, Secretary of State is pretty good too! She will be the third woman to have the post and the first “First Lady” to do so.

During the Clinton Administration it was no secret Hillary was as much a policy wonk as her hubby and for many of us, we thought she was the policy guru in the marriage. Bill may be a great speaker and Rhodes Scholar, but Hillary Clinton was the one who did the homework, filled in the details. She knows how to get the job done.

Except for that horrible failure with health care. That was a disaster.

The other major post in foreign policy: Secretary of Defense. Robert Gates agreed to stay on to shepherd the war in Iraq to a close. He’s been there for two years, appointed shortly after Donald Rumsfeld was run out of the job.

Gates has often said he wants to shut down the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay and with Obama as president, we will no doubt see that happen before the summer, 2009 is over. A new agreement with Iraq has been approved allowing U.S. troops to stay in Iraq through 2011. That gives the U.S. enough time for Obama to adhere to his withdrawal policy — within 16 months — and allows wiggle room if it takes a little more time.

Gates had been a member of that Iraq Advisory Group Bush appointed shortly after the tide of Iraq was becoming clear to the public. It was a failure, bore no resemblance to the bromides Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld had spouted in promoting the fiasco and the IAG basically affirmed it officially. And, it determined that the best course of action was to get U.S. troops out of Iraq as expeditiously as possible.

Well, that didn’t happen, but when it came time to replace Donald Rumsfeld, who promised our troops would not be in Iraq for more than five months, Gates was the obvious choice of everyone to replace Rummy. A true soldier, Gates said he was, “Honored to serve President-Elect Obama,” and of the extension of his post: “I must do my duty as they do theirs,” Gates said, speaking of the troops still engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan, “How could I do otherwise?”

Gotta admire Gates and his sense of duty. He’s the only Republican in the top tier of Obama’s cabinet, but there are rumors more will be in the lower echelons of the Obama Administration.

For his National Security Advisor, Obama picked retired Marine Corps General James Jones, the 32nd Commandant of the Marine Corps, former Supreme Allied Commander Europe and the Commander of the U.S. Forces-Europe, and most importantly, when he started his military career, platoon and company commander for Golf Company, 2nd battalion, 3rd Marines. He’s a grunt, through-and-through.

When people speak of “boots on the ground,” during Vietnam James Jones’s boots were on the ground. He’s a Marine’s Marine. I, on the other hand, was but an engineer, keeping the beer cold and the lights on.

In the key post of Attorney General, Obama appointed Eric Holder, a former #2 in the Justice Department under President Clinton. Holder has much talked about baggage, but he has great knowledge of the department and more importantly, the letter of the law as dictated by the Constitution.

For Secretary of Homeland Security, Obama chose Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano, an expert, we’re told, on border security and immigration. Good luck with that regardless of her credentials. You can’t please everyone and most likely, they’ll piss off everyone with the compromises and accommodations that will take place in the controversy that is immigration.

If there is a surprise in the latest list of Obama appointees, is that long-time foreign policy expert and former Clinton Administration official Susan Rice will be the Ambassador to the United Nations, a stark improvement over the mustachioed one (John Bolton). The surprise though is that Obama will make that ambassadorship a cabinet post.

Already appointed, but not so … dramatic … New Mexico governor and former Clinton Administration cabinet member, Bill Richardson as Commerce Secretary. He really has no issues and is widely considered one of Obama’s best picks for a cabinet post. Unlike former Senator Tom Daschle, chosen as Obama’s Secretary of Health and Human Services. Daschle has been on the board of the Mayo Clinic and worked for a lobbying firm involved in medical and health-related issues.

If there will be bumpy confirmations, it will be with Daschle and Holder. But, it’s a Democratically controlled Senate, so it won’t be very tough, considering key Republicans, like Richard Luger of Indiana and Arlen Spector of Pennsylvania applaud the Obama choices. That should ensure there will be no filibusters. We shall see.

Now it’s time to get back to the economy. The experts have confirmed: we are officially in a recession and have been for the past 15 months. ya think?

The Big Lie

nospam@example.com (Tim Forkes) — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 05:01:00 -0700

Saturday I eavesdropped on a funny conversation. While helping one friend, Mike, move, two of our friends were sitting in the living room watching one of those college football games that had an astronomical score. Can’t remember which one, but everyone marveled at the total number of points on the scoreboard.

So, on comes the Navy commercial, the one that shows the Navy taking part in a bunch of humanitarian missions. One friend says to another, “It’s the media’s fault the military has these humanitarian commercials.”

Really, I ask? How so?

“Well, the media wouldn’t buy military commercials that show what the military actually does, killing, destroying things …”

It’s the media’s fault. And then he tried to turn the argument around and have me blaming the media. Interesting, watching others trying to twist a conversation. The Army has shown plenty of commercials that illustrate their war capabilities.

The Navy, on the other hand, has a hand in humanitarian efforts primarily because they have many services available on their floating cities, like aircraft carriers and so they choose to advertise that mainly because it is more appealing to not just the young people considering time in the military, but their parents who see an endless war in Iraq and Afghanistan and who wants their kids going off to the killing fields?

That’s been one of the rabid right’s favorite ploys; blame it on the media. In this past election, members of the McCain-Palin ticket were leaking damaging information daily, anonymously, and then Sarah Palin would blame the media, as if printing or talking about news items was a bad thing. Often I would feel sorry for Palin, since most of the negative news was about her: the wardrobe, her lack of basic knowledge on politics, the world and even our Constitution, but then she would start talking and the pity would disappear.

It’s always the media’s fault. Unless of course it’s the unions. It’s always the fault of the unions and that is how everyone on the right is twisting the story concerning the Big Three bailout.

First, the right wing wingnuts want us to believe the cause of the Big Three’s financial woes are the contracts with the United Auto Workers. That’s it in a nutshell. In that lie is the falsehood that the average union autoworker makes $70.00 per hour. How the wingnuts arrive at that wonderful number is, they take the highest of wages of UAW workers, about $28.00 per hour, plus the cost of their benefits and another $3.00 an hour, bringing the total to about $31.00 an hour.

Then, to get to the $70-75 dollars per hour that is spouted on TV is really quite simple: first they add things like overtime, shift differentials (getting paid more to work 3rd shift and on holidays and weekends) vacations and even the employer cost of things like taxes and Social Security payments. Then they add the retirements and retirement benefits paid to current retirees and their spouses, stating those retirement benefits weren’t included as costs in the contracts that were ratified to create those retirement costs.

Less than 10% of the price of an American automobile is attributed to labor costs. The rest of the cost has to do with shipping, marketing, design and of course management. You won’t find any top-level management making less than one million dollars per year in base salary. The other bennies, which include bonuses and stock options, take many of those salaries well into the upper seven and sometimes eight figure range.

Once again the working class is taking it on the chin from the right wing, although the right wing will always claim they have the best interests of the middle class in their hearts. And what’s in the best interest of the average union autoworker in the United States? Lower his or her standard of living.

For the right wing, autoworkers are not entitled to things like quality health care or pensions to ensure they live decent lives once they leave the work force. The right wing will of course deny it, but the two biggest “problems” the right wing has the with the autoworkers are their health care and pension plans.

The other part of the story the right wing likes to leave out of their anti-middle class diatribe is that Japanese automakers don’t pay health care benefits for their workers; like most other civilized nations, the Japanese and South Koreans provide nationalized health care. The United States, on the other hand, considers health care to be a privilege and ought to remain a system based on profit, not on the well being of the patients.

On the other hand, U.S. automakers need to start building vehicles Americans want. That means more fuel-efficient vehicles, hybrid even, and they need to start marketing the cars, not just the SUV’s, CUV’s and the pickup trucks. One of the great disparities in the market place is in advertising. The Big Three market their pickups pretty well, not so much SUV’s anymore, but when’s the last time you saw an ad for a Chevy Impala or Chrysler 300 — or even a PT Cruiser?

Ford manages to advertise it’s new Fusion, but none of their other cars. Local dealers might advertise a Focus or Taurus — and rarely a Mustang, their signature vehicle — but the bulk of their advertising is devoted to their line of trucks.

Years ago, when the Japanese started making inroads in the U.S. auto market, U.S. automakers conceded the field to their rivals and now we are often likely to see a television commercial for a Toyota Camry, Honda Civic and Hyundai, but not for a Mercury Sable or Pontiac G6.

Ford and General Motors do advertise their luxury lines, the Lincoln MKE and Cadillac CTS, but that’s the high-end market.

The Republican lie about the Big Three bailout: it isn’t even about the cost of labor and unions. The real issue for the Republicans and their right wing supporters is the power of the unions, not in labor negotiations, but in politics. It’s all about influence in Washington and the unions overwhelmingly support the Democrats. On rare occasions a union will throw it’s support to a Republican, as the Teamsters did when they endorsed Ronald Reagan, but that’s the exception, not the norm.

The real goal of the right wing is the elimination of the unions. It’s part of their goal to completely roll back Roosevelt’s New Deal and return to a time when the titans of industry completely controlled America. As if they don’t control enough already.

The Canaries

nospam@example.com (Tim Forkes) — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 00:01:00 -0700

News from San Diego!

The flagging economy … flagging … as in “flagellation,” from the Latin “flagellum,” which means, “whip.” Yeah, we’re getting whipped all right. Normally, starting something out with flagellation would put a smile on my face … sorry, I’m having a Sabrina Fox moment … but getting whipped by the collapsing economy isn’t bringing any joy to my heart.

This recession started in California, as all things do, great and disastrous. It began to rear it’s spanky little self about three years ago when the real estate market started skyrocketing into a new dimension. Some might call it demented.

My brother and I once lived in 750 sq. ft. condo that was assessed at $360,000.00. That’s about $480.00 a square foot. Some people were shocked and then others were quite excited, but underneath it all most people knew, even spoke of, the inevitable crash. Well, that has come, has been here for over a year, jobs are going if not gone already and that big idea Arnold had when he won his race for governor — sell $15 billion in bonds to forestall the debt until better times arrive — has come home to roost.

Governor Schwarzenegger — even after five years that’s pretty funny — hasn’t been a bad governor, but he hasn’t been a real mover either. On the other hand, he thinks the California Supreme Court should overturn Proposition 8, the one that put discrimination into the California Constitution. Now that’s real Republican thinking! Keep government out of the private lives of the citizens!

Still, California is deep in a recession, over 1.5 million people are now collecting unemployment and fully 40% of homes sold now are foreclosed. The state is spending $500 million a month more than it is bringing in and of course no one wants to raise taxes. It ain’t pretty. So, what do the politicians do? Slash spending.

San Diego is nearly the epicenter of this disaster, nearly. Orange County holds that title since that is where Countrywide, now a piece of Bank of America, began it’s lending practices that sent it into its own foreclosure. But we’re getting whipped pretty good too.

So far, 17 libraries and recreation centers have either been closed or will be soon. That means there will be thousands of kids who will not have after school programs, so expect crime among juveniles to go up and the libraries, I know the one in Scripps Ranch, where I live, always has many patrons, none of them homeless, although there are (probably) many Scripps Ranch residents who are contemplating homelessness right about now.

No wonder. This is one of the priciest neighborhoods in San Diego with homes that were once assessed to be in the millions of dollars. That looked good to the owners three years ago, but now with the economy tanking and the bottom dropping out of the real estate business, the giddy intoxication of those home loans everyone was lapping up is now looking like one big millstone around the neck.

Along with the recreation centers and libraries that are getting shuttered, the city is going to remove all but a few if the remaining fire rings from the various city beaches. The rings aren’t actually round, they’re square and city doesn’t call them fire rings, they call them … let me look it up … fire pits.

The fire pits get used nearly every night of the year, especially in the cooler months when the homeless need a way to keep warm and teenagers want to have their keg less keg parties that can accommodate a lot of people without waking the neighbors.

San Diego, for many residents, myself included, is one big beach and the fire pits are a big part of San Diego’s appeal. Tourists like the beach and all of its accoutrements, including the fire pits. Even during the “slow” season the beaches attract tourists and you can see them standing and sitting around the fire pits with the locals who got the bonfires started.

Fire pits seem like a small thing when you consider the thousands of San Diegans who are now out of work and the thousands more who are headed to the unemployment office. Thankfully, these days, that just means clicking on their web site! Don’t have to waste gas schlepping 30 miles to the unemployment office in Oceanside, 60 miles round trip, to pay homage to their useless service center.

Do I have resentment? Naah … not a big one anyway.

Back to the fire rings, fire pits, whatever. They are part of San Diego’s heritage. When I moved here nearly 17 years ago, there were over 600. Now there are less than 200. The city cut them back because the cost of maintenance was too high and the city was hit by a mini-recession.

Back then, even before Bill Clinton won the election, the bottom was falling out of the defense industry. General Dynamics, which employed 20,000 San Diegans directly closed, sold their Tomahawk cruise missile business to Hughes, located in Arizona, sold their space division to Martin Marietta (Denver) and put all of their employees — and thousands of others who depended on GenDyn for business — out of work.

If you want to see the humor in that, the city of San Diego gave General Dynamics a bailout for them to bail out of San Diego. As you cruise north from Downtown San Diego up State Highway 163, as you pass Balboa Avenue, on the right is a big complex called “The Spectrum.” It’s huge, encompassing … actually, I don’t know how big it is, but it stretches from Balboa on its south end to Clairemont Mesa Boulevard on the North. That’s a full kilometer, two-thirds of a mile. Two hundred thirty-two acres, just Googled it.

The city developed a master plan for the property that stayed empty for years, until General Dynamics could sell it for $79.5 million dollars. Forty years earlier they bought it from the city for less than a million dollars. Talk about good fortune. The city got nothing. Well, the developer made some shopping areas, some housing and hotels and a bunch of new businesses. Well, a little something for the tax base, a few thousand jobs that pay less than subsistence wages for this area.

And now the city, well the mayor, Jerry Sanders, wants to eliminate the rest of San Diego’s beloved fire pits. What’s next? Jeez, I haven’t even looked into budget cuts to the transit system. America is slowly grinding to a halt, literally, and we’ll feel the gears self-destruct here before the rest of the country. Just consider us the canaries.
•••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• ••••
Late Monday the city council rejected Mayor Sanders’ budget-cutting proposals.

Here is Why

nospam@example.com (Tim Forkes) — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 13:01:00 -0700
For the past five days it’s been a baffling riddle: why are the Republicans so adamant in their opposition to the bailout — loans — to the Big Three automakers? If there’s any American industry that epitomizes the U.S., it’s the behemoth auto industry. America is a nation that grew up on automobiles, came of age when auto making was new and as America grew, so did American automakers.

Eventually, the small, niche automobile companies either fell by the wayside or were ate up by the Big Three and by 1960, Ford, Chrysler and General Motors were leading the greatest industrial giant in history. They could swagger and they could do as they pleased, the Big Three owned the automobile industry.
 My favorite cars of the 1960’s and ’70’s: 1963 Corvette, Chevy SS 396, Chevy Camaro Z28, Plymouth Roadrunner, Dodge Challenger R/T Six Pack, Plymouth Hemi Cuda, Plymouth Duster (340), Ford Mustang Boss 302 and of course the GTO — any year.

Of course the people opposing the Big Three bailout bring up the obvious reasons: Detroit has not kept up with the times, identified more with gas-guzzling SUV’s, pickups and low café standards for carbon emissions. Not to mention, everyone knows things like door handles and car radio/stereos break quickly. The quality just seems to suck.

Then there are the rather generous executive salaries and bonuses. That never looks good to the public and it’s an easy whipping post for detractors, executive bonuses and perks. Insurance company AIG came under fire for having conventions and celebrations that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, complete with really lavish and extravagant benefits. Spa treatments being one of the most popular to spotlight.

It’s a red herring though, in the case of AIG. Those conventions are for agents who have done well and achieved sales goals. The events are rewards for doing a great job. I have friends in the insurance business and these four-day affairs are serious incentives for attaining their quotas and goals.

The Big Three have similar bonus perks for their dealers and auto salesmen and we can be sure the opponents of the Big Three bail out will bring them up. That’s bullshit though, especially if these perk weekends are for salespeople who excel at their jobs.

Sales is a tough occupation. Having dipped my toe in it along the way, I don’t make jokes about car salesmen or deride insurance sales. For those people who live (and sometimes crash) on the strength of their commissions, the possibility of going on an all-expense paid trip to Maui or a five-star resort like Acosta in Carlsbad is a great goal. It helps keep their eyes on the prize. They earn those trips.

What the Republicans like to throw into their derision of the Big Three are the labor costs, the highest in the world. The employees of the Big Three are the best-paid autoworkers in the world, with salary and benefits combine to a reportedly $73.00 an hour. But that’s no longer true.

Here’s one of the things that people like to bring up: health care costs of employees. That costs a lot and many people believe automakers spend too much on employee health care. The other benefit that comes under attack is the pension. At this time, the U.S. auto industry is one of the few that actually guarantees its employees will have a pension when they retire, one that ensures their retirees will have a livable income in their later years.

The reason these two costs have spiraled out of control in the eyes of Republicans, who have been bashing the industry for decades, has been the UAW: the United Auto Workers Union. And it really isn’t the salary and benefits the Republicans abhor, it’s the political and social power the unions wield, or once held, over the political spectrum.

In the 1970’s the unions and the management of the Big Three began to work more in partnership with one another to ensure everyone involved benefited from the industry. No one made money during strikes, the point of labor negotiations and the Big Three autoworkers made great gains in the process.

There have been some serious chasms in the following years; G.M. gave filmmaker Michael Moore his start in 1989 when Moore documented the closures of G.M. plants in and around Flint, Michigan by trying to speak with then G.M. chairman Roger Smith. By closing its headquarters plants in Flint, G.M. sent over 50,000 to the unemployment line. The film is called Roger and Me.

Ronald Reagan can be credited for weakening the strength of unions when, in 1981, he fired all of America’s civilian air traffic controllers (PATCO) after they went on strike. The upshot: in 1980, to win PATCO’s political support, Reagan had sent a letter to PATCO president Robert Poli pledging to put in place many of the changes to the job the union went on strike to attain.

Today, air traffic controllers are still in the most stressful of occupations, are still under-staffed and working far too many hours. But, the government is keeping the costs down!

To this day, conservatives want us to believe it’s the unions that are destroying the American work force, that it’s the unions making working conditions untenable across the land. I heard it just this morning from former Texas Congressman Dick Armey. It’s all about getting rid of the unions. None of the Republicans will say it of course, they need the votes of the union rank-and-file, so the conservative politicians bash union leadership as if the union members are held captive.

The reality is, union membership makes up only seven percent of the U.S. work force. Unions aren’t the problem, just last year the UAW negotiated contracts that virtually eliminated the $30 per hour difference between U.S. automakers and those who work for the Japanese automakers.

As the debate unfolds over the Big Three bailout, listen to the conservatives who will speak of restructuring and getting rid of top management. And then listen to them talk about labor costs and you will hear that point become their focus.

Which is why conservatives like the idea of letting the Big Three file for bankruptcy. It’s an avenue for abrogating the union contracts. Thousands of autoworkers will lose their jobs — even the Republicans admit that — but that’s the price the conservatives are willing to pay to rid America of the powerful UAW. What the hell, it’s not their jobs on the line. Just this year Ford alone has cut over 5,000 jobs already.

Clearly, Republicans/conservatives don’t believe working people deserve affordable health care or pensions to secure their future. They will deny that, but their words and actions tell the story.

The truth about why the Big Three is in trouble is multi-faceted, chief among those problems right now being the economy. Banks and lenders are not giving loans to businesses or consumers. Maybe, the next round of financial bailout money should go to lenders who will give the loans to the automakers who need them.