Another Pyrrhic Obamacrat Victory

With evident glee, the New York Times reported that Michael Bennett, the "Obama-backed" candidate in the Colorado Democratic Senate primary, had won out over the progressive challenger, Andrew Romanoff.

Minimizing the divide within the Democratic Party, the Times relegated the Romanoff challenge to an inference and reported only that Bennett "reached out to Mr. Romanoff’s supporters, saying that he would work hard to prove himself worthy of their support, but that in the end the things that divided Democrats were small compared with the issues that would be discussed in the coming midterm elections."

In other words, once again Obama backed a blue dog Democrat and once again the Democratic Party establishment "reached out" to progressives by telling them that they were caught between a rock and a hard place.

Actually the divisions between progressives and sell-out Democrats are hardly "small". Obamacrats are basically Blue Dogs that talk the talk but walk another walk. It is simply another form of double-talk.

The Republican double talk is to talk about "individual freedom" where "individual" really means "corporation". The Obamacrat double talk is to talk about "individual welfare" where "individual" really means "corporation". Both parties are willing to feed the country into the corporate maw with the promise that the remains of country will trickle back down on us.

Obama has produced nothing on the progressive agenda, except sell out and defeat labelled "compromises" and "first steps".

Romanoff had virtually no money and lots to say. Bennett had nothing to say but lots of money. In the end money won out. “It is long past time to cast off the do-nothing, divisive politics of the past and get to work,” Mr. Bennet said. Yawn. It is long past time to cast OUT the do-nothing politicians of the past and get to work saving America for the American people.

What Romanoff stands for; What the Times did not report; What Obamacrats reject:> [here ] .

©Barfo, 2010
.

Disconnects Redux

Needless to say, the press was aghast at Michelle Obama's extravagant vacation to Spain, topped off by a visit with the Royal Family at their summer palace on Mallorca. We will not add to cacophony except to say that Eleanor Roosevelt had the better idea.

The Democrats are running scared. It finally seems to have percolated into their sorry brains that they cannot win the November elections without their, by now, thoroughly disaffected progressive base. So President Obambi, discards his consensual and reasoned academic tone for displays of "hold-me-back!" pugnacity. It is worthy of Vaudeville. Only Vaudeville rang truer.

How is it possible for Michelle Obama to galavant off to the Costa del Sol when America's industrial base is gutted, when real unemployment has reached 17%-20% and when so many homes have been foreclosed on that the banks are hiding the trust deeds in their basements?

It is possible because no party in Washington really gives a damn about the working class. Apart from Obambi doing Rocky, the real talk in Washington is all about austerity, "flat" and jobless "recoveries" and structural readjusment to accept the "reality" of 10 percent permanent unemployment while corporate profits are mysteriously up and the HinWis are making out like the scumbag bandits they are. If the First Lady parties with high net worth individuals it is because that is where her priorities lie. And it is worth remembering that it was another HinWi -- the Democrat Senator Feinstein -- who said the other week that extending unemployment benefits encouraged laziness.

Neither Franklin nor Eleanor had much of any idea of what to do about the Depression; and, to this day, it is argued that nothing they did do really pulled the country out of the economic morass into which it had fallen. But said FDR, "We must be seen to do something!!" And what he made sure was that everyone saw that the something which was being done was something to help the UnWis -- the great un-worthies among the rest of us. For that they are remembered fondly. For their despicable indifference Obama and his 'Crats merit nothing but opprobrium.


Editorial Nut Cracking in Response to a Reader

.

Connecting with Tar Baby and Disconnecting from Reality

Well... it's summer-time and the hydrants are in full-flush -- this time with gushing verbiage from the New York Times and other media outlets over a heated wrangle about an allegedly racist Tea Party billboard in Iowa.

The entire news-world furore driving this issue is a massive exercise in false consciousness that seeks to deflect attention from the political idiocy of the tea-bag movement with a mis-focus on America's handy-dandy, sticky, obsession for all seasons.

Looking at the Iowa billboard the last thing any reasonable, objective observer could think is that it was racist. What in the world is racist about it other than the fact that Obama is black? Is it necessary to "white-face" a black man in order to avoid accusations of "racism "? Nothing in the billboard harps on anything racial.

If anything stands out from the billboard it is "SOCIALISM SOCIALISM SOCIALISM" The message is not Black Black Black but S O C I A L I S M.

And here we come to the utter, beyond moronic idiocy of the tea party movement : carping about the far left, socialist policies of Barack Obama and the current administration".

Far left socialist policies of a candidate for office who was bankrolled by Goldman Sachs? The far left policies of a graduate from neo-liberal Harvard Inc. ? What kind of drivelling nonsense is that? I have said it on my blog (Barfo) and I'll say it again BISMARCK was more left than Barack Obama.

Yes ... the Great Otto Von Bismarck who (after a secret rendezvous with Germany's socialist leader) stole socialist thunder and instituted what is known as "state socialism" -- the socialism-within-capitalism that is the basis for modern European social democracy. When accused of dread and evil socialism by his own conservative party, Bismarck shrugged "Call it socialism or what you will, it's all the same to me."

The true meta-political fact is that (whatever else they might have called for) Soviet Socialism, National Socialism, Fascism, Falangism, and "Social Democracy" all espoused certain institutionalized social benefits deemed basic to the social compact and fabric. As President Sarkozy said in his recent trip to the U.S., his countrymen beheld our disastrous (lack of) health-care debate with astonishment and found it "incomprehensible" that anyone would be denied health care. So too would have Bismarck, Bonaparte, Lenin, Mussolini, Hitler, and ultimately Bevans who introduced "socialism" into England. "The collective principle asserts," he said, "that no society can legitimately call itself civilised if a sick person is denied medical aid because of lack of means."

This is not to say that the "collective principle" has been without a voice in America. On the contrary; a progressive idealism, often drawing strength from religious conceptions, has long been an engaging and redeeming feature in the American political landscape. In fact shortly before he died even FDR aimed to bring up America up to Bismarckian standards. (See his Economic Bill of Rights speech on Youtube or here ).

Since then, however, there has been a massive, coordinated and consistent effort funded and spearheaded by reactionary corporate and banking interests to de-educate the American public. As a result, there is a profoundly ignorant and intellectually diseased disconnect in American political discourse that prevents people from seeing that the political message of the billboard makes no more sense than the braying of an ass.

The capitalist-run press and the Pundits of Destraction that shape what passes for American political consciousness would rather NOT focus on the true meaning and evolution of "socialism" and on how politically retarded the American social compact has become. Rather than educate people on the imbecility that drives the Tea Party movement, the press would rather we all obsess over America's perennial bugbear ... racism.

Blech.

"Call it socialism or what you will; it's all the same to me."

Disconnects & the Guilty Conscience

In the news, it was reported these past days that the Government of Canada has spent 1 billion Loonies providing "security" for the G8/G20 meeting in Toronto. The security costs include 5 million dollars for a fence, which left 995 million dollars for other unstated purposes.

There is probably no one in the Western World who has not heard of Marie Antoinette's famous disconnect -- the one that led to her other; and it would appear to be a proposition that governments -- like people -- reaching the end of their viabilities suffer from certain connection deficits. What kind of irreality could have seized the Harper government to spend such lavish sums on protecting a Coddled Club of twenty big wigs in the middle of a Great Recession which is daily costing people their presents and their futures? One is reminded of Hoover the Great, who donned and dined in a tuxedo thinking it would give an "uplift" to the dispirited hobos of Hoovervilles.

There was an Antonine innocence (or at least insouciance) to Hoover's disconnect. Neither the ill-fated queen nor the ill-fated president were malicious people. On the contrary, it was their very good naturedness (and Hoover's indisputable humanitarian instincts) that made their remove from the reality of others so maddening. The same cannot be said for that creamy face scumbag, Harper. Harper, and the neo-liberal hoodlums he hosts, understand very well what they are about. Their disconnect is connected to a fear that is born of their own social and economic guilt. Although they don't care about the dislocations and deprivations their policies will cause, they do know that their policies will cause them. What we see on the streets of Toronto is the shadow of their own self-betraying conscience.

The brioche of the matter is very simple. The meeting in Toronto is aimed at deciding whether to save the banks or to save large non-bank corporations. Obama-Geithner-Bernake have saved American banks and now want to promote trade in order to push the American corporate economy back into the clover. This is called "ending the recession" -- although it is understood and admitted that it is an End-Of-Recession that will not -- repeat not -- involve an End of Joblessness. In other words, OGB is pushing The People be Damned Option 1.

Europe (and particularly Angela Merkel) is pushing The People be Damned Option 2, otherwise known as "Save Our Banks!--The Sequel" Throughout 2008 and 2009, Europe was quite Le Smug. Those uncouth Americans had wrecked themselves with their Wild West Finance. One could cut the swell of Budenbrooksian self-righteousness with a busser-knife. In fact, Germany, and France too, even played the victim, quietly accepting U.S. taxpayer monies for assorted injuries to their banks at the hands of the credit-swapping genies of Wall Street.

But lo and behold! Quite on their own Swiss, German and French banks were out lending massive sums to those credit-unworthies now known as the PIGS of Europe. To be sure, Goldman Sachs played a "constructive role" in cooking Greece's books; but it took a sure-as-hell willing fool to be duped. As the Wall Street Journal put it with inimitable bluntness, Greece is a nation of taxis and tourists; it couldn't "produce" its way out of a paper bag and will never have an "economy" that can repay its debts. This is news?

Of course, Greece is small pork. The real pigs in the poke are Spain and Italy with outstanding debts of one trillion each. That leaves European banks holding a lot of worthless paper. The answer? Austerity & Privatisation. The People have to get used to doing with less and - in Greece's case in particular, in addition to that, what it has in terms of national infrastructure needs to be privatized. (Indeed two weeks after the "rescue package" was announced a "privatisation schedule" was also announced.)

And so the meeting at Toronto boils down to arguing over imperilled salmon fumée whether to pursue Austerity or a Jobless Recovery. Which side of yes we have no bananas do you prefer?

If there were a Protocols of Toronto this would be it; and there is no way these demons do not know that they are Screwing the People big time. They might turn out their media-cannons to dumb-wit the populace but they know that if the people knew they would be up in arms. Ergo: SECURITY.

In fact, once one perceives that todays coddled cadre of leaders is just a milder speaking version as the same neo-con beast we illusorily got rid of at the last election, it can be seen that they have always had a guilty conscience. Back in 2004 the chipsters reported on the announced development of crowd control weapons -- including slippery jelly, sonic cannon and burn lasers -- avowedly aimed at defending against "terrorists" -- or, as the police chief of Toronto called them yesterday, "multi-issue terrorists". You see in the Austerity Police State a person with an issue (e.g. joblessness, hunger, health care or clean air) is a "terrorist".

There is, in reality, no serious security threat to the very precious leaders of the G8/20. There will be the usual carnival protests by powerless progressives accompanied by assorted minor acts of vandalism by anarcho-theatre groups. But a torched cop car and some smashed windows do not topple Empires and -- more even more importantly-- come nowhere close to presenting a danger to well guarded leaders within their security-perimeters.

So unlike hapless Hoover or the unhappy Autrichenne, the disconnects of todays leaders are in fact well connected to what they are about. Today, their police goons are in fact firing plastic bullets at the shadowy spectres of their haunted conscience; tomorrow they will fire real burn lasers and deaf rays at the truly desperate.

.

The Pied Piper of Psychosis

It is not everyday that we get to watch a country becoming unglued before our very eyes. But listening to Benyamin Netanyahu defend Israel's assault on a food convoy is like watching some psycho-genic Pied Piper of Jerusalem leading his followers over the precipice of sanity.

“This was no Love Boat!" Bibi exclaims. "It was a boat of hatred."

Reverting to the accusatory tone he adopted in his September 2009 address to the United Nations, Netanyahu decried that "For many in the international community no evidence is needed. Israel is guilty until proven guilty,"

Then, retrenching behind the parapets of victim hood, Netanyahu goes on to bemoan that, "The state of Israel faces an attack of international hypocrisy. This is not the first time we have faced this, two years ago we faced a massive attack of missiles fired by Hamas who hid behind civilians."

A previously cleared vessel full of pampers and pablum is a "hate boat"? Since when is bringing humanitarian relief to civilians caught in the maw of hostilities an act of hate? Is the International Red Cross, which also attempts to bring relief to Gaza, also a "hate organization"? What evidence, other than the evidence of his own accusation, did Netanyahu have for suggesting that the seized boat was laden with contraband of war?

What in the world is an "attack of hypocrisy"? How is criticism of a blockade, or of the seizure of a vessel trying to run it, an example of a double standard? Is the world hypocritically condoning a Hamas blockade of Israel?

Mixing his metaphors and analogies, does Netanyahu seriously assert that Hamas subjected Israel to a "massive attack of missiles" -- an attack so overwhelming in its barrage that it has killed less than a dozen people in four years? And does he seriously assert that the world hypocritically failed to condemn Hamas's so-called rocket attacks?

On what factual basis does Netanyahu assert that Israel is always "presumed guilty?" Obviously two opponents in conflict engage in mutual recriminations. Plus ca change. But on this issue of Israel's invasion of Gaza, it took several resolutions and a year of commission studies before the Goldstone Report issued its findings which in no way presumed anything. Concluding, upon hearing, that Israel violated international law is not the same as "presuming" that it did so.

Pyschosis:

Psychotic disorders are severe mental disorders that cause abnormal thinking and perceptions. People with psychoses lose touch with reality. Two of the main symptoms are delusions and hallucinations. Delusions are false beliefs, [ Psychotic Disorders ]

"A delusion is a false belief that is based on an incorrect interpretation of reality. Delusions, like all psychotic symptoms, can occur as part of many different psychiatric disorders. But the term delusional disorder is used when delusions are the most prominent symptom.

"A person with this illness holds a false belief firmly, despite clear evidence or proof to the contrary.

"In delusional disorder, the delusions involve circumstances that could occur in reality even though they are unlikely. ... There are several types of delusions. Themes of persecution are common. Other types are erotic, grandiose, jealous delusions."

Israel has clearly gone psycho.

That she is enmeshed in a violent conflict with Hamas and various Palestinian factions is a fact. That Israel is the weaker party or a helpless victim is nonsense.

That there are people and governments around the world who side with the Palestinians against Israel is also a fact. But it is also a fact that most Western governments, including the most powerful government of all, basically support Israel, militarily, economically, and diplomatically. Israel got her nuclear technology from France. Israel has been given special trade status with the EU. The US continuously provides Israel with arms, cash and -- most important of all -- precious vetoes. Israel is nowhere close to being the World's Waif.

That Hamas (or factions within Hamas) have lobbed a few jumbo firecrackers over the wall at a small farming village called Sderot is a fact. That this constitutes anything like a "rain" or anything like "missles" is a mischaracterization that bares no resemblance to reality.

Let us put aside the pointless issue of "who started it". Assuming that Hamas is "attacking" Israel, the attacks are like those of a five year old kicking a professional boxer in the shins. Would any non-delusional person anyone argue that the boxer is "justified" in ramming a massive fist into the child's face?

And so, one comes to the problem of the blockade. It is correct that international law recognizes the right of blockades, in general between belligerents. There is a real question of whether the "between" part qualifies in this case; but, assuming it does, the right to prevent contrabands of war does not include the right to embargo essential foods and medicines. What have forbidden chocolate and cilantro to do with "missles"?

Even assuming that Israel has an unimpeachable right to stop the relief convoy and granting that one of those ships could be bearing real arms and munitions what is the likelihood that these pre-inspected boats were?

What is really at issue is that the Gaza Blockades by design seeks to bring "pressure" to bear on civilians. Israel has publicly stated that this is the real purpose of the blockade, and this is the primary reason the UN, most governments and scores of NGO's have condemned it. It is (1) out of proportion to the legitimate needs of self defense and (2) consciously (not "collaterally") seeks to collectively punish the civilian population. For Netanyahu to decry this judgement as an attack on Israel's right to self-defense is simply over-the-cliff.

This is not a one-time mis-reaction. With increasing consistency Israel's public pronouncements bear the imprimatur of "Judah contra Mundum". Netanyahu's harangue to the UN General Assembly last September -- in which he alternately bemoaned and accused while waving blueprints of Auschwitz in the air -- was a jaw dropping example.

Netanyahu has become Israel's Pied Piper of Psychosis.

But it is not just Israel. According to Uri Avneri, the delusion afflicts Jews world wide. In a recent article in the Gush Shalom web-page, he reviews Israel's recent polls and policy arguments and concludes,

"Without being conscious of it, we do what we can to be hated again, We shall not rest until the world is anti-Semitic again...."

This is not the statement of some proverbial rabid anti-semite. Avneri gets little coverage in the mainstream US press, but he is a long time and respected journalist. Not only that, he was of the "First Generation" No one can fault his Zionist credentials. He has lived in, participated in and observed Israeli politics from the very beginning. When Uri Avneri says -- in so many words -- that Israel and her Jewish supporters are in self-destruct mode people should listen.

Was it like this at Massada? one wonders. Recent theories have reconstructed the evidence so as to conclude that the massacre was not a voluntary suicide but rather a self-imposed mass execution. We will never know for sure.

Was it like this at Berlin's Sportpalast? where Goebbels gave his infamous Total War Speech in which he whipped the crowd into a "bring-it-on" frenzy. Germania Contra Mundum.

What we do know is that when the speech was over, Goebbels wiped his brow, walked away and said,-- with unparalleled cynicism and contempt -- "What lunacy!"

Does Netanyahu believe his paranoia? We may never know, but it is clear that he is laboring hard to get others to swallow it.

Avneri's warning goes beyond the pros and cons of any one particular incident in a now 60 year long struggle. Regenerating real anti-semitism is no small matter and what Avneri has to say ought to be considered very carefully

©Barfo, 2010
.

Mainstream Media Catches on To Goverment's Plan to Wreck Yours Son's Brain

The News: ABC's Frontline reports that: Since the Iraq War began, soldier arrests in the city of Colorado Springs, Colo., have tripled. At least 36 servicemen based at the nearby Army post of Fort Carson have committed suicide, and 14 Fort Carson soldiers have been charged or convicted in at least 11 killings. Many of the most violent crimes involved men who had served in the same battalion in Iraq. .... FRONTLINE tells the dark tale of the men of 3rd Platoon, Charlie Company, 1st Battalion of the 506th Infantry, and how the war followed them home. It is a story of heroism, grief, vicious combat, depression, drugs, alcohol and brutal murder; an investigation into the Army's mental health services; and a powerful portrait of what multiple tours and post-traumatic stress are doing to a generation of young American soldiers.

The Note:  BARFO reported on this two years ago [ here ] and explained the causes of "Wrecked Brain Syndrome" as elucidated by none other than St. Thomas Aquinas. But we are glad the mainstream media is catching up...and on.

.

The Missing Elephant

It is no surprise the the New York Times should once again emit a clarion call for punitive isolation of Iran. What never ceases to amaze is the bald-faced hypocricy with which they do it.

In an editorial entitled “Fixing the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty”, the Times calls for strenthening the treaty by:

1. requiring that all treaty members accept tougher nuclear monitoring,

2. penalizing any state that violates its treaty commitments and then withdraws from the pact, as North Korea did.

3. refusing to allow any more “India-like exemptions from nuclear trade rules” and requiring that any state that tests a weapon would be denied nuclear trade.

Since, as the Times admits, North Korea has withdrawn from the treaty and since India and Pakistan are not signatories, who is left but Iran?

Of course, as the Times also admits, amending the treaty is something that “could take years of votes”. So, in the meantime, the Queen of 42 Street calls for the stop gap of “a strong political document” reflecting the above points.

In other words, the Times wants the United States and its allies to gang up and issue “robust commitments” for intrusion and isolation of Iran.

This, it might be noted, is the same strategy of indignation, intrusion and isolation that was the runner up to Shock and Awe.

Of course, when it comes to the Times, the astonishing thing is not the elephant in the room, but the elephant left out of the circus. The Times is mum on the issue of Israel which it avoids with a dismissive sneer.

"Egypt, which leads the Nonaligned Movement, is also playing games by pressing for a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East that seeks to force Israel to give up its nuclear arsenal. That is not going to happen any time soon. All states need to ante up and reverse the treaty’s slide. The world’s security depends on it."

Most people, whose minds are not in hock to the Zionist enterprise, would fairly understand that a nuclear free Middle East or, for that matter, world, includes Israel.

While no one makes light of proliferation, most people understand that if the U.S. or India had the bomb it was natrual and forseeable that Russia or Pakistan would seek to get one too. The editorial mavens on 42nd Street understand this, so that what they are really indulging in is simply a species of partisan ethnic arrogance.

From the Times, that too, is unsurprising. Perhaps what warrants note is the depraved cynicism with which they foist their petard.

The Times knows that India, like Israel, is not a signatory to the NNPT. The primary rule of all international law is that: No sovereign is bound unless it wants to be bound. It is as simple and naked as that.

Accordingly the NNPT sought to provide a certain amount of “public pressure” to non-signatory states by providing for a sub-set of trade embargos on party pooping states: you don’t play; we don’t play. But rules were never anything to deter Bullyboy Bush and, in a much noticed snub to the non-proliferation ideal, the United States went ahead and sold a whole bunch of nukie goodies to India, notwithstanding its open and notorious nuclear activities.

Technically, the Times’ call for getting rid of India-like exemptions would encompass getting rid of Israel-like exemptions too, because any actual amendments to the treaty would have to be even-handed. However, interim political measures are another thing and, as the Times reminds us, “that is not going to happen.”

Perhaps not, but how much crystalline in its clarity was Pope Benedict's statement (not reported by the Times) to the World Day of Peace conference in January 2006.

"The truth of peace requires that all -­ whether those governments which openly or secretly possess nuclear arms, or those planning to acquire them ­- agree to change their course by clear and firm decisions, and strive for a progressive and concerted nuclear disarmament. The resources which would be saved could then be employed in projects of development capable of benefiting all their people, especially the poor. "

.

Pope Takes on Vampire Squid

The News: Addressing the plenary session of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, Pope Benedict directly assailed the neo-liberal political economy of the Chicago and Austrian schools. The Pope said,

"[The economic crisis] has also shown the error of the assumption that the market is capable of regulating itself, apart from public intervention and the support of internalized moral standards. This assumption is based on an impoverished notion of economic life as a sort of self-calibrating mechanism driven by self-interest and profit-seeking. As such, it overlooks the essentially ethical nature of economics as an activity of and for human beings.'"

Mary Ann Glendon, president of that academy, summarized the most salient conclusions the Academy had reached in its several days of sessions. In particular, participants in the working groups "spoke of a shift from an economy based in the real production of goods to an economy dominated by speculative activities driven by greed." In addtion, two speakers cautioned against the "danger of the 'financialization' of human relations, in which human activities, even in the family, are reduced to a merely commercial dimension."

"Such a 'financialized' approach to the social order not only narrows the vision of the human person, but creates instability in the economy," Glendon said.

The Note: Gee, could they have had NINJA loans and the Abacus 2007-AC1. in mind? But wait! Blankenfein said he was doing "God's work". Must be a different God. Or maybe it was just a "giant vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity." (No, the Pope didn't put it in quite those words).

.

The Spiritual Significance of Nuclear Weapons

Delivering a speech to the United Nations General Assembly, President Ahmadinejahd had this to say about the nature of nuclear weapons.

"Regrettably, due to distancing of some States from the teachings of the Divine Prophets, the shadow of the threat of nuclear bombs is cast over the whole world,

"The nuclear bomb is a fire against humanity rather than a weapon for defense.

"The possession of nuclear bombs is not a source of pride; it is rather disgusting and shameful. And even more shameful is the threat to use or to use such weapons, which is not even comparable to any crime committed throughout the history."

-0Oo-

Without engaging in ad homs as to Ahmadinejad's motives, what he said is right on target.

Some Things are Slow in Coming

The News: Obama gave an address in which he praised the Health Insurance Company Funding Act as a step in the right direction ....

The Note: It would be pathetic if it weren't so hypocritically vile.

"It is time for us to realise that parts of the socialist demands are reasonable and right..." (Bismarck 1871)

"The State must take the matter in hand, since the State can most easily provide the requisite funds. It must provide them, not as alms, but in fulfilment of the workers' right to look to the State for help in matters where their own good will can achieve nothing more. Why should not the labour solider receive a pension, just as much as the man who has been disabled or has grown oold in the civil service? This view will generally be accepted in the course of time. " (Bismarck 1888)

By 1933 Germany and France had national education, disability insurance, pensions and health care.

By 1945 the idea trickled over to Washington when FDR announced the "Second Bill of Rights in which he said:

We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. Necessitous men are not free men. People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world.

oOo

The Democrat Party is like a garbage can that needs to be scoured from the inside out.

The speech can be found on Youtube. or here

The Police Are Never Called for the Uppah Clahsses.

The News: The Wall Street Journal reports that Europe's Big Two are doing everything possible not to call in the I.M.F. to stabilize floundering Greece. Writes David Cottle: "there's considerable euro-credibility staked on an in-house solution. This is a family problem, they tell us. And families are usually reluctant to call in outsiders. They only 'phone for the inspector when there's actually a corpse on the drawing-room floor. Greece is still breathing." Cottle quotes Investment guru Dennis Gartman who "likens the IMF treatment to mediaeval medicine, only making matters worse with draconian demands for public-spending cuts and the accompanying prospect of civil unrest. He suggests keeping the Fund away from Greece by any means necessary, up to and including garlic, crucifixes and stakes. "

The Note: Funny how no one cares when medieval medicine is applied to Latin America or Africa. Could it be that leeching natural resources is still regarded as a good cure?

.

Auto Reconquista!

La Noticia: El presidente venezolano, Hugo Chávez, anunció este sábado que en la cumbre que el Grupo de Río celebrará en México el lunes y martes próximos asumirá como suya la propuesta de que se cree una instancia continental sin Estados Unidos ni Canadá.

"Siguen soplando vientos de cambio en América Latina: muchos gobiernos del continente estamos planteando, yo pudiera decir incluso que la mayoría nos acompaña en esta propuesta, la creación de una organización de Estados latinoamericanos y caribeños sin Estados Unidos, sin Canadá", dijo en un discurso en Caracas.

Agregó que ésa será la línea central de su propuesta "para desprendernos definitivamente del coloniaje que Estados Unidos le impuso a este continente".

. . .

Chávez anunció que viajará a México el domingo, después de su programa dominical de radio y televisión "Aló Presidente".

Como anfitriona de la cumbre del Grupo de Río, la Cancillería de México ha anunciado que se debatirá la creación de un nuevo organismo para la región "más ágil y flexible, pero compatible" con la Organización de Estados Americanos (OEA), en la que está prácticamente todos los países del continente, a excepción de Cuba y Honduras, que están suspendidos. Chávez afirmó que "este siglo es el siglo de la liberación de América Latina y del Caribe.". Original article here

El Comentario: ? Pues ya hacia falta, no?

Or in other words, since the lamentable fall of the Spanish Empire, the hispanic nations of Ibero America fell prey to the depredations of Anglo-Americans. As Spain reconquered herself from the Moors, may the hemisphere's Ibero-Indians reconquer themselves from los moros del norte

.

Now For the Shaft

The News: Anthem Blue Shield of California has announced rate increases of up to 39%. Similar rate increases are being imposed by other insurance companies around the United States.

The Note: Of course this comes as a total surprise. Sen. Mitch Bitch O'Connell (Retard, Ky.) is left sputtering some incoherent nonsense about how the "free market" knows whats best, really, honest, because "over the long haul" it reduces benefits... uh... costs for everyone. True to form the Demorats will fail to seize the initiative, preferring instead to allow the Tea Bag Convention in Nashville to cite the premium raises as evidence of what's wrong the Big Gubmint.

.

The Other American

The News: "Ahmadinejad suggested in the same interview that Iran would free three jailed US hikers in exchange for Iranians held in US prisons,..... The US responded cautiously, saying... "If President Ahmadinejad's comments suggest that they are prepared to ... resolve the cases of the three hikers and other Americans in custody, we would welcome that step," Gordon Duguid, a state department spokesman, said. (ALJ)

Comment:   Other Americans?!?  What other Americans? How come we haven't heard about these other Americans? Are they less important than the three hikers? Surely the state department is seeking to negotiate the release of some drug mule? What other Americans, and what were they doing that landed them in jail?

.

Big Food Devours America's Children

The News: It was widely reported today that 1 in 5 American children and adolescents 6 to 19 suffer from unhealthy levels of bad cholesterol. This is part of a broader health census showing increased risk levels for diabetes and heart disease among America's youth. The Office of the Surgeon General reported on 11 January 2009 that

"In 1999, 13% of children aged 6 to 11 years and 14% of adolescents aged 12 to 19 years in the United States were overweight. This prevalence has nearly tripled for adolescents in the past 2 decades."

The Note: Tripled ??? For those who might be math-challenged that means that 42% of America's youth are "overweight". Since people who are overweight are also at increased risk of diabetes and heart disease that indicates that more than "1 in 5" are also at risk for these diseases.

Well... let's not be too picky. We are talking medicine and risks, neither of which are rocket science. Let us assume that the "prevalence" of obesity has only doubled. We can also assume that the government's definition of "overweight" is probably overly generous. Factoring in the cholesterol findings we come up with a ball bark figure of 25% -30% suffering bad cholesterol and / or overweight. By any measure, a more than "exceptional" segment of America's youth is seriously health-compromised.

The Government explains these results by noting that:

• overweight in children and adolescents is generally caused by lack of physical activity, unhealthy eating patterns, or a combination of the two, and

• our society has become very sedentary.....

The Government rises to the challenge by advising parents:

• Let your child know he or she is loved and appreciated whatever his or her weight
• Try not to make your child feel different ...

• Plan family activities that provide everyone with exercise and enjoyment.
• Provide a safe environment for your children and their friends to play actively;

• Follow the Dietary Guidelines for healthy eating (www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines).
• Encourage your child to eat when hungry and to eat slowly.
• Eat meals together as a family
• Carefully cut down on the amount of fat and calories in your family's diet.
• Don't place your child on a restrictive diet.
• Children should be encouraged to drink water and to limit intake of beverages with added sugars, such as soft drinks, fruit juice drinks, and sports drinks.
• Plan for healthy snacks.
• Stock the refrigerator with fat-free or low-fat milk, fresh fruit, and vegetables instead of soft drinks or snacks that are high in fat, calories, or added sugars and low in essential nutrients.

Scandalous! Once again, Government aids and abets corporate criminality  this time feeding America's children into the Maw of Profit.

What is killing American children is high fructose corn syrup and sodium both of which are found in exorbitant amounts in any food that comes in a box or a can. In addition to these major culprits we can note phosphates, bromides, dyes, and a host of petro-chemical food additives that our poor distressed livers, kidneys and intestines must deal with.

To say as much, doesn't even factor in that other killer food: MEAT  -- red blooded American meat. It is not that meat per se is a killer. In fact range-fed meat -- particularl bison, elk, and deer -- are actually pretty healthy. But factory-meat, industrial beef and frankenstein chicken are deadly. They are loaded with substances and compounds our bodies don't need and can't process.

These facts have been known for a long time by those freakoids and vegans who fussed about what they ingested into their Bodily Temples. But even for the rest of the population, the cat has been out of the bag for at least a decade. American Factory Food is a Killer

But not once does our Government's solicitous advice focus on the real culprit. Instead it focuses on all sorts of namby-pamby, feel-good, pseudo psychology measures that are actually tangential to the solution.

Darling, here, have a carrot from our new Slim Family Snack Basket; but I want you to know that I love you and that you're my little cupcake no matter what you uh.... measure up to on the scale..

The Government studiously avoids telling us that the average can of peas (a "good food") contains 500 mg of sodium and the average pizza, chicken nuggets or anything else in a box about 750 to 1000 mg. or more. Instead, the Government's Health Advisory will tell us to sprinkle less salt on our eggs. You know cut back on 5 mg and then open a can of 750 mg.

The Government mentions nothing about avoiding high fructose corn syrup, because it if it did it would be telling us to avoid probably half of anything on the market shelf.... and that would not be good for business. Nor does the Government mention that even diet drinks wreak havoc on our insulin production and are counterproductive to say the least.

But "sweeteners" are only half the problem. The other half is "sugar" -- those instant "sugars" produced by foods like white bread or popcorn. Refined flour = refined sugar. Our body reacts to white bread in much the same way it does to a candy bar: 'Oh goody! A sugar -fix.' But as with all fixes, withdrawal follows and is followed by another fix because somehow we are always hungry. Never once did the Government say outright "NO- chips, cheetos, popcorn, candy, donuts, or pop tarts" and worse yet, it never explained to us why an English Muffin is as bad as a chocolate bar and how an apple would make us feel better.

In addition to not directly focusing on the real dietary issues, our Government also mis-directs attention onto the basically false solution of "more exercise." It is certainly true that all societies have become more sedentary and that this, in addition to being not very healthy, contributes to the obesity problem. But exercise is actually a relatively minor factor in the solution.

The fact is that our bodies are rather efficient organisms and it takes a hell of a lot of sweat to burn off a single calorie. An hour's work humping on the stair master can all but be wiped out by a single "energy bar".... to say nothing of the trail mix. The greater role of exericse in weight reduction is the change it produces over time in our metabolism. Keeping one's metabolic boilers running throughout the day burns calories throughout the day and this can also be accomplished by snacking (correctly) throughout the day. Kids tend to have fast metabolisms and even when just loitering about are actually fairly active physically. What is killing them is not so much lack of exercise as junk food.

Of course, our Government's advisories do cover the bases, but only if one already understands what's there to be covered. It parcels out piecemeal advice (within a haze of psycho-babble) without connecting the dots so as to zero-in on the hidden killers or key solution.

What is key to the whole health process is to eat fresh and eat natural. Anything we have to cut, peel, and cook ourselves is better than anything in a can or box, and it doesn't even have to be "organic". In fact, once a person detoxes from the instant-sugar addiction, anything natural is more satisfying.

Fresh and natural eating is not more time consuming or difficult. One has to readjust cooking habits but with few simple and obvious techniques "from scratch" cooking can be just as quick as plop and pop. Even though most people do not want to be bothered baking their own bread or looking for free range bison, they can switch to breads without high fructose corn syrup and they can, with out precipitating a dietary crisis, eat less but better quality meats and always more fish.

Lastly, there is noting wrong with "fats". Good fats like butter, cheese, yogurt, olive oil and nuts (especially almonds and walnuts) are healthier and more satisfying that their guar gum hydrogenated artificial substitutes. To be sure, where fat intake is concerned one does have to up the exercise. But fats are part of natures biological balance, and throughout out the world there are very healthy and long lived populations that consume a lot of fat.

The Governments "concerned" advisory is itself a kind of junk information, padded with data fluff and high fructose psychology so as to avoid focusing on the real culprits.

Let's be clear, the culprits in this genocide of America's youth are Archer Daniel Midlands, Con-Agra, General Foods, Kraft, Tyson and just about any other big name in the Poisoned Cornucopia of U.S. production.

Genocide? Surely that is a little exagerated -- the sort of hysterical puff talk activist issue-groups are prone to. Actually not. Rafael Lemkin in his 1942 seminal study of genocide (he coined the word), pointed out that genocide proceeds in stages, the initial ones of which focus on undermining a target group's biological health through rationing and/or degradation of food. For example, feeding someone lots of bread adulterated with alum is just as harmful as reducing the amount of good bread. Either undermines the health of the population, makes it less physical capable, more prone to disease and more likely to produce offspring with genetic defects. The effects of a degraded diet accumulate and play out over time, but over time they do take their toll. No , "genocide" is not hyperbole.

Just as banks don't care what they do with our money; just as insurance companies don't care about actually providing us with health care; just as big motor doesn't care if our car blows up on contact, so too Big Food doesn't care that it poisons us. In fact, it is overjoyed to do so: a three or four dollar box of processed breakfast sugar aka "cereal" costs them pennies to make and distribute. That is real good gravy.

The American Corporate State is rotten to the core, and this rotteness includes sacrificing the country's children to the voracious maw of profit.


©Barfo, 2010
.

Israel Prohibits Charity In Gaza

The News: Thug Staat Israel has prohibited the following organizations from doing relief work in Gaza or 60 pc of the West Bank: Oxfam, Save the Children, Doctors Without Borders, Terre des Hommes, Handicap International and the Religious Society of Friends (a Quaker organization).

The Note: It's amazing how people have been trained to weep, moan, tear their hair out and crap in their pants when they hear the word "holocost" ... and at the same time turn a blind eye and a deaf ear the sobs of genocide being carried out in plain view in Gaza.

.

Leader at the Eleventh Hour

The News: "President Obama has taken full control of the health care negotiations.... spen[ding] more than six hours with Democratic leaders on Wednesday..." (NYT) "It was always our sense that once the bills were passed that he would have to play a much more direct role in helping work out the details,” his senior adviser, David Axlerod said in an interview, “This has been a prodigious task from start to finish; we knew it would be.”

The Note: This is truly choice. After single payer was ruled out in committee, after the public option died on the Senate floor, after Big Pharma got a 12 year monopoly on all drugs, after Big Insure got a guaranteed income flow with no cap on premiums and after the "efficiency" axe is applied to Medicare, Our President takes "full control" of the legislative process. Will he tap dance too?

Of course there is nothing of substance to take control of at this stage. The bill is a debacle... if, that is, one wanted universal health care for all Americans. That is the one thing no version of the bill does or will provide. So called "health care reform" turns out to be yet another wretched and revolting example of Obama's Neo-Trickledown © -- massive shovelling of monies in the direction of Big Corp. Only this time our pockets get to be plundered directly. A mafia shakedown would be as good.

Ever prioritizing her own political butt, Sen. Feinstein made known that opposition to the bill is running 4 to 1 in her bailiwick (California) and that she is withholding her vote until she see's what's up. No doubt the rest of the Congressional gaggle of Butts-Are-Us, have turned their noses to the wind as well.

Of course, had these congressoids actually put any moxy into serving the public's interest they might be riding a wave of support for efforts well done. But that is not what corporate whores exist for. I hope Feinstein and her co-ilks vote against the bill and then get voted out of office for having made the fiasco possible.

As for our Eleventh Hour Leader? It is truly amazing how such a bright boy turned out to be such a pathetic excuse for a politician. Then again, once one realizes what his real agenda was and for whom, he has turned out to be quite crafty... in a lying two faced way.
.

The Second Bill of Rights

The News:

The Note: Silly man.

What Happens when Quisling Gives Up?

The News: Commenting on the Palestinian leader, Mahmoud Abbas's pre-emptive resignation, Danny Alayon, Israel's Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs, commented, "We don't interfere in others' internal affairs... But it is evident that Israel and the United States are interested in a Palestinian leadership that is responsible and pragmatic." Not interfering, of course, Israeli president Shimon Peres called Abbas a day before his announcement and tried to persuade him to change his mind. Haaretz reported him as telling Abbas, "If you leave, the Palestinians would lose their chance for an independent state."

The Note: It is evident that Israel and its tag-along are interested in a Facade that will allow the de-facto annexation of the West Bank under the pretence of supervised Palestinian autonomy pending some eventual hologram of statehood. Ersatz Palestine within Eretz Israel.

Endless negotiations with a Steppinfechit, a Quisling, a propped-up nobody, is the slow but convenient "road map" to this end. The alternative would be another frank military onslaught which would expose to the world the murderous kernel of zionism. And what then? Who would play the counterpart? Surely somebody; someone depraved enough to assume the mantle of Quisling of Rubble. Doesn't sell very well, does it ? No no... the strategy is too risky. Better an abetting Abbas who will play Israel's game of drip drip drip until the world tires of the whole damn affair and let's Israel have the whole matzoh.

No doubt, there are those in Israel -- in the General Staff and on Jew-Only Roads -- who relish this turn of events. This Land is My Land is their Marseilles. But cooler, craftier heads will be racking their brains figuring out how to massage the denouement.

The contours are obvious. After having made it impossible to negotiate, the wail will go up that Earnest Israel has no one to negotiate with on the Perfidious Palestinian side. Anyone who wants a foretaste of what this song will sound like has but to listen to Bibi's self-commiserating aria at the U.N. "We have tried, and tried and tried, but what can we do....?"

The only thing more nauseating will be the sounds emanating from the inner partner on Israel's couch.

.

Diplomentia

The News: According to BBC News, Hilarity Clinton "warns" Afghanistan's new leader (the ol' Karzai) that he will have to do more to stabilise the country.

The Note: ROFL *&!?%*?#@? Is she nuts or is this Washington's New Comedy Hour?

Face It ....

Headline: "Face it -- the GOP Doesn't Really Matter When it Comes to Health Care." (truthout.org)

Comment: Yeah -- the Demorats are bought well enough.

.

Qui Quibus

The News: Not within 24 hours of President Obama's decision to down-grade America's forward based missle defense in Czecho-Polakia than the New York Times ponders "Now, the question is whether Russia will do more to help prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons." [ here ]

The Note: Well... the quibus of the matter was sort of obvious, but the Times might have waited for a tad more decentish interval.

Anyone who believed the prior administration's claim that America's forward based defense in Eastern Europe was directed at protecting Paris from Persia is probably one of those person who also believes you can get "new growth" hair from a spray can. Clear and explicit NeoCon doctrine has always called for the encirclement and constriction of Russia. That's what Serbia, Ukraine, Georgia and Turkestan were all about. Certainly the Russians weren't fooled.

The only people fooled by the claim that the missles in Poland were aimed at "defending" against missiles in Iran were the New York Times and the gullible intelectufools who slurp their thought from the Times' trough.

This is not to say that the USA and its backer doesn't fuss about Iran. It does, obsessionally. It is simply to say that the forward based defense perimeter (to use NeoCon jargon) in Eastern Europe was directed east not south. Duh.

Now comes Obama, "improving" relations with Russia, dusting off the ol' Clinton-Albright pogey bait of NATO cooperation and what not. As a sweetner Obama downgrades (but does not entirely remove) our eastern defense shield. Okeee... quiz of the week: quid pro quo?

What do we need from the Russians? Help in committing geo-political suicide in AfPakistan? They are already gladly providing that. Trashing hardware contracts with Venezuela? For Venezuela, Richard, for Venezuela? Nah... all the big boys peddle armaments; the price is too much. Disuading Russia from rocking with Brazil, India and China to the tune of "It's our party and we'll laugh it we want to" ? Nah.. the payoff is not enough.

So what's left?

Assuming supposed cold-war realities, from an American point of view the trade off is actually pretty insane. We give up an assumedly needed deterrence against real Russian missles in order to protect ourselves and our "European partners" from non-existent, long range Iranian missles?

Qui quibus quod quoque qui quae quo?

Amusing, really.

©Barfo, 2009
.

Obama's Neo Trickledown

The News: At last, Fauxbama gave his Health Talk to the Nation, the details of which can be found here:

The Note: One perhaps might sigh that at last the farce is over. Alas it has only just begun. Aristotle suggested that a good place to begin anything was at the beginning, and so to understand the villainy of the farce we begin by asking: what is insurance? 

Insurance is a contract for remuneration in the event of a condition. I pay Company money now in consideration of the Company's promise to pay me should a specified event occur; for example a storm that sinks my spice-ship to the Orient. I fear the event might happen; the Company calculates that it will not. If the event does not happen we are both happy. If it does, I am happy to be covered.

It makes sense to insure against anomalies that might happen, not only strikes of lightning and car crashes but arguably, if one is young, against strange illnesses. However it makes no business sense for a company to insure against something that will happen, such as old age and terminal diseases. The concept of insurance was not designed with conditions certain in mind.

To be sure, from the insured's point of view, it makes little difference. He's paid premiums for something that will happen, the only unknown being when. Depending on when, he will usually receive at least the future value of what he paid in.

But from the Company's point of view the certainty of the pay-out event is a disaster, for obvious reasons. As a result medical insurance companies protect themselves by not insuring those who need coverage most and by dumping those who do when they are sick.

"Not insuring" is not limited to those with pre-existing conditions, it includes not insuring high risk people and anyone over 65, the age at which more people start to fall seriously ill. "Dumping" includes anyone who has purchased insurance at all.

This "off-loading" of contractual obligatons is perfectly legal. U.S. law allows it. It is simply government backed theft by fraudulent pretences. It is State supported cruelty.

Obama understands full well the depraved villainy of this "system". He talked about it in his speech.

The problem that plagues the health care system is not just a problem of the uninsured. Those who do have insurance have never had less security and stability than they do today. More and more Americans worry that if you move, lose your job, or change your job, you’ll lose your health insurance too. More and more Americans pay their premiums, only to discover that their insurance company has dropped their coverage when they get sick, or won’t pay the full cost of care. It happens every day.

One man from Illinois lost his coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because his insurer found that he hadn’t reported gallstones that he didn’t even know about. They delayed his treatment, and he died

He knows, as he said in February, that medico/insurance costs "cause[] a bankruptcy in America every 30 seconds" and that "by the end of the year, it could cause 1.5 million Americans to lose their homes." He knows that "[i]n the last eight years, premiums have grown four times faster than wages. And in each of these years, one million more Americans have lost their health insurance." He knows that we are the only nation on earth that allows for such a system and he knows that it is nothing less than a callous, diabolical depravity.

"These are the facts. Nobody disputes them. We know we must reform this system. The only question is how."

Discarding a "single payer" system like that in Canada, Obama went on to say

"I believe it makes more sense to build on what works and fix what doesn’t, rather than try to build an entirely new system from scratch. And that is precisely what those of you in Congress have tried to do over the past several months."

Is he fucking nuts or is he simple a smoothy for the crooks? The paradigm of insuring against what will happen is economically illogical and fundamentally insane. That is precisely why insurance companies are not in the business of insuring those over 65. This "remodelling" cannot work because it makes no sense. The only "building" that can be done is to paper over a putrid and festering evil.

The only way to provide health care to all is to spread the costs among all. And the only way to spread the costs among all fairly and reliably and affordably is to take the profit motive out of the equation. Nothing else makes sense. Nothing else can be "built upon".

But building on rotten timbers, Obama now proposes to require everyone to buy into a system that is fundamentally criminal and evil. In return "it will be against the law for insurance companies to deny you coverage because of a pre-existing condition." Well duh... that's pretty tautological isn't it? If everyone is required to purchase insurance it pretty much follows that all insurance companies must provide it. It does, only the proposals never actually required the insurance companies to provide anything at all.

It was actually unclear whether the prohibition against pre-existing condition denial applies to those who already have insurance (as per what he said in congress) or also applied to those looking for insurance (as per what was posted on the White House web page.)

For the sake of argument, we can assume the more charitable hypothesis, and that it will apply to everyone. We can also assume that once you have insurance "it will be against the law for insurance companies to drop your coverage when you get sick or water it down when you need it most." In other words, gallopping to the rescue Obama promises that "insurance" will really mean "insurance" once everybody is required to buy "insurance". Rejoice! The Second Coming is nigh.

For those who somehow loose or still don't have insurance, Obama proposes a "new insurance exchange – a marketplace where individuals and small businesses will be able to shop for health insurance at competitive prices. Insurance companies will have an incentive to participate in this exchange because it lets them compete for millions of new customers." Furthermore, "all insurance companies that want access to this new marketplace will have to abide by the consumer protections I already mentioned." -- i.e. they will have to actually provide "insurance" as opposed to engaging in outright theft by false pretences. Wow!

This wonderful exchange will not take effect for four years, so don't get sick before then! And if you still can't afford these assumedly lower priced plans, the Government will pitch in and help you with "tax credits". One way or another the insurance companies will get your business.

But will they want it? Comparing plan element 1 with plan element 2 reveals a curious anomaly: while all of us will be required to purchase insurance, insurance companies will only have an "incentive" to provide it. Nothing in these proposals required the insurance companies to offer anything. The president continued,

"I have no interest in putting insurance companies out of business [duh!] They provide a legitimate service [gag] , and employ a lot of our friends and neighbors [awww...]. I just want to hold them accountable [whew...]."

As for the public option?

"an additional step we can take to keep insurance companies honest is by making a not-for-profit public option available in the insurance exchange. Let me be clear – it would only be an option for those who don’t have insurance..... " "it would have to be self-sufficient and rely on the premiums it collects" and "we believe that less than 5% of Americans would sign up" even though "a strong majority of Americans still favor a public insurance option of the sort I’ve proposed tonight."

Do they not teach math at Harvard? Since when is "a strong majority" anything close to 5%? A public option formed around a 5% pool and limited to premiums it collects will not be able to afford to mow your damn lawn. If, on the other hand something close to a strong majority of Americans do sign up for it, the option will do more than "keep the insurance companies honest" it will put them out of business.

As for this key and controversial "option" Obama's speech offered nothing but shuck and jive. So that at last, at least, we've seen some ethnicity. But the problem with bullshit is that there is no telling which way it will slide. Is it a Trojan Horse aimed to penetrate Republican stonewalling? Or is it a sop to "the majority of Americans" that will be hedged about by all sorts of conditions (e.g. "for those who cannot afford") and shrouded pixie dust ("it could provide a good deal for consumers.")?

We should take Obama at his word that "the driving idea behind reform has been to end insurance company abuses and make coverage affordable for those without it" and that he sees the Public Option as a means towards this end and not a true alternative per se. In other words, it is not really an option at all, but simply one of several "incentives" to end insurance company abuses.

The way to end insurance company "abuses" is to criminalize them and start handing out Three Strike sentences to scum bags that CEO these criminal outfits. It is perfectly possible to use insurance companies as an administrative mechanism for delivering health care. I believe that is the system Germany uses. But the way to achieve that is to directly regulate what they must and cannot do: prescribe coverage standards, set premiums and put limits on profits. Instead, Obama hopes to "incentivize" these criminals with a variety of non-compulsory "mechanisms"

It is nothing short revolting. This is the same free-market, incentive approach that just handed a trillion dollars to the very culprits that caused the global recession in the hopes that they would "start lending again." And as Obama's very speech last night admitted, six months into the fattened bottom line, those scumbags haven't lent out a dime. They have simply pocketted the money and closed their doors. We are now to believe that insurance companies, the biggest and vilest theives of all are going to respond to a bunch of "incentives" the most serious of which will have to be "self-supporting" and won't take effect for four years in any case?

In four years the Republoscum will be in c:ontrol and the public option will be on par with a Wisconsin dairy cooperative.

I wish I could believe that Obama is trying to sneak true reform past the corporate criminals and their craven whores in Congress. But everything he has done thus far indicates otherwise. The essence of Obama's political economy is simply Neo-Trickledown

Classical, laissez faire trickledown is based on the proposition that allowing private enterprise to pursue its own interests without hinderances will produce sufficient collateral benefits for society as a whole to justify the absence of regulation. As Alexander Pope put it, "Self interest and social are but the same."

Of course, no system, howsoever liberal, has ever practiced pure laissez faire. At all times, governments have promoted and encouraged enterprise by a variety of fiscal and legal devices: patents, copyrights, licenses, monopolies, easy credit, favorable loans, tax credits and lower tax rates. But aside from certain exceptional situations -- as the vast grants of land parcels to railroads -- most of these devices have fallen into the category of stimuli; and given the conditions at the time, even the land grants to railroads could arguably be regarded as a stimulus.

Obama's Neo-Trickledown crosses the line into outright gifts whereby the public collectively or as individuals pay hard cash in the trillions to private corporations in the hope that this hand out will incentivize them to trickle a little more back our way. In fact, the trillions dumped on the banks were given virtually without conditions, on a one page signed request [here].

This is fiscal insanity. This is worse than robbing Peter to pay Paul. It is robbing yourself on a prayer of receiving back a pittance. But at least we know what Fauxbama is about. Hope is on the way! Indeed.

©Barfo, 2009
.

Surf's Up in the Economy!

The News: "U.S. companies cut more jobs than forecast in August and boosted their workers’ productivity the most since 2003 in the second quarter, signaling employers are seeking to cut costs further even as the economy stabilizes." (Bloomberg)

The Note: This like saying, "Hey! Surf's up!" as hurrican Jimena rages swirling destruction on Baja.

We've always wondered what "productivity" meant. Like most people and, indeed, like most econ textbooks, we've thought of productivity in terms of efficiency: widgets cranked out per hour. Indeed, "productivity qua efficiency" is a standard Capitalist Mantra -- the "build a better mouse trap" saw. The notion foisted is that a "vibrant free market economy" will replace inefficient home spinning wheels (which take six months of gyrations to come up with a wool blanket) with moden mechanical robo-looms (which can turn out a ton of blankets in six hours. ) This is why capitalism is such a magical and wonderful thing.

But how is this productivity actually measured? Does the US Bureau of Labor Statistics send out inspectors with stop watches to time and measure the nut-tightening prowess of a robo-arm and compare it with Charlie Chaplin's frantic efforts taken as a sort of "base line" ? That would measure efficiency, no doubt, but, given the size and complexity of our economy it would be extremely labor intensive and time consuming to conduct such studies on a quarterly basis. Is this the way productivity is really measured? Nooooo. The US Bureau of Labor Statistics puts it this way:

"Productivity is a measure of economic efficiency which shows how effectively economic inputs are converted into output.

"Output per hour of all persons—labor productivity—is the most commonly used productivity measure. Labor is an easily-identified input to virtually every production process.
"Unit labor costs are calculated by dividing total labor compensation by real output or —- equivalently —— by dividing hourly compensation by productivity.

"That is, unit labor costs = total labor compensation / real output ...,

"Thus, increases in productivity lower unit labor costs while increases in hourly compensation raise them."

In other words "productivity" which started out as having something to do with "efficiency" ends up having everything to do with "costs" -- and in particular "labor costs" -- or "worker compensation" as in dollars per hour or retirement and health care benefits.

Sooooo... the headlines really read

"FEWER JOBS CREATED THAN ANTICIPATED & THOSE WORKING ARE EARNING LESS"

Rejoice sucker.

For more accurate measurements and nuances see Statistics Canada
.

Grossartige Angebot

The Note: Last week one of our editorial barfsters joked in a chat channel that Israel had offered to freeze settlement construction "around Ramallah and in Beit Krap" for six months if the U.S. agreed to certain desired intelligence sharing and gave Israel the ol' wink wink to bomb Iran and trigger a global depression.

The News: The details of "pending progress" toward a Middle East peace deal were leaked today. According to press reports, Israel will temporarily freeze construction on settlements in exchange for the U.S. taking a much "harder line" against Iran, including an embargo on oil exports.

.