Saturday Morning Reads: Our Future. Our Selves.

Leymah Gbowee

Good Morning!

I admit to a growing fascination with Leymah Gbowee since hearing several interviews with her after the announcement that she is one of three women sharing the 2011 Nobel Peace Prize.  She is just one of those take charge and get it done women if there ever was one!  I am now itching to see “Pray the Devil Back to Hell”.  This is a documentary by  filmmaker Abigail Disney.  Here is a link to a 2009 report from Bill Moyers Journal on the 2008 film.  Yes, Abigail Disney comes from THAT family but the movie is a long ways away from animated princesses and singing animals.  You can watch the Moyers piece here to get a feel for Gbowee’s commitment to social justice in Liberia.

Women’s News Network updated their recent interview with Gbowee on her work to secure reproductive and sexual rights of African women as well as her efforts to assure peace in Liberia.  She also addresses the needs of American women in the interview.  Yes.  We can learn many things from the struggles of women in developing nations for basic rights as we see the daily erosion of our own.  Did you ever believe you would live a country where the whims of a druggist can dictate your access to prescribed medicine?

In Gbowee’s estimation, American women also have challenges that need to be addressed. This topic came up in response to our conversation about CEDAW, and the inability for the agreement to get national traction. She referenced the disadvantages that come from not signing the international treaty. Totally frank in her assessment questioning America’s ability to provide cogent leadership on women’s issues, Gbowee pointed to matters that leaders “don’t want to tackle.”

She said, “If a President or Secretary of State is standing up and making statements about the rapes in Congo, and that same country has not signed a document that is so important to the lives of their women —what other name do you give it but hypocrisy?”

Part of our exchange included how important it was for those working to help women under siege, to truly engage in an equal dialogue. “There is a need to speak to the women of these countries,” Gbowee said. She told me a story about a trip she had taken to Congo where she had spoken with women on the ground, and learned that for them “rape was at the bottom of the list.”

At the top — was “political participation.” For those women, “rape is a symptom of an actual issue.” She continued, “We want to help. But we need to step out of our donor driven issues and step into what it is that these communities actually want.”

Yes. Gbowee’s  got me thinking on how United States women are losing ground daily. She is right.  Our country has not signed on to CEDAW.  What does this say about a President that MS magazine labelled a feminist?  This link takes you to the Text of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women.   Why is our country not a signatory? Why are our rights not a priority?

The Convention defines discrimination against women as “…any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field.”

By accepting the Convention, States commit themselves to undertake a series of measures to end discrimination against women in all forms, including:

  • to incorporate the principle of equality of men and women in their legal system, abolish all discriminatory laws and adopt appropriate ones prohibiting discrimination against women;
  • to establish tribunals and other public institutions to ensure the effective protection of women against discrimination; and
  • to ensure elimination of all acts of discrimination against women by persons, organizations or enterprises.

 The Convention provides the basis for realizing equality between women and men through ensuring women’s equal access to, and equal opportunities in, political and public life — including the right to vote and to stand for election — as well as education, health and employment.  States parties agree to take all appropriate measures, including legislation and temporary special measures, so that women can enjoy all their human rights and fundamental freedoms.

It seems that a country as advanced as ours would consider the rights of half of its citizens to be extremely important, wouldn’t it?  However, that doesn’t appear to be the priority of many folks in government outside of the US State Department.  Here is a youtube of SOS Clinton saying that the treaty is a priority of the Obama administration.  Why haven’t we signed it?

American women are experiencing an incredible set back in rights.  Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius spoke at an  abortion rights  fundraiser on Wednesday where she issued a strong warning against moves by Republicans to roll back women’s health gains by 50 years.  Women are being sent back to chattel status in state after state.

“We’ve come a long way in women’s health over the last few decades, but we are in a war,” Sebelius said at a NARAL Pro-Choice America luncheon attended by about 300 people, who gave some of their loudest applause at her mention of the Obama administration’s support for requiring insurance plans to cover birth control without copays.

Sebelius said women have suffered discrimination by insurance companies that considered “Viagra an essential medication and birth control a lifestyle choice.”

Her message resonated with some at the event who acknowledged doubts about Obama’s leadership on a variety of liberal issues.

“I’m a little disappointed with his force, his forcefulness, pretty much across the board,” Chicagoan Bamboo Solzman said of Obama. Sebelius’ remarks at Wednesday’s event solidified Solzman’s support of Obama’s re-election, she said. “He was forward enough to choose her, so that does help,” Solzman said.

We are clearly losing ground.  While women in the administration are being sent out to do heartfelt speeches, nothing is being done to protect our rights.  Speeches do not protect women and children from the brutalities of fundamentalist religions and the economic realities of sex-based discrimination.  Neoconfederate Ron Paul is just one among many Republican presidential contenders that wants to eliminate access to something as simple as basic birth control.  The fight is not just for our right to abortion.  It is for our right to birth control and self determination.

“I am deeply troubled by the flippancy with which President Obama recently discussed regulations that are alarming and troublesome for many Americans,” Paul said. “Not all Americans are comfortable with the Obama administration’s decision to mandate coverage of birth control and morning-after pills, and the considerations of these people, many of them Christian conservatives, are worthy of careful consideration – not mockery.”

“Many, like me, view this rigid regulatory overstep from which there is inadequate opportunity to self-exempt as payback to Planned Parenthood and big pharmaceutical companies for their support of Obamacare,” Paul added. “Many others oppose it out of strict moral conviction and their voices should be heard at least to the extent that an authentic opportunity to exempt be provided. That is, until Obamacare is repealed in its entirety.”

“As this mandate violates the conscience of millions of pro-life Americans, I have introduced in Congress H.R. 1099, the Taxpayer Freedom of Conscience Act, which removes all federal funding for domestic and international family planning,” Paul continued. “As President, I plan to defund Obamacare and all federal programs that use tax money taken from the American people to promote abortion and provide abortion services domestically and globally. I pledge also to veto any bill with funding for Planned Parenthood or any other international family planning regimes.”

Any of us can have deeply felt beliefs against the death penalty, against invasions of nations, and against assassination without due process of American citizens, yet none of our concerns are met with similar angst and pearl clutching.  Only the fetus fetishists get to object to using their puny tax dollars for every one.  If they don’t want abortions or birth control, they just shouldn’t get them.  That should have nothing to do with our access  Their views preclude the findings of modern science and medicine and they are ruling the day.

Most Republican presidential wannabes spent their week pandering to so called “values voters” at a summit cum hatefest.   Clearly, this political movement is out to define every one’s personal choices to meet their maxims. They have declared an open war on women’s rights.  Rick Perry’s Endorser called Mitt Romney’s faith a “cult” and referred to Planned Parenthood as “a slaughterhouse for the unborn”.  This is nothing more than hate speech dressed up in a pastor’s robe.

It was no ordinary opener from the prominent Southern Baptist Convention leader, Pastor Robert Jeffress, who endorsed Perry on Friday. Jeffress praised Perry for defunding Planned Parenthood in Texas, calling the provider of women’s health and abortion services, “that slaughterhouse for the unborn.”

He also lauded Perry’s “strong commitment to biblical values.”

“Do we want a candidate who is skilled in rhetoric or one who is skilled in leadership? Do we want a candidate who is a conservative out of convenience or one who is a conservative out of deep conviction?” Jeffress said. “Do we want a candidate who is a good, moral person — or one who is a born-again follower of the lord Jesus Christ?”

Jeffress called Perry a “genuine follower of Jesus Christ.” The pastor did not mention Perry’s rival Mitt Romney by name, but he told reporters after his remarks on Friday that Mormonism was a “cult.”

Jeffress’ comments and his endorsement of Perry threatened to inject some tension into what has been a relatively quiet year for religion on the campaign trail and the Perry campaign sought to quiet the uproar.

The campaign’s official comment on Jeffress evolved quickly on Friday afternoon. When initially asked by ABC News whether Gov. Perry agreed that Mormonism is a cult, Perry spokesman Mark Miner said: “The governor doesn’t judge what is in the heart and soul of others. He leaves that to God.”

My horrible governor Bobby Jindal joked about pedophilia at this same hub of hatred.  What an inappropriate topic for jokes! Since so many folks were herded out of New Orleans and Southern Louisiana after Katrina, we can no longer even find a decent field of candidates to run against a man that’s trying to bring back the plantation system of government and economics.  He has spent tremendous amounts of money courting chicken evisceration plants to our state for a few horrible paying jobs while decimating our already fragile public health and education systems.

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) knows just how to crack up the audience at the Values Voter Summit: just make a joke about former Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) being a pedophile.

After a long winded speech about all his accomplishments protecting children from sex offenders, Jindal brought it home.

“What I can do as governor is this: I can make Louisiana the last place that anyone who wants to in any way harm a child by exposing children to inappropriate material,” Jindal said. “I can make Louisiana a dangerous place for Congressman Weiner to relocate to.”

Louisiana is a dangerous place for teachers, nurses, and public employees right now because of this man and that clearly makes it a dangerous place for children.  After all, this is the same governor that foisted a creationist law on them.   He clearly doesn’t value children enough to educate them in science, protect their health, and provide them decent teachers and classrooms.  Our children need protection from our Governor.

The scientific community has long advocated that allowing anything but science in the teaching of evolution will be intellectually harmful. In an e-mail sent to the Associated Press, Harold Kroto, a Nobel Prize winner for chemistry in 1996, said voting against the repeal creates a situation that “should be likened to requiring Louisiana school texts to include the claim that the Sun goes round the Earth.”

While evolutionary biology is based in the work of Charles Darwin, which shows how humans evolved through natural selection, creationism is rooted in a fundamental reading of Biblical texts that say mankind is the product of a divine maker.

With the law intact, Louisiana is the state that has gone the furthest in approving legislation that opens the door to allowing alternatives to science taught in its schools.

American women are also not making much headway to influence corporate culture and business decisions through board appointments.  America’s top business women attended Fortune Most Powerful Women Summit in Laguna Niguel, California.  Board positions are key to efforts to break the glass ceiling because boards approve CEO pay and appointments.  One of the questions raised at the meeting was dealing with requests to become a board’s token woman. The topic was raised by Anne Mulcahy–former Xerox CEO and board member–who questioned if it was worth the effort to become the lone female on what has been an all boy board.

At the same time, female representation on boards is still a major issue. The percentage of female directors, which hovers around 20 percent, has been at a standstill over the past decade—Spencer Stuart finds that there has been no increase in that ratio since 2000. The research firm Catalyst reports an even lower number, 16 percent, putting the United States behind Finland, Sweden and Norway, which actually has a law requiring 40 percent of all board members at Norwegian companies to be women. Those low percentages persist despite the fact that study after study has shown that more diverse boards are associated with greater company performance.

I get what Mulcahy is saying. Why should women in positions of power join a club, as she puts it, that they may not want to be a part of? At that level, most women have multiple commitments, and joining a board where they’re treated like tokens rather than assets may not be the best use of their time. In addition, they may be able to have more of an impact on a board that is already forward thinking and receptive to diversity.

So, at a time when we are celebrating the progress made by women who have reached presidencies in countries in South America, Africa, Australia, and the East, we are seeing tremendous setbacks in women’s rights here in the United States.  Who are the Leymah Gbowee’s of North America?    Let us do more than just pray a few of our own devils back to hell.  Let’s be in their faces and all in their business just like Ms. Gbowee! (See youtube below.) Let’s be an entire population of women that won’t shut up!!!


Friday Morning Reads

Good Morning!

I’ve been working on a lot of research recently to get ready for the big job market event for finance professors in October in Denver.  As a result, I’m enviously reading that a lot of you are already reading the Suskind book and kind enough to comment here.  Keep it up so I can live vicariously through your ability to read it and get a little fix and distraction while I work!

I found a few interesting links this morning to share.  Bill Clinton offered his opinions on the death penalty and the Troy Davis execution which was based solely on notoriously bad eye witness accounts that were later found to be coerced.  He believes that hard evidence is the essential to making our justice system do what its supposed to do.

While in office, Clinton signed into law the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, which, according to Time, “reduced new trials for convicted criminals and sped up their sentences by restricting a federal court’s ability to judge whether a state court had correctly interpreted the U.S. Constitution.” The law has been cited as one of the major obstacles that prevented Davis from being granted a new trial.

Clinton’s comments on Thursday seemed to suggest that he believes some of these cases should be slowed down in light of advances in technology.

He added that increased reliance on DNA evidence and its ability to decisively prove the innocence or guilt of a defendant is the “the most important thing that’s happened in criminal justice in the last 30 years.”

“When there’s any chance a DNA test can resolve this, then there should be no proceeding with the [death] penalty until that’s resolved,” he said.

“I actually spent some time yesterday on this appeals case, just listening to the news coverage,” he continued. “The thing I found strange was that even though there were some people who apparently wanted to change their testimony when there was a hearing before the court — the lawyers for the defendant didn’t bring them on to say what they had to say. So it’s an unusual case.”

Davis’ attorney did not immediately return a request for comment.

Clinton supported the death penalty as president and oversaw four executions while serving as governor of Arkansas, including the controversial case of Ricky Ray Rector.

In 2000, Clinton stayed the execution of Juan Raul Garza, who was just five days away from being the first federal prisoner executed since 1963. He ordered the Justice Department to examine “racial and geographic disparities in the federal death penalty system.” Garza was eventually executed in 2001.

Clinton held a round table with bloggers in a side conversation during his Global Initiative being held in NYC.  He also addressed the Middle East situation mourning the losses of Rabin to assassination and Sharon to illness.  He did not have the same kind words for current Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu whom Clinton blames for the current problems in the peace process.  He also blames Arafat for being unreasonable during the peace process when he was directly involved with negotiations.

“The two great tragedies in modern Middle Eastern politics, which make you wonder if God wants Middle East peace or not, were [Yitzhak] Rabin‘s assassination and [Ariel] Sharon‘s stroke,” Clinton said.

Sharon had decided he needed to build a new centrist coalition, so he created the Kadima party and gained the support of leaders like Tzipi Livni and Ehud Olmert. He was working toward a consensus for a peace deal before he fell ill, Clinton said. But that effort was scuttled when the Likud party returned to power.

“The Israelis always wanted two things that once it turned out they had, it didn’t seem so appealing to Mr. Netanyahu. They wanted to believe they had a partner for peace in a Palestinian government, and there’s no question — and the Netanyahu government has said — that this is the finest Palestinian government they’ve ever had in the West Bank,” Clinton said.

“[Palestinian leaders] have explicitly said on more than one occasion that if [Netanyahu] put up the deal that was offered to them before — my deal — that they would take it,” Clinton said, referring to the 2000 Camp David deal that Yasser Arafat rejected.

But the Israeli government has drifted a long way from the Ehud Barak-led government that came so close to peace in 2000, Clinton said, and any new negotiations with the Netanyahu government are now on starkly different terms — terms that the Palestinians are unlikely to accept.

“For reasons that even after all these years I still don’t know for sure, Arafat turned down the deal I put together that Barak accepted,” he said. “But they also had an Israeli government that was willing to give them East Jerusalem as the capital of the new state of Palestine.”

Republicans attending the debates for presidential candidates continue to set lows for hateful, angry, bigoted, nasty behavior.  First, they scream loud approving hoorays at Perry’s horrible record of state murder in Texas, then then screamed “let him die” in response to a question to Ron Paul on people with no health insurance.  This time they boo’d an active duty soldier serving our country in the Iraq War in the second Fox News Hater Fest.   These are people that are sick sick sick and I wonder who invited them to the shindig and how we can export them all to Devil’s Island where they can create a hell realm all to themselves.

Planet Michele was in full alignment last night with the alternate universe.  She thinks taxpayers should keep all the money they earn.  I guess the government will have to hold bake sales to run the war in Afghanistan.  What ever happened to those t shirts?  We’ll have to redo them for her bits of policy wisdom, I guess.

Former IRS lawyer Michele Bachmann has an interesting approach to taxation: she thinks Americans should get to keep “every dollar” they earn, though she says the government needs to get money somehow.

Fox News host Megyn Kelly asked Bachmann about a question at a previous Republican debate on how much of every dollar taxpayers should get to keep. Bachmann said that she talked to the young man who asked the question at the last debate.

“I said ‘I wish I could have answered that question, because I want to tell you what my answer is. I think you earned every dollar, you should get to keep every dollar that you earned,’” Bachmann said. “That’s your money, that’s not the government’s money, that’s the whole point.”

Some one needs to check when the jeebus cult love bombs that  just keep going off in her mind for expiration dates.  Also, her campaign staff

New poster woman for WHAT NOT TO WEAR

needs to send her to TLC and What to Wear where: “Stacy London and Clinton Kelly help the frumpy by giving them life-changing fashion makeovers and fashion advice.” She looks and acts like the Manchurian candidate for Wonderland.  Michele, when you are standing as the only woman in a line up of men and want to be taken seriously, you cannot wear ghost white panty hose and tacky tacky sandals.  Isn’t the styler for Quitterella available? She always looked terrific! It almost made you forget the insanity that spewed from her mouth.  I really think Marcus HAS to be dressing Michele from his secret wardrobe.  I found the picture on the left to be just as bad as it gets.  Look at those shoes!!!  If you want to be a power player, you freaking have to dress like one!  Notice that none of the men are ever out of their traditional corporate monkey suits!  Bachmann’s a total ditz and I wouldn’t want her in charge of anything, but I really think women in positions that should command respect have to go out of their way dress themselves to avoid looking trivial unless they want to be treated that way!  It’s still a power suit world in politics and business. Strappy sandals are for cocktail parties given by lobbyists!

The Villagers are obsessed with the nonperformance of Perry who appeared to have left the Texas part of his personality at home. That didn’t leave much.  Frank Luntz was trying to convince every one that would listen that Perry was yesterday’s plate of grilling beans and that Romney was becoming more Reaganesque every debate and waking moment. He was even seen directing his post debate ‘focus group’ to mimic his talking points.  His eyes kept pleading “Romney can beat the one!  Please LIKE HIM DAMMIT!”  The group describe Perry as a waffler and that Romney held himself accountable for all those ‘mistakes’ that seemed a lot like complete flip flops to the rest of us.  There were some fireworks between the two on Social Security among other issues. Oh, and the newbie to the crowd, some governor whose name I forget from New Mexico ripped a joke off from Rush Limbaugh.  Every one thought it was great until they discovered the source.  Hint to yahoo politicians from New Mexico:  don’t plagiarize any one on your first major TV appearance. You may think that ripping off Rush gives you creds with the ditto heads but it really brings out the worst in the media.

Face to face in confrontational debate, Republican presidential hopefuls Mitt Romney and Rick Perry sarcastically accused each other Thursday night of flip-flopping on Social Security and health care, flashpoints in their early struggle for the party nomination.

Romney accused Perry of having said the federal government “shouldn’t be in the pension business, that it’s unconstitutional,” a reference to Social Security benefits.

The Texas governor disputed the charge, saying it “wasn’t the first time Mitt’s been wrong on some issue before.” But Romney mocked his rival’s denial, adding crisply, “You better find that Rick Perry and get him to stop saying that.”

Perry soon returned the favor, saying that Romney switched his position on health care between editions of a book he had published. In one edition, Perry said, Romney advocated expanding the health care program he signed in Massachusetts to the rest of the country. “Then in your paperback you took that line out, so speaking of not getting it straight in your book, Sir.”

“It’s like badminton,” said Perry.

WTF is it with men and really stupid sports metaphors?  Sheesh! They’re always like two small steps away from being those little boys on the little league team that can’t do anything right. Oh, and the joke rip off has already gone to Rush’s big fat lying head …

Former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson brought down the house at Thursday night’s Fox News/ Google debatewhen he joked about how his “next-door neighbor’s two dogs have created more shovel-ready jobs than this current administration.”

The joke killed among the GOP faithful. But was Johnson the first to use it?

Just today, talk radio host Rush Limbaugh delivered a similar joke on air.

“My dogs have created more shovel-ready work than Obama has just this week alone,” Limbaugh said. “The new puppy. Honest to God. More shovel-ready work for me this week than Obama has created all two and a half years.”

So what does Limbaugh think of the similarity?

“I guess I’ve become show prep for the GOP debates now, too,” Limbaugh told The Huffington Post in an email. Limbaugh said he thought he used the line yesterday, “but the days run together, so I’m not really sure.”

Well, the guy’s name is Gary Johnson–how could I forget that!–and he used to be the Governor of New Mexico. His one chance to be remembered and he’ll be known as the guy that plagiarized Rush Limbaugh!  Alrighty then … I’m continuing my policy of making sure we don’t forget the BP Oil spill.  Here’s one from my local rag that’s worth your reading time about the silencing of Gulf oil spill Investigators.

A U.S. House committee was forced to postpone a hearing on the findings of a federal investigation into the causes of the BP oil spill because the Obama administration suddenly refused to let investigators testify, the committee chairman said.

The alleged silencing of the members of the joint Coast Guard and Interior Department investigative team comes in the wake of the sudden resignation of Interior’s lead investigator, Hammond resident David Dykes.

In a news release late Thursday afternoon, Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., the chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, blasted the Obama administration.

“It took far too long for the final report to be issued and the Obama administration is now further delaying proper oversight by suddenly refusing to allow members of the investigation team to testify,” Hastings said in a statement.

Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement and the Coast Guard said they never wanted “line investigators” to testify. They are seeking to clarify that with Hastings at a meeting Friday, apparently to offer more senior agency officials to testify.

“BOEMRE and the Coast Guard were responsive to Chairman Hastings and his Committee’s request late last week for a hearing. However, we felt strongly from the beginning it was inappropriate for BOEMRE and Coast Guard line investigators to testify, and presented alternative options,” a joint statement from the two agencies said.

Wow!  I just think I made it through an entire morning news post without mentioning ONE economics story.  Must be a record!  What’s on your reading and blogging list today?


The Financial Crisis Explained

Who says Elizabeth Warren doesn’t have fire in her belly?

We already knew Robert Reich does.

Why do we buy lies based on unsubstantiated wishful thinking over what we know from theory based on on empirical data.

This is all just common sense and it’s backed by data.

These are people that know the facts over the ideology.  This is real economics over voodoo economics.


Don’t welcome the Neoconfederate Overlords

I used to be a Republican.  I registered as a Democrat when I moved to Louisiana 15 years ago. The Clinton Presidency was a beacon of hope for what I considered a party so co-opted by crazies that I couldn’t take it any more.  As some of you know, I ran for state office in Nebraska and was completely stalked and harassed by right to life true believers and looney bin church members.  I used to work for Republican candidates during my high school years.  I attended many state and county conventions. During the 80s there was a distinct change.  The conventions were packed with people recruited from church pews that were sent with directions on who to vote for and which principles to remove from the party platform. They removed the ERA and support for abortion rights with some of the most specious reasons I’d ever heard.  I really thought if I heard any one mention unisex bathrooms one more time that I was going to slap some one silly.

All I ever got for nearly everything I said was some absolutely insane diatribe that wasn’t grounded in reality let alone science or economics or sound principles of governance.  You can’t really debate any one who insists the earth is less than 10,000 years old and that scientists lie. The minute you run for office to start a policy discussion, you become labelled a politician and branded as part of the problem.  They hate you for your education and call you an elite.  You are screamed down for attending celebrations of women’s suffrage for ‘marching with lesbians in the street’ as if that was some kind of craven and criminal act.  I’ve seen rabid dogs with less crazed eyes than the looks I’ve seen on anti-choice zealots.  I completely understand why people always say they never knew they had a mass murderer burying bodies in yards right next to theirs.  They choose not to see what’s going on.  So many people avoid being truly awake.  No amount of evidence seems to wake people who really want to be uninformed.

I totally self-identify as an Independent now because I think it’s pretty obvious that both parties are only interested in self-sustenance and not the country.  I will not ever get involved with party politics again but I  occasionally will work for a candidate. The last campaign I volunteered for was Hillary Clinton’s campaign for the Democratic nomination.   I watch the new Republican party machinations with complete horror.  An article in TruthOut has brought back all my angst felt while I was trying to help wrest the party from religious and John Birch-style extremists in the 80s and 90s.  Its headline is this: “Goodbye to All That: Reflections of a GOP Operative Who Left the Cult”.  The author is Mike Lofgren who served as a Republican staffer–mostly in a budget analyst position for the House and Senate–for 30 years and has now quit.  You should read the article and be very afraid. It’s an insider’s guide to the rebirth of the confederacy where quoting the Bible justifies any form of slavery and violence as a state’s right.

To those millions of Americans who have finally begun paying attention to politics and watched with exasperation the tragicomedy of the debt ceiling extension, it may have come as a shock that the Republican Party is so full of lunatics. To be sure, the party, like any political party on earth, has always had its share of crackpots, like Robert K. Dornan or William E. Dannemeyer. But the crackpot outliers of two decades ago have become the vital center today: Steve King, Michele Bachman (now a leading presidential candidate as well), Paul Broun, Patrick McHenry, Virginia Foxx, Louie Gohmert, Allen West. The Congressional directory now reads like a casebook of lunacy.

It was this cast of characters and the pernicious ideas they represent that impelled me to end a nearly 30-year career as a professional staff member on Capitol Hill. A couple of months ago, I retired; but I could see as early as last November that the Republican Party would use the debt limit vote, an otherwise routine legislative procedure that has been used 87 times since the end of World War II, in order to concoct an entirely artificial fiscal crisis. Then, they would use that fiscal crisis to get what they wanted, by literally holding the US and global economies as hostages.

The debt ceiling extension is not the only example of this sort of political terrorism. Republicans were willing to lay off 4,000 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) employees, 70,000 private construction workers and let FAA safety inspectors work without pay, in fact, forcing them to pay for their own work-related travel – how prudent is that? – in order to strong arm some union-busting provisions into the FAA reauthorization.

Everyone knows that in a hostage situation, the reckless and amoral actor has the negotiating upper hand over the cautious and responsible actor because the latter is actually concerned about the life of the hostage, while the former does not care. This fact, which ought to be obvious, has nevertheless caused confusion among the professional pundit class, which is mostly still stuck in the Bob Dole era in terms of its orientation. For instance, Ezra Klein wrote of his puzzlement over the fact that while House Republicans essentially won the debt ceiling fight, enough of them were sufficiently dissatisfied that they might still scuttle the deal. Of course they might – the attitude of many freshman Republicans to national default was “bring it on!”

It should have been evident to clear-eyed observers that the Republican Party is becoming less and less like a traditional political party in a representative democracy and becoming more like an apocalyptic cult, or one of the intensely ideological authoritarian parties of 20th century Europe. This trend has several implications, none of them pleasant.

He continues to write about how the media has not really awakened to the true nature of the party’s activists as well as a list of the current lunatic ideology that has captured the Republican political machinery.   I’ve often written about the way the press never seems to hold any one to account for lying.  They are complicit in the destruction of political discourse.  They refuse to call out obvious lies.

The media are also complicit in this phenomenon. Ever since the bifurcation of electronic media into a more or less respectable “hard news” segment and a rabidly ideological talk radio and cable TV political propaganda arm, the “respectable” media have been terrified of any criticism for perceived bias. Hence, they hew to the practice of false evenhandedness. Paul Krugman has skewered this tactic as being the “centrist cop-out.” “I joked long ago,” he says, “that if one party declared that the earth was flat, the headlines would read ‘Views Differ on Shape of Planet.'”

Lofgren cites a fairly recent article from The New Republic worth reading. Its’ written by John B Judis and titled ” If Obama Likes Lincoln So Much, He Should Start Acting Like Him”. 

Over the last four decades, the Republican Party has transformed from a loyal opposition into an insurrectionary party that flouts the law when it is in the majority and threatens disorder when it is the minority. It is the party of Watergate and Iran-Contra, but also of the government shutdown in 1995 and the impeachment trial of 1999. If there is an earlier American precedent for today’s Republican Party, it is the antebellum Southern Democrats of John Calhoun who threatened to nullify, or disregard, federal legislation they objected to, and who later led the fight to secede from the union over slavery.

Today, Republicans are threatening a government shutdown and an international monetary crisis over raising the debt ceiling. They have demanded a set of ruinous concessions as a condition for raising the ceiling. These conditions would include draconian budget cuts at a time when economic growth has virtually stalled—it grew a mere 0.9 percent the first half of this year—because of the exhaustion of the 2009-10 government stimulus. To gain Tea Party votes, House Speaker John Boehner set another condition for raising the debt ceiling again in six months: the passage by the House and Senate of a constitutional amendment to balance the budget. An amendment of this kind would make it impossible for the federal government to reverse economic downturns. The Republicans are, in effect, demanding a major constitutional change in return for not shutting down the government and undermining the American economy. That’s insurrectionary behavior.

I am not an expert on Lincoln, but I have a pretty good idea what he would say if he were to suddenly appear on the scene. He would reject the Republican majority’s attempt to blackmail the rest of the government and the nation. If, because of Republican intransigence, the Congress were unable to raise the debt ceiling by August 2nd, I suspect he would follow Bill Clinton’s advice and raise the debt ceiling unilaterally on the grounds of the fourteenth amendment, which says that “the validity of the public debt … shall not be questioned.” That’s certainly a risky move. If Obama were to do it, he could eventually face a hostile Supreme Court majority, just as Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus aroused the ire of Chief Justice Roger Taney in 1861. But, given the dangerous game that the Republican Party is playing, that’s a risk worth taking.

I am completely baffled by the inability of people that like Ron Paul to listen to him and not hear the same confederate language that framed the civil rights era.  He uses the same language I heard in the 60s and 70s when people in the south were trying to justify all their Jim Crow Laws and their monumental laws supporting voter disenfranchisement.  We’re seeing today’s Republican Governors pass legislation to restrict access to votes.  We’re seeing Republican Governors and legislation restrict access to a constitutionally protected medical procedure. Still, there seems to be a distinct lack of outrage by people who supposedly support limited government on these actions.  This is the same group of people that are now screaming about the size of federal debt while they were more than willing to spend incredible amounts of money on unnecessary military actions and items during the Reagan years and the Bush 43 years.  The hypocrisy is just maddening. The complicity of the press in presenting this insanity as simply another view point is virtually treasonous.

Back to Lofgren who demonstrates point-by-point that the Republican party is obsessed with protecting its rich constituents, promoting war and military industry, and has a religious bent now based on the view of the inevitability of apocalypse.   This alliance of neoconfederates, crony capitalists, religious fanatics, and war mongers has been 40 years in the making.

It is my view that the rise of politicized religious fundamentalism (which is a subset of the decline of rational problem solving in America) may have been the key ingredient of the takeover of the Republican Party. For politicized religion provides a substrate of beliefs that rationalizes – at least in the minds of followers – all three of the GOP’s main tenets.

Televangelists have long espoused the health-and-wealth/name-it-and-claim it gospel. If you are wealthy, it is a sign of God’s favor. If not, too bad! But don’t forget to tithe in any case. This rationale may explain why some economically downscale whites defend the prerogatives of billionaires.

The GOP’s fascination with war is also connected with the fundamentalist mindset. The Old Testament abounds in tales of slaughter – God ordering the killing of the Midianite male infants and enslavement of the balance of the population, the divinely-inspired genocide of the Canaanites, the slaying of various miscreants with the jawbone of an ass – and since American religious fundamentalist seem to prefer the Old Testament to the New (particularly that portion of the New Testament known as the Sermon on the Mount), it is but a short step to approving war as a divinely inspired mission. This sort of thinking has led, inexorably, to such phenomena as Jerry Falwell once writing that God is Pro-War.

It is the apocalyptic frame of reference of fundamentalists, their belief in an imminent Armageddon, that psychologically conditions them to steer this country into conflict, not only on foreign fields (some evangelicals thought Saddam was the Antichrist and therefore a suitable target for cruise missiles), but also in the realm of domestic political controversy. It is hardly surprising that the most adamant proponent of the view that there was no debt ceiling problem was Michele Bachmann, the darling of the fundamentalist right. What does it matter, anyway, if the country defaults? – we shall presently abide in the bosom of the Lord.

I frequently lament that not enough people really pay attention to candidates when they exercise their voting rights. However, unless you are willing to do your homework and embrace the idea that politicians may not be who they say they are, you will wind up as one of those low information voters that’s easy prey to the likes of Rick Perry. Back to Lofgren.

It is this broad and ever-widening gulf between the traditional Republicanism of an Eisenhower and the quasi-totalitarian cult of a Michele Bachmann that impelled my departure from Capitol Hill. It is not in my pragmatic nature to make a heroic gesture of self-immolation, or to make lurid revelations of personal martyrdom in the manner of David Brock. And I will leave a more detailed dissection of failed Republican economic policies to my fellow apostate Bruce Bartlett.

I left because I was appalled at the headlong rush of Republicans, like Gadarene swine, to embrace policies that are deeply damaging to this country’s future; and contemptuous of the feckless, craven incompetence of Democrats in their half-hearted attempts to stop them. And, in truth, I left as an act of rational self-interest. Having gutted private-sector pensions and health benefits as a result of their embrace of outsourcing, union busting and “shareholder value,” the GOP now thinks it is only fair that public-sector workers give up their pensions and benefits, too. Hence the intensification of the GOP’s decades-long campaign of scorn against government workers. Under the circumstances, it is simply safer to be a current retiree rather than a prospective one.

If you think Paul Ryan and his Ayn Rand-worshipping colleagues aren’t after your Social Security and Medicare, I am here to disabuse you of your naiveté. They will move heaven and earth to force through tax cuts that will so starve the government of revenue that they will be “forced” to make “hard choices” – and that doesn’t mean repealing those very same tax cuts, it means cutting the benefits for which you worked.

The lessons of the last year could not be clearer.  If you live in a state with a governor and a legislature sympathetic to these views, you’re watching the country descend into a locus of neoconfederate states where the state serves the plantation masters and the rest of us are slaves to ideology, servitude, debt and old tyme religion.  We are all share croppers now.   Take some time to think about this on a weekend that celebrates the struggles that our grandparents endured to bring us in to the modern age.  Think about this as we descend in to Civil-War era politics and mindsets. Also, be very aware that the absolute ineptitude and corruption of the Democratic party and their inability to stop this insanity is as treasonous as the ‘fair-minded’ press.  We the People need to do something quickly.


Norwegian Terrorist: Extremist Christian and Right Winger

You’re probably reading right now that around 90+ teenagers were gunned down in Norway simply for attending a labor party

Anders Behring Breivik

summer camp. If you made the rounds on some blogs yesterday as well as some main stream media sites, you’d have read some of the most blatantly hateful comments on Muslims that you could ever imagine.  The immediate assumption was this was an attack by Islamic extremists.  Frankly, many places read like it was an attack by a random Muslim.

Turns out that the Norwegian Terrorist is a fundamentalist Christian who admires infamous hate mongers and enemies of our liberties as spelled out in the US constitution Pam Geller of Atlas Shrugs and Robert Spencer of  Jihad Watch.  I’ve read some of Breivik’s prolific internet writings now. He praises Lou Dobbs and criticizes CNN for telling him to tone down his rants dealing with Muslims.  He also likes to call every one Marxists at the drop of the hat; especially the press and academics.  Additionally, he thinks Christians need to go back to the basics and stop helping poor Palestinians.  Sound like any one you may know?

What I’d like to know is if we’re going to put those folks into indefinite detention now and subject them to enhanced interrogation by the CIA to determine the extent to which they were complicit (or not) in this terrorist attack?  Perhaps Rick Perry and his friends should be sent to Guantanamo so we all can feel safe.  I’m just waiting for New York Congressman Peter King to hold hearings on the radicalization of Nordic Americans.  Perhaps some people should start protesting the building of anything related to Freemasons especially near shops that sell herring.  Is that something Herman Cain is willing to take up?  Oh, wait, he’s probably one of them.  Off to Guantanamo for him and Michelle Bachmann.   These are just the application of the same prescriptions these people were applying to the wrong “goatfuckers” yesterday when the assumption was that it was an attack by an Islamic extremist rather than a Christian one.

Many bloggers and reporters without preconceived hatreds have been busy trying to find out the political leanings of mass murderer and domestic terrorist Anders Behring Breivik before the Freemasons and other interested parties–like Pam Geller–can scrub their sites. Here is a taste via the LGF link above to Doug Saunders whose Norwegian friend spent some time collecting and translating Breivik’s internet spew and has placed documents here.  They read like a manifesto against “multiculturalism”, Marxist professors and media, and Muslims found all around this country in Talk Radio, Republican Presidential Speeches, and right wing blog sites. Try this Breivik confession on for size.

I myself am a Protestant and baptized / confirmed to me by my own free will when I was 15. But today’s Protestant church is a joke. Priests in jeans who march for Palestine and churches that look like the minimalist shopping centers. I am a supporter of an indirect collective conversion of the Protestant church back to the Catholic. In the meantime, I vote for the most conservative candidates in church elections.The only thing that can save the Protestant church is to go back to basics.

This is one rant that I found particularly recognizable from the American Right Wing and the extreme Christian right.

The problem is that it often does not help about 80% of Muslims are “moderates”, ie they ignore the Quran. “It takes very few people to overthrow a plane.

“What percentage is the Taliban of Pakistan’s population? 1%, 3%, 5%? And how much chaosis there today?In every society where Islam exists there will be a certain percentage of the Muslims who actually follow the traditional interpretations of the Koran.And then we have the relationship between conservative Muslims and so-called “moderateMuslims”.

There is moderate Nazis, too, that does not support fumigation of rooms and Jews. But they’restill Nazis and will only sit and watch as the conservatives Nazis strike (if it ever happens). If we accept the moderate Nazis as long as they distance themselves from the fumigation of rooms and Jews?

Now it unfortunately already cut himself with Marxists who have already infiltrated-culture,media and educational organizations. These individuals will be tolerated and will even work as professors and lecturers at colleges/universities and are thus able to spread their propaganda.For me it is very hypocritical to treat Muslims, Nazis and Marxists differ.They are alls upporters of hate-ideologies.

Not all Muslims, Nazis and Marxists are conservative, most are moderate. But does it matter? A moderate Nazi might, after having experienced fraud, choose to be conservative. A moderate Muslim can, after being refused to enter a club, be conservative,etc.It is obvious that the moderate supporters of hate-ideologies, at a later date may choose conservatism.

Islam (ism) has historically led to 300 million deaths

Communism has historically led to 100 million deaths

Nazism has historically led to 6-20 million deaths. ALL hate ideologies should be treated equally

Here’s an insightful comment gleaned by Sergey Romanov at the LGF link above showing that readers in the US that hang out at places like Pam Geller’s sight or Jihad Watch really agree with the Norwegian Terrorist.  This shows we undoubtedly have that problem brewing here.

One of them writes (sorry, won’t link; h/t: oslogin):

There is very little that he said that I would disagree with. It is clear that he is a Counterjihadist and visits the same sites that most of us do, Gates of Vienna, Jihadwatch, Atlas Shrugs, etc. He also follows political developments in Britain and reads the Telegraph and Daily Mail. The revelation of the Labour government’s conspiracy to flood the country with immigrants to “rub the right’s nose in diversity” was of great interest to him. I’m sure the bien-pensants in the British left will now want to reflect soberly on the folly of pushing people too far.What emerges very clearly from the comments is that he harbours resentment against the mainstream media for pushing a culturally Marxist agenda and covering up Muslim wrong-doing and the negative effects of mass immigration and multiculturalism in Europe generally. This applies especially in Norway, where he felt that the politically correct agenda was completely unchallenged by the mainstream press. This may explain the attack on the VG newspaper’s offices. In some of the comments, he discussed setting up a Norwegian media organisation with a culturally conservative focus.

The Guardian has gleaned through these documents and interviewed childhood friends of Anders Behring Breivik. Here is their latest profile.

A friend told the Norwegian newspaper VG that Breivik had been from the far right politically since at least his late twenties, when he began posting a series of controversial opinions on Facebook and the Norwegian site Document.no, which is critical of Islam.

What has emerged so far paints a disturbing picture: a Christian fundamentalist with a deep hatred of multiculturalism, of the left and of Muslims, who had written disparagingly of prominent Norwegian politicians.

Raised in Oslo, he is reported to have attended the same Smestad primary school as Norway’s crown prince, later attending schools in Oslo’s Gaustad and the Handelsgymnasium. Writing later about his teenage years, he would describe racial tension between Norwegians and young immigrants.

Another significant event was being baptised into the Protestant church of “his own free will” at the age of 15. More recently, however, he had expressed his disgust at his own church. “Today’s Protestant church is a joke,” he wrote in an online post in 2009. “Priests in jeans who march for Palestine and churches that look like minimalist shopping centres. I am a supporter of an indirect collective conversion of the Protestant church back to the Catholic.”

He was a fan of violent video games and former neighbours said he had sometimes been seen in “military-style” clothing. In the pictures that have so far emerged, Breivik appears well dressed, slender and clean shaven, a picture of the young entrepreneur he wanted to be. His businesses, however, were not much of a success, each one being dissolved after a short while after making a loss, until he established his farm business in 2009 and moved out of Oslo.

The purpose of his businesses, as Breivik admitted in one posting, was in any case to support his political activities.

But the man who listed Kafka and George Orwell’s 1984 as his favourite books on Facebook made little secret to friends and others who frequented Christian fundamentalist and far-right websites of his racist views. A member of an Oslo Masonic lodge, reportedly a body builder and a hunter with two registered weapons – a Glock pistol and an automatic rifle – it has been Breivik’s online profile that has, so far supplied the most public information.

He was a former “youth member” of his country’s conservative Progress party between 1999 and 2004, a party he criticised in one posting for embracing “multiculturalism” and “political correctness” rather than taking an “idealistic stand”.

My question to you is how many “mainstream” Republican politicians, right wing talk shows, and posters on sites that you may frequent say the same kind of stuff?  I went yesterday to post a simple cat story on a friendly site and found similar hate mongering that could have come straight from this terrorist’s postings. How many neighbors do you know that hold similar views and have no problems venting them?  Hopefully, this should scare some people into realizing the extent to which all hatred, anger, and extremism turns many people into the worst examples of humankind.  My prayer is that we don’t see copy cats here.  I doubt it will change Pam Geller at all–here’s a nasty link to prove that–but I’m looking forward to watching her dance her way to a rationalization with the rest of her ilk.  Then there’s Herman Cain.  I also imagine he’s gotta have a doozy of an explanation up his blue serge sleeve for this Christian Cultural Conservative.

Oh, and just in case you have any doubt that he’s part of the Christian Cultural Conservative Movement, read this! We’re considered cultural Marxists or “Kulturmarxistene” so let’s join hands and sing the Internationale.

Kulturmarxistene managed to bargain crucial popular platforms that secured them victory:
Sexual Liberation (weakening of the church / morals / patriarchy / nuclear family / birth rates)
Feminism – positive and negative effects (weakening of the church / patriarchy / nuclearfamily / birth rates)
Rights of workers – positive aspects- Drug / alcohol / party of liberation (weakening of the nuclear family / moral / birth rates)
Multi-Cultural – sold in as the introduction of exciting offers / food / experiences (negativeaspects: mass immigration, Islam, ghettofication-> enklavisering, crime-murder / rape /robbery / violence, weakening of the identity / culture / unit / nation etc.. )
Too much of these elements (with a few exceptions) will help to draw us towards a Marxist utopia (chaos). The only pragmatic we can do is work on cultural conservative consolidation in the next10/20/30/40 year so that we can avail ourselves of the window that will surely open up (FjordMan scenario.)

98% of all Norwegian journalists are now cultural Marxists / multiculturalists / politically correct (or sympathize).The problem is that the fundamental institutions in Norway as for example, Volda University College (School of Journalism) and University of Oslo has been infiltrated already several decades ago (and most other schools for that matter). These are today indoktrineringsleire forfuture generations of the cultural Marxists / multiculturalists / politically correct.

This was obviously not last year. The cultural Marxists have had the opportunity (when the APnever punished / imprisoned them) to infiltrate our institutions since 1945. In 1968, the first”litter” indoctrinated with Marxists are ready to implement their doctrines. The results we seetoday.I have no idea how we are to reverse this. It seems as if Islam can actually solve this problem for us in the course of 30-70 years, when the cultural Marxists will soon lose control over these forces.I’ve always wondered, there was no cultural conservative intellectual and / or grass roots options in 1968? One can see forever the cultural Marxists demonstrating in the streets of the images in1968-1972, but where was the cultural-conservative forces?

Again, sound like any Republican Presidential Candidates, Radio Talk Show hosts, and bloggers you know?