bureaucracybusters

Posts Tagged ‘DEBT CEILING’

HOW WE REACHED THE “FISCAL CLIFF”: PART FOUR (END)

In Bureaucracy, History, Politics on December 10, 2012 at 12:00 am

Noted MSNBC political analyst Chris Matthews summed up the sheer criminality of Republican “bargaining” tactics during the summer of 2011.

He did so on July 28, 2011–five days before Congress reached its August 2 deadline to raise the debt-ceiling or plunge the Nation into bankruptcy.

“The first people to bow to the demands of those threatening to blow up the economy were the Republicans in the House, the leaders. The leaders did what the followers told them to do: meet the demands, hold up the country to get their way.

“Those followers didn’t win the Senate, or the Presidency, just the House.

“But by using the House they were able to hold up the entire United States government. They threatened to blow things up economically and it worked.

“They said they were willing to do that–just to get their way–not by persuasion, not by politics, not by democratic government, but by threatening the destruction of the country’s finances.

“Right. So what’s next? The power grid? Will they next time threaten to close down the country’s electricity and communications systems?”

President Obama could have faced down the extortionists of the Republican Party in two ways:

  1. Prosecuting them under the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act and/or the USA Patriot Act; and/or
  2. Addressing the Nation as President John F. Kennedy did during the Cuban Missile Crisis and warning his fellow citizens that the Nation faced a moment of supreme danger.

In Part Three of this series, I outlined how the President could apply the RICO Act and/or the USA Patriot Act to hold Republican extortionists criminally accountable.

In this part, I will outline his second option (which can be coupled with criminal prosecution).

Making a Cuban Missile Type Speech

During such a national address, President Obama could have revealed such blunt truths as:

  • Republicans have adopted the same my-way-or-else “negotiating” stance as Adolf Hitler.
  • Like the Nazis, they are determined to gain absolute power–or destroy the Nation they claim to love.
  • They raised the debt ceiling seven times during the eight-year Presidency of George W. Bush.
  • But now that a black Democrat holds the White House, raising the debt ceiling is unacceptable.
  • Despite Republican lies, we cannot revitalize the economy by slashing taxes on the wealthy and cash-hoarding corporations while cutting benefits for millions of average Americans.
  • We will need both tax increases and sensible entitlement cuts to regain our economic strength.

Finally, President Obama could have ended his speech by directly calling for the active support of his fellow Americans. Something like this:

“My fellow Americans, I have taken an oath to ‘preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.’

“But I cannot do this on my own. As citizens of a Republic, each of us carries that burden. We must each do our part to protect the land and the liberties we love.

“Tonight, I’m asking for your help.

“We stand on the edge of economic disaster.   Therefore, I am asking each of you to stand up for America tonight.

“I am asking you to demand the immediate recall of the entire membership of the Republican Party.

“As President John F. Kennedy said:

‘In your hands, my fellow citizens, more than mine, will rest the final success or failure of our course.’

“Since this country was founded, each generation of Americans has been summoned to give testimony to its national loyalty.

“This is the moment when each of us must decide–whether we will survive as a Republic, or allow ruthless political fanatics to destroy what has lasted and thrived for more than 200 years.”

President Obama has taken forceful action against America’s foreign enemies—most notably Osama bin Laden.

If the Nation is to survive, he must now act just as forcefully against America’s domestic enemies.

Fortunately, there is still time for him to do so.

A prosecutor who chooses to not indict on one occasion may still do so on another.  And, in doing so, President Obama may find history repeating itself.

Joachim C. Fest, author of Hitler (l973), writes of the surprise that awaited Allied soldiers occupying Nazi Germany in 1945:

“Almost without transition, virtually from one moment to the next, Nazism vanished after the death of Hitler and the surrender.  It was as if National Socialism had been nothing but the motion, the state of intoxication and the catastrophe it had caused….

“Hitler’s propaganda specialists had talked constantly of invincible Alpine redoubts, nests of resistance, and swelling werewolf units, and had predicted a war beyond the war. But there was no sign of this.

“Once again it became plain that National Socialism, like Fascism in general, was dependent to the core on superior force, arrogance, triumph, and by its nature had no resources in the moment of defeat.”

With luck, the same will prove true for the extortionists and blackmailers of the Republican Party.

HOW WE REACHED THE “FISCAL CLIFF”: PART THREE (OF FOUR)

In Bureaucracy, History, Politics on December 7, 2012 at 12:13 am

With the United States teetering on the brink of national bankruptcy, President Obama faced three choices:

  1. Counter Republican extortion attempts via RICO–the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act.
  2. Make a “Cuban Missile Crisis”-style address to the American people, seeking to rally them against a criminal threat to the financial security of the Nation.
  3. Cave in to Republican demands.

Unfortunately for Obama and the Nation, he chose Number Three.

Here is how he could have applied the other two options.

Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act

In 1970, Congress passed the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1961-1968.

Congress’ goal was to eliminate the ill-affects of organized crime on the nation’s economy. To put it bluntly, RICO was intended to destroy the Mafia.

In the 1980s, however, civil lawyers noticed section 1964(c) of the RICO Act. This allows civil claims to be brought by anyone injured in their business or property by reason of a RICO violation.

RICO has been applied to not only the Mafia but to individuals, businesses, political protest groups, and terrorist organizations.  In short, a RICO claim can arise in almost any context.

Such as the one President Barack Obama faced last summer when Republicans threatened to destroy the credit rating of the United States unless their budgetary demands were met.

RICO opens with a series of definitions of “racketeering activity” which can be prosecuted by Justice Department attorneys.  Among those crimes: Extortion.

Extortion is defined as “a criminal offense which occurs when a person unlawfully obtains either money, property or services from a person(s), entity, or institution, through coercion.”

The RICO Act defines “a pattern of racketeering activity” as “at least two acts of racketeering activity, one of which occurred after the effective date of this chapter and the last of which occurred within ten years…after the commission of a prior act of racketeering activity.”

And if President Obama had believed that RICO was not sufficient to deal with extortionate behavior, he could have relied on the USA Patriot Act of 2001, passed in the wake of 9/11.

In Section 802, the Act defines domestic terrorism.  Among the behavior that is defined as criminal:

“Activities that…appear to be intended…to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion [and]…occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”

The remedies for punishing such criminal behavior are now legally in place.  President Obama need only direct the Justice Department to apply them.

  • President Obama could have directed Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate whether actions by Republican Congressman—and their Tea Party cohorts—broke Federal anti-racketeering and/or anti-terrorism laws.
  • Holder, in turn, could have ordered the FBI to conduct that investigation.
  • If the FBI found sufficient evidence that these laws had been violated, Holder could have empaneled criminal grand juries to indict those violators.

The fact that members of Congress would be criminally investigated and possibly indicted would not violate the separation-of-powers principle.  Congressmen have in the past been investigated, indicted and convicted for various criminal offenses.

Such indictments and prosecutions–and especially convictions–would serve notice on current and future members of Congress that the lives and fortunes of American citizens may not be held hostage as part of a negotiated settlement.

On August 1, Chris Matthews, host of MSNBC’s “Hardball,”  wrapped up his program with a search for “options” to avoid another round of Republican extortion tactics.

“I want to know what steps the president ‘could’ have taken to avoid this hostage-taking.

“…Is there another way than either buckling to the Republicans or letting the government and the country crash?

“How does he use the power of the presidency, the logic, emotion and basic patriotism of the people to thwart those willing to threaten, disrupt, even possibly destroy to get their way?”

The answer to his questions–then and now–is: Replace the law of fear with the rule of law.

But there was another way Obama could have stood up to Republican extortionists: By urging his fellow Americans to rally to him in a moment of supreme national danger.

President John F. Kennedy did just that–successfully–during the most dangerous crisis of his administration.

Addressing the Nation on October 22, 1962, Kennedy shocked his fellow citizens by revealing that the Soviet Union had installed offensive nuclear missiles in Cuba.

After outlining a series of steps he had taken to end the crisis, Kennedy sought to reassure and inspire his audience. His words are worth remembering today:

“The path we have chosen for the present is full of hazards, as all paths are, but it is the one most consistent with our character and courage as a nation and our commitments around the world.

“The cost of freedom is always high, but Americans have always paid it. And one path we shall never choose, and that is the path of surrender or submission.”

President Obama could have sent that same message to the extortionists of the Republican Party.

HOW WE REACHED THE “FISCAL CLIFF”: PART TWO (OF FOUR)

In Bureaucracy, History, Politics on December 6, 2012 at 10:23 am
“Those who are willing to risk everything, even death and destruction, to attain their ends will prevail over more responsible and prudent men who have more to lose and are rational, not suicidal.”
–Ernst Casier, Chairman of Philosophy, Hamburg University

“Fascism,” said author Ernest Hemingway, “is a lie told by bullies.” Thus, when Republicans couldn’t attain their goals by lying, they sought to do so by force–or at least the threat of it.

Republicans have repeatedly threatened to shut down the government unless their constantly escalating demands were met.

In November, 1995, Newt Gingrich, then Speaker of the House of Representatives, carried out his threat. Gingrich unwisely admitted that he did so because President Bill Clinton had put him in the back of Air Force One during a recent trip to Israel.

The shutdown proved a disaster for Republicans. Clinton was handily re-elected in 1996 and Gingrich suddenly resigned from Congress in 1998.

Still, the Republicans continued their policy of my-way-or-else. In April, 2011, the United States government almost shut down over Republican demands about subsidized pap smears.

In April, 2011, the United States government almost shut down over Republican demands about subsidized pap smears.

During a late-night White House meeting with President Barack Obama and key Congressional leaders, Republican House Speaker John Boehner made this threat:

His conference would not approve funding for the government if any money were allowed to flow to Planned Parenthood through Title X legislation.

Facing an April 8 deadline, negotiators worked day and night to strike a compromise–and finally reached one.

Three months later–on July 9–Republican extortionists again threatened the Nation with financial ruin and international disgrace unless their demands were met.

President Obama had offered to make historic cuts in the federal government and the social safety net–on which millions of Americans depend for their most basic needs.

But House Speaker John Boehner rejected that offer. He could not agree to the tax increases that Democrats wanted to impose on the wealthiest 1% as part of the bargain.

John Boehner

As the calendar moved ever closer to the fateful date of August 2, Republican leaders continued to insist: Any deal that includes taxes “can’t pass the House.”

One senior Republican said talks would go right up to–and maybe beyond–the brink of default.

“I think we’ll be here in August,” said Republican Representative Pete Sessions, of Texas. “We are not going to leave town until a proper deal gets done.”

President Obama had previously insisted on extending the debt ceiling through 2012. But in mid-July, he simply asked congressional leaders to review three options with their members:

  1. The “Grand Bargain” choice—favored by Obama–would cut deficits by about $4 trillion, including spending cuts and new tax revenues.
  2. A medium-range plan would aim to reduce the deficit by about $2 trillion.
  3. The smallest option would cut between $1 trillion and $1.5 trillion, without increased tax revenue or any Medicare and Medicaid cuts.

And the Republican response?

Said Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee: “Quite frankly, [Republican] members of Congress are getting tired of what the president won’t do and what the president wants.”

Noted political analyst Chris Matthews summed up the sheer criminality of what happened within the House of Representatives.

Speaking on MSNBC’s “Hardball,” on July 28–five days before Congress reached its August 2 deadline to raise the debt-ceiling–Matthews noted:

“The first people to bow to the demands of those threatening to blow up the economy were the Republicans in the House, the leaders. The leaders did what the followers told them to do: meet the demands, hold up the country to get their way.

“Those followers didn’t win the Senate, or the Presidency, just the House.

“But by using the House they were able to hold up the entire United States government. They threatened to blow things up economically and it worked.

“They said they were willing to do that–just to get their way–not by persuasion, not by politics, not by democratic government, but by threatening the destruction of the country’s finances.

“Right. So what’s next? The power grid? Will they next time threaten to close down the country’s electricity and communications systems?”

With the United States teetering on the brink of national bankruptcy, President Obama faced three choices:

  1. Counter Republican extortion attempts via RICO–the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act.
  2. Make a “Cuban Missile Crisis”-style address to the American people, seeking to rally them against a criminal threat to the financial security of the Nation.
  3. Cave in to Republican demands.

Unfortunately for Obama and the Nation, he chose Number Three.

In my next column, I will outline how he could have applied Number One and/or Number Two.

HOW WE REACHED THE “FISCAL CLIFF”: PART ONE (OF FOUR)

In Bureaucracy, History, Politics on December 5, 2012 at 12:02 am

Robert Payne, author of the bestselling biography, The Life and Death of Adolf Hitler (1973), described the “negotiating” style of the Nazi dictator thusly:

“Although Hitler prized his own talents as a negotiator, a man always capable of striking a good bargain, he was totally lacking in finesse.  He was incapable of bargaining.  He was like a man who goes up to a fruit peddler and threatens to blow his brains out if he does not sell his applies at the lowest possible price.”

Hitler is dead.  But his my-way-or-else “negotiating” style lives on in today’s Republican party.

During the summer of 2011, Republicans refused to raise the debt ceiling unless Democrats agreed to massively cut social programs for the elderly, poor and disabled.

If Congress failed to raise the borrowing limit of the federal government by August 2, the date when the U.S.  reached the limit of its borrowing abilities, it would have begun defaulting on its loans.

As Warren Buffett, CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, explained the looming economic catastrophe:

“If you don’t send out Social Security checks, I would hate to think about the credit meeting at S&P and Moody’s the next morning.

“If you’re not paying millions and millions and millions of people that range in age from 65 on up, money you promised them, you’re not a AAA,” said Buffett.

A triple-A credit rating is the highest possible rating that can be received.

And while Republicans demanded that the disadvantaged tighten their belts, they rejected any raising of taxes on their foremost constituency–the wealthiest 1%.

To raise taxes on the wealthy, they insisted, would be a “jobs-killer.” It would “discourage” corporate CEOs from creating tens of thousands of jobs they “want” to create.

Republicans knew this argument was a lie.  And so did the editors of Time.

The difference between them: The editors of Time were willing to reveal the truth.

In its June 20, 2011  cover-story on “What U.S. Economic Recovery? Five Destructive Myths,” Rana Foroohar, the magazine’s assistant managing editor in charge of economics and business, delivered this warning:

Profit-seeking corporations can’t be relied on to ”make it all better.”

Wrote Foroohar:

“There is a fundamental disconnect between the fortunes of American companies, which are doing quite well, and American workers, most of whom are earning a lower hourly wage now than they did during the recession.

“The thing is, companies make plenty of money; they just don’t spend it on workers here.

“There may be $2 trillion sitting on the balance sheets of American corporations globally, but firms show no signs of wanting to spend it in order to hire workers at home.”

Yet there is also a disconnect between the truth of this situation and the willingness of Americans to face up to that truth.

The reason:

“The Republicans have pulled off a major (some would say cynical) miracle,” writes Foroohar.

They have convinced “the majority of Americans that the way to jump-start the economy is to slash taxes on the wealthy and on cash-hoarding corporations while cutting benefits for millions of Americans.

“It’s fun-house math that can’t work. We’ll need both tax increases and sensible entitlement cuts to get back on track.

“Yet surveys show 50% of Americans think that not raising the debt ceiling is a good idea — that you can somehow starve your way to economic growth.”

How have Republicans achieved this?  By adopting the principles of propaganda laid down by no less an authority on lying than Adolf Hitler.

According to Mein Kampf-–”My Struggle”–-Hitler’s autobiography and political treatise:

  1. The great majority of a nation is ruled by sentiment rather than by sober reasoning.
  2. This sentiment, however, is not complex, but simple and consistent. It is not highly differentiated, but has only the negative and positive notions of love and hatred, right and wrong, truth and falsehood.
  3. Propaganda must not investigate the truth objectively and must present only that aspect of the truth which is favorable to its own side.
  4. The receptive powers of the masses are very restricted, and their understanding is feeble. On the other hand, they quickly forget.
  5. All effective propaganda must be confined to a few bare essentials and those must be expressed as far as possible in stereotyped formulas.
  6. These slogans should be persistently repeated until the very last individual has come to grasp the idea that has been put forward.

Following these principles, Republicans have proved hugely successful at persuading millions that truth is whatever their party claims it to be at any given moment.

“Fascism,” said author Ernest Hemingway, “is a lie told by bullies.”

Thus, when Republicans couldn’t attain their goals by lying, they sought to do so by force–or at least the threat of it.

INSANITY VS. REALITY – PART THREE (END)

In History, Law, Politics on September 14, 2012 at 12:05 am

THE EMAIL:

  • …Once re-elected, Barack Obama, as confirmed by his willingness to do or say anything and his unscrupulous re-election tactics, would not only threaten government shutdowns but would deliberately withhold payments to those dependent on government support as a means of intimidating and forcing a Republican controlled Congress to surrender to his demands, thus neutering their ability to control the administration through spending constraints.

THE REALITY:

  • Republicans–not Democrats–have repeatedly threatened to shut down the government if they didn’t get their way. 
  • In 1994, during Bill Clinton’s Presidency, Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich shut down the government because he felt slighted by Clinton on a trip to Israel. 
  • And earlier this year, Republicans threatened to force the United States to default on its loans by refusing to raise the debt ceiling unless Democrats agreed to an extortionate budgetary deal–which expires in December. 
  • When that happens, Republicans will once again pull their extortion routine at the expense of the nation they claim to love.
  • Democrats have never threatened to shut down the government.
  • Further, this administration has shown contempt for the courts by…stonewalling subpoenas and requests issued by Congress.
  • The  Eric Holder Justice Department has become the epitome of corruption as part of the most dishonest and deceitful administration in American history.
  • “Fast and Furious”–to which the reference to “stonewalling” alludes– was an operation begun during the George W. Bush administration. It involved allowing guns to be bought by members of the Mexican drug cartels to trace them to the outlaw bands.
  • Such operations–whether begun under Democratic or Republic administrations–are inherently risky and have nothing to do with politics.
  • When they go right the top leaders of the cartel go to prison. When they go wrong, it’s a scandal.
  • This one just didn’t work out.  Agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms lost control of the firearms–and one of the guns was used to kill a U.S. Border patrol officer.
  • In a second term the arrogance of Barack Obama and his minions will become more blatant as he will not have to be concerned with re-election.
  • Who will be there to enforce the rule of law, a Supreme Court ruling or the Constitution? No one.
  • Barack Obama and his fellow-travelers will be unchallenged as they run roughshod over the American people.
  • “Fellow-travelers” is a term used by 1950s Republicans–such as Joseph McCarthy–to mean Communists. 
  • If Obama is a Communist sympathizer–let alone a card-carrying one–this email offers no evidence to prove it.  But then, for the Right, evidence of treason isn’t necessary–only accusation.
  • Judging by his actions, words and deeds during his first term, [Obama] does not intend to work with Congress either Republican or Democrat in his second term but rather to force his radical agenda on the American people through the power he has usurped or been granted.
  • During the last three years. Obama has repeatedly sought compromises with Congressional Republicans.  But the Republicans have been the ones refusing to compromise.
  • Indiana State Treasurer Richard Mourdock, who’s now running for U.S. Senator, perfectly summed up the Republican attitude: “I have a mindset that says bipartisanship ought to consist of Democrats coming to the Republican point of view.”
  • That’s the sort of “compromise” Adolf Hitler understood, but it’s not the sort that’s acceptable in a democracy.
  • …We the American people also must come to grips with this moment in time and our role in denying Barack Obama his lifelong goal of “transforming” us  into his slaves working on his government plantation.

It’s hard to imagine Americans’ being enslaved when, because of President Obama:

  • They’re finally able to get healthcare insurance that was previously denied them because of a “pre-existing condition.”
  • They’re able to get such insurance for their children.
  • U.S. forces are finally being recalled from Iraq, where they never should have been sent.
  • American forces are being withdrawn from Afghanistan, where they’ve spent eleven years trying to remake a backwards, alien land into a modern nation.
  • There’s finally legislation to prevent another Wall Street meltdown because of the uncontrolled greed of corporate “leaders.”
  • A massive polluter like BP is called to account and forced to put up money to at least partially repair what it has monumentally spoiled.

But for the Right, black-and-white have always been inverted.  Thus one of the marching songs of Hitler’s black-uniformed SS offered these lyrics:

Clear the streets, the SS marches! 
The storm-columns stand at the ready. 
They will take the road 
From tyranny to freedom…. 

Or, as Ernest Hemingway once put it: “Fascism is a lie told by bullies.”

INSANITY VS. REALITY – PART TWO (OF THREE)

In History, Law, Politics on September 13, 2012 at 12:00 am

THE EMAIL:

  • The Environmental Protection Agency on a near daily basis issues new regulations clearly out of their purview in order to modify and change environmental laws previously passed and to impose a radical green agenda never approved by Congress.

THE REALITY:

  • In April, 2010, a  BP oil rig exploded off the coast of Louisiana, spilling untold millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico.   
  • Up to then the Right–led by Sarah Palin–had been literally screaming: “Drill, baby, drill!”  Then, suddenly, that shouting fell silent.    Now it’s back again–as in this email. 
  • The vast majority of scientists in the United States have confirmed that global warming is a reality and that man-made pollution is the main cause. 
  • But the Right refuses to accept those findings–or the rises in temperature and accompanying drought across the country.

The left in America knows this usurpation of power is nearly impossible to reverse unless stopped in its early stages.

  • There’s a story about a peasant in a poor Jewish village in Russia who subscribed to several anti-Semitic newspapers.  These warned constantly about how Jews ran the banks, the governments, and virtually everything else..  One day a friend of his demanded: “How can you, a Jew, read such garbage?”  And the peasant said: “I love to see how powerful I am.”
  • The same thing applies here.  The writer of this email gives far too much credit to the “power” of the left. 
  • In doing so he ignores the rise of the Tea Party movement and its power to stalemate legislation in Congress. 
  • He also ignores the truth that, economically and politically, real power lies with the Right.  But to acknowledge this would demolish his pet theory of Leftist all-powerfulness. 
  • Most of the donors backing Mitt Romney are elderly billionaires.  Their median age is 66, and their median wealth is $1 billion. 
  • In the primary season, they invested $52 million in his  Super PAC, Restore Our Future. 
  • They all expect to profit from Romney’s pledges to eliminate inheritance taxes, extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, and slash the top tax rates by another 20%.  
  • “Money buys power,” warns the Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman.  “And the increasing wealth of a tiny minority has effectively bought the allegiance of one of our two major political parties.  Support from billionaires has always been the main thing keeping those charlatans and cranks in business. And now the same people effectively own a whole political party.”

  • It is clearly the Mindset of this administration and its appointees that Congress is merely a nuisance and can be ignored after they were able to take full advantage of the useful idiots in the Democrat controlled House and Senate in 2009-2010 and the Democrat Senate in the current Congress.

  • Contempt of Congress is a long-running story with Presidents.  The administrations of Lyndon B. Johnson, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush held Congress in absolute contempt. 
  • Johnson prepared the now-infamous “Gulf of Tonkin” resolution–giving him unrestricted right to wage war in Vietnam–before hostilities erupted.  And he got Congress to pass it overwhelmingly. 
  • Reagan ignored Congress’ ban on sending weapons to the right-wing Nicaraguan “Contras” and instructed his aides to raise money by selling anti-aircraft missiles to Iran in exchange for a handful of American hostages. 
  • Bush intended to attack Iraq from Day One of his Presidency, to “avenge” his father’s losing re-election in 1992 for “failing” to topple Saddam Hussein. 
  • He mounted a major PR campaign to persuade Congress that Iraq had WMDs and had plotted 9/11 with Hussein–even there was absolutely no evidence of either.
  • Additionally, Barack Obama knows after his re-election a Republican-controlled House and Senate will not be able to enact any legislation to roll back the power previously granted to the Executive Branch or usurped by them.
  • His veto will not be overridden as there will always be at least 145 Democratic members of the House or 34 in the Senate in agreement with or intimidated by an administration more than willing to use Chicago style political tactics.

  • Republicans dominate the House–which pushed the country to the brink of bankruptcy earlier this year.  They’re now trying to win control of the Senate, and may well do so. 
  • Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has said the top priority of his party is to “make Barack Obama a one-term President.” 
  • This does not seem to be a party that’s “intimidated” by “Chicago-style political tactics.”   

INSANITY VS. REALITY – PART ONE (OF THREE)

In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Politics on September 12, 2012 at 12:05 am

A new email is sweeping the Internet, claiming to be from a former agent of the Federal Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).

It’s aimed at voters who might vote to re-elect Barack Obama.  And it’s filled with generalizations, slanders and paranoid conspiracy theories.

Reading it is to journey into the darkest regions of the American electorate–and the right-wing organizations that seek to exploit them in the pursuit of absolute power.

Let’s take that journey.

THE EMAIL:

Obama’s Second Term Transformation Plans

  • The 2012 election has often been described as the most pivotal since 1860. This statement is not hyperbole.
  • If Barack Obama is re-elected the United States will never be the same, nor will it be able to re-capture its once lofty status as the most dominant nation in the history of mankind.
  • The overwhelming majority of Americans do not understand that Obama’s first term was dedicated to putting in place executive power to enable him and the administration to fulfill the campaign promise of “transforming America ” in his second term regardless of which political party controls Congress.
  • That is why his re-election team is virtually ignoring the plight of incumbent or prospective Democratic Party office holders.
THE REALITY:
  • It’s commonplace for incumbent Presidents to hoard their own popularity (if they have it) and not spend a lot of time campaigning on behalf of other politicians.  Or to spend as little time doing so as they can. 
  • One reason for this is they want to spend their time passing legislation or dealing with foreign affairs.  Every moment they spend on the campaign trail leaves them less time for what they consider their real duties as President. 
  • Another reason is that campaigning is a high-stress business and many Presidents don’t see much to be gained–by them–for doing it for others.
  • The most significant accomplishment of Obama’s first term is to make Congress irrelevant.
  • Under the myopic and blindly loyal leadership of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, the Democrats have succeeded in creating an imperial and, in a second term, a potential dictatorial presidency.
  • If anyone is to blame for making Congress irrelevant, it’s Congress itself.  Earlier this year, Congressional Republicans pushed the country to the brink of bankruptcy simply to get their way on budgetary negotiations. 
  • They got their way as extortionists–and the nation’s credit rating fell accordingly.  And so did the job-approval rating of Congress–which, according to Gallup, now stands at 16%.
  • During the first two years of the Obama administration when the Democrats overwhelming controlled both Houses of Congress and the media was in an Obama worshiping stupor, a myriad of laws were passed and actions taken which transferred virtually unlimited power to the executive branch.
  • The birth of multi-thousand page laws was not an aberration. This tactic was adopted so the bureaucracy controlled by Obama appointees would have sole discretion in interpreting vaguely written laws and enforcing thousands of pages of regulations they and not Congress would subsequently write.
  • Congress has passed  laws running to hundreds or thousands of pages during both Democratic and Republican administrations. 
  • The tax code alone runs to 17,000 pages and 5.5 million words.  The Patriot Act–which completely rewrote the laws governing Federal law enforcement agencies–runs to 342 pages.   
  • Major spending bills frequently run more than 1,000.  The climate bill that the House passed in June, 2009, was 1,200 pages.
  • Bill Clinton’s 1993 health care plan was 1,342 pages long.   In 2007, President Bush’s budget bill ran to 1,482 pages.
  • The same is true in the 2,319 pages of the Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act which confers nearly unlimited power on various agencies to control by fiat the nation’s financial, banking and investment sectors.
  • The bill also creates new agencies, such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, not subject to any oversight by Congress.
  • This overall process was repeated numerous times with other legislation all with the intent of granting unfettered power to the executive branch controlled Barack Obama and his radical associates.
  • The Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act was passed to prevent a repeat of the 2008 Wall Street meltdown.  Its stated purpose:
  • “To promote the financial stability of the United States by improving accountability and transparency in the financial system, to end ‘too big to fail’, to protect the American taxpayer by ending bailouts, to protect consumers from abusive financial services practices, and for other purposes.”
  • Only the Federal Government has the power to protect citizens from the overwhelming greed and stupidity of the men who run the financial community. 
  • But to prevent the wealthy few from destroying the financial standing of the United States is, for the Right, an act of Communism.

NEGOTIATING NAZI-REPUBLICAN STYLE – PART SEVEN (END)

In History, Politics on May 25, 2012 at 12:00 am

Noted MSNBC political analyst Chris Matthews summed up the sheer criminality of Republican “bargaining” tactics last summer.

He did so on July 28, 2011–five days before Congress reached its August 2 deadline to raise the debt-ceiling or plunge the Nation into bankruptcy.

“The first people to bow to the demands of those threatening to blow up the economy were the Republicans in the House, the leaders. The leaders did what the followers told them to do: meet the demands, hold up the country to get their way.

“Those followers didn’t win the Senate, or the Presidency, just the House.

“But by using the House they were able to hold up the entire United States government. They threatened to blow things up economically and it worked.

“They said they were willing to do that–just to get their way–not by persuasion, not by politics, not by democratic government, but by threatening the destruction of the country’s finances.

“Right. So what’s next? The power grid? Will they next time threaten to close down the country’s electricity and communications systems?”

President Obama could have faced down the extortionists of the Republican Party in two ways:

  1. Prosecuting them under the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act and/or the USA Patriot Act; and/or
  2. Addressing the Nation as President John F. Kennedy did during the Cuban Missile Crisis and warning his fellow citizens that the Nation faced a moment of supreme danger.

In Part Six of this series, I outlined how the President could apply the RICO Act and/or the USA Patriot Act to hold Republican extortionists criminally accountable.

In this part, I will outline his second option (which can be coupled with criminal prosecution).

Making a Cuban Missile Type Speech

During such a national address, President Obama could have revealed such blunt truths as:

  • Republicans have adopted the same my-way-or-else “negotiating” stance as Adolf Hitler.
  • Like the Nazis, they are determined to gain absolute power–or destroy the Nation they claim to love.
  • They raised the debt ceiling seven times during the eight-year Presidency of George W. Bush.
  • But now that a Democrat holds the White House, raising the debt ceiling is unacceptable.
  • Despite Republican lies, we cannot revitalize the economy by slashing taxes on the wealthy and on cash-hoarding corporations while cutting benefits for millions of average Americans.
  • We will need both tax increases and sensible entitlement cuts to regain our economic strength.

Finally, President Obama could have ended his speech by directly calling for the active support of his fellow Americans. Something like this:

“My fellow Americans, I have taken an oath to ‘preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.’

“But I cannot do this on my own. As citizens of a Republic, each of us carries that burden. We must each do our part to protect the land and the liberties we love.

“Tonight, I’m asking for your help.

“We stand on the edge of economic disaster.  Therefore, I am asking each of you to stand up for America tonight–by demanding the recall of the entire membership of the Republican Party.

“As President John F. Kennedy said:

‘In your hands, my fellow citizens, more than mine, will rest the final success or failure of our course. Since this country was founded, each generation of Americans has been summoned to give testimony to its national loyalty.’

“This is the moment when each of us must decide–whether we will survive as a Republic, or allow ruthless political fanatics to destroy what has lasted and thrived for more than 200 years.”

President Obama has taken forceful action against America’s foreign enemies—most notably Osama bin Laden.

If the Nation is to survive, he must now act just as forcefully against America’s domestic enemies.

Fortunately, there is still time for him to do so. The fact that a prosecutor chooses to not indict on one occasion doesn’t prevent him from doing so on another.

In doing so, he may find history repeating itself.

Joachim C. Fest, author of Hitler (l973), writes of the surprise that awaited Allied soldiers occupying Nazi Germany in 1945:

“Almost without transition, virtually from one moment to the next, Nazism vanished after the death of Hitler and the surrender.  It was as if National Socialism had been nothing but the motion, the state of intoxication and the catastrophe it had caused….

“Hitler’s propaganda specialists had talked constantly of invincible Alpine redoubts, nests of resistance, and swelling werewolf units, and had predicted a war beyond the war. But there was no sign of this.

“Once again it became plain that National Socialism, like Fascism in general, was dependent to the core on superior force, arrogance, triumph, and by its nature had no resources in the moment of defeat.”

With luck, the same will prove true for the extortionists and blackmailers of the Republican Party.

NEGOTIATING NAZI-REPUBLICAN STYLE – PART SIX (OF SEVEN)

In History, Politics on May 24, 2012 at 12:00 am

With the United States teetering on the brink of national bankruptcy, President Obama faced three choices:

  1. Counter Republican extortion attempts via RICO–the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act.
  2. Make a “Cuban Missile Crisis”-style address to the American people, seeking to rally them against a criminal threat to the financial security of the Nation.
  3. Cave in to Republican demands.

Unfortunately for Obama and the Nation, he chose Number Three.

Here is how he could have applied the other two options.

Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act

RICO has been applied to not only the Mafia but to individuals, businesses, political protest groups, and terrorist organizations.  In short, a RICO claim can arise in almost any context.

Such as the one President Barack Obama faced last summer when Republicans threatened to destroy the credit rating of the United States unless their budgetary demands were met.

RICO opens with a series of definitions of “racketeering activity” which can be prosecuted by Justice Department attorneys.  Among those crimes: Extortion.

Extortion is defined as “a criminal offense which occurs when a person unlawfully obtains either money, property or services from a person(s), entity, or institution, through coercion.”

The RICO Act defines “a pattern of racketeering activity” as “at least two acts of racketeering activity, one of which occurred after the effective date of this chapter and the last of which occurred within ten years…after the commission of a prior act of racketeering activity.”

And if President Obama had believed that RICO was not sufficient to deal with extortionate behavior, he could have relied on the USA Patriot Act of 2001, passed in the wake of 9/11.

In Section 802, the Act defines domestic terrorism.  Among the behavior that is defined as criminal:

“Activities that…appear to be intended…to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion [and]…occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”

The remedies for punishing such criminal behavior are now legally in place.  President Obama need only direct the Justice Department to apply them.

  • President Obama could have directed Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate whether actions by Republican Congressman—and their Tea Party cohorts—broke Federal anti-racketeering and/or anti-terrorism laws.
  • Holder, in turn, could have ordered the FBI to conduct that investigation.
  • If the FBI found sufficient evidence that these laws had been violated, Holder could have empaneled criminal grand juries to indict those violators.

The fact that members of Congress would be criminally investigated and possibly indicted would not violate the separation-of-powers principle.  Congressmen have in the past been investigated, indicted and convicted for various criminal offenses.

Such indictments and prosecutions–and especially convictions–would serve notice on current and future members of Congress that the lives and fortunes of American citizens may not be held hostage as part of a negotiated settlement.

On August 1, Chris Matthews, host of MSNBC’s “Hardball,”  wrapped up his program with a search for “options” to avoid another round of Republican extortion tactics.

“I want to know what steps the president ‘could’ have taken to avoid this hostage-taking.

“…Is there another way than either buckling to the Republicans or letting the government and the country crash?

“How does he use the power of the presidency, the logic, emotion and basic patriotism of the people to thwart those willing to threaten, disrupt, even possibly destroy to get their way?”

The answer to his questions–then and now–is: Replace the law of fear with the rule of law.

But there was another way Obama could have stood up to Republican extortionists: By urging his fellow Americans to rally to him in a moment of supreme national danger.

President John F. Kennedy did just that–successfully–during the most dangerous crisis of his administration.

Addressing the Nation on October 22, 1962, Kennedy shocked his fellow citizens by revealing that the Soviet Union had installed offensive nuclear missiles in Cuba.

After outlining a series of steps he had taken to end the crisis, Kennedy sought to reassure and inspire his audience. His words are worth remembering today:

“The path we have chosen for the present is full of hazards, as all paths are, but it is the one most consistent with our character and courage as a nation and our commitments around the world.

“The cost of freedom is always high, but Americans have always paid it. And one path we shall never choose, and that is the path of surrender or submission.”

President Obama could have sent that same message to the extortionists of the Republican Party.

NEGOTIATING NAZI-REPUBLICAN STYLE – PART FIVE (OF SEVEN)

In History, Politics, Social commentary on May 23, 2012 at 12:00 am
“Those who are willing to risk everything, even death and destruction, to attain their ends will prevail over more responsible and prudent men who have more to lose and are rational, not suicidal.”
–Ernst Casier, Chairman of Philosophy, Hamburg University

U.S. House of Representatives

In April, 2011, the United States government almost shut down over Republican demands about subsidized pap smears.

During a late-night White House meeting with President Barack Obama and key Congressional leaders, Republican House Speaker John Boehner made this threat:

His conference would not approve funding for the government if any money were allowed to flow to Planned Parenthood through Title X legislation.

Facing an April 8 deadline, negotiators worked day and night to strike a compromise–and finally reached one.

Three months later–on July 9–Republican extortionists again threatened the Nation with financial ruin and international disgrace unless their demands were met.

President Obama had offered to make historic cuts in the federal government and the social safety net–on which millions of Americans depend for their most basic needs.

But House Speaker John Boehner rejected that offer. He could not agree to the tax increases that Democrats wanted to impose on the wealthiest 1% as part of the bargain.

John Boehner

As the calendar moved ever closer to the fateful date of August 2, Republican leaders continued to insist: Any deal that includes taxes “can’t pass the House.”

One senior Republican said talks would go right up to–and maybe beyond–the brink of default.

“I think we’ll be here in August,” said Republican Representative Pete Sessions, of Texas. “We are not going to leave town until a proper deal gets done.”

President Obama had previously insisted on extending the debt ceiling through 2012. But in mid-July, he simply asked congressional leaders to review three options with their members:

  1. The “Grand Bargain” choice—favored by Obama–would cut deficits by about $4 trillion, including spending cuts and new tax revenues.
  2. A medium-range plan would aim to reduce the deficit by about $2 trillion.
  3. The smallest option would cut between $1 trillion and $1.5 trillion, without increased tax revenue or any Medicare and Medicaid cuts.

And the Republican response?

Said Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee: “Quite frankly, [Republican] members of Congress are getting tired of what the president won’t do and what the president wants.”

Noted political analyst Chris Matthews summed up the sheer criminality of what happened within the House of Representatives.

Speaking on MSNBC’s “Hardball,” on July 28–five days before Congress reached its August 2 deadline to raise the debt-ceiling–Matthews noted:

“The first people to bow to the demands of those threatening to blow up the economy were the Republicans in the House, the leaders. The leaders did what the followers told them to do: meet the demands, hold up the country to get their way.

“Those followers didn’t win the Senate, or the Presidency, just the House.

“But by using the House they were able to hold up the entire United States government. They threatened to blow things up economically and it worked.

“They said they were willing to do that–just to get their way–not by persuasion, not by politics, not by democratic government, but by threatening the destruction of the country’s finances.

“Right. So what’s next? The power grid? Will they next time threaten to close down the country’s electricity and communications systems?”

With the United States teetering on the brink of national bankruptcy, President Obama faced three choices:

  1. Counter Republican extortion attempts via RICO–the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Oganizations Act.
  2. Make a “Cuban Missile Crisis”-style address to the American people, seeking to rally them against a criminal threat to the financial security of the Nation.
  3. Cave in to Republican demands.

Unfortunately for Obama and the Nation, he chose Number Three.

Here is how he could have applied the other two options.

Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act

In 1970, Congress passed the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1961-1968.

Congress’ goal was to eliminate the ill-affects of organized crime on the nation’s economy. To put it bluntly, RICO was intended to destroy the Mafia.

In the 1980s, however, civil lawyers noticed section 1964(c) of the RICO Act.  This allows civil claims to be brought by anyone injured in their business or property by reason of a RICO violation.

Anyone who prevailed in a a civil RICO suit would automatically receive judgment of three times their actual damages and would be awarded their costs and attorneys’ fees.

Originally, the RICO Act was aimed at the Mafia and other organized crime syndicates.  But in United States v. Turkette, 452 U.S. 576 (1981), the Supreme Court held that RICO applied to both legitimate and illegitimate RICO enterprises.

Previously, many lower courts had tried to limit RICO to recognized “criminal” enterprises. After Turkette, RICO could also be used against corporations, political protest groups, labor unions and loosely knit-groups of people.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 49 other followers

%d bloggers like this: