Archive for the ‘Business’ Category
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BASKET OF DEPLORABLES SPEECH, BBC, BILL CLINTON, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CELINDA LAKE, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, EMPLOYERS RESPONSIBILITY ACT, FACEBOOK, FISHER INVESTMENTS, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, FORBES MAGAZINE, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HILLARY CLINTON, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HUFFINGTON POST, KENNETH FISHER, MEDIA MATTERS, MEDICAL INSURANCE, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, POPULISM, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, U.S. SENATE, UNEMPLOYMENT, UP, UPI, USA TODAY, WAL-MART, WEALTH GAP, WONKETTE
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on September 4, 2017 at 12:38 am
Hillary Clinton gave only one memorable speech during the 2016 Presidential campaign—and then quashed any benefits that might have come from it.
This was the “basket of deplorables” speech, delivered at a New York fundraiser on September 9, 2016. It was the only Clinton speech to be widely quoted by Democrats and Republicans.
She divided Donald Trump’s supporters into two groups. The first group were the “deplorables,” for whom she showed open contempt:
“You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it.
“And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up.
“He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people—now 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks—they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America.”
Hillary Clinton
But the second group, she said, consisted of poor, alienated Americans who rightly felt abandoned by their employers and their government:
“But….that other basket of people are people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down. Nobody cares about them. Nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they’re just desperate for change. It doesn’t really even matter where it comes from.
“They don’t buy everything [Trump] says, but he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different. They won’t wake up and see their jobs disappear, lose a kid to heroin, feel like they’re in a dead-end. Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well.”
After giving this speech, Clinton threw away the good it might well have done her.
First, the day after making the speech, she apologized for it: “Last night I was ‘grossly generalistic,’ and that’s never a good idea. I regret saying ‘half’—that was wrong.”
Many of Trump’s followers were racists, sexists and xenophobes—who deserved condemnation, not apologies. By apologizing, she looked weak, indecisive.
Second, having eloquently reached out to many of the men and women who were a prime constituency for Donald Trump, she made no effort to follow up.
She could have used this moment to offer an economic package that would quickly and effectively address their vital needs for jobs and medical care.
But that would have required her to put one together long ago. And all she had to offer now was boilerplate rhetoric, such as: “Education is the answer.”
Meanwhile, Donald Trump, adopting the role of a populist, appealed to blue-collar voters.
Trump visited “Rustbelt” states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and vowed to “bring back” jobs that had been lost to China, such as those in coal mining and manufacturing. Clinton didn’t deign to show up, assuming she had those states “locked up.”
Donald Trump
Most economists agree that, in a globalized economy, such jobs are not coming back, no matter who becomes President.
Even so, voters went for the man who promised them a better future, and shunned the woman who didn’t promise them any future at all.
In May, 2016, Democratic pollster CeLinda Lake had warned Clinton to revamp her economic platform.
“Democrats simply have to come up with a more robust economic frame and message,” Lake said after the election.
“We’re never going to win those white, blue-collar voters if we’re not better on the economy. And 27 policy papers and a list of positions is not a frame. We can laugh about it all we want, but Trump had one.”
Actually, Trump and Clinton had one thing in common when it came to tackling unemployment: Both of them ignored the single greatest cause of unemployment among Americans: The refusal of employers to hire.
Employers like Kenneth Fisher, chief executive officer of Fisher Investments, who said, in 2012: “Believe it or not, I’m for fewer jobs, not more.”
In the Christmas Eve, 2012 issue of Forbes, he asserted: “Job Growth is Overrated.”
“Throughout 2012 we heard politicians and pundits of all stripes yammering endlessly on the need for job growth—that we don’t have enough jobs. It’s pure rubbish.”
Kenneth Fisher
According to Fisher, jobs are actually signs of weakness in the economy. Fewer employees can produce more products—and that’s good for us all.
For Fisher—a billionaire—the template for future economic success is Walmart, the nation’s largest private employer: “With Walmart you get an awe-inspiring company at 13 times my January 2014 earnings estimate, with a 2.2% dividend yield.”
But America can put an end to this “I’ve-got-mine-and-the-hell-with-you” job-killing arrogance of people like Kenneth Fisher.
The answer lies in three words: Employers Responsibility Act (ERA).
If passed by Congress and vigorously enforced by the U.S. Departments of Justice and Labor, an ERA would ensure full-time, permanent and productive employment for millions of capable, job-seeking Americans.
And it would achieve this without raising taxes or creating controversial government “make work” programs. Such legislation would legally require employers to demonstrate as much initiative for hiring as job-seekers are now expected to show in searching for work.
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AP, BUREAUCRACY, BUSINESS REGULATION, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CONGRESS, CORPORATIONS, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DISASTER RELIEF, FACEBOOK, FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY, FERTILIZER PLANT EXPLOSION, HURRICANE SANDY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (OSHA), POLITICO, RAW STORY, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TEXAS, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UP, UPI, USA TODAY
In Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on August 30, 2017 at 1:54 am
On August 25, Hurricane Harvey smashed into Texas with torrential rain and winds of 130 mph.
Within three days, thousands of homes were flooded and hundreds had to be rescued from rising flood waters.
Rain-flooded streets in South Texas
And Texas United States Senator Rafael Edward “Ted” Cruz quickly requested full-fledged Federal relief for his state.
But in 2012, Cruz voted three times against federal aid for victims of Hurricane Sandy.
Then he reversed himself in 2013, by seeking “all available resources” for victims of the April 17 explosion at a fertilizer plant in West, McLennan County, Texas.
The blast killed 13 people, wounded about 200 others, and caused extensive damages to surrounding homes.
In October, 2012, Hurricane Sandy had killed about 150 people and caused an estimated $75 billion in damage across the Northeast.
The Republican legislator stood foursquare against the Sandy Aid Relief bill, claiming that it was loaded with “pork”:
“Hurricane Sandy inflicted devastating damage on the East Coast, and Congress appropriately responded with hurricane relief,” said Cruz.
“Unfortunately, cynical politicians in Washington could not resist loading up this relief bill with billions in new spending utterly unrelated to Sandy.
“Emergency relief for the families who are suffering from this natural disaster should not be used as a Christmas tree for billions in unrelated spending, including projects such as Smithsonian repairs, upgrades to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration airplanes, and more funding for Head Start.”
Another Republican, Rep. Bill Flores, who represented West, McLennan County, also voted against the Sandy relief package. But this didn’t stop him from requesting federal aid for the disaster in his home district.
U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
According to PolitiFact, “A big portion of the $17 billion in ‘immediate’ assistance, more than $5 billion, went to replenish FEMA’s disaster relief fund, which may fund relief from future disasters.”
Furthermore, Rick Ungar, writing at Forbes, pointed out that the “pork” came from having to bribe red state Republicans-–including Texas—to get the package passed over their filibuster:
“However, as it turns out, the pork portions of the Senate bill were not earmarked to benefit Democratic members of the upper chamber of Congress….
“The answer can be found in a quick review of the states that are set to benefit from the Senate’s extra-special benevolence—states including Alabama, Mississippi, Texas and Louisiana.” All of these have solid Republican constituencies.
In fact, Texas had the most FEMA-declared disasters since the start of 2009, according to a September 29, 2011 article in iWatch News
“Eleven Republican U.S. senators who represent the states with the most FEMA-declared disasters since the start of 2009 voted against a bill designed to keep the agency’s disaster relief fund from running out of cash.”
“The top two states, Texas and Oklahoma, combined for more than a quarter of the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s declared disasters since Jan. 1, 2009.”
Yet the hypocrisy didn’t end there.
“The nation’s number one resource is its workers,” said Keith Wrightson, safety expert at Public Citizen, a nonprofit consumer advocacy group. “But the agency that’s charged with protecting them is not given the resources to do it. I think it’s worrisome for the nation.”
The West Fertilizer Company facility hadn’t been inspected by the Labor Department’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) since 1985, when the company was fined $30. Why did the facility go for almost 30 years without further inspections from OSHA?
As a small employer, the fertilizer facility may have been exempt from some forms of OSHA scrutiny. Years ago, Congress attached a rider to agency funding that forbids OSHA to perform inspections of workplaces with 10 or fewer employees and whose industries have low injury rates.
Lawmakers reasoned that small businesses shouldn’t have to shoulder the same costs of compliance as larger ones.
But smaller worksites aren’t necessarily less dangerous. According to safety advocates, small companies often have fewer resources to invest in worker safety and, with less government oversight, even less incentive.
On April 20, 2013, the damning news broke in a Reuters story:
“The fertilizer plant that exploded on Wednesday, obliterating part of a small Texas town and killing at least 14 people, had last year been storing 1,350 times the amount of ammonium nitrate that would normally trigger safety oversight by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS).”
Explosion at a fertilizer plant in West, McLennan County, Texas
According to Reuters, West Fertilizer, the company that owned the plant, did not tell DHS about the potentially explosive fertilizer as it was required to do.
The DHS is a major regulator of ammonium nitrate-–which can also be used in bomb making. Thus, it was left totally unaware of the potential danger posed by the plant..
Fertilizer plants and depots must report to the DHS when they hold 400 lb or more of the substance. Filings this year with the Texas Department of State Health Services, which weren’t shared with DHS, show the plant had 270 tons of it on hand in 2012.
Recently called out for his efforts to deny aid to Hurricane Sandy victims, Cruz replied: “Well, you know, look. There’s time for political sniping later. I think our focus needs to be on this crisis.”
In short, it’s a crisis when it happens in his state, not when it happens elsewhere.
ABC NEWS, AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, ALTERNET, AMERICAN NAZI PARTY, AP, BBC, BORDER WALL, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHARLOTTESVILLE VIOLENCE, CNN, DAILY KOS, DONALD TRUMP, EGOMANIA, ERIC SCHNEIDERMAN, FACEBOOK, FOX NEWS SUNDAY, GOLDEN SHOWERS REPORT, HILLARY CLINTON, JAMES R. CLAPPER, MORNING JOE, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NAFTA, NATO, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, Ronald Reagan, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SEXUAL HARASSMENT, SLATE, SOVIET UNION, TAX RETURNS, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TREASON, TRUMP UNIVERSITY, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, VLADIMIR PUTIN
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on August 25, 2017 at 12:08 am
Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper witnessed President Donald Trump’s 77-minute rant at a Phoenix campaign rally on August 22.
Trump angrily defended his refusal to condemn white supremacists for their intimidating and violent actions in Charlottesville, Virginia, on August 12-13. And he continued to slander the news media as unpatriotic.
He also attacked NAFTA and the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”) and threatened to shut down the government if Congress refused to pay for a border wall. (During his 2016 campaign, he had repeatedly promised that Mexico would pay for this.)
Afterward, Clapper told CNN: “I find this downright scary and disturbing….I really question his ability to be—his fitness to be—in this office, and I also am beginning to wonder about his motivation for it. Maybe he is looking for a way out.”
James Clapper
But the part of Clapper’s interview that most caught the attention of the media and Washington’s political establishment came when reporter Don Lemon asked: Is Trump a threat to national security?
“Well, he certainly could be,” Clapper replied.
“Again, having some understanding of the levers that a president can exercise, I worry about, frankly, you know, the access to nuclear codes,” Clapper answered.
And Clapper knows more about “the levers that a President can exercise” than most: He served no fewer than ten Presidents–from John F. Kennedy to Barack Obama.
He warned that “in a fit of pique,” Trump could order a nuclear strike against the regime of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.
“There’s actually very little to stop him,” Clapper said. “The whole system’s built to ensure rapid response if necessary. So there’s very little in the way of controls over you know, exercising a nuclear option, which is pretty damn scary.”
But long before the Clapper interview, Americans had more than enough knowledge about Trump to judge him unfit for the Oval Office.
- He unknowingly admitted to being a sexual predator of women: “You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful—I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.”
Donald Trump
- He refused to release his tax returns—unlike every other Presidential candidate since Ronald Reagan in 1980.
- He said he was prepared to withdraw from NATO, the American-European alliance that held the Soviet Union at bay for a half-century.
- He often and publicly praised Russian President Vladimir Putin, the absolute dictator of a foreign power hostile to the United States.
- He publicly invited “Russia”—i.e., Putin—to interfere directly in an American Presidential election: “I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 [Hillary Clinton] emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
Vladimir Putin
- On November 18, Trump—rather than face trial—settled the Trump University case out of court for $25 million. “Today’s $25 million settlement agreement is a stunning reversal by Donald Trump,” said New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, “and a major victory for the over 6,000 victims of his fraudulent university.”
- On March 16, he warned Republicans that if he didn’t win the GOP nomination in July, his supporters would literally riot: “I think you’d have riots. I think you would see problems like you’ve never seen before. I think bad things would happen. I really do. I wouldn’t lead it, but I think bad things would happen.”
- On August 9, Trump issued a veiled solicitation for the assassination of Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton: “Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish, the Second Amendment. If she gets to pick her [Supreme Court] judges, nothing you can do folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know.”
- After slandering President Barack Obama for five years as “the President from Kenya,” he blatantly lied: “Hillary Clinton and her campaign of 2008 started the birther controversy. I finished it.”
The number of people, places and things Trump has insulted is so extensive The New York Times compiled a list of 273 of them.
Trump’s rampant egomania is literally stamped on his properties. Of the 515 entities he owns, 268 of them—52%—bear his last name. Among the references he’s made to himself:
- “My fingers are long and beautiful, as, it has been well documented, are various other parts of my body.”
- “I think the only difference between me and the other candidates is that I’m more honest and my women are more beautiful.”
- “My Twitter has become so powerful that I can actually make my enemies tell the truth.”
- “My IQ is one of the highest—and you all know it.”
- Asked on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” who he consults about foreign policy, he replied: “I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things.”
* * * * *
Those Americans who voted for Donald Trump knew the character of the man they were electing. They cannot claim ignorance of who he was and what he intended to do.
They enthusiastically supported him because he gave voice to their hatreds and prejudices. And because they believed he would humiliate and destroy those they wanted to see humiliated and destroyed.
They are as deserving of the contempt of their fellow Americans as Trump himself.
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI, AP, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DEIDRE BALL, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, JOAN BENNETT, JOHN F. KELLY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REINCE PRIEBUS, REUTERS, RYAN LIZZA, SALON, SEAN SPICER, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, STEVE BANNON, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE MAN I MARRIED, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UP, UPI, USA TODAY, WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF, WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY
In Bureaucracy, Business, Entertainment, History, Military, Social commentary, Uncategorized on August 2, 2017 at 1:51 am
Anthony “The Mooch” Scaramucci desperately sought a high-stakes position with the Donald Trump White House.
He would have done better to have studied the truths offered in the 1940 movie, The Man I Married.
Carol Cabbott (Joan Bennett) is the editor of The Smart World, married to Eric Hoffman (Francis Lederer) a German. They have a seven-year-old son, Ricky (Johnny Russell).
Sometime in the 1930s they decide to vacation in Nazi Germany. Eric is quickly enamored of the Third Reich. His ardor is shared by Frieda (Anna Sten) a former schoolmate who reunites with him.
Frieda and Eric attend Nazi gatherings, and he decides to stay in Germany. Carol, however, is appalled at the cruelty and barbarism of the Reich and can’t wait to return to the United States.
As time passes, Eric becomes more strident in his worship of Adolf Hitler. Carol and he grow increasingly estranged.
Eventually, Eric tells Carol he is in love with Frieda and wants a divorce. Even worse, he wants to keep his son in Germany, to become a loyal follower of the Nazis.
For Carol, the situation is desperate: Under German law, Eric’s rights will trump hers.
But then fate takes a hand. While visiting his elderly father, Eric learns something truly shocking: His mother was a Jewess—the absolute worst calamity that could befall an ardent Nazi.
“If you won’t let your son return to America with his mother,” says his father, “I will go to the authorities and show them the marriage certificate.”
Eric is stunned. So is Frieda, who is standing by when the news breaks. Disgusted that she was about to “racially defile” herself, she angrily stalks out.
Suddenly, Eric now says he doesn’t know what came over him, and he wants to return to the United States. Even more startling, he expects to go on with his marriage to Carol, as if nothing has happened.
But, for Carol, the damage is too great and the marriage is over.
She and Ricky return to the United States without Eric—who has lost everything: His wife, his son and his future with the Third Reich.
Now, fast forward to the 21st century of Donald Trump’s America—and the fate of Anthony Scaramucci.
Anthony Scaramucci
Jdarsie11 [CC BY-SA 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0)%5D
In 2005, Scaramucci founded SkyBridge Capital, a global alternative investment firm.
But, in 2017, hoping to attain a position with the Trump administration, he resigned from his co-management role and ended his affiliation with SkyBridge.
On January 12, he was named Assistant to President Trump and director of the White House Office of Public Liaison and Intergovernmental Affairs.
Then disaster struck. On January 31, Trump’s chief of staff, Reince Priebus, called Scaramucci “to tell him he should pull out of consideration.”
Priebus opposed Scaramucci’s appointment because of Scaramucci’s stake in Skybridge Capital. The reason: Skybridge held a majority stake sale to RON Transatlantic EG and HNA Capital (U.S.) Holding, a Chinese conglomerate with close ties to China’s Communist Party.
But then Scaramucci’s future with the Trump administration suddenly appeared a reality.
On July 21, 2017, he was named as White House Communications Director, to take office on July 25. Even more importantly, he would report directly to the President—and not to Priebus, as had White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer.
Spicer, who had opposed Scarmucci’s hiring, resigned on the day of the appointment. Priebus had also strongly argued against the hiring, to no avail.
Then Scaramucci’s own hubris intervened.
On July 26, in a call to Ryan Lizza of The New Yorker, Scaramucci said he would rid the White House of “leakers.” He threatened to fire the entire White House Communications staff if Lizza didn’t reveal the source who had leaked the story of a dinner he had had with Trump.
He blasted Priebus as a “leaker” and “a fucking paranoid schizophrenic, a paranoiac,” and predicted that Priebus “would resign soon.”
Scaramucci also had harsh words for Trump’s chief strategist, Steve Bannon: “I’m not Steve Bannon, I’m not trying to suck my own cock. I’m not trying to build my own brand off the fucking strength of the President. I’m here to serve the country.”
On July 27, Priebus resigned as chief of staff.
The next day, Trump announced that he had named retired general John F. Kelley as Priebus’ replacement.
Then, on July 31, Scaramucci joined Spicer and Priebus as an ex-White House employee—dismissed by Trump at Kelly’s request, according to The New York Times.
And, like Eric Hoffman in The Man I Married, Scaramucci found himself without a marriage.
His wife, Deidre Ball—like Carol Hoffman—despised the man he yearned to work for: Donald Trump.
Married to Scaramucci in 2014, Ball filed for divorce in early July 2017 when she was eight months pregnant with their second child.
On July 24, Deidre gave birth to the couple’s son, James—while Anthony was in West Virginia attending the Boy Scouts Jamboree with Trump. He reportedly sent her a note: “Congratulations, I’ll pray for our child.”
Like Icarus, the mythical character who flew too close to the sun, he rose to the heights—and plunged to his doom.
9/11, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BENGHAZI TERROR ATTACK, BIRTH CERTIFICATE, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHARLES KOCH, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DAVID KOCH, DR. STANTON GLANTZ, FACEBOOK, FBI, GEORGE W. BUSH, IMPEACHMENT, IRS, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, NAVY SEALS, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TEA PARTY, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TOBACCO INDUSTRY, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UP, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on July 27, 2017 at 12:05 am
The Tea Party hated President Barack Obama and believed he should be impeached.
That you could have easily learned by visiting its website.
But there is a great deal about the Tea Party itself that its website won’t tell you.
Such as:
- Despite its propaganda, it is not a “grassroots organization” comprised of “ordinary Americans.”
- It was created with money from the tobacco industry and the billionaire Koch brothers.
- Its purpose is to co-opt Right-wing Americans and channel their votes into legislation that benefits the 1% richest.
That’s the conclusion of a study by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institute of Health.
National Cancer Institute
The roots of the Tea Party lie in the early 1980s, when tobacco companies started pouring money into third-party groups.
Their mission was two-fold:
- To fight excise taxes on cigarettes; and
- To combat health studies showing a link between cancer and secondhand smoke.
Stanton Glantz, professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, has been a longtime foe of the tobacco industry.
Dr. Stanton Glantz
In 2012, he authored a study for the peer-reviewed academic journal, Tobacco Control. Writing about the ties between the Tea Party and the tobacco industry, Glantz noted:
“The Tea Party, which gained prominence in the USA in 2009, advocates limited government and low taxes. Tea Party organisations, particularly Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks, oppose smoke-free laws and tobacco taxes.
“Rather than being a purely grassroots movement that spontaneously developed in 2009, the Tea Party has developed over time, in part through decades of work by the tobacco industry and other corporate interests.”
Click here: ‘To quarterback behind the scenes, third-party efforts’: the tobacco industry and the Tea Party — Fallin et al. –
Charles and David Koch, the real founders of the Tea Party
Most people believe the Tea Party originated as a 2009 grassroots uprising to protest taxes. But its origins can be traced to 2002.
That was when the Charles and David Koch and tobacco-backed Citizens for a Sound Economy set up the first Tea Party website.
From the National Cancer Institute’s study of the Tea Party:
- “The Tea Party, a loosely organised network of grassroots coalitions at local and state levels, is a complex social and political movement to the right of the traditional Republican Party that promotes less government regulation and lower taxes.”
- “David Koch was a co-founder of Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE) and Americans for Prosperity (AFP) Foundation,” both major allies of the tobacco industry.
- “National organisations funded by corporations, particularly Americans for Prosperity (AFP) and FreedomWorks, played an important role in structuring and supporting the Tea Party in the initial stages. They provided training, communication and materials for the earliest Tea Party activities, including the first ‘Tea Party’ on 27 February 2009.”
- “FreedomWorks organised the nationwide Tea Party tax protests in April 2009, the town hall protests about the proposed healthcare reform in August 2009 and the Taxpayers’ March on Washington the following September 2009.”
- “As of 2012, AFP and FreedomWorks were supporting the tobacco companies’ political agenda by mobilising local Tea Party opposition to tobacco taxes and smoke-free laws.”
- “In many ways, the Tea Party of the late 2000s has become the ‘movement’ envisioned by Tim Hyde, RJR director of national field operations in the 1990s, which was grounded in patriotic values of ‘freedom’ and ‘choice’ to change how people see the role of ‘government’ and ‘big business’ in their lives, particularly with regard to taxes and regulation.”
- “Many factors beyond the tobacco industry have contributed to the development of the Tea Party. Anti-tax sentiment has been linked to notions of patriotism since the inception of the USA when the colonies were protesting against taxation by the British.”
- “In addition, the Tea Party has origins in the ultra-right John Birch Society of the 1950s, of which Fred Koch (Charles and David Koch’s father) was a founding member.”
- “Although the Tea Party is a social movement, it has been affiliated closely with, and somewhat incorporated into, the Republican Party. This may be due in part to the increased conservatism of politically active Republicans since 1970s and the increased polarisation of American politics.”
- “….AFP and FreedomWorks…capitalised on the changing political realities following President Barack Obama’s election in 2008.”
- “In particular, they harnessed anti-government sentiment arising from the confluence of the mortgage and banking bailout, President Barack Obama’s stimulus package and the Democratic push for healthcare reform, which provided them with the opportunity for more successful grassroots-level Tea Party organising.”
CHART SHOWING Connections between the tobacco industry, third-party allies and the Tea Party, from the 1980’s (top) through 2012 (bottom).
Since 2008, the Tea Party has played a major role in American politics.
Throughout 2009, its thuggish supporters sought to terrorize members of Congress into opposing passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), otherwise known as Obamacare.
This despite the fact that the ACA offered many of them their only chance to obtain access to medical care.
And in 2010 they played a pivotal role in delivering the House of Representatives to the Republican Party. Similarly, they helped Republicans take control of the Senate in 2014.
Yet the vast majority of the Tea Party’s low-level membership probably doesn’t know the origins—or the real purposes—of their organization.
But for those for whom truth is important, “the truth”—as The X-Files tagline once went—“is out there.”
9/11, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BENGHAZI TERROR ATTACK, BIRTH CERTIFICATE, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHARLES KOCH, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DAVID KOCH, DR. STANTON GLANTZ, FACEBOOK, FBI, GEORGE W. BUSH, IMPEACHMENT, IRS, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, NAVY SEALS, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TEA PARTY, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TOBACCO INDUSTRY, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UP, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on July 26, 2017 at 12:41 am
“Should Barack Obama Be Impeached?” shouted the September, 2014 headline on the Right-wing website of TeaParty.org.
“A fake birth certificate, the Benghazi attack, the IRS scandal, National Security invasions on privacy….Many are questioning Obama’s competence. Should Congress initiate impeachment proceedings?
“What do you think?”
Then the site offered this in tribute to its sponsor:
“TeaParty.org, one of America’s leading websites and top online news sources is conducting a poll about an important issue.
“The results of these polls will be published online and are shared with major news networks and policymakers.
“Don’t miss this opportunity to let your voice be heard! Vote today!”
The viewer was then given two questions to answer.
The first was: “Should Barack Obama be impeached?”
The website offered three possible answers for the visitor to choose:
- “Yes, the events are now overwhelming.”
- “No, these do not meet the threshold of high crimes and misdemeanors.”
- “Not sure, still waiting to review the evidence.”
The second question was: “Whom do you believe has better solutions for the nation’s problems?”
It, too, provided three possible answers:
- “Conservatives”
- “Liberals”
- “Neither.”
The website omitted a number of truths—about both President Barack Obama and the Tea Party itself.
Slander #1: “A false birth certificate”
The election of Barack Obama pushed the Right to new heights of infamy. With no political scandal (such as Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky) to fasten on, the Republican Party deliberately promoted the slander that Obama was not an American citizen.
From this there could be only one conclusion: That he was an illegitimate President, and should be removed from office.
President Barack Obama
During the 2008 Presidential campaign, Republicans charged that Obama was really a Muslim non-citizen who intended to sell out America’s security to his Muslim “masters.”
And this smear campaign continued throughout his Presidency.
To the dismay of his enemies, Obama—in the course of a single week—dramatically proved the falsity of both charges.
On April 27, 2011, he released the long-form of his Hawaii birth certificate.
The long-form version of President Obama’s birth certificate
“We do not have time for this kind of silliness,” said Obama at a press conference, speaking as a father might to a roomful of spiteful children. “We have better stuff to do. I have got better stuff to do. We have got big problems to solve.
“We are not going to be able to do it if we are distracted, we are not going to be able to do it if we spend time vilifying each other…if we just make stuff up and pretend that facts are not facts, we are not going to be able to solve our problems if we get distracted by side shows and carnival barkers.”
And on May 1, he announced the solving of one of those “big problems”: Osama bin Laden, mastermind of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, had been tracked down and shot dead by elite U.S. Navy SEALS in Pakistan.
Slander #2: “The Benghazi attack”
A total of four Americans died in a terrorist attack on the American diplomatic consulate in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11, 2012.
Whereas a total of 3,000 Americans died in the Al Qaeda attacks of September 11, 2001. But those occurred on the watch of a white Republican President, so naturally no treason charges were invoked by the Right.
Slander #3: “The IRS scandal”
In 2013, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) disclosed that it had selected political groups applying for tax-exempt status for intensive scrutiny based on their names or political themes.
Although Right-wingers have claimed that their political organizations were exclusively targeted by the IRS, the agency opened investigations based on such trigger-words as:
- Tea Party
- Patriots
- 9/12 Project
- progressive
- occupy
- Israel
- medical marijuana
“While some of the IRS questions may have been overbroad, you can look at some of these groups and understand why these questions were being asked,” said Ohio State University law professor Donald Tobin.
In January, 2014, the FBI announced that it had found no evidence warranting the filing of federal criminal charges in connection with the scandal.
No evidence has come to light suggesting that President Obama was responsible for the IRS’s actions.
Slander #4: “National Security Agency (NSA) invasions on privacy”
This totally ignores that it was former President George W. Bush who, after 9/11, ordered the NSA to vastly increase its electronic-interception capabilities.
No longer would the agency be confined to spying on calls outside the United States. From now on, it would target Americans who might be linked to international terror cells.
Slander #5: “Many are questioning Obama’s competence”
While this was true—among those on the Right and Left—it missed the essential legal point: Even if true, “incompetence” is not a legitimate impeachable offense.
And no evidence ever came forth to indict President Obama for “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
Meanwhile, there was a great deal about the Tea Party itself that its founders didn’t reveal in their “poll”.
Such as the truth that it was created by the tobacco industry and the billionaire Koch brothers.
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AP, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CRIME, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, FACEBOOK, GUN CONTROL, MARTIN LUTHER KING, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REUTERS, ROBERT F. KENNEDY, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SECOND AMENDMENT, SELF-DEFENSE, SLATE, STAND-YOUR-GROUND LAWS, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. CONSTITUTION, U.S. NAVY SEALS, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, VIRGINIA TECH SHOOTINGS, WRONGFUL-DEATH LAWSUITS
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on July 25, 2017 at 12:09 am
The victims of the violence are black and white, rich and poor, young and old, famous and unknown. They are, most important of all, human beings whom other human beings loved and needed. No one—no matter where he lives or what he does— can be certain who will suffer from some senseless act of bloodshed. And yet it goes on and on.
–Robert F. Kennedy, April 4, 1968
Senator Robert F. Kennedy announcing the murder of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
What should the surviving victims of gun massacres do to seek redress?
And how can the relatives and friends of those who didn’t survive seek justice for those they loved?
Two things:
First, don’t count on politicians to support a ban on assault weapons.
Politicians—with rare exceptions—have only two goals:
- Get elected to office, and
- Stay in office.
And too many of them fear the economic and voting clout of the NRA to risk its wrath.
Consider Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama.
Both rushed to offer condolences to the surviving victims of the massacre at the Century 16 Theater in Aurora, Colorado, on July 20, 2012.
And both steadfastly refused to even discuss gun control—let alone support a ban on the type of assault weapons used by James Holmes, leaving 12 dead and 58 wounded.
Second, those who survived the massacre–and the relatives and friends of those who didn’t–should file wrongful death, class-action lawsuits against the NRA.
There is sound, legal precedent for this.
- For decades, the American tobacco industry peddled death and disability to millions and reaped billions of dollars in profits.
- The industry vigorously claimed there was no evidence that smoking caused cancer, heart disease, emphysema or any other ailment.
- Tobacco companies spent billions on slick advertising campaigns to win new smokers and attack medical warnings about the dangers of smoking.
- Tobacco companies spent millions to elect compliant politicians and block anti-smoking legislation.
- From 1954 to 1994, over 800 private lawsuits were filed against tobacco companies in state courts. But only two plaintiffs prevailed, and both of those decisions were reversed on appeal.
- In 1994, amidst great pessimism, Mississippi Attorney General Mike Moore filed a lawsuit against the tobacco industry. But other states soon followed, ultimately growing to 46.
- Their goal: To seek monetary, equitable and injunctive relief under various consumer-protection and anti-trust laws.
- The theory underlying these lawsuits was: Cigarettes produced by the tobacco industry created health problems among the population, which badly strained the states’ public healthcare systems.
- In 1998, the states settled their Medicaid lawsuits against the tobacco industry for recovery of their tobacco-related, health-care costs. In return, they exempted the companies from private lawsuits for tobacco-related injuries.
- The companies agreed to curtail or cease certain marketing practices. They also agreed to pay, forever, annual payments to the states to compensate some of the medical costs for patients with smoking-related illnesses.
The parallels with the NRA are obvious:
- For decades, the NRA has peddled deadly weapons to millions, reaped billions of dollars in profits and refused to admit the carnage those weapons have produced: “Guns don’t kill people. People kill people.” With guns.
- The NRA has bitterly fought background checks on gun-buyers, in effect granting even criminals and the mentally ill the right to own arsenals of death-dealing weaponry.
- The NRA has spent millions on slick advertising campaigns to win new members and frighten them into buying guns.
- The NRA has spent millions on political contributions to block gun-control legislation.
- The NRA has spent millions attacking political candidates and elected officials who warned about the dangers of unrestricted access to assault and/or concealed weapons.
- The NRA has spent millions pushing “Stand Your Ground” laws in more than half the states, which potentially give every citizen a “license to kill.”
- The NRA receives millions of dollars from online sales of ammunition, high-capacity ammunition magazines, and other accessories through its point-of-sale Round-Up Program—thus directly profiting by selling a product that kills about 30,288 people a year.
- Firearms made indiscriminately available through NRA lobbying have filled hospitals with casualties, and have thus badly strained the states’ public healthcare systems.
It will take a series of highly expensive and well-publicized lawsuits to significantly weaken the NRA, financially and politically.
The first ones will have to be brought by the surviving victims of gun violence—and by the friends and families of those who did not survive it. Only they will have the courage and motivation to take such a risk.
As with the cases first brought against tobacco companies, there will be losses. And the NRA will rejoice with each one.
But, in time, state Attorneys General will see the clear parallels between lawsuits filed against those who peddle death by cigarette and those who peddle death by armor-piercing bullet.
And then the NRA—like the tobacco industry—will face an adversary wealthy enough to stand up for the rights of the gun industry’s own victims.
Only then will those politicians supporting reasonable gun controls dare to stand up for the victims of these needless tragedies.
ABC NEWS, AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BBC, BLOOMBERG, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHILDRENS HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOS, DAILY KOZ, DAVID BROOKS, DONALD TRUMP, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HEALTHCARE AND RECONCILIATION ACT OF 2010, HUFFINGTON POST, JOHN MCCAIN, MARK SHIELDS, MEDIA MATTERS, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OBAMACARE, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, RESTORING AMERICANS HEALTHCARE FREEDOM RECONCILIATION ACT OF 2015, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, TAX POLICY CENTER, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE INTERCEPT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UP, UPI, USA TODAY, WARREN BUFFETT, X
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on July 24, 2017 at 2:44 pm
On July 14, Arizona’s United States Senator John McCain underwent a “minimally invasive” medical procedure at Mayo Clinic Hospital in Phoenix to remove a blood clot from above his left eye.
Soon afterward, his Senate office announced:
“Senator McCain received excellent treatment at Mayo Clinic Hospital in Phoenix, and appreciates the tremendous professionalism and care by its doctors and staff.
“He is in good spirits and recovering comfortably at home with his family. On the advice of his doctors, Senator McCain will be recovering in Arizona next week.”
John McCain
McCain, who has a fair complexion, has repeatedly battled melanoma, a sometimes-deadly form of skin cancer. In 2000, the year he ran for President against George W. Bush, he had a particularly serious episode.
When he ran again for President in 2008, he told reporters: “Like most Americans, I go to see my doctor fairly frequently.”
He has had at least four documented cases of melanoma.
Lost in the massive publicity of McCain’s latest brush with melanoma was the sheer irony of the situation.
McCain had “received excellent treatment at Mayo Clinic Hospital” at a time when he and his fellow Republicans were vigorously trying to repeal President Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act (ACA).
Barack Obama
The Act—nicknamed “Obamacare”—has provided access to healthcare to millions of poor and middle-class Americans who had previously been unable to afford it.
Since its becoming law on March 23, 2010, Republicans have declared it Public Enemy Number One and set out to repeal it. By March 2014 they had voted against it 54 times, trying to undo or substantially change it.
In October, 2013, they shut down the Federal Government for 15 days. They hoped to extort Obama into de-funding the ACA: If he did, they would re-open Federal agencies.
But, facing pressure from voters unable to obtain basic government services, Republicans backed down.
During the 2016 Presidential campaign, every Republican candidate pledged to repeal Obamacare if s/he were elected.
Donald Trump—who won the Republican nomination and then the election—repeatedly made this the centerpiece of his campaign.
On October 25, he promised: “My first day in office, I am going to ask Congress to put a bill on my desk getting rid of this disastrous law and replacing it with reforms that expand choice, freedom, affordability.”
McCain himself has repeatedly tried to restrict access to healthcare by ordinary Americans.
On January 29, 2009, he voted against the Childrens Health Insurance Program Reauthorization and Expansion.
This expanded State Children’s Health Insurance Program coverage from 6.6 million children to about 11 million children.
On December 24, 2009, he voted against the ACA.
On February 2, 2011, McCain voted to repeal the ACA.
On July 26, 2015, McCain voted to repeal the ACA and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.
On December 3, 2015, he voted for the “Restoring Americans’ Healthcare Freedom Reconciliation Act of 2015.”
This would have gutted “Obamacare” by repealing the individual mandate, the employer mandate, the medical device excise tax, and the “Cadillac tax”” on expensive employee health insurance premiums.
It also included a measure to eliminate federal Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood for one year.
And what lay behind Republican efforts to “repeal and replace” the ACA?
Americans earning $5 million or more—those in the top 0.1%—would receive an average tax cut of nearly $250,000 in 2026, according to an analysis by the Tax Policy Center. Those earning $875,000 and more—those in the top 1%—would save $45,500 in taxes a year.
Appearing on the June 23 edition of the PBS Newshour, syndicated columnist Mark Shields said: “And what it is, the only thing that the House and the Senate are consistently faithful on is that it’s a major tax cut, It is a redistribution.
David Brooks and Mark Shields
“Obama, who was, you know, if anything, overly moderate for many tastes, did, in fact, lay it on the most advantaged among us to pay, to cover people who couldn’t afford it in his plan. And a 3.8 percent tax on unearned income for those earning over a quarter of a million dollars became the rallying cry, the organizing principle for the opposition.
“And that’s the one constant that has been through it all. Warren Buffett, to his everlasting credit, pointed out that he will get a tax cut under the Republican plan this year of $630,000. That’s the redistribution.
“And, you know, in the richest nation in the history of the world, it is a terrible indictment, a sad commentary that the most vulnerable among us, the least—the least among us are really tossed off as a political statement.”
Speaking on the same program, David Brooks, conservative columnist for the New York Times, said: “What it does—you ought to start with, what kind of country are we in? We’re in a country where—widening inequality.
“And so I think it’s possible to be a conservative and to support market mechanisms basically to redistribute wealth down to those who are suffering.
“This bill doesn’t do that. It goes the other way. So, I think, fundamentally, it doesn’t solve the basic problem our country has, which is a lot of people are extremely vulnerable.”
ABC NEWS, AIRLINES, ALTERNET, ANTHEM INC., AP, BUSINESS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHINA, CNN, COMPUTER SECURITY, CREDIT CARDS, CROOKS AND LIARS, CYBERSECURITY, DAILY KOZ, DAIRY QUEEN, FACEBOOK, HACKING, JOHN HERING, JPMORGAN/CHASE, LILY TOMLIN, LOOKOUT, LUGGAGE THEFTS, MA BELL, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REUTERS, ROWAN & MARTIN'S LAUGH-IN, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SOCIAL SECURITY, STAPLES, TARGET, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UP, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on July 14, 2017 at 1:15 am
Comedian Lily Tomlin rose to fame on the 1960s comedy hit, Rowan & Martin’s Laugh-In, as Ernestine, the rude, sarcastic switchboard operator for Ma Bell.
She would tap into customers’ calls, interrupt them, make snide remarks about their personal lives. And her victims included celebrities as much as run-of-the-mill customers.
Lily Tomlin as Ernestine
She introduced herself as working for “the phone company, serving everyone from presidents and kings to the scum of the earth.”
But perhaps the line for which her character is best remembered was: “We don’t care. We don’t have to. We’re the phone company.”
Watching Ernestine on Laugh-In was a blast for millions of TV viewers. But facing such corporate arrogance in real-life is no laughing matter.
Clearly, too many companies take the same attitude as Ernestine: “We don’t care. We don’t have to.”
This is especially true for companies that are supposed to safeguard their customers’ most sensitive information—such as their credit card numbers, addresses, emails and phone numbers.
An October 22, 2014 “commentary” published in Forbes magazine raised the highly disturbing question: “Cybersecurity: Does Corporate America Really Care?”
And the answer is clearly: No.
Its author is John Hering, co-founder and executive director of Lookout, which bills itself as “the world leader in mobile security for consumers and enterprises alike.”
Click here: Cybersecurity: Does corporate America really care?
October, 2014 proved a bad month for credit card-using customers of Kmart, Staples and Dairy Queen.
All these corporations reported data breeches involving the theft of credit card numbers of countless numbers of customers.
Earlier breaches had hit Target, Home Depot and JPMorgan/Chase.
And on February 5, 2015, health insurance giant Anthem Inc. announced that hackers had breached its computer system and accessed the medical records of tens of millions of its customers and employees.
Anthem, the nation’s second-largest health insurer, said the infiltrated database held records on up to 80 million people.
Among the customers’ information accessed:
- Names
- Birthdates
- Social Security numbers
- Member ID numbers
- Addresses
- Phone numbers
- Email addresses and
- Employment information.
Some of the customer data may also include details on their income.
Click here: Anthem hack exposes data on 80 million; experts warn of identity theft – LA Times
Bad as that news was, worse was to come.
A February 5 story by the Wall Street Journal revealed that Anthem stored the Social Security numbers of 80 million customers without encrypting them.
The company believes that hackers used a stolen employee password to access the database
Anthem’s alleged reason for refusing to encrypt such sensitive data: Doing so would have made it harder for the company’s employees to track health care trends or share data with state and Federal health providers.
Anthem spokeswoman Kristin Binns blamed the data breach on employers and government agencies who “require us to maintain a member’s Social Security number in our systems so that their systems can uniquely identify their members.”
She said that Anthem encrypts personal data when it moves in or out of its database–but not where it is stored.
This is a commonplace practice in the healthcare industry.
The FBI launched an investigation into the hack.
According to an anonymous source, the hackers used malware that has been used almost exclusively by Chinese cyberspies.
Naturally, China has denied any wrongdoing. With a completely straight face, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said:
“We maintain a cooperative, open and secure cyberspace, and we hope that countries around the world will make concerted efforts to that end.”
He also said that the charge that the hackers were Chinese was “groundless.”
Click here: Health Insurer Anthem Didn’t Encrypt Stolen Data – WSJ
Meanwhile, John Hering’s complaints remain as valid today as they did last October.
“One thing is clear,” writes Hering. “CEOs need to put security on their strategic agendas alongside revenue growth and other issues given priority in boardrooms.”
Hering warns that “CEOs don’t seem to be making security a priority.” And he offers several reasons for this:
- The sheer number of data compromises;
- Relatively little consumer outcry;
- Almost no impact on the companies’ standing on Wall Street;
- Executives may consider such breaches part of the cost of doing business.
“There’s a short-term mindset and denial of convenience in board rooms,” writes Hering.
“Top executives don’t realize their systems are vulnerable and don’t understand the risks. Sales figures and new products are top of mind; shoring up IT systems aren’t.”
There are three ways corporations can be forced to start behaving responsibly on this issue.
- Smart attorneys need to start filing class-action lawsuits against companies that refuse to take steps to protect their customers’ private information. There is a name for such behavior: Criminal negligence. And there are laws carrying serious penalties for it.
- There must be Federal legislation to ensure that multi-million-dollar fines are levied against such companies—and especially their CEOs—when such data breaches occur.
- Congress should enact legislation allowing for the prosecution of CEOs whose companies’ negligence leads to such massive data breaches. They should be considered as accessories to crime, and, if convicted, sentenced to lengthy prison terms.
Only then will the CEO mindset of “We don’t care, we don’t have to” be replaced with: “We care, because we’ll lose our money and/or freedom if we don’t.”
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BBC, BP, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHILDREN'S BOOKS, CNN, DAILY KOS, DEMOCRATIC PARTY, DONALD TRUMP, DR. SEUSS, ENERGY POLICY, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, FACEBOOK, GLOBAL WARMING, LOUISIANA, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OIL SPILL, POLITICO, POLLUTION, RAW STORY, REUTERS, SALON, Sarah Palin, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on June 26, 2017 at 12:01 am
Dr. Seuss (Theodor Geisel) published over 60 children’s books, which were often filled with imaginative characters and rhyme.
Among his most famous books were Green Eggs and Ham, The Cat in the Hat, and One Fish Two Fish Red Fish Blue Fish.
Honored in his lifetime (1904-1991) for the joy he brought to countless children, Dr. Seuss may well prove one of the unsung prophets of our environmentally-threatened age.
Dr. Seuss
In 1949, he penned Bartholomew and the Oobleck, the story of a young page who must rescue his kingdom from a terrifying, man-made substance called Oobleck.
The story is quickly told:
Derwin, the King of Didd, announces he’s bored with sunshine, rain, fog and snow. He wants a new kind of weather.
So he calls in his black magicians and gives them the order. The magicians assure him they can create it.
“What will you call it?” asks the king.
“We’ll call it Oobleck,” says one of the magicians.
“What will it be like?” asks King Didd.
“We don’t know, Sire,” the magician replies. “We’ve never created Oobleck before.”
The next morning, Oobleck–a greenish, glue-like substance—starts raining.
The king orders Bartholomew, the royal page, to tell the Bell Ringer that today will be a holiday. But the bell doesn’t ring—because it’s filled with Oobleck.
Bartholomew warns the Royal Trumpeter about the Oobleck, but the trumpet gets stopped up with the goo.
The Captain of the Guards thinks the Oobleck is pretty and sees no danger in it—until he eats some. Instantly, his mouth is glued shut.
The Oobleck rain intensifies. The falling blobs—now as big as buckets full of broccoli—now break into the palace, immobilizing the servants and guards.
At the climax of the story, Bartholomew confronts King Derwin for giving such a rash order: “If you can’t do anything else,” says Bartholomew, “at least you can say you’re sorry.”
King Derwin refuses, and Bartholomew says, “If you can look at all the horror you’ve caused and not say you’re sorry, you’re no sort of king at all.”
In real-life, such a king would have instantly ordered Bartholomew’s execution. But this is a children’s story.
So, overcome with guilt, King Derwin utters the magic words: “You’re right, this is all my fault, and I am sorry.”
Suddenly the Oobleck stops raining and the sun melts away the rest.
With life returning to normal, King Derwin mounts the bell tower and rings the bell. He proclaims a holiday dedicated not to Oobleck, but to rain, sun, fog, and snow, the four elements of Nature—of which Man is but a part.
* * * * *
Flash forward to the following Donald Trump tweets:
November 6, 2012: “The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.”
December 6, 2013: “Ice storm rolls from Texas to Tennessee – I’m in Los Angeles and it’s freezing. Global warming is a total, and very expensive, hoax!”
January 1, 2014: “This very expensive GLOBAL WARMING bullshit has got to stop. Our planet is freezing, record low temps, and our GW scientists are stuck in ice.”
On May 5, 2016, as a Presidential candidate, Trump pointed to signs being waved at a rally in Charleston, South Carolina:in the crowd: “I see over here: ‘Trump digs coal,’ That’s true. I do.”
Donald Trump
Upon becoming President, Trump picked Scott Pruitt, a leading climate change denier, as director of the Environmental Protection Agency: “So no, I would not agree that [human activity] it’s a primary contributor to the global warming that we see,”Pruitt said on CNBS’s program, “Squawk Box”
On March 16, 2017, the Trump administration released a budget proposal to eliminate $100 million in funding for the EPA’s climate work, including scientific research.
On March 28, 2017, Trump ordered his administration to rewrite the Clean Power Plan. His objective: To gut former President Barack Obama’s landmark restrictions on power plant emissions.
On June 1, 2017, Trump announced that he would withdraw the United States from the Paris climate-change agreement deal.
There are forces in Nature far more powerful than anything Man and his puny strength can defy—or harness. And we invoke the wrath of those forces at our own peril.”
In the world of children’s stories, it’s possible for a king to undo the terrible damage he’s unleashed by finding the courage to say: “I’m sorry.”
In real-life, tyrants almost never say “I’m sorry,” no matter how enormous their mistakes and/or crimes.
From 1936 to 1938, Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin slaughtered the cream of his own Army and Air Force. When Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, Stalin blamed his remaining generals for the massive defeats inflicted by the Wehrmacht.
And as Soviet forces finally closed on Berlin in April, 1945, and Adolf Hitler prepared to commit suicide in his underground bunker, he blamed the German people for losing the war he had started.
Saying “I’m sorry” cannot reverse decades of rampant environmental abuse. To believe that it can is as ridiculous as believing that self-righteous tyrants will ever take responsibility for their own crimes and follies.
Bureaucracybuster's Blog 
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BASKET OF DEPLORABLES SPEECH, BBC, BILL CLINTON, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CELINDA LAKE, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, EMPLOYERS RESPONSIBILITY ACT, FACEBOOK, FISHER INVESTMENTS, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, FORBES MAGAZINE, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HILLARY CLINTON, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HUFFINGTON POST, KENNETH FISHER, MEDIA MATTERS, MEDICAL INSURANCE, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, POPULISM, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, U.S. SENATE, UNEMPLOYMENT, UP, UPI, USA TODAY, WAL-MART, WEALTH GAP, WONKETTE
TURNING PREDATORS INTO PATRIOTS: PART ONE (OF THREE)
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on September 4, 2017 at 12:38 amHillary Clinton gave only one memorable speech during the 2016 Presidential campaign—and then quashed any benefits that might have come from it.
This was the “basket of deplorables” speech, delivered at a New York fundraiser on September 9, 2016. It was the only Clinton speech to be widely quoted by Democrats and Republicans.
She divided Donald Trump’s supporters into two groups. The first group were the “deplorables,” for whom she showed open contempt:
“You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it.
“And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up.
“He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people—now 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks—they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America.”
Hillary Clinton
But the second group, she said, consisted of poor, alienated Americans who rightly felt abandoned by their employers and their government:
“But….that other basket of people are people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down. Nobody cares about them. Nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they’re just desperate for change. It doesn’t really even matter where it comes from.
“They don’t buy everything [Trump] says, but he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different. They won’t wake up and see their jobs disappear, lose a kid to heroin, feel like they’re in a dead-end. Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well.”
After giving this speech, Clinton threw away the good it might well have done her.
First, the day after making the speech, she apologized for it: “Last night I was ‘grossly generalistic,’ and that’s never a good idea. I regret saying ‘half’—that was wrong.”
Many of Trump’s followers were racists, sexists and xenophobes—who deserved condemnation, not apologies. By apologizing, she looked weak, indecisive.
Second, having eloquently reached out to many of the men and women who were a prime constituency for Donald Trump, she made no effort to follow up.
She could have used this moment to offer an economic package that would quickly and effectively address their vital needs for jobs and medical care.
But that would have required her to put one together long ago. And all she had to offer now was boilerplate rhetoric, such as: “Education is the answer.”
Meanwhile, Donald Trump, adopting the role of a populist, appealed to blue-collar voters.
Trump visited “Rustbelt” states like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and vowed to “bring back” jobs that had been lost to China, such as those in coal mining and manufacturing. Clinton didn’t deign to show up, assuming she had those states “locked up.”
Donald Trump
Most economists agree that, in a globalized economy, such jobs are not coming back, no matter who becomes President.
Even so, voters went for the man who promised them a better future, and shunned the woman who didn’t promise them any future at all.
In May, 2016, Democratic pollster CeLinda Lake had warned Clinton to revamp her economic platform.
“Democrats simply have to come up with a more robust economic frame and message,” Lake said after the election.
“We’re never going to win those white, blue-collar voters if we’re not better on the economy. And 27 policy papers and a list of positions is not a frame. We can laugh about it all we want, but Trump had one.”
Actually, Trump and Clinton had one thing in common when it came to tackling unemployment: Both of them ignored the single greatest cause of unemployment among Americans: The refusal of employers to hire.
Employers like Kenneth Fisher, chief executive officer of Fisher Investments, who said, in 2012: “Believe it or not, I’m for fewer jobs, not more.”
In the Christmas Eve, 2012 issue of Forbes, he asserted: “Job Growth is Overrated.”
“Throughout 2012 we heard politicians and pundits of all stripes yammering endlessly on the need for job growth—that we don’t have enough jobs. It’s pure rubbish.”
Kenneth Fisher
According to Fisher, jobs are actually signs of weakness in the economy. Fewer employees can produce more products—and that’s good for us all.
For Fisher—a billionaire—the template for future economic success is Walmart, the nation’s largest private employer: “With Walmart you get an awe-inspiring company at 13 times my January 2014 earnings estimate, with a 2.2% dividend yield.”
But America can put an end to this “I’ve-got-mine-and-the-hell-with-you” job-killing arrogance of people like Kenneth Fisher.
The answer lies in three words: Employers Responsibility Act (ERA).
If passed by Congress and vigorously enforced by the U.S. Departments of Justice and Labor, an ERA would ensure full-time, permanent and productive employment for millions of capable, job-seeking Americans.
And it would achieve this without raising taxes or creating controversial government “make work” programs. Such legislation would legally require employers to demonstrate as much initiative for hiring as job-seekers are now expected to show in searching for work.
Share this: