You who read this blog know that I do not take political sides here. I do present opposing views so we may all benefit from a broader view.
This, my friends, is something to think about especially if you are a Republican voter.
OP-ED COLUMNIST
We Need a Second Party
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Published: February 11, 2012
WATCHING the Republican Party struggling to agree on a presidential candidate, one wonders whether the G.O.P. shouldn’t just sit this election out — just give 2012 a pass.
You know how in Scrabble sometimes you look at your seven letters and you’ve got only vowels that spell nothing? What do you do? You go back to the pile. You throw your letters back and hope to pick up better ones to work with. That’s what Republican primary voters seem to be doing. They just keep going back to the pile but still coming up with only vowels that spell nothing.
There’s a reason for that: Their pile is out of date. The party has let itself become the captive of conflicting ideological bases: anti-abortion advocates, anti-immigration activists, social conservatives worried about the sanctity of marriage, libertarians who want to shrink government, and anti-tax advocates who want to drown government in a bathtub.
Sorry, but you can’t address the great challenges America faces today with that incoherent mix of hardened positions. I’ve argued that maybe we need a third party to break open our political system. But that’s a long shot. What we definitely and urgently need is a second party — a coherent Republican opposition that is offering constructive conservative proposals on the key issues and is ready for strategic compromises to advance its interests and those of the country.
Without that, the best of the Democrats — who have been willing to compromise — have no partners and the worst have a free pass for their own magical thinking. Since such a transformed Republican Party is highly unlikely, maybe the best thing would be for it to get crushed in this election and forced into a fundamental rethink — something the Democrats had to go through when they lost three in a row between 1980 and 1988. We need a “Different Kind of Republican” the way Bill Clinton gave us a “Different Kind of Democrat.”
Because when I look at America’s three greatest challenges today, I don’t see the Republican candidates offering realistic answers to any of them.
The first is responding to the challenges and opportunities of an era in which globalization and the information technology revolution have dramatically intensified, creating a hyperconnected world. This is a world in which education, innovation and talent will be rewarded more than ever. This is a world in which there will be no more “developed” and “developing countries,” but only HIEs (high-imagination-enabling countries) and LIEs (low-imagination-enabling countries).
And this is a world that America is hard-wired to thrive in — provided we invest in better infrastructure, postsecondary education for all, more talented immigrants, regulations that incentivize risk-taking and prevent recklessness, and government-financed research to push out the boundaries of science and let our venture capitalists pluck the best flowers. There is no way we can thrive in this era without this kind of public-private partnership. We need strong government, but limited government, which enables our companies and individuals to compete globally. It’s the kind of public-private partnership that Republicans like Dwight Eisenhower and George H.W. Bush embraced.
The second of our great long-term challenges are our huge debt and entitlement obligations. They can’t be fixed without raising and reforming taxes and trimming entitlements and defense. We absolutely cannot just cut entitlements and defense. That would imperil the personal security and national security of every American. We must also reform taxes to raise more revenues.
But when all the Republican candidates last year said they would not accept a deal with Democrats that involved even $1 in tax increases in return for $10 in spending cuts, the G.O.P. cut itself off from reality. It became a radical party, not a conservative one. And for the candidates to wrap themselves in a cartoon version of Ronald Reagan — a real conservative who raised taxes, including the gasoline tax, when he discovered his own cuts had gone too far — is fraudulent.
Our third great challenge is how we power our future — without dangerously polluting and warming the earth — as the global population grows from 7 billion to 9 billion people by 2050, and more and more of them want to drive, eat and live like Americans. Two billion more people who want to live like us? We can’t drill our way out of that challenge, which is why energy efficiency and clean power will be the next great global industry. Real conservatives — like Richard Nixon, the father of the Environmental Protection Agency, and George H.W. Bush, the author of the first cap-and-trade deal to curb acid rain — believe in conserving. The current Republican candidates are so captured by the oil and coal lobbies that they can’t think seriously about this huge opportunity for energy innovation.
Until the G.O.P. stops being radical and returns to being conservative, it won’t provide what the country needs most now — competition — competition with Democrats on the issues that will determine whether we thrive in the 21st century. We need to hear conservative fiscal policies, energy policies, immigration policies and public-private partnership concepts — not radical ones. Would somebody please restore our second party? The country is starved for a grown-up debate.
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Friday, January 27, 2012
In case You Have Any Doubts
about who you want to lead us. Think about the incredibly dishonest performances we have watched in the republican debates and compare it to the performance you will see when you click on the link below. You may have to cut and paste to your browser.
The occasion was last week, when the Pres toasted Al Green at the Apollo Theater in NYC.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xbVNIWR9UA
Have great week end and hope the Newt wins......
The occasion was last week, when the Pres toasted Al Green at the Apollo Theater in NYC.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xbVNIWR9UA
Have great week end and hope the Newt wins......
Thursday, January 19, 2012
You Tell Me!
GM reports today that they sold 900 million cars in 2011. They have returned to profitability and have out paced Toyota the previous number one car manufacturer in the world.
Now I ask you who beside the customers, management and shareholders of GM created the opportunity for that to happen?
Answer that question and then think carefully about the leadership we will choose this election year.
Peace
Now I ask you who beside the customers, management and shareholders of GM created the opportunity for that to happen?
Answer that question and then think carefully about the leadership we will choose this election year.
Peace
Saturday, November 19, 2011
Happy Thanksgiving
Time to say count our blessings.
Well, here is a practical guide to survival during the holidays from Saturday's NY TImes. Amusing but some how hits the mark?
NOVEMBER 15, 2011, 7:04 PM
How Do I Not Lose My Marbles Stuck in the Car With My Father-in-Law?
By JEFF GORDINIER
Q.
Thanksgiving this year means my wife and I will have to pick up her father, a clueless sociopathic serial womanizer who basically talks about himself in a 24-minute clip that repeats endlessly. How do I not lose my marbles stuck in the car with this self-absorbed maniac?
A.
For decades there’s been a joke in Buddhist circles: A guy comes back from a retreat and tells his friend that he’s achieved enlightenment. To which his friend replies, “Wait until you have to spend the weekend with your parents.”
Thanksgiving, of course, is not only about food. It’s about sharing that food with people who grate on you and push buttons. Buddhists talk about the way we get trapped in the suffering of repeated cycles of existence. Sound familiar?
During the holidays, “we fall back into our ruts,” said Lama Surya Das, a 60-year-old Buddhist teacher and author. “People make holiday resolutions: ‘Oh, I’m not going to get mad at Uncle So-and-So, or at my mother or father.’ And how long does that last?”
His tips for breaking out of those crazy-making ruts are based on decades of teaching — and common sense. Sit next to people who annoy you the least. Avoid conversations about religion and politics. Drink in moderation. “Alcohol disinhibits, so people get a little more sloppy and less mindful and say things they wouldn’t,” he said. Try to empathize with family members who drive you bonkers.
“I try to see the Buddha in them,” he said. “See the light, the divinity in them. Even in the difficult ones.”
And if all else fails, tell yourself what the Buddha figured out: it’s all an illusion.
“I quote from the diamond wisdom sutra: This is just like a dream, like a fantasy, like a sitcom,” Lama Surya said. “And then I can laugh much more. You’ve got to keep a sense of humor about these things, and not expect the struggle to end.”
Well, here is a practical guide to survival during the holidays from Saturday's NY TImes. Amusing but some how hits the mark?
NOVEMBER 15, 2011, 7:04 PM
How Do I Not Lose My Marbles Stuck in the Car With My Father-in-Law?
By JEFF GORDINIER
Q.
Thanksgiving this year means my wife and I will have to pick up her father, a clueless sociopathic serial womanizer who basically talks about himself in a 24-minute clip that repeats endlessly. How do I not lose my marbles stuck in the car with this self-absorbed maniac?
A.
For decades there’s been a joke in Buddhist circles: A guy comes back from a retreat and tells his friend that he’s achieved enlightenment. To which his friend replies, “Wait until you have to spend the weekend with your parents.”
Thanksgiving, of course, is not only about food. It’s about sharing that food with people who grate on you and push buttons. Buddhists talk about the way we get trapped in the suffering of repeated cycles of existence. Sound familiar?
During the holidays, “we fall back into our ruts,” said Lama Surya Das, a 60-year-old Buddhist teacher and author. “People make holiday resolutions: ‘Oh, I’m not going to get mad at Uncle So-and-So, or at my mother or father.’ And how long does that last?”
His tips for breaking out of those crazy-making ruts are based on decades of teaching — and common sense. Sit next to people who annoy you the least. Avoid conversations about religion and politics. Drink in moderation. “Alcohol disinhibits, so people get a little more sloppy and less mindful and say things they wouldn’t,” he said. Try to empathize with family members who drive you bonkers.
“I try to see the Buddha in them,” he said. “See the light, the divinity in them. Even in the difficult ones.”
And if all else fails, tell yourself what the Buddha figured out: it’s all an illusion.
“I quote from the diamond wisdom sutra: This is just like a dream, like a fantasy, like a sitcom,” Lama Surya said. “And then I can laugh much more. You’ve got to keep a sense of humor about these things, and not expect the struggle to end.”
Thursday, November 17, 2011
Please Read This!
Four years ago when I began this blog, I offered some insight into the goals of radical Islam. I recommended a book by Bruce Bowers called " While Europe Slept"
Radical Islam is not a religion; but an aggressive violent movement dedicated to the establishment of Sharia law with a take no prisoners approach. There is no compromise, no co-existence, and certainly no acceptance of the rights of women and men that the world has been striving toward for 5000 years of recorded history.
When Mubarak was ousted and the Arab Spring began, I wrote a blog to alert you to the fact that the Brotherhood was in the mix, had changed its tactics and was starting out to become part of society and the political process.
Why? Because to do other wise would have brought the rest of the world to its feet in response.
The tactic, as Bower pointed out five years ago, was to conquer by assimilation!
Friends please watch this youtube video and be aware of the real danger to our country(ies).
Please le me know what you think.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dN6CHtGGo4g
Radical Islam is not a religion; but an aggressive violent movement dedicated to the establishment of Sharia law with a take no prisoners approach. There is no compromise, no co-existence, and certainly no acceptance of the rights of women and men that the world has been striving toward for 5000 years of recorded history.
When Mubarak was ousted and the Arab Spring began, I wrote a blog to alert you to the fact that the Brotherhood was in the mix, had changed its tactics and was starting out to become part of society and the political process.
Why? Because to do other wise would have brought the rest of the world to its feet in response.
The tactic, as Bower pointed out five years ago, was to conquer by assimilation!
Friends please watch this youtube video and be aware of the real danger to our country(ies).
Please le me know what you think.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dN6CHtGGo4g
Thursday, November 3, 2011
A SERIOUS QUESTION?
If you are a Republican or a Tea Party member what do you think of the candidates in the last week? Would love to hear from you. Can it be that Sarah will start to look really good shortly? Even Rudy?
As for the Democrats, you need not answer. I KNOW WHAT YOU THINK....YOU HAVE BEEN SENDING ME MATERIAL ALL WEEK THAT I SHALL PUBLISH SHORTLY.
Of course if you can not resist, send your comments along
As for the Democrats, you need not answer. I KNOW WHAT YOU THINK....YOU HAVE BEEN SENDING ME MATERIAL ALL WEEK THAT I SHALL PUBLISH SHORTLY.
Of course if you can not resist, send your comments along
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
I received several thoughtful responses to the blog published this week regarding the Israeli/Palestinian impasse.
The following is from a friend and colleague who is an Israeli by birth and lives there currently. English is his second or third language so I have edited some for clarity.
Dear Ted,
Thank you for forwarding your wonderful blog, also to my attention.
I couldn’t post my comment on the blog, however, will be grateful if you can do so.
Generally speaking – I do agree with the comment of your friend.
As another friend of you, please let me share with you and your follower, also with my view point –
1. As a moral people, we(Israelis) also are not innocent from mistakes. Over the last decades we are suffering from governments that are reluctant to govern. Thus, we should be rather “précised”( I think he means tolerant) with our attitude and actions.
2. We must consider the “Arab Spring” where dictatorship collapsed and an interim era begins. No one can predict what shall be in Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and, even in Jordan (collection of tribes where the Palestinian are the majority…..). My guess is many years to come with chaos with the risk the extremists shall take control. Hence, the Youngsters that dreamed for a sort of open societies might forget about it.
3. Recently, Turkey had realized that they have a great chance to reestablish the ‘Othman Empire’. That’s how come the hug of the Arab countries (especially Egypt). Where are the European Countries on that matter? –
4. Reminder – there are about 6 Million Turkish in Germany, only…
5. Europe – demonstrating its “Double-Standard” policy. Looks at the Brits where the “multi-Coulture” seems to fail… Scandinavia – where the Muslims immigrants abuse the welfare-state .....France – where the North Africans are spoiling the language….
6. USA – it became (again) that the existing Administration has no “Foreign Policy”….. Above all, the first and immediate to be harmed are the Interests of America.
7. As a Jew I’m not willing to control other people rights to live in peace and freedom. My only question is – whether we have a “partner” for our wishes.
Shana Tova to you All,
The following is from a friend and colleague who is an Israeli by birth and lives there currently. English is his second or third language so I have edited some for clarity.
Dear Ted,
Thank you for forwarding your wonderful blog, also to my attention.
I couldn’t post my comment on the blog, however, will be grateful if you can do so.
Generally speaking – I do agree with the comment of your friend.
As another friend of you, please let me share with you and your follower, also with my view point –
1. As a moral people, we(Israelis) also are not innocent from mistakes. Over the last decades we are suffering from governments that are reluctant to govern. Thus, we should be rather “précised”( I think he means tolerant) with our attitude and actions.
2. We must consider the “Arab Spring” where dictatorship collapsed and an interim era begins. No one can predict what shall be in Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and, even in Jordan (collection of tribes where the Palestinian are the majority…..). My guess is many years to come with chaos with the risk the extremists shall take control. Hence, the Youngsters that dreamed for a sort of open societies might forget about it.
3. Recently, Turkey had realized that they have a great chance to reestablish the ‘Othman Empire’. That’s how come the hug of the Arab countries (especially Egypt). Where are the European Countries on that matter? –
4. Reminder – there are about 6 Million Turkish in Germany, only…
5. Europe – demonstrating its “Double-Standard” policy. Looks at the Brits where the “multi-Coulture” seems to fail… Scandinavia – where the Muslims immigrants abuse the welfare-state .....France – where the North Africans are spoiling the language….
6. USA – it became (again) that the existing Administration has no “Foreign Policy”….. Above all, the first and immediate to be harmed are the Interests of America.
7. As a Jew I’m not willing to control other people rights to live in peace and freedom. My only question is – whether we have a “partner” for our wishes.
Shana Tova to you All,
Monday, September 19, 2011
Israel & the Palestinians: What is the truth?
In the Sunday September 20, 2011 NY Times Review section, Tom Friedman's column describes Israel and its leaders, especially PM Netanyahu, as self serving obstacles to Middle East peace and purveyors of occupation.
I asked a qualified friend who is a student of not only history but current events and whom I know to be fair and balanced to comment. Please read what he has to say. When the Times and Friedman gang up on you, can the boots be far behind?
Comment:
I am intensely depressed about the hostility of the world to the existence of Israel. I like Tom Friedman and agree with him on most of his observations except for his position on Israel. Here he joins with other liberals who blame the Netanyanhu government for the failure of the peace process which was was also a failure during the extremely liberal past administrations of Rabin and Ehud Barak and others. The reason this conflict will never end is because the Palestinians and their Arab brothers are dedicated to the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state. The more extremist muslim entities, like Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah, have made known they are dedicated to the eradication of the entire Jewish population which they have declared publicly and which the liberal community chooses to ignore.
So the Palestinians claim, which has been supported by the liberal, anti-semitic Europeans (and don't tell me the Brits, French and Scandinavians are not) have distilled the cause of the ongoing conflict down to the construction of settlements in "occupied" territory belonging to the Palestinians. They choose to forget that Israel pulled out of Lebanon and pulled their settlements out of Gaza and probably would pull out of most areas of the West Bank and has agreed to trade territory in Israel occupied by Arabs for territory around Jerusalem occupied by Jews. They take no notice that Abbas refused to negotiate even when Netanyanhu agreed to a 10 month freeze on new projects (which were erroneously labeled as settlements), The area around Jerusalem where these projects are being built had been designated by Israel for development 30 or more years ago and is presently the home of perhaps 400,000 or more Jews. Israel never agreed to return to the 1967 borders, nor did the the UN agreement state that it had to. The borders were supposed be negotiated. After all, the wars fought against overwhelming Arab states from 1948 until now, they are entitled to this.
Nor does the world, or Tom Friedman note that Abbas has made peace with Hamas which is an internationally recognized terrorist organization dedicated to the annihilation of the Jewish state. How indeed could Israel live in peace with a Palestinian state comprised of a large population who seek its destruction. Nor does the world note that the peace made with Egypt is now at risk of fallling apart because the Arab dictators who made the peace (for which they were handsomely rewarded by the U.S. and the opening of the Suez Canal) are now dead and the Arab masses are calling for the blood of Jews. Nor does the world take note of the immense threat to Israel posed by Iran who is intent on building nuclear weapons and rockets with the intent of realizing its declared objective of wiping the Jewish state off the map or of their proxies Hezbollah now armed with 40,000 rockets supplied by Iran and Hamas which is continuing to launch thousands of rockets on Israel each year.
Now let's clarify this Muslim hatred of Israel. It is based on anti-semitism, not just anti Zionism. It is ingrained in the Koran and the teachings of Mohammed who massacred entire Jewish tribes because they refused to accept his Islamic invention. Nor does the world take notice that 20% of Israel's population is Arab who much prefer to live in Israel than in Palestinian territory even though they continue to hate the Jews who who provide them with the freedom of a democracy, the right to vote, welfare payments, access to universities and employment even though they contribue very little to the state. Israelis and involved Jews, like me, know that the Arabs (and other Muslims) promote the most vicious anti-semitism including wide spread use of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and the use of Nazi cartoons and literature through their mass media sources of TV, news and the relentless anti-semitic diatribes of their mullahs and sheiks every week in their mosques. How the hell are the Israelis supposed to believe the Palestinians are serious about making peace when they are teaching their children to hate Jews and venerating suicide bomber martyrs who were successful in killing innocent Israeli civilians.
I do not understand why Israel would agree to participate in any peace conferences before the Palestinians agree to accept the existence of two states, one Arab Palestinian and one Jewish Israeli. I do not believe any Arab would agree to this. The Palestinians believe they will return to their land in Israel and they are willing to fight and wait and live like rats and teach their children to hate and to commit suicide for as long as it takes to achieve the expulsion of the Jews from the land of Islam. Read the Koran. Read the history of Mohammed. It is no coincidence that the violence of the entire world is mostly caused by Muslims. It is no coincidence that they are the most backward of populations except for Africans and aboriginal tribal peoples. The world takes little note of this in its view of the Israel-Palestinian conflct. Are we really supposed to believe that the Egyptians who are killing their Copts and the Syrians who are killing their Sunnis and the Bahrainis who are killing their Shiites and the Iragis who are killing each other and the Pakistanis who are killing all Muslims who are not Pashtun and on and on, are really distressed about the Palestinians. Over 1,000,000 Arabs live in Israel. How many Jews live in Arab lands? How many Christians live in Arab lands? How many Christians are being persecuted in Muslim lands? The liberal western world which truly believes in Tolerance, has no problem accepting the massive Intolerance of the Muslim nations who refuse to tolerate any religion other than Islam.
You cannot imagine how I, as a Jew, who lived during the rabid anti-semitism of the pre-WWll diatribes of Father Coughlin, Henry Ford and Lindbergh and who has relatives who died in the worst crime in history committed by Germans assisted by France, Holland, Scandinavia, Romania, Switzerland (who bought the gold from the teeth of Jewish victims) and almost all of the other nations of Europe, who has read of the 2000 year history of persecution of Jews by the Catholic, Lutheran and Orthodox Christian churches feels now that the world seems to, once again, be aligning against the 6 million Jews living in the tiny state of Israel and ignoring that they live in such grave danger posed by the relentless hatred of 450 million Muslim neighbors, who agree on only one thing, the annihilation of the Jewish state in their midst.
I asked a qualified friend who is a student of not only history but current events and whom I know to be fair and balanced to comment. Please read what he has to say. When the Times and Friedman gang up on you, can the boots be far behind?
Comment:
I am intensely depressed about the hostility of the world to the existence of Israel. I like Tom Friedman and agree with him on most of his observations except for his position on Israel. Here he joins with other liberals who blame the Netanyanhu government for the failure of the peace process which was was also a failure during the extremely liberal past administrations of Rabin and Ehud Barak and others. The reason this conflict will never end is because the Palestinians and their Arab brothers are dedicated to the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state. The more extremist muslim entities, like Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah, have made known they are dedicated to the eradication of the entire Jewish population which they have declared publicly and which the liberal community chooses to ignore.
So the Palestinians claim, which has been supported by the liberal, anti-semitic Europeans (and don't tell me the Brits, French and Scandinavians are not) have distilled the cause of the ongoing conflict down to the construction of settlements in "occupied" territory belonging to the Palestinians. They choose to forget that Israel pulled out of Lebanon and pulled their settlements out of Gaza and probably would pull out of most areas of the West Bank and has agreed to trade territory in Israel occupied by Arabs for territory around Jerusalem occupied by Jews. They take no notice that Abbas refused to negotiate even when Netanyanhu agreed to a 10 month freeze on new projects (which were erroneously labeled as settlements), The area around Jerusalem where these projects are being built had been designated by Israel for development 30 or more years ago and is presently the home of perhaps 400,000 or more Jews. Israel never agreed to return to the 1967 borders, nor did the the UN agreement state that it had to. The borders were supposed be negotiated. After all, the wars fought against overwhelming Arab states from 1948 until now, they are entitled to this.
Nor does the world, or Tom Friedman note that Abbas has made peace with Hamas which is an internationally recognized terrorist organization dedicated to the annihilation of the Jewish state. How indeed could Israel live in peace with a Palestinian state comprised of a large population who seek its destruction. Nor does the world note that the peace made with Egypt is now at risk of fallling apart because the Arab dictators who made the peace (for which they were handsomely rewarded by the U.S. and the opening of the Suez Canal) are now dead and the Arab masses are calling for the blood of Jews. Nor does the world take note of the immense threat to Israel posed by Iran who is intent on building nuclear weapons and rockets with the intent of realizing its declared objective of wiping the Jewish state off the map or of their proxies Hezbollah now armed with 40,000 rockets supplied by Iran and Hamas which is continuing to launch thousands of rockets on Israel each year.
Now let's clarify this Muslim hatred of Israel. It is based on anti-semitism, not just anti Zionism. It is ingrained in the Koran and the teachings of Mohammed who massacred entire Jewish tribes because they refused to accept his Islamic invention. Nor does the world take notice that 20% of Israel's population is Arab who much prefer to live in Israel than in Palestinian territory even though they continue to hate the Jews who who provide them with the freedom of a democracy, the right to vote, welfare payments, access to universities and employment even though they contribue very little to the state. Israelis and involved Jews, like me, know that the Arabs (and other Muslims) promote the most vicious anti-semitism including wide spread use of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and the use of Nazi cartoons and literature through their mass media sources of TV, news and the relentless anti-semitic diatribes of their mullahs and sheiks every week in their mosques. How the hell are the Israelis supposed to believe the Palestinians are serious about making peace when they are teaching their children to hate Jews and venerating suicide bomber martyrs who were successful in killing innocent Israeli civilians.
I do not understand why Israel would agree to participate in any peace conferences before the Palestinians agree to accept the existence of two states, one Arab Palestinian and one Jewish Israeli. I do not believe any Arab would agree to this. The Palestinians believe they will return to their land in Israel and they are willing to fight and wait and live like rats and teach their children to hate and to commit suicide for as long as it takes to achieve the expulsion of the Jews from the land of Islam. Read the Koran. Read the history of Mohammed. It is no coincidence that the violence of the entire world is mostly caused by Muslims. It is no coincidence that they are the most backward of populations except for Africans and aboriginal tribal peoples. The world takes little note of this in its view of the Israel-Palestinian conflct. Are we really supposed to believe that the Egyptians who are killing their Copts and the Syrians who are killing their Sunnis and the Bahrainis who are killing their Shiites and the Iragis who are killing each other and the Pakistanis who are killing all Muslims who are not Pashtun and on and on, are really distressed about the Palestinians. Over 1,000,000 Arabs live in Israel. How many Jews live in Arab lands? How many Christians live in Arab lands? How many Christians are being persecuted in Muslim lands? The liberal western world which truly believes in Tolerance, has no problem accepting the massive Intolerance of the Muslim nations who refuse to tolerate any religion other than Islam.
You cannot imagine how I, as a Jew, who lived during the rabid anti-semitism of the pre-WWll diatribes of Father Coughlin, Henry Ford and Lindbergh and who has relatives who died in the worst crime in history committed by Germans assisted by France, Holland, Scandinavia, Romania, Switzerland (who bought the gold from the teeth of Jewish victims) and almost all of the other nations of Europe, who has read of the 2000 year history of persecution of Jews by the Catholic, Lutheran and Orthodox Christian churches feels now that the world seems to, once again, be aligning against the 6 million Jews living in the tiny state of Israel and ignoring that they live in such grave danger posed by the relentless hatred of 450 million Muslim neighbors, who agree on only one thing, the annihilation of the Jewish state in their midst.
Sunday, August 7, 2011
And so the results are in.....
I have been silent these many months on matters politic. Why? I wished to provide space and time for all of our good intentions and wishes to take hold, give our elected leaders a chance to change direction. I wanted to think well of our president, congress, our fellow citizens and certainly our direction.
I am sad to say that I think the Era of Hope, hope we can believe in is over. I ask that you please read the article by Drew Westen in today's NYTimes, Sunday Review section. He nails it and it is not a pretty sight. I am not advocating that we turn against our president; but I am suggesting that we may have misjudged him and he is not up to it.
Now what ?
Please paste this link into your browser's address bar to read the article. Please comment back so I know I am not wasting my time and thanks
Ted
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/opinion/sunday/what-happened-to-obamas-passion.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper
I am sad to say that I think the Era of Hope, hope we can believe in is over. I ask that you please read the article by Drew Westen in today's NYTimes, Sunday Review section. He nails it and it is not a pretty sight. I am not advocating that we turn against our president; but I am suggesting that we may have misjudged him and he is not up to it.
Now what ?
Please paste this link into your browser's address bar to read the article. Please comment back so I know I am not wasting my time and thanks
Ted
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/opinion/sunday/what-happened-to-obamas-passion.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper
Monday, March 7, 2011
If You Think your Life is Tough?
Hello Family and Friends,
A life long friend sent me a link to his niece's blog. Please take a moment to read it. Then, whisper a prayer for this courageous woman and her young family. And stay tuned because many of us are going to figure out how this young family gets through this catastrophe financially.
http://familybondingtime.blogspot.com/
A life long friend sent me a link to his niece's blog. Please take a moment to read it. Then, whisper a prayer for this courageous woman and her young family. And stay tuned because many of us are going to figure out how this young family gets through this catastrophe financially.
http://familybondingtime.blogspot.com/
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Weapons of Mass Destruction
Well, as is frequently the case, the truth comes out.
The Guardian has published a story and a video that is scary. Scary to think how the world's intelligence agencies can be so easily duped or cynically misuse information for their own agenda
Click below or paste into your browser to read the article and see the video.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/15/defector-admits-wmd-lies-iraq-war
The Guardian has published a story and a video that is scary. Scary to think how the world's intelligence agencies can be so easily duped or cynically misuse information for their own agenda
Click below or paste into your browser to read the article and see the video.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/15/defector-admits-wmd-lies-iraq-war
Sunday, February 6, 2011
The Onion on Emanuel and Mubarak
Just for fun I offer the Onion's report of Rahm Emanuel's quest for the mayorship of the venerable city of Chicago..Hysterical!!
Closer to truth than we would like, I am sure
And then on to the US negotiation of Mubarak's severance package.
Illinois Supreme Court Deems Rahm Emanuel Sleazy Enough To Run For Mayor Of Chicago
FEBRUARY 2, 2011 | ISSUE 47•05 CHICAGO—In a unanimous decision handed down on Thursday, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel was sleazy enough to be included on Chicago's mayoral ballot. "It is the opinion of this court that Mr. Emanuel is coarse, vulgar, and power-hungry to such a degree that he should be eligible to hold this city's highest office," Illinois Justice Robert R. Thomas wrote in his majority opinion, adding that Emanuel also met a key stipulation requiring that any mayor of Chicago be a bully willing to do whatever is necessary to push his agenda through the city council. "Further, Mr. Emanuel is a sleazebag and a sleazeball, both of which are criteria he fulfilled prior to filing his papers with the local election board." The decision overturned an appellate court's ruling that Emanuel was only sleazy enough to be the governor of Illinois, and that he lacked the slithery, snake-like attributes necessary to oversee the morally bankrupt cesspool of Chicago politics.
And then the Onion moved on to Egypt, Mubarak and US
U.S. Negotiating Mubarak's Severance Package
FEBRUARY 2, 2011 | ISSUE 47•05 CAIRO—In an effort to provide monetary compensation to the Egyptian president for three decades of faithful service, U.S. officials opened negotiations with Hosni Mubarak Tuesday, offering him a severance package worth $20 million upon termination of his employment. "We are all thankful for the hard work and long hours President Mubarak put in over the years, and hope our discussions continue smoothly," said senior U.S. negotiator Frank Wisner, who admitted that the final settlement would have to be considerable, as Mubarak's contract with the U.S. was being terminated 15 years early. "Unfortunately, he no longer reflects our needs in the region at this time, but we would like to end our relationship on the right foot. He deserves to retire in comfort." Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has also reportedly offered to write Mubarak a letter of recommendation in case he wishes to apply for any dictatorship jobs with U.S. allies in the future.
Closer to truth than we would like, I am sure
And then on to the US negotiation of Mubarak's severance package.
Illinois Supreme Court Deems Rahm Emanuel Sleazy Enough To Run For Mayor Of Chicago
FEBRUARY 2, 2011 | ISSUE 47•05 CHICAGO—In a unanimous decision handed down on Thursday, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel was sleazy enough to be included on Chicago's mayoral ballot. "It is the opinion of this court that Mr. Emanuel is coarse, vulgar, and power-hungry to such a degree that he should be eligible to hold this city's highest office," Illinois Justice Robert R. Thomas wrote in his majority opinion, adding that Emanuel also met a key stipulation requiring that any mayor of Chicago be a bully willing to do whatever is necessary to push his agenda through the city council. "Further, Mr. Emanuel is a sleazebag and a sleazeball, both of which are criteria he fulfilled prior to filing his papers with the local election board." The decision overturned an appellate court's ruling that Emanuel was only sleazy enough to be the governor of Illinois, and that he lacked the slithery, snake-like attributes necessary to oversee the morally bankrupt cesspool of Chicago politics.
And then the Onion moved on to Egypt, Mubarak and US
U.S. Negotiating Mubarak's Severance Package
FEBRUARY 2, 2011 | ISSUE 47•05 CAIRO—In an effort to provide monetary compensation to the Egyptian president for three decades of faithful service, U.S. officials opened negotiations with Hosni Mubarak Tuesday, offering him a severance package worth $20 million upon termination of his employment. "We are all thankful for the hard work and long hours President Mubarak put in over the years, and hope our discussions continue smoothly," said senior U.S. negotiator Frank Wisner, who admitted that the final settlement would have to be considerable, as Mubarak's contract with the U.S. was being terminated 15 years early. "Unfortunately, he no longer reflects our needs in the region at this time, but we would like to end our relationship on the right foot. He deserves to retire in comfort." Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has also reportedly offered to write Mubarak a letter of recommendation in case he wishes to apply for any dictatorship jobs with U.S. allies in the future.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
You Think Democracy is on the March in Egypt?
Think again!
Yesterday's Wall Street Journal published an excellent symposium using the writings of four truly experienced middle east observers and participants. Please read to gain an understanding of what is happening not only in Egypt; but the ripple effect in the region.
Liberals Had Better Get Organized
By Francis Fukuyama
Recent events first in Tunisia and now in Egypt demonstrate that there is no Arab cultural exception to the broad desire for freedom around the world.
The act of self-immolation that set off these dramatic events was that of a Tunisian vegetable seller who had his cart repeatedly confiscated by the government and then was slapped and insulted by a policewoman when he went to complain. People want political rights because they want their governments to treat them with dignity, a wish that obviously reverberates throughout the Arab world.
The revolt does not seem to be driven by the poor, the marginalized or the religious, but by the middle-class—technologically savvy Tunisians and Egyptians who don't have opportunities for meaningful work or political participation. They want to join the rest of the world and not cut themselves off from it.
But why is the Arab world coming so late to a democracy party that Latin Americans, Eastern Europeans, Asians and Africans first started attending 20 years ago? Part of the answer is the deliberate strategy that authoritarian leaders like Hosni Mubarak have pursued—of gutting liberal opposition and permitting the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood to operate just enough to scare the United States and other Western backers.
This strategy worked on a series of American administrations that paid lip service to the need for democracy but were never willing to push their ally, for fear of empowering the Islamist opposition. Those chickens are now coming home to roost.
If Mr. Mubarak indeed leaves office and there is a clean break with his regime—meaning that longtime aides like Omar Suleiman, now the vice president, leave power too—then Egyptians' central task will be the unglamorous one of institution-building.
Democracy does not magically spring to life once the dictator is gone, or even after the first free and fair election has taken place. The color revolutions in Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgystan, as well as the U.S. interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq, invariably disappointed their hopeful early backers by not producing effective democratic governance.
Facebook and Twitter are great at mobilizing flash mobs to bring down tyrants, but they are less useful in building political parties, forming coalitions, negotiating political programs or making officials honest.
At present, the best-organized forces in Egypt are the military and the Muslim Brotherhood. Egyptians who want a free and democratic future had better get busy organizing themselves if those groups are not to inherit the future.
Mr. Fukuyama, a senior fellow at Stanford, is author of "The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution" (forthcoming from Farrar, Straus and Giroux).
The Army Will Play a Crucial Role
By Ryan Crocker
However events play out on the streets of Cairo and Alexandria, there is no question that the Mubarak era is over. Egypt faces as fundamental a shift today as it did in 1952.
The Obama administration has rightly emphasized two words: "orderly transition." There must be transition—the old order cannot hold. But it must be orderly.
The crowds in Egypt's streets do not constitute a party or a coalition. There is no clear agenda beyond Mubarak's ouster and no established leader. Mohamed ElBaradei is far more respected and known outside of Egypt than he is within. For all of his distinction, he is no Vaclav Havel.
The Egyptian army will play a critical role, now and as a new political order emerges. U.S. defense leaders are in direct contact with Egyptian counterparts. The army has shown remarkable restraint, but each day that passes without the initiation of a viable political process increases the risk of violence that could destroy any prospects for a successful political strategy.
What might that strategy look like?
Mr. Mubarak has announced that he will not be a candidate in the September elections. He should now offer credible assurances that these elections will be fair, monitored by an independent election commission and international observers.
Second, he should initiate a broad political and economic reform dialogue involving all of Egypt's major political figures—including Mr. ElBaradei, the dissident Ayman Nour, the leaders of parties including the Muslim Brotherhood, and emerging figures in civil society. The results of that dialogue, which are likely to include constitutional changes, could be submitted to a public referendum or to a newly elected parliament.
Hopefully such steps would mean an end to the street demonstrations. Not only do those demonstrations contain the seeds of unchecked violence, but they are devastating to an already weak economy. Tourism will take months if not years to recover, and investor confidence is badly shaken if not shattered.
View Full Image
AFP/Getty Images
Demonstrators in Cairo Feb. 1.
This will require hard choices by all parties, especially Mr. Mubarak. If his immediate departure is a sine qua non to end the street protests, he should be prepared to hand power to his new vice president and prime minister during the transition period, with the knowledge that this would represent the best chance to maintain what he has worked for these past 31 years—a stable Egypt.
Our adversaries, Iran and al Qaeda, will certainly attempt to take advantage of any prolonged disorder in Egypt. We should remember that al Qaeda's No. 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri, is an Egyptian who left the country during the government's successful repression of Egyptian Islamic Jihad in the 1990s.
As was clear then, Islamic Jihad and the Muslim Brotherhood are enemies, not partners. The Brotherhood can be accommodated in the political system. But al Qaeda and Islamic Jihad would like nothing better than to regain a foothold in Egypt, the largest Arab country, and destroy that system. That must not happen.
Mr. Crocker, the dean of Texas A&M's George Bush School of Government and Public Service, was U.S. ambassador to Pakistan from 2004 to 2007 and U.S. ambassador to Iraq from 2007 to 2009.
The Muslim Brotherhood Lacks a Khomeini Figure
By Maajid Nawaz
Having spent four years in an Egyptian prison for Islamist activism—where I shared a cell with some of the leaders of the current uprising—I view these events as far more than just an academic or policy interest. I abandoned Islamism years ago, but for me this is personal.
First, let's clarify the nature of this uprising: It is a spontaneous people's revolt. It was not planned by any political party or orchestrated by any ideologically aligned movement. Rather, it was instigated by the tired, angry urban young, and fast grew to become an all-Egyptian affair. The best revolutions are made of the very ingredients that cooked up this Egyptian storm: spontaneity, inclusiveness and persistence.
Egypt's old guard has long presented the world with a potent choice: Accept our police state or extremists will take over. Rooted in the old politics of colonialism, this dichotomy effectively deterred democracy in the Arab world. What the ongoing uprising shows is that this dichotomy is no longer valid. Real change is now possible, and the old analysis that it can come only through empowering Islamists has been shattered.
The new Egypt—led by but not restricted to the youth—has little time for the octogenarians of old, who include not only Hosni Mubarak but also Mohamed Badie, the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and my former cellmate. Within the Brotherhood, Mr. Badie has recently been challenged by a reformist faction now led by the younger Abdul Monim Aboul Fatouh (another former cellmate of mine).
The leaderless nature of Egypt's street uprising raises the question of who will fill the vacuum after victory. Concerns about an Islamist takeover are valid. But that scenario is unlikely.
The Brotherhood realizes that this uprising wasn't theirs to begin with, and that the new Egypt—more patriotic, pluralistic and inclusive—would likely reject a Brotherhood attempt at usurpation. Unlike Amr Moussa (the head of the Arab League), Mohamed ElBaradei (the former international bureaucrat), and Ayman Nour (the liberal party leader and another former cellmate of mine), no one in the Brotherhood possesses the stature to unite the nation behind them. There is no Khomeini-like Islamist figure to hijack this revolution.
In a post-Mubarak Egypt, the Brotherhood would likely increase its presence in parliament, but no Brotherhood figure is likely to win the presidency or a key cabinet post. As the Brotherhood becomes an increasingly legitimate force, though, policy makers in Egypt and beyond should pressure it to abandon its remaining extremist positions, such as its insistence that only a Muslim male may lead the nation.
Mr. Nawaz is co-founder of the counterextremism think tank Quilliam and founder of the Khudi movement, which works to promote a democratic culture in Pakistan.
Egypt Doesn't Have a Democratic Culture
By Amr Bargisi
As of this writing, the contest between President Hosni Mubarak and hundreds of thousands of protesters remains a standoff. No one can predict what Egypt will look like in a few days—let alone the next few months and years. But from my vantage point in Cairo, I believe that the result will be one of two evils.
First, the 1789 case—a win for the revolutionaries, as the massive anger that sparked the uprising is channeled into a Jacobin regime that hunts down its enemies mercilessly. It is a grave mistake to assume that the rage of the masses will be placated by the ousting of the tyrant.
Last night, one demonstrator told two friends of mine in downtown Cairo's Tahrir Square that the next step will be to knock on the doors of suburban villas and ask the owners: Where did you get the money to afford these?
The second possibility is a reactionary scenario. If the ruling elite wins—meaning Mr. Mubarak's cronies, if not Mr. Mubarak himself—the country will be ruled by a contract between the state and the frightened middle classes to make sure no similar uprising ever happens again. This is an angle that has been totally missing from Western media coverage, as far as I can tell without Internet access.
There is another force in the streets of Cairo besides the demonstrators. Equal, if not in numbers then certainly in influence, are the thousands of young men standing all night in front of their houses and stores to protect them from looting.
Perhaps they share the anger of their peers in Tahrir Square, but their fear is much stronger than their rage. On Friday night, after the police disappeared, these young men got a taste of what could come: Hundreds of thugs roamed the streets, looting and burning. Then there are the inmates, reportedly several thousand, who have fled prison and are apparently still on the loose.
I believe the reactionary scenario is more likely. But regardless of my own opinion, what is clear is that Egypt lacks the sort of political culture that can sustain a liberal democratic regime. The superficiality of the opposition's demands is matched only by the absurdity of the regime's discourse. Without knowledge of the likes of Locke and Burke, Hamilton and Jefferson, my country is doomed to either unbridled radicalism or continued repression.
Mr. Bargisi, a former Bartley fellow at the Journal, is a senior partner with the Egyptian Union of Liberal Youth. Due to lack of Internet service, he dictated his comments by phone.
Yesterday's Wall Street Journal published an excellent symposium using the writings of four truly experienced middle east observers and participants. Please read to gain an understanding of what is happening not only in Egypt; but the ripple effect in the region.
Liberals Had Better Get Organized
By Francis Fukuyama
Recent events first in Tunisia and now in Egypt demonstrate that there is no Arab cultural exception to the broad desire for freedom around the world.
The act of self-immolation that set off these dramatic events was that of a Tunisian vegetable seller who had his cart repeatedly confiscated by the government and then was slapped and insulted by a policewoman when he went to complain. People want political rights because they want their governments to treat them with dignity, a wish that obviously reverberates throughout the Arab world.
The revolt does not seem to be driven by the poor, the marginalized or the religious, but by the middle-class—technologically savvy Tunisians and Egyptians who don't have opportunities for meaningful work or political participation. They want to join the rest of the world and not cut themselves off from it.
But why is the Arab world coming so late to a democracy party that Latin Americans, Eastern Europeans, Asians and Africans first started attending 20 years ago? Part of the answer is the deliberate strategy that authoritarian leaders like Hosni Mubarak have pursued—of gutting liberal opposition and permitting the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood to operate just enough to scare the United States and other Western backers.
This strategy worked on a series of American administrations that paid lip service to the need for democracy but were never willing to push their ally, for fear of empowering the Islamist opposition. Those chickens are now coming home to roost.
If Mr. Mubarak indeed leaves office and there is a clean break with his regime—meaning that longtime aides like Omar Suleiman, now the vice president, leave power too—then Egyptians' central task will be the unglamorous one of institution-building.
Democracy does not magically spring to life once the dictator is gone, or even after the first free and fair election has taken place. The color revolutions in Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgystan, as well as the U.S. interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq, invariably disappointed their hopeful early backers by not producing effective democratic governance.
Facebook and Twitter are great at mobilizing flash mobs to bring down tyrants, but they are less useful in building political parties, forming coalitions, negotiating political programs or making officials honest.
At present, the best-organized forces in Egypt are the military and the Muslim Brotherhood. Egyptians who want a free and democratic future had better get busy organizing themselves if those groups are not to inherit the future.
Mr. Fukuyama, a senior fellow at Stanford, is author of "The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution" (forthcoming from Farrar, Straus and Giroux).
The Army Will Play a Crucial Role
By Ryan Crocker
However events play out on the streets of Cairo and Alexandria, there is no question that the Mubarak era is over. Egypt faces as fundamental a shift today as it did in 1952.
The Obama administration has rightly emphasized two words: "orderly transition." There must be transition—the old order cannot hold. But it must be orderly.
The crowds in Egypt's streets do not constitute a party or a coalition. There is no clear agenda beyond Mubarak's ouster and no established leader. Mohamed ElBaradei is far more respected and known outside of Egypt than he is within. For all of his distinction, he is no Vaclav Havel.
The Egyptian army will play a critical role, now and as a new political order emerges. U.S. defense leaders are in direct contact with Egyptian counterparts. The army has shown remarkable restraint, but each day that passes without the initiation of a viable political process increases the risk of violence that could destroy any prospects for a successful political strategy.
What might that strategy look like?
Mr. Mubarak has announced that he will not be a candidate in the September elections. He should now offer credible assurances that these elections will be fair, monitored by an independent election commission and international observers.
Second, he should initiate a broad political and economic reform dialogue involving all of Egypt's major political figures—including Mr. ElBaradei, the dissident Ayman Nour, the leaders of parties including the Muslim Brotherhood, and emerging figures in civil society. The results of that dialogue, which are likely to include constitutional changes, could be submitted to a public referendum or to a newly elected parliament.
Hopefully such steps would mean an end to the street demonstrations. Not only do those demonstrations contain the seeds of unchecked violence, but they are devastating to an already weak economy. Tourism will take months if not years to recover, and investor confidence is badly shaken if not shattered.
View Full Image
AFP/Getty Images
Demonstrators in Cairo Feb. 1.
This will require hard choices by all parties, especially Mr. Mubarak. If his immediate departure is a sine qua non to end the street protests, he should be prepared to hand power to his new vice president and prime minister during the transition period, with the knowledge that this would represent the best chance to maintain what he has worked for these past 31 years—a stable Egypt.
Our adversaries, Iran and al Qaeda, will certainly attempt to take advantage of any prolonged disorder in Egypt. We should remember that al Qaeda's No. 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri, is an Egyptian who left the country during the government's successful repression of Egyptian Islamic Jihad in the 1990s.
As was clear then, Islamic Jihad and the Muslim Brotherhood are enemies, not partners. The Brotherhood can be accommodated in the political system. But al Qaeda and Islamic Jihad would like nothing better than to regain a foothold in Egypt, the largest Arab country, and destroy that system. That must not happen.
Mr. Crocker, the dean of Texas A&M's George Bush School of Government and Public Service, was U.S. ambassador to Pakistan from 2004 to 2007 and U.S. ambassador to Iraq from 2007 to 2009.
The Muslim Brotherhood Lacks a Khomeini Figure
By Maajid Nawaz
Having spent four years in an Egyptian prison for Islamist activism—where I shared a cell with some of the leaders of the current uprising—I view these events as far more than just an academic or policy interest. I abandoned Islamism years ago, but for me this is personal.
First, let's clarify the nature of this uprising: It is a spontaneous people's revolt. It was not planned by any political party or orchestrated by any ideologically aligned movement. Rather, it was instigated by the tired, angry urban young, and fast grew to become an all-Egyptian affair. The best revolutions are made of the very ingredients that cooked up this Egyptian storm: spontaneity, inclusiveness and persistence.
Egypt's old guard has long presented the world with a potent choice: Accept our police state or extremists will take over. Rooted in the old politics of colonialism, this dichotomy effectively deterred democracy in the Arab world. What the ongoing uprising shows is that this dichotomy is no longer valid. Real change is now possible, and the old analysis that it can come only through empowering Islamists has been shattered.
The new Egypt—led by but not restricted to the youth—has little time for the octogenarians of old, who include not only Hosni Mubarak but also Mohamed Badie, the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and my former cellmate. Within the Brotherhood, Mr. Badie has recently been challenged by a reformist faction now led by the younger Abdul Monim Aboul Fatouh (another former cellmate of mine).
The leaderless nature of Egypt's street uprising raises the question of who will fill the vacuum after victory. Concerns about an Islamist takeover are valid. But that scenario is unlikely.
The Brotherhood realizes that this uprising wasn't theirs to begin with, and that the new Egypt—more patriotic, pluralistic and inclusive—would likely reject a Brotherhood attempt at usurpation. Unlike Amr Moussa (the head of the Arab League), Mohamed ElBaradei (the former international bureaucrat), and Ayman Nour (the liberal party leader and another former cellmate of mine), no one in the Brotherhood possesses the stature to unite the nation behind them. There is no Khomeini-like Islamist figure to hijack this revolution.
In a post-Mubarak Egypt, the Brotherhood would likely increase its presence in parliament, but no Brotherhood figure is likely to win the presidency or a key cabinet post. As the Brotherhood becomes an increasingly legitimate force, though, policy makers in Egypt and beyond should pressure it to abandon its remaining extremist positions, such as its insistence that only a Muslim male may lead the nation.
Mr. Nawaz is co-founder of the counterextremism think tank Quilliam and founder of the Khudi movement, which works to promote a democratic culture in Pakistan.
Egypt Doesn't Have a Democratic Culture
By Amr Bargisi
As of this writing, the contest between President Hosni Mubarak and hundreds of thousands of protesters remains a standoff. No one can predict what Egypt will look like in a few days—let alone the next few months and years. But from my vantage point in Cairo, I believe that the result will be one of two evils.
First, the 1789 case—a win for the revolutionaries, as the massive anger that sparked the uprising is channeled into a Jacobin regime that hunts down its enemies mercilessly. It is a grave mistake to assume that the rage of the masses will be placated by the ousting of the tyrant.
Last night, one demonstrator told two friends of mine in downtown Cairo's Tahrir Square that the next step will be to knock on the doors of suburban villas and ask the owners: Where did you get the money to afford these?
The second possibility is a reactionary scenario. If the ruling elite wins—meaning Mr. Mubarak's cronies, if not Mr. Mubarak himself—the country will be ruled by a contract between the state and the frightened middle classes to make sure no similar uprising ever happens again. This is an angle that has been totally missing from Western media coverage, as far as I can tell without Internet access.
There is another force in the streets of Cairo besides the demonstrators. Equal, if not in numbers then certainly in influence, are the thousands of young men standing all night in front of their houses and stores to protect them from looting.
Perhaps they share the anger of their peers in Tahrir Square, but their fear is much stronger than their rage. On Friday night, after the police disappeared, these young men got a taste of what could come: Hundreds of thugs roamed the streets, looting and burning. Then there are the inmates, reportedly several thousand, who have fled prison and are apparently still on the loose.
I believe the reactionary scenario is more likely. But regardless of my own opinion, what is clear is that Egypt lacks the sort of political culture that can sustain a liberal democratic regime. The superficiality of the opposition's demands is matched only by the absurdity of the regime's discourse. Without knowledge of the likes of Locke and Burke, Hamilton and Jefferson, my country is doomed to either unbridled radicalism or continued repression.
Mr. Bargisi, a former Bartley fellow at the Journal, is a senior partner with the Egyptian Union of Liberal Youth. Due to lack of Internet service, he dictated his comments by phone.
Monday, December 20, 2010
Our American Heritage
Dear Friends,
Please take some time and look at this collection of original pictures taken between, 1939 and 1943 in America. Truly astounding and telling.
http://blogs.denverpost.com/captured/2010/07/26/captured-america-in-color-from-1939-1943/2363/
Happy Holidays
Please take some time and look at this collection of original pictures taken between, 1939 and 1943 in America. Truly astounding and telling.
http://blogs.denverpost.com/captured/2010/07/26/captured-america-in-color-from-1939-1943/2363/
Happy Holidays
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
The Damage of the New tax Deal
Everyone knows that the "deal" that President Obama agreed to with Republicans will extend George W. Bush's reckless millionaire tax bailout—but what a lot of folks don't realize is that there are lots of other terrible parts of it, too.
Unemployed Americans desperately need their benefits extended to get by in this economy—so Republicans held them hostage to force through a slew of horrible economic policies in this deal. Here are just a few that you might not have heard about.
Share the list by going to http://pol.moveon.org/taxdealproblems?id=25497-1884697-bsjCA.x&t=3
If you're on Facebook, share it by clicking here. If you're on Twitter, tweet it here.
Top 5 Problems with the Tax Deal
Problem #1: The deal is a stealth attack on Social Security.
The deal will lower the payroll tax—the tax that funds the Social Security trust. This is a trap for Democrats. Republicans have been coming after Social Security for years and this cut is the biggest threat to the vital program in decades. It will cut one-third of Social Security's funding this year alone and when we need to restore the payroll tax back to its current level, Republicans will cry "tax increases" and could gut it permanently. 1
Problem #2: For nearly one in three workers, it's a tax increase.
Nearly 50 million working Americans—including all workers making less than $20,000 per year—and millions of federal, state, and municipal workers will see their taxes go up because of the deal.2
Problem #3: The deal has not one but TWO millionaire bailouts.
In addition to extending all the Bush income tax breaks for the top 2%, the deal will slash the estate tax. If Congress did nothing, next year the estate tax would be 55% and apply to everyone inheriting $1 million or more. But the deal reduces it to 35% and only people who inherit more than $5 million will have to pay. This second bailout will give a gigantic tax giveaway to a few thousand of the richest families in the country and add hundreds of billions to the national debt.3
Problem #4: Unemployment help is insufficient and inadequate.
While the deal extends unemployment benefits for another 13 months for people currently receiving it, millions of unemployed workers who've struggled the most and been out of work more than 99 weeks—since the giant Wall Street banks wrecked the economy—will get no help at all under the deal.4 It's a gamble that there will be jobs in the next 13 months when the insurance runs out, but the tax cuts will go well beyond that. Better to just pass a stand-alone unemployment extension to help all struggling Americans.
Problem #5: Tax giveaways to the rich are a terrible way to create jobs.
Tax breaks for the rich are the least efficient way to create jobs and help the economy grow. In fact the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says extending all tax cuts would lower unemployment only 0.1% to 0.3% over the next year5 and that the cost of the tax deal would be $900 billion over the next five years.6
We've got to stop this deal and make sure everyone understands what's really in it. Can you share this list now?
Thanks
Sources:
1."Tax Cut Deal A Hidden Threat To Social Security," The Huffington Post, December 8, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=205508&id=25497-1884697-bsjCA.x&t=6
2. "Obama-Republican Deal Could Mean Tax Hike For One In Three Workers," The Huffington Post, December 10, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=205509&id=25497-1884697-bsjCA.x&t=7
3. "Estate tax deal: worst part of a bad tax compromise," The Christian Science Monitor, December 7, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=205510&id=25497-1884697-bsjCA.x&t=8
4. "Unemployment benefits: Extension won't help '99ers'," The Christian Science Monitor, December 7, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=205511&id=25497-1884697-bsjCA.x&t=9
5. "The Deal," Paul Krugman, The New York Times, December 7, 2010
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/07/the-deal/
6. "CBO score shows tax plan ups deficit $900 billion in 5 years," CNN.com, December 10, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=205512&id=25497-1884697-bsjCA.x&t=10
Want to support our work? We're entirely funded by our 5 million members—no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. Chip in here.
Unemployed Americans desperately need their benefits extended to get by in this economy—so Republicans held them hostage to force through a slew of horrible economic policies in this deal. Here are just a few that you might not have heard about.
Share the list by going to http://pol.moveon.org/taxdealproblems?id=25497-1884697-bsjCA.x&t=3
If you're on Facebook, share it by clicking here. If you're on Twitter, tweet it here.
Top 5 Problems with the Tax Deal
Problem #1: The deal is a stealth attack on Social Security.
The deal will lower the payroll tax—the tax that funds the Social Security trust. This is a trap for Democrats. Republicans have been coming after Social Security for years and this cut is the biggest threat to the vital program in decades. It will cut one-third of Social Security's funding this year alone and when we need to restore the payroll tax back to its current level, Republicans will cry "tax increases" and could gut it permanently. 1
Problem #2: For nearly one in three workers, it's a tax increase.
Nearly 50 million working Americans—including all workers making less than $20,000 per year—and millions of federal, state, and municipal workers will see their taxes go up because of the deal.2
Problem #3: The deal has not one but TWO millionaire bailouts.
In addition to extending all the Bush income tax breaks for the top 2%, the deal will slash the estate tax. If Congress did nothing, next year the estate tax would be 55% and apply to everyone inheriting $1 million or more. But the deal reduces it to 35% and only people who inherit more than $5 million will have to pay. This second bailout will give a gigantic tax giveaway to a few thousand of the richest families in the country and add hundreds of billions to the national debt.3
Problem #4: Unemployment help is insufficient and inadequate.
While the deal extends unemployment benefits for another 13 months for people currently receiving it, millions of unemployed workers who've struggled the most and been out of work more than 99 weeks—since the giant Wall Street banks wrecked the economy—will get no help at all under the deal.4 It's a gamble that there will be jobs in the next 13 months when the insurance runs out, but the tax cuts will go well beyond that. Better to just pass a stand-alone unemployment extension to help all struggling Americans.
Problem #5: Tax giveaways to the rich are a terrible way to create jobs.
Tax breaks for the rich are the least efficient way to create jobs and help the economy grow. In fact the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says extending all tax cuts would lower unemployment only 0.1% to 0.3% over the next year5 and that the cost of the tax deal would be $900 billion over the next five years.6
We've got to stop this deal and make sure everyone understands what's really in it. Can you share this list now?
Thanks
Sources:
1."Tax Cut Deal A Hidden Threat To Social Security," The Huffington Post, December 8, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=205508&id=25497-1884697-bsjCA.x&t=6
2. "Obama-Republican Deal Could Mean Tax Hike For One In Three Workers," The Huffington Post, December 10, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=205509&id=25497-1884697-bsjCA.x&t=7
3. "Estate tax deal: worst part of a bad tax compromise," The Christian Science Monitor, December 7, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=205510&id=25497-1884697-bsjCA.x&t=8
4. "Unemployment benefits: Extension won't help '99ers'," The Christian Science Monitor, December 7, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=205511&id=25497-1884697-bsjCA.x&t=9
5. "The Deal," Paul Krugman, The New York Times, December 7, 2010
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/07/the-deal/
6. "CBO score shows tax plan ups deficit $900 billion in 5 years," CNN.com, December 10, 2010
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=205512&id=25497-1884697-bsjCA.x&t=10
Want to support our work? We're entirely funded by our 5 million members—no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. Chip in here.
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Too Optimistic?
That is what one blog reader thinks I am. After reading my last blog in which I echoed the thinking of one of the great commentators of our time, David Brooks, the reader wrote:
"I wish I could believe in your optimistic vision of a groundswell movement that will arise and renew and re-energize the best American values and cure the ills of our political system. My experience of the American system is that it swings from one extreme to an another and it manages to balance out the extremist views only over long periods of time and only after much distress and pain.
Ameirican industrialists fought for half a century against the right of workers to organize to fight oppresively low wages and horrible working conditions yet by mid 20th century, after a World War and a Great Depression, when unions finally gained legal rights, labor used their new found power to force their employers into accepting unreasonable settlements that hastened the decline of American industry and ultimately led to the bankruptcy of the American automobile industry.
Now the pendulum has swung in the opposite direction. The weaslth of the nation is once again in the hands of 1% of the population, just as it was in 1929 before the crash. This time however, big business and other private interests have built a powerful fortress to protect their dominance including a network of Lobbyists who spend vast sums of money to support politicians who support their self-seeking interests,"grass roots" organizations financed by ulta-conservative billionaires and a nationwide media empire powerful enough to dwarf the bully pulpit of any sitting president. In the process they have created a political party that has moved so far to the right they are convinced that the business of the United States is business and nothing else matters. Any position that conflicts with this ideology is trash, compromise is out of the question and the opposition party is an enemy to be destroyed if possible and defeated at all costs.
Yet, to my great astonishment, in the wake of the worst economic upheaval since the Great Depression - the American voter has overwhelmingly rejected an administration that has struggled against intractable opposition to right the ship and protect the interests of the middle class and the planet on which we all live. Sorry Ted, I cannot believe that help is on the way and the nation will right itself anytime soon. The American people have spoken and they have said, things will have to get a lot worse before we figure out what to do about it".
Like to know what you think. I remain optimistic and believe that out current president can take us through. He does need our support and that of the feint hearted democrats in Congress. The predictions are that the republicans, afraid of the tea party, will move right and continue to blockade progress on jobs, energy, immigration and climate change. We, friends can not let that happen. Please think how you may get involved to have your opinions count!
HAPPY THANKSGIVING
and
MAY GOD BLESS AMERICA
"I wish I could believe in your optimistic vision of a groundswell movement that will arise and renew and re-energize the best American values and cure the ills of our political system. My experience of the American system is that it swings from one extreme to an another and it manages to balance out the extremist views only over long periods of time and only after much distress and pain.
Ameirican industrialists fought for half a century against the right of workers to organize to fight oppresively low wages and horrible working conditions yet by mid 20th century, after a World War and a Great Depression, when unions finally gained legal rights, labor used their new found power to force their employers into accepting unreasonable settlements that hastened the decline of American industry and ultimately led to the bankruptcy of the American automobile industry.
Now the pendulum has swung in the opposite direction. The weaslth of the nation is once again in the hands of 1% of the population, just as it was in 1929 before the crash. This time however, big business and other private interests have built a powerful fortress to protect their dominance including a network of Lobbyists who spend vast sums of money to support politicians who support their self-seeking interests,"grass roots" organizations financed by ulta-conservative billionaires and a nationwide media empire powerful enough to dwarf the bully pulpit of any sitting president. In the process they have created a political party that has moved so far to the right they are convinced that the business of the United States is business and nothing else matters. Any position that conflicts with this ideology is trash, compromise is out of the question and the opposition party is an enemy to be destroyed if possible and defeated at all costs.
Yet, to my great astonishment, in the wake of the worst economic upheaval since the Great Depression - the American voter has overwhelmingly rejected an administration that has struggled against intractable opposition to right the ship and protect the interests of the middle class and the planet on which we all live. Sorry Ted, I cannot believe that help is on the way and the nation will right itself anytime soon. The American people have spoken and they have said, things will have to get a lot worse before we figure out what to do about it".
Like to know what you think. I remain optimistic and believe that out current president can take us through. He does need our support and that of the feint hearted democrats in Congress. The predictions are that the republicans, afraid of the tea party, will move right and continue to blockade progress on jobs, energy, immigration and climate change. We, friends can not let that happen. Please think how you may get involved to have your opinions count!
HAPPY THANKSGIVING
and
MAY GOD BLESS AMERICA
Monday, November 15, 2010
The Choice is Ours to Make
The only thing we have to fear is fear itself. Ever hear that? Well, folks I think it is all about attitude from here on in. We either pull together or we are doomed to third rate former empire status.
David Brooks from the NYTimes says it very well below. Are we to have two years of meaningless congressional investigations? Two years of "just say no" so that the president has no chance to move an agenda or be reelected? Two years of failing to enact both an immigration policy or energy policy? Is this what we mean when we say less government, less regulation, less taxes?
Here is a thought. What if climate change is not man caused? Does that mean that we should let the oceans rise 3 feet in the next 15 years? Wouldn't that have devastating effects on the coast lines and people along them on every continent in the world? Say goodbye to New York City, Venice and the Netherlands to name a few.
Here is David Brooks in yesterday's NYTimes:
"So we continue on the headlong path toward a national disaster. And along the way our dysfunctional political system will leave all sorts of other problems unaddressed: immigration, energy policy and on and on.
Yet, I’m optimistic right now. I’m optimistic because while our political system is a mess, the economic and social values of the country remain sound. My optimism is also based on the conviction that serious, vibrant societies don’t sit by and do nothing as their governments drive off a cliff.
Over the past few years, we have seen millions of people mobilize — some behind President Obama and others around the Tea Parties. The country is restive and looking for alternatives. And before the next round of voting begins, I suspect we will see another mass movement: a movement of people who don’t feel represented by either of the partisan orthodoxies; a movement of people who want to fundamentally change the norms, institutions and rigidities that cause our gridlock and threaten our country.
You can’t organize a movement like this around pain — around tax increases and spending cuts. But you can organize one around a broad revitalization agenda, and, above all, love of country.
It will take a revived patriotism to motivate Americans to do what needs to be done. It will take a revived patriotism to lift people out of their partisan cliques. How can you love your country if you hate the other half of it?
It will take a revived patriotism to get people to look beyond their short-term financial interest to see the long-term national threat. Do you really love your tax deduction more than America’s future greatness? Are you really unwilling to sacrifice your Social Security cost-of-living adjustment at a time when soldiers and Marines are sacrificing their lives for their country in Afghanistan?
Like the civil rights movement, this movement will ask Americans to live up to their best selves. But it will do other things besides.
It will have to restore the social norms that prevailed through much of American history: when narcissism and hyperpartisanship was mitigated by loyalties larger than tribe and self; when competition between the parties was limited and constructive, not total and fratricidal.
This movement will have to build institutions to support the leaders who make the hard bargains. As in the civil rights era, politicians won’t make big changes unless they are impelled and protected by a social upsurge.
Most important, this movement will have to develop a governing philosophy and a policy agenda. Right now, orthodox liberals and conservatives have their idea networks, and everybody else is intellectual roadkill. This coming movement will have to revive the American System: a governing philosophy that believes in targeted federal efforts to arouse growth, social mobility and responsibility.
Like the chairmen’s report, this movement could demand that Congress wipe out tax loopholes and begin anew. It could protect federal aid to the poor while reducing federal subsidies to the upper-middle class.
The coming movement may be a third party or it may support serious people in the existing two. Its goal will be unapologetic: preserving American pre-eminence. It will preserve America’s standing in the world on the grounds that this supremacy is a gift to our children and a blessing for the earth.
David Brooks from the NYTimes says it very well below. Are we to have two years of meaningless congressional investigations? Two years of "just say no" so that the president has no chance to move an agenda or be reelected? Two years of failing to enact both an immigration policy or energy policy? Is this what we mean when we say less government, less regulation, less taxes?
Here is a thought. What if climate change is not man caused? Does that mean that we should let the oceans rise 3 feet in the next 15 years? Wouldn't that have devastating effects on the coast lines and people along them on every continent in the world? Say goodbye to New York City, Venice and the Netherlands to name a few.
Here is David Brooks in yesterday's NYTimes:
"So we continue on the headlong path toward a national disaster. And along the way our dysfunctional political system will leave all sorts of other problems unaddressed: immigration, energy policy and on and on.
Yet, I’m optimistic right now. I’m optimistic because while our political system is a mess, the economic and social values of the country remain sound. My optimism is also based on the conviction that serious, vibrant societies don’t sit by and do nothing as their governments drive off a cliff.
Over the past few years, we have seen millions of people mobilize — some behind President Obama and others around the Tea Parties. The country is restive and looking for alternatives. And before the next round of voting begins, I suspect we will see another mass movement: a movement of people who don’t feel represented by either of the partisan orthodoxies; a movement of people who want to fundamentally change the norms, institutions and rigidities that cause our gridlock and threaten our country.
You can’t organize a movement like this around pain — around tax increases and spending cuts. But you can organize one around a broad revitalization agenda, and, above all, love of country.
It will take a revived patriotism to motivate Americans to do what needs to be done. It will take a revived patriotism to lift people out of their partisan cliques. How can you love your country if you hate the other half of it?
It will take a revived patriotism to get people to look beyond their short-term financial interest to see the long-term national threat. Do you really love your tax deduction more than America’s future greatness? Are you really unwilling to sacrifice your Social Security cost-of-living adjustment at a time when soldiers and Marines are sacrificing their lives for their country in Afghanistan?
Like the civil rights movement, this movement will ask Americans to live up to their best selves. But it will do other things besides.
It will have to restore the social norms that prevailed through much of American history: when narcissism and hyperpartisanship was mitigated by loyalties larger than tribe and self; when competition between the parties was limited and constructive, not total and fratricidal.
This movement will have to build institutions to support the leaders who make the hard bargains. As in the civil rights era, politicians won’t make big changes unless they are impelled and protected by a social upsurge.
Most important, this movement will have to develop a governing philosophy and a policy agenda. Right now, orthodox liberals and conservatives have their idea networks, and everybody else is intellectual roadkill. This coming movement will have to revive the American System: a governing philosophy that believes in targeted federal efforts to arouse growth, social mobility and responsibility.
Like the chairmen’s report, this movement could demand that Congress wipe out tax loopholes and begin anew. It could protect federal aid to the poor while reducing federal subsidies to the upper-middle class.
The coming movement may be a third party or it may support serious people in the existing two. Its goal will be unapologetic: preserving American pre-eminence. It will preserve America’s standing in the world on the grounds that this supremacy is a gift to our children and a blessing for the earth.
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Food for Thought
The election is over and the people have had their say. It is said that for the democrats, the election was theirs to lose and they did. The one thing the democrats really can not stand, it seems, is to have the opportunity to achieve their agenda. Our president, as I and others I have published here have pointed out, failed to either recognize the depth of this recession or lacked the courage to do what needed to be done to stimulate the economy.
He seems to be a pragmatist rather than a balls out leader. I am hoping he finds his cojones now that he has nothing more than a second term to lose.
Our president can also not call the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan Bush's wars any longer; nor can he explain why we are in Afghanistan at all at the cost of $200 mm dollars a day. I am a supporter of this president; but I have been saying for some time that he missed the severity of the recession and should already be out of Afghanistan.
It is also clear that while he had both houses he was abandoned by the independents and the so-called blue dog democrats. For example, good old Ben Nelson from Montana rode his horse in, had his mask on, his guns out and held up the president till he got what he wanted. Great support Mr. Senator! Along the way he made himself and the president appear as though they are wheelers and dealers willing to compromise beyond propriety and good sense.
There were and are three issues: Jobs, Jobs, Jobs!
The president, using the advice of the trio who brought us the recession, Summers, Geithner and Paulson, under estimated the recession and simply did not create a large enough stimulus package. And the one he did create never reached the ordinary working person. Stimulating the economy really amounts to spending money until business, which is sitting on $2.5 trillion in retained earnings, invests in its companies again. Thereby creating jobs, thereby putting money in peoples' pockets, who then spend it and voila, the economy is stimulated.
Now we shall see the likes of Rove, Cheney, the American Enterprise Institute, McConnell, Palin, Bachman, Boehner and Paul run the country. Here is their mantra: reduce the size of government( agencies that regulate- hmmmm been there done that haven't we!), cut all discretionary spending across the board, keep the Bush tax cuts intact, and repeal the health care reform law.
Couple of hints on what this means. Cut discretionary spending means cutting everything but Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and Defense( 70% of the budget). This means cutting education, monies allocated for research and development grants, monies for infrastructure projects. Anybody seen the shape New York City's East river bridges are in lately? And, cutting monies dedicated to alternative fuels. Oh well, we don't need them anyway since climate change is a political ploy invented by liberals. Every one agrees they can cut earmarks which frankly amounts to a rounding error considering the size of the U.S. budget.
Here is the light at the end of the tunnel: the republicans put up Palin as the presidential nominee in two years. Need I say more? Meantime we go to hell in a hand basket and the American people see that. Watch this next one. We are about to go through redistricting which means with a republican house the democrats will be screwed until at least the next census.
Keep hope alive, please, and push back every where you can. Demand that the platitudes the Tea party and Republicans have been expounding be fleshed out with specifics on what they will do to end the recession and reduce expenses.
A little scary when the republican leadership says their agenda is to be sure President Obama is a one term president. Therefore, they will offer nothing constructive hoping he fails. Then when we have another republican in the white house, we can go back to the care and feeding of the wealthy and perhaps eight more years of Rove, Cheney, a Bush-like president so we can run up eight more years of deficits and find other countries to invade and spread democracy.
Gary Tomei offers a thought:
There are differences between us and every other country, and I'm not prepared to advocate any other country's system, but this does provide food for thought. We should not assume that we can not learn anything from any source that does not originate from within our borders.
Capitalism Uber Alles: How the American Working Class Got Brainwashed
. . . Our country has long been admired for its extraordinary social mobility, but as Arianna Huffington points out in Third World America, Canada, Germany, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Sweden, and France now have greater social mobility -- university education is free, or at minimal cost in Western Europe. Compared to other advanced industrialized countries which all provide universal health care, we are at the bottom in life expectancy and infant mortality. Americans have three months unpaid parental leave -- Swedes have 13 months, paid. Unlike Western Europeans, we have no government legislated paid vacations. In Germany, the world's largest exporter after China, workers get 6 weeks a year off. Americans average 13 days.
American conservatives delight in predicting the imminent demise of socialistic Western European benefits. But these benefits are part of the social contract within which all major European political parties, including conservatives, operate. While large national debts are leading to some cuts in benefits, these cuts do not represent reneging on that contract, just as cuts to education in the U.S. do not represent reneging on government funding for education -- which is part of our social contract.
A look at the divergence in political thinking between Western Europeans and Americans provides much of the answer to why we lag so far behind. . . .
☞ Think about it: We are more than triple their population – and we have all those amazing agricultural exports – yet Germany, with its 6-week vacations, universal health care, and strong labor unions, outcompetes us in the world market. How can that be?
We’re number one! But in obesity. China now has the world’s fastest supercomputer.
Can the solution really be to borrow $700 billion to extend tax cuts on income above $250,000? Get rid of the minimum wage and social safety net, cut back on education, deregulate polluters, and increase military spending?
Food for thought.
=
He seems to be a pragmatist rather than a balls out leader. I am hoping he finds his cojones now that he has nothing more than a second term to lose.
Our president can also not call the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan Bush's wars any longer; nor can he explain why we are in Afghanistan at all at the cost of $200 mm dollars a day. I am a supporter of this president; but I have been saying for some time that he missed the severity of the recession and should already be out of Afghanistan.
It is also clear that while he had both houses he was abandoned by the independents and the so-called blue dog democrats. For example, good old Ben Nelson from Montana rode his horse in, had his mask on, his guns out and held up the president till he got what he wanted. Great support Mr. Senator! Along the way he made himself and the president appear as though they are wheelers and dealers willing to compromise beyond propriety and good sense.
There were and are three issues: Jobs, Jobs, Jobs!
The president, using the advice of the trio who brought us the recession, Summers, Geithner and Paulson, under estimated the recession and simply did not create a large enough stimulus package. And the one he did create never reached the ordinary working person. Stimulating the economy really amounts to spending money until business, which is sitting on $2.5 trillion in retained earnings, invests in its companies again. Thereby creating jobs, thereby putting money in peoples' pockets, who then spend it and voila, the economy is stimulated.
Now we shall see the likes of Rove, Cheney, the American Enterprise Institute, McConnell, Palin, Bachman, Boehner and Paul run the country. Here is their mantra: reduce the size of government( agencies that regulate- hmmmm been there done that haven't we!), cut all discretionary spending across the board, keep the Bush tax cuts intact, and repeal the health care reform law.
Couple of hints on what this means. Cut discretionary spending means cutting everything but Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and Defense( 70% of the budget). This means cutting education, monies allocated for research and development grants, monies for infrastructure projects. Anybody seen the shape New York City's East river bridges are in lately? And, cutting monies dedicated to alternative fuels. Oh well, we don't need them anyway since climate change is a political ploy invented by liberals. Every one agrees they can cut earmarks which frankly amounts to a rounding error considering the size of the U.S. budget.
Here is the light at the end of the tunnel: the republicans put up Palin as the presidential nominee in two years. Need I say more? Meantime we go to hell in a hand basket and the American people see that. Watch this next one. We are about to go through redistricting which means with a republican house the democrats will be screwed until at least the next census.
Keep hope alive, please, and push back every where you can. Demand that the platitudes the Tea party and Republicans have been expounding be fleshed out with specifics on what they will do to end the recession and reduce expenses.
A little scary when the republican leadership says their agenda is to be sure President Obama is a one term president. Therefore, they will offer nothing constructive hoping he fails. Then when we have another republican in the white house, we can go back to the care and feeding of the wealthy and perhaps eight more years of Rove, Cheney, a Bush-like president so we can run up eight more years of deficits and find other countries to invade and spread democracy.
Gary Tomei offers a thought:
There are differences between us and every other country, and I'm not prepared to advocate any other country's system, but this does provide food for thought. We should not assume that we can not learn anything from any source that does not originate from within our borders.
Capitalism Uber Alles: How the American Working Class Got Brainwashed
. . . Our country has long been admired for its extraordinary social mobility, but as Arianna Huffington points out in Third World America, Canada, Germany, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Sweden, and France now have greater social mobility -- university education is free, or at minimal cost in Western Europe. Compared to other advanced industrialized countries which all provide universal health care, we are at the bottom in life expectancy and infant mortality. Americans have three months unpaid parental leave -- Swedes have 13 months, paid. Unlike Western Europeans, we have no government legislated paid vacations. In Germany, the world's largest exporter after China, workers get 6 weeks a year off. Americans average 13 days.
American conservatives delight in predicting the imminent demise of socialistic Western European benefits. But these benefits are part of the social contract within which all major European political parties, including conservatives, operate. While large national debts are leading to some cuts in benefits, these cuts do not represent reneging on that contract, just as cuts to education in the U.S. do not represent reneging on government funding for education -- which is part of our social contract.
A look at the divergence in political thinking between Western Europeans and Americans provides much of the answer to why we lag so far behind. . . .
☞ Think about it: We are more than triple their population – and we have all those amazing agricultural exports – yet Germany, with its 6-week vacations, universal health care, and strong labor unions, outcompetes us in the world market. How can that be?
We’re number one! But in obesity. China now has the world’s fastest supercomputer.
Can the solution really be to borrow $700 billion to extend tax cuts on income above $250,000? Get rid of the minimum wage and social safety net, cut back on education, deregulate polluters, and increase military spending?
Food for thought.
=
Sunday, October 24, 2010
In Case you Missed This,,,,,,
Gail Collins writes a column for the NY Times. If you missed this last week it is worth reading. If the stakes were not so high the hypocrisy she points out would be amusing. I reprint it for you below.
October 20, 2010
The Fury Failure
By GAIL COLLINS
Rage is not working out.
In Delaware, the Republican voters were so angry that they rejected a popular congressman and gave their Senate nomination to an apparently unemployed 41-year-old woman whose major life success had been an ongoing performance as Wacko Conservative Girl on late-night talk shows. In Alaska, they were so mad that they tossed out their incumbent senator for Joe Miller, a lawyer who believes unemployment compensation is unconstitutional, except when his wife is receiving it.
So now in Delaware the unangry Democrat candidate is way ahead. In Alaska, Miller keeps dropping in the polls, which made him so mad that he had his private security guards take an inquiring reporter into custody.
That did not go over very well even in Alaska, an extremely angry state that hateshateshates all forms of government, despite the fact that 40 percent of its economy comes from government aid, and the state’s oil-revenue-sharing program gives families thousands of dollars in payments every year. “Unemployment has never been lower; there is no housing crisis; banks are solvent. We just got Permanent Fund Checks — and, boy, are we pissed off!” said Michael Carey, an Anchorage Daily News columnist.
Really, people, rage never gets you anything but overturned garbage cans and broken windows. If you want to do rage, go to France.
We are talking here about undifferentiated anger, which creates nothing but a feeling of moral superiority on the part of the irate. It’s natural to get furious at specific things: a tax increase or an unfaithful spouse or a blown tire. Or, in the case of the Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate in Kentucky, Rand Paul, a debate opponent who asks: “When is it ever appropriate to tie up a woman and have her kneel before a false idol that you refer to as Aqua Buddha?”
This involved a college prank that Paul told reporters he doesn’t remember. You can see why he was angry, although it does sound hard to forget.
It’s the difference between Joe Manchin, the Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate in West Virginia, who has ads showing him metaphorically shooting a bullet into the heart of the cap-and-trade bill, and the unsuccessful Republican candidate for Congress in Arizona, who had herself filmed spraying machine-gun fire all over the place while an announcer said: “Pamela Gorman — conservative Christian and a pretty fair shot.” Even if you don’t agree with Manchin’s position, you have to admit that Gorman would probably be more difficult to work with.
In New York, Republicans were so full of free-floating rage that they nominated Carl Paladino, a hotheaded developer from Buffalo, for governor. For a while this summer, upstate New York was littered with “I’m Mad As Hell, Too, Carl!” lawn signs.
Paladino quickly developed a gender gap the size of the Grand Canyon. A recent Siena College poll showed that 71 percent of female voters preferred his opponent, Andrew Cuomo, while 21 percent supported him, demonstrating yet again that women will not vote for a guy who yells.
The Republican nominee got into fights, promised to “take out” one reporter and insulted gays. He trotted out his poor wife, who gave interviews recounting how she had forgiven Carl for fathering a 10-year-old daughter after he broke the news while she was getting ready for their son’s funeral.
Cuomo, meanwhile, has not only refrained from yelling, he’s barely had to leave his office.
On the rage-o-meter, this week’s gubernatorial debate in New York was not quite as stirring as Kentucky’s, possibly because it involved seven people, some in alarming get-ups, sitting on uncomfortable chairs in a line. Actually, it looked less like a debate than a tryout for some particularly embarrassing reality show.
Several third-party candidates, including a former Black Panther in a Nehru jacket, were more experienced in the politics of unproductive rage than Paladino. In a late-breaking attempt to change the tone, Paladino announced that he was not actually angry but simply “passionate.” Unfortunately, the world will remember his performance only for the part in which he had to run off to go to the bathroom before his concluding remarks.
The person who got the most postdebate attention was Jimmy McMillan of the Rent Is Too Damn High Party. McMillan wore black gloves and had a moustache that wound around his head like a ribbon, and a goatee that looked like two little fuzzy gerbils hanging from his chin. He was very, very, very angry. Particularly about the rents, which he pointed out were too damn high.
Afterward, Sarah Maslin Nir of The Times tracked him down in Brooklyn and discovered that McMillan’s own personal rent is, he said, zero. His landlords, he added, are “like family. They don’t want me to pay any money at all. I am basically living rent free.”
Which doesn’t mean he can’t be ticked off about it.
Remember to vote November 2 so we can "keep" our country!
October 20, 2010
The Fury Failure
By GAIL COLLINS
Rage is not working out.
In Delaware, the Republican voters were so angry that they rejected a popular congressman and gave their Senate nomination to an apparently unemployed 41-year-old woman whose major life success had been an ongoing performance as Wacko Conservative Girl on late-night talk shows. In Alaska, they were so mad that they tossed out their incumbent senator for Joe Miller, a lawyer who believes unemployment compensation is unconstitutional, except when his wife is receiving it.
So now in Delaware the unangry Democrat candidate is way ahead. In Alaska, Miller keeps dropping in the polls, which made him so mad that he had his private security guards take an inquiring reporter into custody.
That did not go over very well even in Alaska, an extremely angry state that hateshateshates all forms of government, despite the fact that 40 percent of its economy comes from government aid, and the state’s oil-revenue-sharing program gives families thousands of dollars in payments every year. “Unemployment has never been lower; there is no housing crisis; banks are solvent. We just got Permanent Fund Checks — and, boy, are we pissed off!” said Michael Carey, an Anchorage Daily News columnist.
Really, people, rage never gets you anything but overturned garbage cans and broken windows. If you want to do rage, go to France.
We are talking here about undifferentiated anger, which creates nothing but a feeling of moral superiority on the part of the irate. It’s natural to get furious at specific things: a tax increase or an unfaithful spouse or a blown tire. Or, in the case of the Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate in Kentucky, Rand Paul, a debate opponent who asks: “When is it ever appropriate to tie up a woman and have her kneel before a false idol that you refer to as Aqua Buddha?”
This involved a college prank that Paul told reporters he doesn’t remember. You can see why he was angry, although it does sound hard to forget.
It’s the difference between Joe Manchin, the Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate in West Virginia, who has ads showing him metaphorically shooting a bullet into the heart of the cap-and-trade bill, and the unsuccessful Republican candidate for Congress in Arizona, who had herself filmed spraying machine-gun fire all over the place while an announcer said: “Pamela Gorman — conservative Christian and a pretty fair shot.” Even if you don’t agree with Manchin’s position, you have to admit that Gorman would probably be more difficult to work with.
In New York, Republicans were so full of free-floating rage that they nominated Carl Paladino, a hotheaded developer from Buffalo, for governor. For a while this summer, upstate New York was littered with “I’m Mad As Hell, Too, Carl!” lawn signs.
Paladino quickly developed a gender gap the size of the Grand Canyon. A recent Siena College poll showed that 71 percent of female voters preferred his opponent, Andrew Cuomo, while 21 percent supported him, demonstrating yet again that women will not vote for a guy who yells.
The Republican nominee got into fights, promised to “take out” one reporter and insulted gays. He trotted out his poor wife, who gave interviews recounting how she had forgiven Carl for fathering a 10-year-old daughter after he broke the news while she was getting ready for their son’s funeral.
Cuomo, meanwhile, has not only refrained from yelling, he’s barely had to leave his office.
On the rage-o-meter, this week’s gubernatorial debate in New York was not quite as stirring as Kentucky’s, possibly because it involved seven people, some in alarming get-ups, sitting on uncomfortable chairs in a line. Actually, it looked less like a debate than a tryout for some particularly embarrassing reality show.
Several third-party candidates, including a former Black Panther in a Nehru jacket, were more experienced in the politics of unproductive rage than Paladino. In a late-breaking attempt to change the tone, Paladino announced that he was not actually angry but simply “passionate.” Unfortunately, the world will remember his performance only for the part in which he had to run off to go to the bathroom before his concluding remarks.
The person who got the most postdebate attention was Jimmy McMillan of the Rent Is Too Damn High Party. McMillan wore black gloves and had a moustache that wound around his head like a ribbon, and a goatee that looked like two little fuzzy gerbils hanging from his chin. He was very, very, very angry. Particularly about the rents, which he pointed out were too damn high.
Afterward, Sarah Maslin Nir of The Times tracked him down in Brooklyn and discovered that McMillan’s own personal rent is, he said, zero. His landlords, he added, are “like family. They don’t want me to pay any money at all. I am basically living rent free.”
Which doesn’t mean he can’t be ticked off about it.
Remember to vote November 2 so we can "keep" our country!
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Suggested Fixes for the Economy
As promised the following are the suggested fixes for the economy taken from the best minds* who are thinking, writing and speaking on the subject. At issue is whether Joseph Stiglitz( 10% unemployment may be the new normal) is correct and if so can we alter that outcome.
We need to learn from our major competitors to combine the forces of private enterprise with long-term government strategies and assistance to produce growth and prosperity.
America needs to change its perspective and theory about how our economy(or any economy works). All the models to date fail to account for one important element: Trust. People do not only behave or make economic decisions based upon macro or micro accepted Keynesian or Adam Smith theories. People also make decisions based upon their "gut instincts" for good or bad!
The government must stimulate the economy with enough money to kick start a growth cycle. An analysis of both the TARP and The Stimulus Package(TSP) reveals they were both on target, necessary and if anything not large enough. We must use the power of the Federal Reserve Bank and Congress to change the present course.
TARP which had $700 billion to be loaned actually spent $540 billions on 829 applicants. To date $194 billions have been paid back.*
TSP is working and when combined with the extension of unemployment benefits, the Small Business Stimulus Bill just enacted, letting tax cuts expire for those earning more than $250,000 a year will continue to keep growth from going negative or staying flat.
Wall Street and the Banks have not been reigned in and continue to behave badly(foreclosure scandal now hitting) They have proven that they can not police themselves. The government must use all of its powers to monitor and regulate their activities.
Is flat or going negative good enough?
Growth requires a different strategy. Business must come on line and invest the trillions of dollars held on their balance sheets. It is not a chicken and egg strategy, it is a cause and effect tactic. If business provides long term jobs, people will earn and put the money back into the economy.
Here is one that will send many of you into orbit: deficit spending is not going to hurt us long term. Getting our industries back to work, having them actually produce something and then selling the output world-wide will keep us from sliding into a third rate nation status behind China,India and even Germany who propers at the expense of its European neighbors.
President Obama has set the tone and direction. He is poised to spend us, yes I said spend us, to a kick-started economy. The existing political structure is unwilling to support such a plan. Demagogues from all segments with opinions based upon platitudes rule the day. Misinformation and an uninformed( by choice)electorate all have a say.
Examine the use of Targeted Credit. That is, credit should be extended to those who under normal conditions would be economically capable of using it and qualify for it.
Restructure Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to break the dream of every one in America can own a home.
No one of these tactics will in it self fix the economy. It requires a change of perspective, a willingness on the part of the electorate to sacrifice and become informed, an ability for the political structure to put aside partisan demagoguery and to understand that what is broken in the nation is Trust
Please support our president and our government. Have they done it all right? No. Have they had the foxes guarding the hen house? Yes? But the foxes are leaving and the president is showing courage and clear thinking on a range of issues.
Vote on November 2
* Sources
Joseph Stiglitz, Robert Shiller, Paul Krugman, George Akerlo, David Brooks and Noriel Roubini, The Wall Street Journal, The NY Times.
We need to learn from our major competitors to combine the forces of private enterprise with long-term government strategies and assistance to produce growth and prosperity.
America needs to change its perspective and theory about how our economy(or any economy works). All the models to date fail to account for one important element: Trust. People do not only behave or make economic decisions based upon macro or micro accepted Keynesian or Adam Smith theories. People also make decisions based upon their "gut instincts" for good or bad!
The government must stimulate the economy with enough money to kick start a growth cycle. An analysis of both the TARP and The Stimulus Package(TSP) reveals they were both on target, necessary and if anything not large enough. We must use the power of the Federal Reserve Bank and Congress to change the present course.
TARP which had $700 billion to be loaned actually spent $540 billions on 829 applicants. To date $194 billions have been paid back.*
TSP is working and when combined with the extension of unemployment benefits, the Small Business Stimulus Bill just enacted, letting tax cuts expire for those earning more than $250,000 a year will continue to keep growth from going negative or staying flat.
Wall Street and the Banks have not been reigned in and continue to behave badly(foreclosure scandal now hitting) They have proven that they can not police themselves. The government must use all of its powers to monitor and regulate their activities.
Is flat or going negative good enough?
Growth requires a different strategy. Business must come on line and invest the trillions of dollars held on their balance sheets. It is not a chicken and egg strategy, it is a cause and effect tactic. If business provides long term jobs, people will earn and put the money back into the economy.
Here is one that will send many of you into orbit: deficit spending is not going to hurt us long term. Getting our industries back to work, having them actually produce something and then selling the output world-wide will keep us from sliding into a third rate nation status behind China,India and even Germany who propers at the expense of its European neighbors.
President Obama has set the tone and direction. He is poised to spend us, yes I said spend us, to a kick-started economy. The existing political structure is unwilling to support such a plan. Demagogues from all segments with opinions based upon platitudes rule the day. Misinformation and an uninformed( by choice)electorate all have a say.
Examine the use of Targeted Credit. That is, credit should be extended to those who under normal conditions would be economically capable of using it and qualify for it.
Restructure Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to break the dream of every one in America can own a home.
No one of these tactics will in it self fix the economy. It requires a change of perspective, a willingness on the part of the electorate to sacrifice and become informed, an ability for the political structure to put aside partisan demagoguery and to understand that what is broken in the nation is Trust
Please support our president and our government. Have they done it all right? No. Have they had the foxes guarding the hen house? Yes? But the foxes are leaving and the president is showing courage and clear thinking on a range of issues.
Vote on November 2
* Sources
Joseph Stiglitz, Robert Shiller, Paul Krugman, George Akerlo, David Brooks and Noriel Roubini, The Wall Street Journal, The NY Times.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
