Wednesday, October 21, 2015

From Raw Story: 50 pieces of GWB d'baggery

Here are 50 despicable things George W. Bush did before and after 9/11

George W. Bush speaks to CBS News (screen grab)

1. He stole the presidency in 2000. People may forget that Republicans in Florida purged more than 50,000 African-American voters before Election Day, and then went to the Supreme Court where the GOP-appointed majority stopped a recount that would have awarded the presidency to Vice-President Al Gore if all votes were counted. National news organizations verified that outcome long after Bush had been sworn in.

2. Bush’s lies started in that race. Bush ran for office claiming he was a “uniter, not a divider.” Even though he received fewer popular votes than Gore, he quickly claimed he had the mandate from the American public to push his right-wing agenda.

3. He covered up his past. He was a party boy, the scion of a powerful political family who got away with being a deserter during the Vietnam War. He was reportedly AWOL for over a year from his assigned unit, the Texas Air National Guard, which other military outfits called the “Champagne Division.”

4. He loved the death penalty. As Texas governor from 1995-2000, he signed the most execution orders of any governor in U.S. history—152 people, including the mentally ill and women who were domestic abuse victims. He spared one man’s life, a serial killer.

5. He was a corporate shill from Day 1. Bush locked up the GOP nomination by raising more campaign money from corporate boardrooms than anyone at that time. He lunched with CEOs who would jet into Austin to “educate” him about their political wish lists.

6. He gutted global political progress. He pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol which set requirements for 38 nations to lower greenhouse gas emissions to combat climate change, saying that abiding by the agreement would “harm our economy and hurt our workers.”

7. He embraced global isolationism. He withdrew from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, over Russia’s protest, taking the U.S. in a direction not seen since World War I.

8. He ignored warnings about Osama bin Laden. He ignored the Aug. 6, 2001 White House intelligence briefing titled, “Bin Laden determined to strike in the U.S.” Meanwhile, his chief anti-terrorism advisor, Richard Clarke, and first Treasury Secretary, Paul O’Neill, testified in Congress that he was intent on invading Iraq within days of becoming president.

9. Ramped up war on drugs, not terrorists. The Bush administration had twice as many FBI agents assigned to the war on drugs than fighting terrorism before 9/11, and kept thousands in that role after the terror attacks.

10. “My Pet Goat.” He kept reading a picture book to grade-schoolers at a Florida school for seven minutes after his top aides told him that the World Trade Centers had been attacked in 9/11. Then Air Force One flew away from the school, vanishing for hours after the attack.

11. Squandered global goodwill after 9/11. Bush thumbed his nose at world sympathy for the victims of the September 11, 2001 attacks, by declaring a global war on terrorism and declaring “you are either with us or against us.”

12. Bush turned to Iraq not Afghanistan. The Bush administration soon started beating war drums for an attack on Iraq, where there was no proven Al Qaeda link, instead of Afghanistan, where the 9/11 bombers had trained and Osama bin Laden was based. His 2002 State of the Union speech declared that Iraq was part of an “Axis of Evil.”

13. Attacked United Nation weapons inspectors. The march to war in Iraq started with White House attacks on the credibility of U.N. weapons inspectors in Iraq, whose claims that Saddam Hussein did not have nuclear weapons proved to be true.

14. He flat-out lied about Iraq’s weapons. In a major speech in October 2002, he said that Saddam Hussein had the capacity to send unmanned aircraft to the U.S. with bombs that could range from chemical weapons to nuclear devices. “We cannot wait for the final proof—the smoking gun—that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud,” he said.

15. He ignored the U.N. and launched a war. The Bush administration tried to get the U.N. Security Council to authorize an attack on Iraq, which it refused to do. Bush then decided to lead a “preemptive” attack regardless of international consequences. He did not wait for any congressional authorization to launch a war.

16. Abandoned international Criminal Court. Before invading Iraq, Bush told the U.N. that the U.S. was withdrawing from ratifying the International Criminal Court Treaty to protect American troops from persecution and to allow it to pursue preemptive war.

17. Colin Powell’s false evidence at U.N. The highly decorated soldier turned Secretary of State presented false evidence at the U.N. as the American mainstream media began its jingoistic drumbeat to launch a war of choice on Saddam Hussein and Iraq.

18. He launched a war on CIA whistleblowers. When a former ambassador, Joseph C. Wilson, wrote a New York Times op-ed saying there was no nuclear threat from Iraq, the White House retaliated by leaking the name and destroying the career of his wife, Valerie Plame, one of the CIA’s top national security experts.

19. Bush pardoned the Plame affair leaker. Before leaving office, Bush pardoned the vice president’s top staffer, Scooter Libby, for leaking Plame’s name to the press.

20. Bush launched the second Iraq War. In April 2003, the U.S. military invaded Iraq for the second time in two decades, leading to hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths and more than a million refugees as a years of sectarian violence took hold on Iraq. Nearly 6,700 U.S. soldiers have died in the Iraq and Afghan wars.

21. Baghdad looted except for oil ministry. The Pentagon failure to plan for a military occupation and transition to civilian rule was seen as Baghdad was looted while troops guarded the oil ministry, suggesting this war was fought for oil riches, not terrorism.

22. The war did not make the U.S. safer. In 2006, a National Intelligence Estimate (a consensus report of the heads of 16 U.S. intelligence agencies) asserted that the Iraq war had increased Islamic radicalism and had worsened the terror threat.

23. U.S. troops were given unsafe gear. From inadequate vests from protection against snipers to Humvees that could not protect soldiers from roadside bombs, the military did not sufficiently equip its soldiers in Iraq, leading to an epidemic of brain injuries.

24. Meanwhile, the war propaganda continued. From landing on an aircraft carrier in a flight suit to declare “mission accomplished” to surprising troops in Baghdad with a Thanksgiving turkey that was a table decoration used as a prop, Bush defended his war of choice by using soldiers as PR props.

25. He never attended soldiers’ funerals. For years after the war started, Bush never attended a funeral even though as of June 2005, 144 soldiers (of the 1,700 killed thus far) were laid to rest in Arlington National Cemetery, about two miles from the White House.

26. Meanwhile, war profiteering surged. The list of top Bush administration officials whose former corporate employers made billions in Pentagon contracts starts with Vice-President Dick Cheney and Halliburton, which made $39.5 billion, and included his daughter, Liz Cheney, who ran a $300 million Middle East partnership program.

27. Bush ignored international ban on torture. Suspected terrorists were captured and tortured by the U.S. military in Baghdad’s Abu Gharib prison, in the highest profile example of how the Bush White House ignored international agreements, such as the Geneva Convention, that banned torture, and created a secret system of detention that was unmasked when photos made their way to the American media outlets.

28. Created the blackhole at Gitmo and renditions. The Bush White House created the offshore military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as well as secret detention sites in eastern Europe to evade domestic and military justice systems. Many of the men still jailed in Cuba were turned over to the U.S. military by bounty hunters.

29. Bush violated U.S. Constitution as well. The Bush White House ignored basic civil liberties, most notably by launching a massive domestic spying program where millions of Americans’ online activities were monitored with the help of big telecom companies. The government had no search warrant or court authority for its electronic dragnet.

30. Iraq war created federal debt crisis. The total costs of the Iraq and Afghan wars will reach between $4 trillion and $6 trillion, when the long-term medical costs are added in for wounded veterans, a March 2013 report by a Harvard researcher has estimated. Earlier reports said the wars cost $2 billion a week.

31. He cut veterans’ healthcare funding. At the height of the Iraq war, the White House cut funding for veterans’ healthcare by several billion dollars, slashed more than one billion from military housing and opposed extending healthcare to National Guard families, even as they were repeatedly tapped for extended and repeat overseas deployments.

32. Then Bush decided to cut income taxes. In 2001 and 2003, a series of bills lowered income tax rates, cutting federal revenues as the cost of the foreign wars escalated. The tax cuts disproportionately benefited the wealthy, with roughly one-quarter going to the top one percent of incomes compared to 8.9% going to the middle 20 percent. The cuts were supposed to expire in 2013, but most are still on the books.

33. Assault on reproductive rights. From the earliest days of his first term, the Bush White House led a prolonged assault on reproductive rights. He cut funds for U.N. family planning programs, barred military bases from offering abortions, put right-wing evangelicals in regulatory positions where they rejected new birth control drugs, and issued regulations making fetuses—but not women—eligible for federal healthcare.

34. Cut Pell Grant loans for poor students. His administration froze Pell Grants for years and tightened eligibility for loans, affecting 1.5 million low-income students. He also eliminated other federal job training programs that targeted young people.

35. Turned corporations loose on environment. Bush’s environmental record was truly appalling, starting with abandoning a campaign pledge to tax carbon emissions and then withdrawing from the Kyoto Protocol on greenhouse gases. The Sierra Club lists 300 actions his staff took to undermine federal laws, from cutting enforcement budgets to putting industry lobbyists in charge of agencies to keeping energy policies secret.

36.. Said evolution was a theory—like intelligent design. One of his most inflammatory comments was saying that public schools should teach that evolution is a theory with as much validity as the religious belief in intelligent design, or God’s active hand in creating life.

37. Misguided school reform effort. Bush’s “No Child Left Behind” initiative made preparation for standardized tests and resulting test scores the top priority in schools, to the dismay of legions of educators who felt that there was more to learning than taking tests.

38. Appointed flank of right-wing judges. Bush’s two Supreme Court picks—Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel Alito—have reliably sided with pro-business interests and social conservatives. He also elevated U.S. District Court Judge Charles Pickering to an appeals court, despite his known segregationist views.

39. Gutted the DOJ’s voting rights section. Bush’s Justice Department appointees led a multi-year effort to prosecute so-called voter fraud, including firing seven U.S. attorneys who did not pursue overtly political cases because of lack of evidence.

40. Meanwhile average household incomes fell. When Bush took office in 2000, median household incomes were $52,500. In 2008, they were $50,303, a drop of 4.2 percent, making Bush the only recent two-term president to preside over such a drop.

41. And millions more fell below the poverty line. When Bill Clinton left office, 31.6 million Americans were living in poverty. When Bush left office, there were 39.8 million, according to the U.S. Census, an increase of 26.1 percent. The Census said two-thirds of that growth occurred before the economic downturn of 2008.

42. Poverty among children also exploded. The Census also found that 11.6 million children lived below the poverty line when Clinton left office. Under Bush, that number grew by 21 percent to 14.1 million.

43. Millions more lacked access to healthcare. Following these poverty trends, the number of Americans without health insurance was 38.4 million when Clinton left office. When Bush left, that figure had grown by nearly 8 million to 46.3 million, the Census found. Those with employer-provided benefits fell every year he was in office.

44. Bush let black New Orleans drown. Hurricane Katrina exposed Bush’s attitude toward the poor. He didn’t visit the city after the storm destroyed the poorest sections. He praised his Federal Emergency Management Agency director for doing a “heck of a job” as the federal government did little to help thousands in the storm’s aftermath and rebuilding.

45. Yet pandered to religious right. Months before Katrina hit, Bush flew back to the White House to sign a bill to try to stop the comatose Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube from being removed, saying the sanctity of life was at stake.

46. Set record for fewest press conferences. During his first term that was defined by the 9/11 attacks, he had the fewest press conferences of any modern president and had never met with the New York Times editorial board.

47. But took the most vacation time. Reporters analyzing Bush’s record found that he took off 1,020 days in two four-year terms—more than one out of every three days. No other modern president comes close. Bush also set the record for the longest vacation among modern presidents—five weeks, the Washington Post noted.

48. Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld. Not since Richard Nixon’s White House and the era of the Watergate burglary and expansion of the Vietnam War have there been as many power-hungry and arrogant operators holding the levers of power. Cheney ran the White House; Rove the political operation for corporations and the religious right; and Rumsfeld oversaw the wars.

49. He’s escaped accountability for his actions. From Iraq war General Tommy Franks’ declaration that “we don’t do body counts” to numerous efforts to impeach Bush and top administration officials—primarily over launching the war in Iraq—he has never been held to account in any official domestic or international tribunal.

50. He may have stolen the 2004 election as well. The closest Bush came to a public referendum on his presidency was the 2004 election, which came down to the swing state of Ohio. There the GOP’s voter suppression tactics rivaled Florida in 2000 and many unresolved questions remain about whether the former GOP Secretary of State altered the Election Night totals from rural Bible Belt counties.

Any bright spots? Conservatives will lambaste lists like this for finding nothing good about a president like W. So, yes, he created the largest ocean preserve offshore from Hawaii in his second term. And in his final year in office, his initiative to fight AIDS across Africa has been credited with saving many thousands of lives. But on balance, George W. Bush was more than eight years of missed opportunities for America and the world. He was a disaster, leaving much of America and the world in much worse shape than when he took the oath of office in 2001. His reputation should not be resurrected or restored or seen as anything other than what it was.

Editor's note: many experts today blame George W. Bush for creating the power vacuum in Iraq that led to the rise of ISIS. Yes, yes, we know that Saddam Hussein was a "very bad man." But Reagan installed him, and the Bush family loved him until they decided he was inconvenient. What does that make them?

From Ring of Fire: the Dunning-Kruger effect

Papantonio: When Stupid People Don’t Know They’re Stupid
September 23, 2015

In this classic interview, America’s Lawyer, Mike Papantonio, discussed the finding’s from Cornell University, known as the Dunning-Kruger effect, with Chauncey DeVega and how that so perfectly describes Glenn Beck and the Tea Party-types. Watch the discussion below.



Editor's note:
America is exceptional after all...
1 in 10 of the world's poorest people live here.
See the articles linked at the bottom of this interview for more information: http://ringoffireradio.com/2015/09/23/papantonio-when-stupid-people-dont-know-theyre-stupid/

From Business Insider: GWB received many pre-9/11 warnings

Editor's note: poor "Jeb!" is trying to distance his brother, and himself by association, from 9/11. Luckily for him, Americans have notoriously bad memories. How many FOX viewers do you think blame 9/11 on Obama, saying that it happened on his watch?

See the original article here:
http://www.businessinsider.com/new-report-shows-how-many-warnings-about-bin-laden-were-ignored-by-the-bush-white-house-2012-9

Bush Received More Warnings About 9/11 Than We Realized
 
 
Sep. 11, 2012


Wikimedia Commons

The Bush White House ignored even more warnings about September 11 than we thought, according to journalist Kurt Eichenwald, who has a column in the NYT and a new book out today.

We already knew about the presidential brief from Aug. 6, 2001 that was titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” The White House has shown that this declassified document was primarily a history of Al Qaeda, not a warning of imminent attack.

But there were other briefings, some seen by Eichenwald, that did warn of an imminent attack.

On May 1, the CIA said that a terrorist group in the U.S. was planning an attack.

On June 22, it warned that this attack was "imminent."

On June 29, the brief warned of near-term attacks with "dramatic consequences" including major casualties.

On July 1, the briefing said that the terrorist attack had been delayed but "will occur soon."

On July 24, the president was told again that the attack had been delayed but would occur within months.

These and other similar warnings were ignored by the White House. The Neocons in charge insisted that the threat was instead a coordinated diversion meant to distract attention from Saddam Hussein, according to Eichenwald. This opinion frustrated the intelligence community, who saw the theory as totally illogical.

Eichenwald's column is already getting a lot of attention today. No doubt so will his book, 500 Days: Secrets And Lies In The Terror Wars.

From The New Civil Rights Movement: 23 House Republicans selling agendas for cash

Editor's note: Republicans' BENGHAZI-Hillary witch hunt is going down in flames in a way that could give Hillary a pass with voters. A lot of Americans root for the underdog. Republicans may have shot themselves in the foot by exaggerating or fabricating wrongdoing and pandering to their donors instead of holding Hillary accountable for her actual misdeeds and mistakes.

See http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/thomasalberts/23_republicans_ethics_violations 
for the original article.

Selling Agendas For Campaign Cash': Ethics Violations Complaint Filed Against 23 House Republicans

The surprising resignation of House Speaker John Boehner, the withdrawal of his expected replacement, no viable candidate in sight, admissions that the Benghazi Committee was created to take down Hillary Clinton and its chair telling fellow Republicans to "shut up," and now allegations of cash for agendas. Is the House GOP trying to self-destruct?

Republicans' troubles may be just beginning considering that the American Democracy Legal Fund (ADLF) has contacted the Office of Congressional Ethics charging 23 House Republicans over ethics violations. The complaint argues that these Republicans may have used their government resources for political and campaign purposes – a direct violation of federal law.

The complaint alleges the 23 House Republicans agreed, the Des Moines Register reports, "to provide details of their legislative strategy in exchange for campaign cash and "special attention.'"

A letter by the ADLF, released earlier this month, lists the 23 GOP congressional representatives that it argues have engaged in corrupt behavior:

Dear Chairman Skaggs:

This letter constitutes a complaint against United States Representatives Stephen Knight, Barbara Comstock, Rodney Davis, Jeff Denham, Dan Benishek, Tim Walberg, Martha McSally, David Valadao, Mike Coffman, Carlos Curbelo, David Young, Bob Dold, Mike Bost, Bruce Poliquin, Frank Guinta, Cresent Hardy, Lee Zeldin, John Katko, Will Hurd, Ryan Costello, Elise Stefanik, Daniel Donovan and Mike Bishop, (the “Members”) pursuant to Rule 3(A) of the Office of Congressional Ethics Rules for the Conduct of Investigations. It has come to my attention that the Members have violated 31 U.S.C. § 1301 and House rules prohibiting official resources from being used for campaign or political purposes.


“Vulnerable Republican House Members are literally selling their legislative agendas to a political committee for campaign cash,” American Democracy Legal Fund (ADLF) spokeswoman Mary Jennings said in a statement. “Members of Congress are supposed to craft a legislative agenda that benefits their constituents, not auction their vote off to the highest bidder.”

Meanwhile, an emboldened Hillary Clinton will testify before the Benghazi Committee Thursday as Rep. Gowdy tries to reassert control over the situation – even going so far as to try to silence fellow Republicans involved in the matter. On Sunday, he said on CBS' "Face the Nation" that he wanted other Republicans to "shut up" regarding Hillary Clinton and the Benghazi Committee.

"I have told my own Republican colleagues and friends, shut up talking about things that you don't know anything about. And unless you're on the committee, you have no idea what we've done, why we've done it and what new facts we have found," Gowdy said.

Clinton has already taken advantage of recent remarks made by House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy and New York State Representative Richard Hanna that both insinuated that the Benghazi Committee has specifically targeted Clinton in order to hurt her presidential campaign. The remarks have called the committee's purpose and Gowdy's reputation into question.

Clinton herself has used the situation to her advantage in the first Democratic debate last week and in a recent interview with CNN, saying, "I think it's pretty clear that whatever they might have thought they were doing, they ended up becoming a partisan arm of the Republican National Committee with an overwhelming focus on trying to as, they admitted, down my poll numbers."

If an investigation into the 23 Republicans targeted by the ADLF turns up evidence of corruption then the entire House GOP could be thrown into greater turmoil. This, combined with the controversy that Gowdy finds himself in could spell trouble for House Republicans as McCarthy's admission has already cost him the House Speakership. This does not bode well for the GOP heading into the 2016 election approaches.

From DKos: video from a responsible gun owner

Tue Oct 06, 2015 at 10:50 AM PDT

Mark Carman making a point about gun control in video addressed to all responsible gun owners
 
To All Responsible Gun Owners
Mark Carman is a self-described "gun enthusiast." In light of recent events in Oregon, Mr. Carman decided to record a video discussing the problems with our virtually non-existent gun laws and posted the video to his Facebook page and it has taken off. He opens with a handgun held in front of his face and asks:
Do you know what this is?
I have to admit, I know it's a gun, but that is about all.
That's a semi-automatic handgun. And I own it. And I like it. You could own one too. In fact you could own this very one. All you'd have to do is come over to my house with the right money and I could just hand it to you standing on my front porch. I don't have to do a background check. You don't have to fill out a form. We don't have to sign any papers. All's you got to do is decide you want it, bring the money, and legally I can sell it to you.
He's talking about the legality of sales and record keeping, or lack thereof.
But take a look at it. Is that firearm safe? Would you know how to make it safe? How many people do you think would know how?
He proceeds to make the gun safe by taking out the clip and opening the gun to make sure there is nothing in the chamber. He returns the gun to the camera.
How much different does it look from what it looked like a minute ago? Folks we got a problem. I love firearms, I do. I'm trained in their use. I'm skilled in their use. I'm trained in safety. And I'm a responsible firearms owner. But this message is to responsible firearm owners.
Watch the whole piece below. Pass it on.

From DKos: this is why privatizing schools is BAD

Tue Oct 06, 2015 at 02:02 PM PDT
Empty classroom

Paramount Charter school parents and teachers are outraged at the mismanagement of the school
How would you feel as a parent if a little more than one month into the school year the principal of your new charter school fired the bulk of teachers and forced others to take huge pay cuts, lose benefits to remain? That's what happened at Paramount Charter School in Broward county where stunned parents discovered their kids were sitting around and drawing all day because there were no teachers left:
"I just picked them up one day and all their teachers were gone," Brooks said, still incredulous. "I'm looking around like, 'OK, where's your teacher? Where's your teacher?' Nobody had a teacher."
And where were the teachers? Looking for new jobs. As many as 20 were fired and many more resigned:
Three now-former Paramount teachers who, fearing retaliation, spoke on condition of anonymity said about 20 teachers lost their jobs, many in a mass firing, the others resigning. "One by one, she would call everybody in and they were getting fired, fired, fired," one teacher said.
Those who weren't fired were given a stark choice:
One said that after the mass firings, she was called into the room and told that the school wanted to keep her, but that if she wanted to keep her job she would have to take a cut in pay from $36,000 to $30,000 and that promised benefits, including health care, would be cut.
The teachers who spoke with Local 10 News in Miami said the school was a mess from the minute it opened the doors—teachers didn't have lists of their students names, no teaching supplies, no student schedules. Teachers and parents say they feel betrayed and worse yet—their kids are paying the price. See more on the unbelievable mismanagement of this Florida Charter school at Local10News.com. The Paramount Charter School website proudly notes how charter schools are free of those pesky regulations that drag down traditional public schools:
Charter schools are public schools that operate under a performance contract, or a “charter” which frees them from many regulations created for traditional public schools while holding them accountable for academic and financial results. The charter contract between the charter school governing board and the sponsor details the school’s mission, program, goals, students served, methods of assessment and ways to measure success. The length of time for which charters are granted varies but most are granted for five years.  
The Florida Legislature, in authorizing the creation of public charter schools, established the following guiding principles: high standards of student achievement while increasing parental choice; the alignment of responsibility with accountability; and ensuring parents receive information on reading levels and learning gains of their children. Charter schools are intended to improve student learning; increase learning opportunities with special emphasis on low performing students and reading; and measure learning outcomes. Charter schools may create innovative measurement tools; provide competition to stimulate improvement in traditional schools; expand capacity of the public school system; and mitigate the educational impact created by the development of new residential units.

From DKos: one man's journey from Tea Party to Democrat

Tue Oct 06, 2015 at 12:35 PM PDT

By Ilya Galak

There are many important issues to debate. I believe that without manufacturing our middle class is doomed. Restoring manufacturing became my passion. That is why I changed my party affiliation and became a democrat.

An immigrant to this country from the former Soviet Union, I am an electrical engineer by profession and, with my wife, the owner a small business that manufactures women’s fashions.

Before 2009 I wasn’t political. But in 2009, during the brunt of the financial meltdown, and with the election of President Obama and the Democrats in congress, one heard the words “labor movement” and “forward” often...
“Not only the wealth, but the independence and security of a country, appear to be materially connected with the prosperity of manufacturers. Every nation, with a view to those great objects, ought to endeavor to possess within itself all the essentials of national supply. These comprise the means of subsistence, habitation, clothing, and defense” – Alexander Hamilton
There are many important issues to debate. I believe that without manufacturing our middle class is doomed. Restoring manufacturing became my passion. That is why I changed my party affiliation and became a democrat.

An immigrant to this country from the former Soviet Union, I am an electrical engineer by profession and, with my wife, the owner a small business that manufactures women’s fashions. Before 2009 I wasn’t political. But in 2009, during the brunt of the financial meltdown, and with the election of President Obama and the Democrats in congress, one heard the words “labor movement” and “forward” often. In the USSR, those words didn’t have the same connation they have in America; they were not empowering but were associated with the aims of the hated Soviet dictatorship. That drove me to political activism, and not always in a constructive way.

Living a place filled with conservatives, including many other immigrants from the former USSR who are attracted to the Republican Party because of its strong stand against the Soviets in the 1980s, my American political journey began as a Tea Party Republican. I was particularly moved by the arguments against government spending and the national debt.

Eventually, after observing, reading, listening to people of all political persuasions, my views changed. I realized our biggest problem is the relentless war on the middle class and the outsourcing of good-paying manufacturing jobs.

There are many important issues to debate. But I became convinced that without manufacturing and the good-paying jobs they provide, our middle class, already endangered, is doomed to extinction. Restoring manufacturing became my passion.

Yet, as hard as I tried, I couldn’t find any support for this position within Republican Party. Republicans were obsessed with “taking the country back”. (Taking it back from whom I’ve never been able to determine)

 I found the people who were willing to fight with me for American jobs only in Democratic Party, two of whom (John Kubinski and Robert Holst) had started the Middle Class Action Project (MCAP) which is focused on the economic issues facing everyday Americans and finding ways to save a broad and prosperous middle class.

For years, the accepted truth has been that American-made products cannot compete with products made in China or other low-wage countries. The “accepted truth’ is a myth. The true cost of any product or material is more than just the cost of manufacture—it also includes the cost of transportation as well as added costs of middlemen, multiple levels of government agencies along the way.  Most importantly, also comes with the added cost of the hollowing out the American middle class, whose good-paying jobs have been sent abroad. Those Americans no longer have the purchasing power to power the economy ahead and are often forced to live off debt in order to maintain the middle class lifestyle their parents took for granted.

Democrats were and are the people who accompanied me as we went from politician to politician, from club to club, and from forum to forum, with a plan to cut the real waste (read – save taxpayer’s money) and create good-paying jobs here at home, specifically in NYS.

I am still with disagreement with Democratic Party on many issues, and I realize full that they also had a hand in what’s happened over the last 35 years.  But the Democrats seem to have learned from their mistakes while the Republicans have not.

I can no longer be a member of a “trickle-down” Republican Party which has done so much damage to the American middle class and has evidently learned nothing along the way.

AlterNet: what "bro jobs" are, and why they are popular

SEX & RELATIONSHIPS:
The Bro Job: Why 'Straight' Men Secretly Have Sex With Each Other
Sexuality is one of the few areas where women are afforded more leniency than men.
 
October 10, 2015


Photo Credit: Shutterstock

At this point, lesbian sex (the porny kind) is practically considered vanilla. But when it comes to two self-identified straight guys getting together, we tend to stiffen up, and not in the fun way.

The term “bro job” generally refers to sex acts taking place between heterosexual men. The phenomenon was recently explored by Dr. Jane Ward in her book Not Gay: Sex Between Straight White Men, who suggests it's a lot more common than most people may think.

Sex therapist Susan Block agrees. “I hear about it going on in Saudi Arabia, in Latin America – I talk to guys from all over the world who are doing this. In all different cultures.”

Block explained to AlterNet that sexual activity between self-identifying straight males is one of the most common topics introduced during her therapy sessions with men.

“We’ve shut down on the phenomenon of male sexuality. Now, we’re starting to ease up on that natural fluidity of men. But it's always been there,” she says. “Sometimes you hide it because you don’t want to suffer from society’s punishments.”

Of course, identity politics is a messy game. And while arousal makes up just one piece of the very complex puzzle that is sexual orientation, it is a major player. We’re quick to assign the “bisexual” label to those for which sexual arousal is not dictated by gender. But it’s not always a welcome title. “I am often forced to call myself ‘bi,’ but I rarely find labels appropriate,” says model Paul LaBlanc (a pseudonym).

As Block explains, sexual orientation goes a lot further than the sexual activities we engage in. “I think to a great degree when people think about their own sexual orientation, they’re thinking about their hopes and dreams for themselves in terms of love and romance. Not just sex.”

In her book, Ward insists that sex acts between men are not symptoms of a suppressed gay identity, but rather an example of the fluid nature of human sexuality. Still, some ask, why men?

Ward writes, “By understanding their same-sex sexual practice as meaningless, accidental, or even necessary, straight white men can perform homosexual contact in heterosexual ways.”

“Meaningless.” A hard word to sneak by a therapist. But this notion of meaninglessness may help explain what makes sex between men appealing. “Women are full of meaning,” says Block “One of the things that men like about other men is how meaningless it is. It’s just for fun.”

That’s not to say that men don’t crave intimacy – they do, in its place. But Block suggests that for men looking for free, no-strings-attached sex, a male partner may be their best bet. Removing sex from its prescribed context is often discouraged in heterosexual relationships. If you’re looking to have sex for sport, doing it with another man might make some sense.

Professional dominatrix Sandra LaMorgese once told AlterNet, “I’m dominant in every aspect of life but I'm not going to have a submissive partner. I need someone to dominate me. That way I get the balance too.” LaMorgese refers to herself as an “alpha submissive.” It's an experience that many men crave as well. And some will step outside the bounds of gender to achieve it.

LaBlanc explains, “I tend strongly towards being dominant with women and submissive with men. Not totally in either direction, it's not that simple... But it is clear that I take on different roles with different genders.”

“To me, no man has the soft indescribable beauty of a woman. And no woman can ‘take me’ the way a man can.”

There are other reasons self-identified straight men might have sex with each other. Block explained that some men are looking for the BDSM element, which can involve humiliation by means of another penis, a larger penis. There’s the curiosity bit, the desire to be with someone ‘who looks like me.’ There's also mutual masturbation. And then there’s the simple fact that males manifest their sexual excitement in much more obvious ways than women, and that’s something a lot of guys find arousing, even relieving. Of course, condensing the scope of sexual desire isn’t something that can be done in a thousand words or so.

The recent wave of interest in this not-so-recent phenomenon says something about our current sexual climate. We can now admit that "bro jobs" are happening, and happening often. Though where they take place is often indicative of how people expect others to digest the news of these rendezvous. “I hear a lot about secrets,” says Block.

The fact that society is starting to have more open discussions about sex is good. The fact that society only wants to discuss certain kinds of sex leaves something to be desired. But if we take a step back we might find that what traditionalists deem “unnatural” sexual behavior (i.e. anything outside the confines of heterosexual marriage) can be fairly intrinsic. However those participating in them want to self-identify is up to them.

Block suggests we take a look at our closest "kissing cousins," the Bonobo. In her book, The Bonobo Way: The Evolution of Peace Through Pleasure, Block explains that the apes often engage in what’s known as “penis fencing,” whereby two males will rub their erect penises against each other’s.

She told us, “They stop each other from killing each other by rub rub rubbing, until they come come come. And then have a banana together or something," adding, "I think there’s a very positive and certainly very natural aspect to this.”

---
Carrie Weisman is an AlterNet staff writer who focuses on sex, relationships and culture. Got tips, ideas or a first-person story? Email her.

AlterNet: did neurosurgeon Ben Carson remove his own brain?

ELECTION 2016:
America's Newest Political Curse: Ben Carson, the Neurosurgeon Who Can't Think
Along with Donald Trump, Dr. Ben Carson is way ahead of the pack for the Republican presidential nomination.
 
October 9, 2015




NATIONAL HARBOR, MD - MARCH 8, 2014: Neurosurgeon and author Ben Carson speaks at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC).
Photo Credit: Christopher Halloran / Shutterstock.com

What does it say about higher education, that you can graduate from Yale and still believe that the devil made Darwin do it? What does it say about medicine, that you can both be a gifted neurosurgeon and also declare, “I never saw a body with bullet holes that was more devastating than taking the right to arm ourselves away”?

Along with Donald Trump, Dr. Ben Carson is way ahead of the pack for the Republican presidential nomination. When Trump, an alumnus of the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, says that climate change is a hoax, I can believe it’s a cynical lie pandering to the Republican base, rather than an index of his ignorance. But when Carson, a retired Johns Hopkins neurosurgeon, denies that climate change is man-made, or calls the Big Bang a fairy tale, or blames gun control for the extent of the Holocaust, I think he truly believes it.

It’s conceivable that the exceptional hand-eye coordination and 3D vision that enabled Carson to separate conjoined twins is a compartmentalized gift, wholly independent of his intellectual acuity. But he could not have risen to the top of his profession without learning the Second Law of Thermodynamics (pre-meds have to take physics), without knowing that life on earth began more than 6,000 years ago (pre-meds have to take biology), without understanding the scientific method (an author of more than 120 articles in peer-reviewed journals can’t make up his own rules of evidence). Yet what does it mean to learn such things, if they don’t stop you from spouting scientific nonsense?

This hasn’t hindered his campaign. Participants in focus groups of Republican caucus and primary voters in Iowa and New Hampshire, conducted in recent days by Bloomberg’s Mark Halperin and John Heilemann, used these words to describe Carson: “deep,” “thoughtful,” “intelligent,” “smart,” “brilliant,” a “top mind.” I get this. According to a recent Public Policy Polling report, 46 percent of Carson supporters (and 61 percent of Trump supporters) think President Obama was not born in the U.S., and 61 percent of Carson supporters (and 66 percent of Trump supporters) think the president is a Muslim. Carson’s being called brilliant by that base ain’t baffling.

What I don’t get is how his rigorous scientific education and professional training gave Carson’s blind spots a pass. Was it, in George W. Bush’s memorable phrase, “the soft tyranny of low expectations”? Or was it the tyranny of fundamentalism over facts?

In the humanities, the equivalent conundrum is the failure of a deep appreciation for masterworks of art, literature and music to instill virtue. I first came across this disturbing indictment when I was an undergraduate at the chief rival of Carson’s alma mater. My field of concentration (Harvard’s pretentious term for “major”) was molecular biology, and I would have quickly flamed out if I’d maintained that science was consistent with creationism, or any of the other canards that survived Carson’s education. But I was also in love with literature, and ended up with a doctorate in it. On the way there, what troubled me about my studies was an essay called “To Civilize Our Gentlemen” by George Steiner. Its thesis ran so counter to the bedrock of an elite education – the belief that the humanities humanize – that I went to England for two years to study at Cambridge with Steiner, as passionate an embodiment of academic high culture as could be, in order to reconcile my love for humanistic learning with its apparent inability to prevent barbarism.

My copy of the essay, and the book it appeared in, “Language and Silence,” is full of a 20-year-old’s underlining and marginalia (“right on!”). These are some of the passages that jangled me:

“We know now that a man can read Goethe or Rilke in the evening, that he can play Bach and Schubert, and go to the day’s work at Auschwitz in the morning. To say that he has read them without understanding or that is ear is gross, is cant…. The simple yet appalling fact is that we have very little solid evidence that literary studies do very much to enrich or stabilize moral perception, that they humanize…. Indeed, I would go further: it is at least conceivable that the focusing of consciousness on a written text… diminishes the sharpness and readiness of our actual moral response…. The capacity for [moral response]… is not limitless; on the contrary, it can be rapidly absorbed by fictions, and thus the cry in the poem may come to sound louder, more urgent, more real than the cry in the street outside. The death in the novel may move us more potently than the death in the next room…. [S]urely there is something terrible in our doubt whether the study and delight a man finds in Shakespeare makes him any less capable of organizing a concentration camp.”

When Wolf Blitzer asked Carson if he wanted to amend or take back his comparison of Obama’s America to Nazi Germany, he replied, “Absolutely not.” Am I comparing Carson to Nazis? Absolutely not. I’m comparing the compatibility of a scientific education and intellectual ignorance with the compatibility of a humanistic education and moral ignorance.

The simple yet appalling fact is that we have at least some solid evidence that a top scientific education and a distinguished career in medicine does not make a man any less capable of believing untruths to be true and truths to be false.

I don’t know how I’d react if a shooter opened fire in my classroom. Maybe I’d risk my safety to protect others. Maybe I’d be too petrified do anything. But I do know the feeling that would devastate me if someone I loved became “a body with bullet holes”; it would not be the feeling that the Second Amendment is in jeopardy. It is at least conceivable that the clinical detachment required by a doctor to deal with the deaths in this room makes the deaths in the next room less urgent, less real.

I know plenty of physicians of whom that is not true. But when Ben Carson blames a mass murderer’s victims for failing to foil him, I know of at least one man of science whose capacity for moral response has been absorbed by fictions.

---
Marty Kaplan is the Norman Lear professor of entertainment, media and society at the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism. Reach him at martyk@jewishjournal.com.

From DKos: FOX a clear and present danger


First, a little background is necessary. I come from a fairly typical, conservative, middle-class Protestant family. (How they got stuck with a progressive, pagan, recovering addict daughter is a mystery to us all!). My dad worked for the government for about 30 years, for everybody’s favorite big brother, the NSA. He took early retirement and has a pension for the rest of his life. My mom does real estate – still – and never worked a full-time job after the kids were born. Typical white, privileged family who don’t know how incredibly lucky they are.

My parents, nevertheless, were decent people. Typical conservatives: unintentionally selfish and unaware of their privilege, but not bad people at heart. They were casually racist in what I considered a passive, mostly harmless way – by which I mean they considered themselves superior to people of color, but in spite of that underlying belief, they treated others kindly. They still tended to meet each individual as an individual, regardless of the person’s race.

(As an aside, I don’t actually believe any racism is harmless. I only mean I considered the attitude just a vestige of their upbringing in the pre-civil rights era and it didn’t seem to prevent them from treating everyone fairly. They were never hateful to persons of color, they were just sort of semi-consciously "superior.”)

Sorry for the long back-story, but its important for context about what upset me so much.
The details of the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Night below the orange Fox-scrambled brain:
Last week, I went over to my parent's house for dinner. It was the day of the Oregon school shooting. Fox News was on – Fox News is ALWAYS on.

I generally NEVER discuss politics with them anymore, not since the 2008 election, if I can possibly avoid it, because they have become more and more strident and less and less anchored in reality. But the tragedy of the Oregon shooting seemed uncontroversial to me so I made the mistake of saying,

“It's so sad. Another school shooting. I read today it's the 45th mass shooting this year.”

Obama was on-screen giving his response at the time. And my father starts complaining that “he’s getting ready to say something bad, something about gun control.” And I'm surprised, I kind of sarcastically reply, “Yeah, and that's a CRAZY idea.” (Not terribly diplomatic of me).

My dad starts screaming, actually screaming, that “gun control won’t work because the criminals won’t follow the rules and will steal guns or buy them illegally.” That really irritated me after the 45th senseless shooting, so I replied, “I’ll bet you money this shooter legally acquired the gun he used.”

Well, that REALLY set him off. He starts screaming at the TV that he “hates that fucking n***r, he can't stand that man, he'd like to take a gun and shoot him in the head RIGHT NOW.”

Our president. Spoken by a lifelong civil servant.

I was speechless. Angry, disturbed, and very disappointed.

First of all, he’s not a gun person. He actually does own a gun - an antique rifle from my granddad. I don’t think that he’s ever shot a gun recreationally in his life. Secondly, my dad was never a yeller. Lastly, he worked for our government for 30 years, so expressing the desire to murder our democratically elected president, even hypothetically, seemed beyond the pale.

My mother chimes in that HER problem with him is that he’s a Muslim. Beyond the obvious fact that if you say you’re not a Muslim, you’re not (and how else could you prove it anyway?), it wouldn't matter if he was. I said to her “You have problem with him because you think he’s a bad president. It wouldn’t matter if he was Muslim if he was a good president, right?” – vainly trying to get her to base her objections on some kind of factual basis, however misguided.

She agrees, “Well, he’s not a good president!” I think we're getting somewhere here. I say, “OK!

Then its NOT because he’s Muslim, its because you think he’s a bad president, right??”

“No, it’s because he’s a Muslim.” Well, alrighty then. Case closed.

The point of this long-winded rant is that THESE ARE NOT MY PARENTS. These are pod people.

Hate-filled, fearful, bigoted, willfully ignorant pod people.

Their level of discourse, their understanding of the issues of the day has declined steadily over the years as they have watched Fox's daily propaganda. And their belief that they are the only ones who know the "real truth" has increased proportionately. Obviously, this has been exacerbated by a more virulent racism than I was aware of, but the tone of Fox “News” encourages and blesses latent racism and acts as a hothouse for it grow larger.

These are people who I used to have spirited but intelligent political discussions with. That’s gone now. Those people are gone.

In all other ways, they remain competent, functioning adults. My mom still works, they both are very computer-literate and active. Yet they believed that Dearborn, Michigan was under Sharia law. They believe that Planned Parenthood is selling baby parts for profit. They believe our President is a Kenyan Muslim Socialist.

Fox news IS propaganda, very dangerous propaganda.The harm it has done and continues to do cannot be overstated.

Thanks for listening. I just had to get this off my chest.

Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 9:54 PM PT: Holy cats! Listed on the REC sidebar? Thanks Kossacks! This community has kept me sane over the years. Thanks for the support and understanding!
 
5:54 AM PT: Everyone, I can't thank you enough for all the great discussion, ideas and support. It really has made this a lot easier to bear, at least I'm not alone. That's something!

10:25 AM PT: Really, top of the recommended email?? I'm speechless again, for a good reason.

10:26 AM PT: Plus, this made me laugh: "Haikukitty, did you know our top story in today’s e-mail was written by a first-time diarist? It’s a powerful, first-person blog post about the author's right-wing parents. Read it, and then log back into your Daily Kos account and write your personal story."

Originally posted to Haikukitty on Thu Oct 08, 2015 at 06:43 PM PDT.

Also republished by New Diarists.  

From DKos: oops--Ben Carson spilled the beans

Thu Oct 01, 2015 at 07:31 AM PDT
 
Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson speaks to the press after speaking at the Commonwealth Club at the InterContinental Mark Hopkins Hotel in San Francisco, California, September 8, 2015. REUTERS/Stephen Lam - RTX1RPSM
attribution: REUTERS
Many a true word is spoken in jest
On Wednesday, Sept. 30, Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson reflected on his youth. Remembering when he and his friends would be chased by police for mischief, he said, "That was back in the day before they would shoot you."
 
There was laughter from the almost exclusively white crowd. Carson, perhaps sensing that he went too far, then immediately backed off of the statement and said, "I'm just kidding, you know they wouldn't do that."
 
Except that is exactly what police do nowadays. They shoot and kill young black men and women in instances where lethal force was absolutely preposterous.
 
Rekia Boyd, Tamir Rice, Kendrec McDade, and hundreds of other completely unarmed African Americans have been shot and killed by American police in the years since they playfully chased Ben Carson and his buddies.
 
In fact, you should hear Ben Carson tell his story below. It only takes about a minute, and pretty much illustrates exactly how things have changed—including Carson's unwillingness to let the whole truth be told without reservation.
Editor's note: the video the author mentions seems to have been taken down. I found it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oixsh5ctQvg

Hear Ye, Hear Ye!

Check out the Progressive Candidate Scorecard!

How does your favorite Democratic candidate stack up?

http://candidatescorecard.net/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=yourcampaign#!/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=yourcampaign?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=yourcampaign

Brought to you by Campaign for America's Future

A Real Pro-Life Daily Kos Reader Answers the Phone

Sat Aug 22, 2015 at 12:35 PM PDT

The phone rang while I was doing a mindless task in the middle of a field, a few minutes ago.

And the right words flowed.

She asked, "Are you pro-life?"

I said, "Yes.

"I believe in prenatal care for all women.

"I believe in making sure everyone has adequate nutrition.

"I believe everyone should receive medical care.

"No one should die because of an untreated chronic disease, inadequate pain control, or lack of prevention.

"I believe everyone should have safe shelter and a place to call 'home.'"

She asked, "What about a fetus--are you pro-life?"

I said, "Yes.

"I believe any mother who wants to complete her pregnancy should have the quality medical care to make that happen without barriers.

"I believe that a woman can make her own life decisions.

"I do not believe in the death penalty."

She hung up.

I am tired of saying I am pro-choice.

Because really I am not.

I am Pro Life.

I am for living the best quality life one can.

From DKos: Hillary adores kids

Sun Oct 18, 2015 at 01:49 PM PDT
by Scan

This photo, taken last month in the backyard of an Iowa State Senator, was posted to the official Hillary for Iowa Facebook page on Saturday.

A voter describes the scene:
"It was Hillary’s interaction with my kids. We were in Liz Mathis' backyard, and we went up to greet her. I couldn’t believe how my seven-year-old was acting with her—swinging her arm, hanging on her. He doesn’t do that with strangers. I was thinking, 'What are you thinking?! It’s Hillary Clinton!'
So as we’re standing there taking our picture with her, I said: 'We believe in you, and we’re here with you a hundred percent. What you’ve done for healthcare, women’s issues, children’s issues’—and she turned to me, and she put her hands on my kids, Sydnei and Fayde, and she said ‘I’m doing it for them.' And I started crying. 
As we're walking away, I turn around—and there’s Hillary and Fayde, laughing. She said 'are you ticklish?’ and he said 'only in my armpits.' Then they were tickling. And he goes, with his tongue out:
'Boo-yah.'
I couldn’t believe it."
–Linda, Marion
This photo and story may surprise you, but it really shouldn't.
 
When looking at the entirety of Hillary Clinton's life and accomplishments, the most obvious common thread is her passionate advocacy for children and families.

From volunteering to babysit for immigrant families as part of her church youth group, to her first job out of law school working for the Children's Defense Fund, to fighting for and achieving higher educational standards as First Lady of Arkansas, to being a driving force in the creation of the Children's Health Insurance Program in 1997 (which now covers over eight million kids), to her numerous initiatives as Secretary of State to improve girls education worldwide...the record on this could not be more clear or inspiring.

So when Hillary says that she's in this race for the children, you better believe that it's not just a political soundbite. They have been the obvious focus of her life's work for many decades and she's not stopping anytime soon.
 
The gleeful childlike laugh in this photo also makes something else clear: She loves them.
 
And it looks like the feeling is mutual.

From DKos: Bernie on Socialism

Sun Oct 18, 2015 at 11:26 PM PDT
by cdub24

Wow... amazing response. At an Iowa town hall on Sunday he was asked how he'd respond to smears about him being a Socialist.

He said that he's going to give a speech on what that is. But then proceeds to NAIL it in an AMAZING response. Check it out:



Here's a link that jumps to the right time too. 20:30

Basically - Democratic Socialism is democracy.

More voter turn out... government for the people not for a few... and then pointed out that programs that people LOVE like social security is socialism... medicare is socialism... YES YES YES!

Awesome response.

GO BERNIE!