Anyway for our American neighbors don't take anything for granted Get Up and Get Out the Vote for Obama . Don't let the Republicans Steal this election because some people didn't bother to vote because they thought Barack Obama was assured a win on Tuesday. Remember It's Not Over Til It's Over.
Michael Moore: 'Don't Dance on the Five Yard Line' - Keith Olbermann
"Nobody should take any of this for granted. ... Instead of taking about it, everybody should be working tomorrow, the next day, the next day ..." -- Michael Moore on Countdown with Keith Olbermann, Friday, October 31st, 2008
Here's another truthful but nasty bit about McCain's Smear Campaign & Republicans Using Racism & Fear Mongering .to try to win since their policies are either non-existent or are just more of the same. These Republicans are even at this late date still focusing on the fact that Obama is Black and the only reason Black People and I guess liberals are voting for him is because he is black and not because McCain ran a lousy campaign and that Obama ran a stellar campaign.
The Young Turks -Republican Memo Warns- Watch Out! Blacks Are Voting !
The election in the United States takes place this coming Tuesday but Bush is still in charge until January and he intends to use this time period to pass legislation based upon ultra conservative ideology of deregulation. Meanwhile his administration is expanding on the the Bush Doctrine to extend the war on terror beyond Iraq and Afghanistan to encompass other countries including Syria, Pakistan and Iran etc.
Bush's Push For Deregulation - CBS, Oct. 31, 2008
Bush's Last Push For Deregulation
Rachel Maddow
Bush pushing through a number of regulationsA Last Push To Deregulate Friday 31 October 2008 by: R. Jeffrey Smith, The Washington Post
White House to ease many rules.
The White House is working to enact a wide array of federal regulations, many of which would weaken government rules aimed at protecting consumers and the environment, before President Bush leaves office in January.
The new rules would be among the most controversial deregulatory steps of the Bush era and could be difficult for his successor to undo. Some would ease or lift constraints on private industry, including power plants, mines and farms.
Those and other regulations would help clear obstacles to some commercial ocean-fishing activities, ease controls on emissions of pollutants that contribute to global warming, relax drinking-water standards and lift a key restriction on mountaintop coal mining.
Once such rules take effect, they typically can be undone only through a laborious new regulatory proceeding, including lengthy periods of public comment, drafting and mandated reanalysis.
"They want these rules to continue to have an impact long after they leave office," said Matthew Madia, a regulatory expert at OMB Watch, a nonprofit group critical of what it calls the Bush administration's penchant for deregulating in areas where industry wants more freedom. He called the coming deluge "a last-minute assault on the public . . . happening on multiple fronts."
White House spokesman Tony Fratto said: "This administration has taken extraordinary measures to avoid rushing regulations at the end of the term. And yes, we'd prefer our regulations stand for a very long time -- they're well reasoned and are being considered with the best interests of the nation in mind."
As many as 90 new regulations are in the works, and at least nine of them are considered "economically significant" because they impose costs or promote societal benefits that exceed $100 million annually. They include new rules governing employees who take family- and medical-related leaves, new standards for preventing or containing oil spills, and a simplified process for settling real estate transactions.
----
Bailout characterized by Naomi Klein as an ongoing pillage of America's wealth by the Rich compares it to the Patriot Act. Great deal for the banks but not for average American citizens.
Naomi Klein on the Bailout - An "Economic Patriot Act"
Friday, October 31, 2008 by The Nation
The Bailout: Bush's Final Pillage
by Naomi Klein
...What, then, is the real purpose of the bailout? I fear it is something much more ambitious than a one-off gift to big business--that this bailout has been designed to keep pillaging the Treasury for years to come. Remember, the main concern among big market players, particularly banks, is not the lack of credit but their battered share prices. Investors have lost confidence in the banks' honesty, and with good reason. This is where Treasury's equity pays off big time.
...By purchasing stakes in these institutions, Treasury is sending a signal to the market that they are a safe bet. Why safe? Because the government won't be able to afford to let them fail. If these companies get themselves into trouble, investors can assume that the government will keep finding more cash, since allowing them to go down would mean losing its initial equity investments (just look at AIG). That tethering of the public interest to private companies is the real purpose of the bailout plan: Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson is handing all the companies that are admitted to the program--a number potentially in the thousands--an implicit Treasury Department guarantee. To skittish investors looking for safe places to park their money, these equity deals will be even more comforting than a Triple-A rating from Moody's
...Treasury is indeed having trouble dispersing the bailout funds. It has requested about $350 billion of the $700 billion, but most of this hasn't yet made it out the door. Meanwhile, every day it becomes clearer that the bailout was sold on false pretenses. It was never about getting loans flowing. It was always about turning the state into a giant insurance agency for Wall Street--a safety net for the people who need it least, subsidized by the people who need it most.
This grotesque duplicity is an opportunity. Whoever wins the election on November 4 will have enormous moral authority. It can be used to call for a freeze on the dispersal of bailout funds--not after the inauguration, but right away. All deals should be renegotiated immediately, this time with the public getting the guarantees.
It is risky, of course, to interrupt the bailout. The market won't like it. Nothing could be riskier, however, than allowing the Bush gang their parting gift to big business--the gift that will keep on taking.
And John McCain's policies if he is elected would be a continuation of this redistribution of wealth from the bottom upwards. The wealthy would maintain and even increase their wealth on the backs of the average American tax-payer.
Tuesday 28 October 2008 by: Thom Shanker, The New York Times
McCain Is Robin Hood in Reverse
By Joshua Holland, AlterNet. Posted October 31, 2008.
McCain wants to be the great "re-distributor": He takes money from poor people and sends it upward.
John McCain is a firm believer in a philosophy of governance that's been responsible for the most dramatic redistribution of American income and wealth since the New Deal. For the past 30 years, the conservative movement has focused relentlessly on redistributing income, but always upward, toward the top. It's a great irony of the 2008 campaign: Nobody is more dedicated to redistributing wealth than adherents of the ideology that McCain represents.
The numbers don't lie. In 1972, the top 1 percent of Americans took in 8.7 percent of all earned income, but that figure skyrocketed to more than 20 percent in 2006. Recently, the Wall Street Journal reported the results of all this conservative redistribution: "The richest 1 percent of Americans in 2006 garnered the highest share of the nation's adjusted gross income for two decades, and possibly the highest since 1929."
Meanwhile, wages have stagnated for most of us. Economists Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez sliced and diced the American economy, going back to the beginning of the last century, and they found that between 1973 and 2005, despite several periods of healthy growth, the average income of all but the top 10 percent of the economic ladder -- 9 out of 10 American families -- actually fell by 3 percent.
------------
Meanwhile the Bush administration is expanding the the Bush doctrine so they will have the right to pre-emptively stike against countries they claim are helping in one way or another terrorist organizations through supplying arms or personnel or financial help of any kind. So if the Red Cross or Red Crescent give food or give medical assisance to these terrorists is the Red Cross or Red Crescent to be deemed as enemies of the United States or its allies or its colonies. So if someone gives money to an organization which they believe to be purely humanitarian in its mission but in fact has personnel who are aiding some " terrorist Organization" is that person to be treated as an enemy of the United States. Are those who try to bring food and medical assistance to the Palestinians in the occupied territories for instance guilty of being enemies of Israel and therefore by extension enemies of the United States. This doctrine is a dangerous slippery-slope which could be applied to ostenably humanitarian organizations or individuals involved in humanitarian aid. But the US has already applied such draconian measures in Iraq when they have refused to allow the Red Cross or Red Cresent into populated areas to take care of wounded civilians as they did in the battle against Fallujah and other populated area in Iraq and they have fired upon ambulances and medics with impunity.This is not surprising because the Bush administration including Condoleeza Rice have argued that International Laws including the Geneva Conventions do not apply to the United States and its " War On Terror " . The economic and political interests of America they tell us over-ride all such " quaint" and "old Fashioned " laws and agreements.
Expanding The Bush Doctrine: Rachel Maddow
and so it goes,
GORD.
No comments:
Post a Comment