EPA Backs Off On Claim That Fracked Water Has No Adverse Effects

It is deeply disturbing to discover the content and quantity of toxic chemicals, like benzene and lead, being injected into the ground without the knowledge of communities whose health would be affected."
 - Sen. Diana DeGette,  commenting on 2010 fracking report

After six years and $29 million spent, the EPA - facing a Trumpist takeover- has admitted there is no way to say for sure that fracking poses no risk to drinking water. A new report issued last Thursday said that fracked water is a risk to drinking water "in some circumstances"  but a lack of definitive information precluded a definitive statement on how severe the risk is.

The exact wording of the report is:

"Because of the significant data gaps and uncertainties in the available data, it was not possible to fully characterize the severity of impacts nor was it possible to calculate or estimate the national frequency of impacts on drinking water resources".

This is at least an improvement on its earlier position in a misguided draft from last year, saying that "fracking had not caused widespread, systemic harm to drinking water in the United States".

But this was always in contradiction to an inquiry by the House Energy and Commerce Committee in 2010-11, which report found that fourteen of the nation's most active hydraulic fracturing companies used 866 million gallons of chemical fracturing products, and more than 650 of the chemicals named in the report were known carcinogens, supposedly regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act. (Which was rendered toothless for fracking by lobbyists) Among the most toxic of the chemicals used (11.4 million gallons in all) were: benzene, toluene, xylene and ethylbenzene.

Among the toxic fracking chemicals and their adverse effects uncovered by the inquiry:

-Benzene: a powerful bone-marrow poison (aplastic anemia) associated with leukemia, breast and uterine cancer

- Styrene, which may cause eye and mucous membrane irritation, neurotoxic effects in the central and peripheral nervous systems.

- Toluene, which may cause muscular incoordination, tremors, hearing loss, dizziness, vertigo, emotional instability and delusions, liver and kidney damage, and anemia.

- Xylene, with cancer-causing (mainly in the kidneys, liver) and neurotoxic effects, as well as reproductive abnormalities.

- Methylene chloride, which may cause cancer, liver and kidney damage, central nervous system disorders and COPD



Then there was the 2014 study, from Yale University and published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, surveyed 492 people living in 180 randomly selected households in southwestern Pennsylvania, an area containing more than 600 active natural gas wells. A full 39 percent of those living less than a kilometer (0.6 miles) away from a well, researchers found, said they’d experienced upper respiratory symptoms, including coughing, itchy eyes and nosebleeds, compared to 18 percent living 2 kilometers away or more. And 13 percent of those living close to wells reported skin conditions like persistent rashes and unexplained hair loss, compared to just 3 percent of the others.

In Pennsylvania, where drilling has exploded in the past eight years, whistle-blowers  accused the state Department of Health of deliberately ignoring health complaints. Critics added that the state has yet to conduct even one study on fracking’s potential health risks.  Clearly, the state has been in the paws of the fracking industry.

In other words, there's no issue on the harm, and the only responsible reaction has to be invoking the precautionary principle.  That is,  it is the frackers' job to prove their chemicals are harmless, not the job of environmentalist to prove they're harmful.

Given the preceding, it was no surprise that in the wake of the EPA reversal industry groups and their PR affiliates went bonkers. A number of these groups claimed that the Obama administration had yielded to political pressure on its way out the door.   But this is lame. More probably, the Obama administration recognized that with the revival of Rick Perry as head of DOE, in conjunction with the Trumpista EPA picks , the result could be destruction of the key  files showing the adverse effects - so decided to expose them now before the takeover - given the "barbarians" are at the gate.

This is especially important now given the Trumpistas also plan to kick millions off Obamacare. So when they do get seriously ill - including cancers - from fracked water, they will have no way to recover.  At least now they will know one reason for those cancers if they are in proximity to fracking wells.

One oil industry exec called the EPA report "absurd reversal "  and insisted it "changed a science-based conclusion to one based on political ambiguity". 

Erik Melito, a lobbyist for the American Petroleum Institute, quoted in The Denver Post, claimed:

"The agency has walked away from nearly a thousand sources of information from technical reports and peer-reviewed scientific reports demonstrating that hydraulic fracturing does not lead to widespread, systemic impacts to drinking water resources."

Of course, this is hogwash and what you'd expect from an oil industry PR hack. Anyone likely to believe this asshole or his cohort really needs to get hold of Naomi Oreskes' work 'Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming'  - on the PR Departments that serve the  frackers and their lot.  All of which are reminiscent of the vermin PR meisters exposed in Toxic Sludge is Good for You, by Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber, based on the 1990s tactic of toxic industries to try to soft sell the use of their sludge in fertilizers. .

Oreskes explained that the job of corporate PR depts. is not to necessarily show they're right, but merely to spur and stir phony debate. Once the debate is consolidated, it becomes a matter of endless back and forth, "he said, she said" etc, and the ruse succeeds by staving off regulation because, hey, "the issue isn't settled". But in reality it is, as much as the fact that 6 million Jews perished in a holocaust.

But one thing we know is that PR must bow to physical reality. That includes the videos of fracked water set on fire,  as it comes out of water taps  e.g.
Scene from the Josh Fox documentary ‘Gasland’ in which a homeowner lights his tap water.

Never mind the squeals of the stuck pig fossil fuelers, John Noel of Clean Water Action, puts it in perspective:

"We are glad the EPA resisted the oil and gas industry spin and delivered the facts".

As for Melito and his ilk, he's been exposed after he said, quoted in the Post:

"We look forward to working with the new administration to instill fact-based science into the public policy process."

Translation: "We look forward to Trump's EPA appointees destroying all the data and files for the fact-based science so we can have carte blanche in wasting the water supplies of the nation with our proven, toxic shit."

Sadly, the deluded Trump voters who make light of Rick Perry's DOE appointment, as well as Scott Pruitt's to the EPA, appear unaware of how all these impact the well being of their kids and grand kids. These and millions more will have to live in the wasteland world the Trumpistas leave us. For those of us getting on in years it makes little difference as we already lived our lives, and one more condition - say on top of existing cancers - won't make a lot of difference.  But for the youngest citizens to now be faced with a host of diseases - many from exposure to fracked water- is something that ought to outrage any normal, sane mind.  Especially as their health care will now be dismantled as well, preventing them from coping with what's coming.

DOE Defiance of Trump Witch Hunt Shows Charles Blow Is Correct: That Resistance Is Needed

The news yesterday that at least one federal agency, the Department of Energy (DOE),  is resisting pressure from the Trumpists is music to the ears of many. As most may recall, the Trump team had issued orders to the brain trust at DOE to name all those who attended any meetings about climate change. However, those at the agency (mainly scientists) have now declared 'No way!' and they will not cooperate, given this is an obvious witch hunt - analogous to when Hitler's goons demanded the names of all sources who had been spreading "lies" about the Fuhrer to the non-German media in the 1930s.

As ABC's Brian Ross reported last night:

"At the Department of Energy tonight, fears by employees and scientists had spread that they would be targets of witch hunt by a new President who has repeatedly insisted climate change is a scam. Concerns came to a head when the Trump team sent a list of 74 questions to the Department of Energy.  In particular question 27:

Can you provide us a list of all Department of Energy Employees or contractors who have attended any interagency Working Group meeting on the Social Cost of Carbon?"

But now they have refused to comply, the first act of many of multiple resistance which will be needed by courageous citizens under a fascist Trumpista regime. Anthony Reardon, President of the National Treasury Employees Union, gave the reasons in a segment for the same news piece:

"They are scared about the ability to carry out their duties, their work, their research, with integrity. But also with independence."

This is indeed critical, because without independence research teams become merely rubber stampers for whoever is in power.

As Ross at ABC further reported, "In a show of defiance the DOE  responded to the letter and questions: ''We received significant feedback from our workforce  We will be forthcoming with all publicly available information. We will not be providing individual names...' "


This is because individual names are not part of publicly available information. Hence, the Trumpists are not entitled to it and all they really merit is what the DOE is prepared to give, publicly available material.  This also comes as the asshole- in - waiting announced as head of the DOE none other than Reeptardo Rick Perry, e.g.
 
This is the ignorant yokel who in a 2011 Reepo debate could not recall the name of the DOE, which was one of the federal agencies he wanted to eliminate. Process that for a bit!

All of which shows that Trump and team of abominables is merely out to troll decent and rational citizens, and why - more than ever- the Hamilton elector movement must succeed in preventing these degenerates from reaching power. Especially in the wake of Trump's own attack on the intelligence agencies who now - by any register - ought to be willing themselves to take him down.


To put it another way: putting Rick Perry in as Secretary of the Department of Energy is like putting Bozo the Clown in charge of the Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.    To firm up that analogy, the ignorant dope Perry who couldn't even remember the name of the DOE in 2011, will now take over an office held by....wait for it!....a nuclear physicist!

Despite this, the Trump team and its paid hacks continues to spread offal and false information, like one dimwit bloviating from Trump Tower a few days ago that: "There used to be an overwhelming science that the world was flat". Actually attempting to analogize flat earthers to global warming scientists in a clueless display of astounding ignorance as well as low IQ.

In fact, as far back as 240 B.C. it was known by the much more enlightened Greek astronomers, in particular Eratosthenes, that the Earth was spherical, not flat. This was opposed to the primitive flat Earth perceptions (NOT science!)  embraced by the sheep herder tribes of Judea, many of whom scribbled down their Bronze Age myths in the Bible.


This is all very relevant now as we can expect to hear, as Trumpistas take office, more and more lies try to justify jettisoning existing climate science. But it also alerts us of the need to resist.

NY Times columnist Charles Blow hit the nail on its head in his recent piece that we are obligated as citizens to defy a Trump presidency. Granted, 62 million odd knuckle draggers and imps voted this turd into power but that doesn't mean we have to respect it, or kowtow to their insane impulsive choice. As Blow writes:

"It is not the job of the defiant to conform to a future president who makes them completely uncomfortable. The burden of unity lies with Trump, not his detractors."

Bingo!

“Just wait and see.” “Give him a chance.” But what if what you’ve already seen is so beyond the pale that it’s irrevocable? What if Trump has already squandered more chances than most of us will ever have?

What if Trump has shown himself beyond doubt and with absolute certainty to be a demagogue and bigot and xenophobe and has given space and voice to concordant voices in the country and in his emerging Legion of Doom cabinet? In that reality, resistance isn’t about mindless obstruction by people blinded by the pain of ideological defeat or people gorging on sour grapes. To the contrary, resistance then is an act of radical, even revolutionary, patriotism. Resistance isn’t about damaging the country, but protecting it.

Blow is also spot on when he writes:

"Furthermore, the emergence of Donald Trump as a political figure has threatened to kill many of the ideals that we hold dear: decency and decorum, inclusion and empathy, truth and facts themselves.

Trump and his agents of idiocracy are now engaged in an all-out crusade to exaggerate the scope of his victory, rewrite racial history, justify their vendettas and hostilities and erase the very distinction between true and false.

At a fiery exchange during a panel at Harvard, Hillary Clinton’s communications director, Jennifer Palmieri, rightly accused the Trump campaign of emboldening “white supremacists and white nationalists.”

The Trump campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway , tried to defend this idiocracy but what would you expect. This harridan is a member of it.  As Blow pointed out, truth and facts are now under major assault, i.e.  "everybody has a way of interpreting them to be the truth or not true.”

He continued, quoting Conway: “There’s no such thing, unfortunately, anymore of facts.”  And Blow added:

"Folks, Dimwit-ism is a disease easily spread and denigrators of the absolutism of truth are its vectors.This is why resistance isn’t only principled, but essential and even existential. We are not in an ordinary postelection period of national unity and rapprochement. We are facing the potential abrogation of fundamental American ideals. We stand at the precipice, staring into an abyss that grows darker by the day."

Already, at a meeting this week of climate scientists in San Francisco there is outrage at what is happening. How Trump and his band of appointed assholes are clearly ready to dismantle all progress on global warming research leaving us all for the high jump.  The scenes last night on ABC showed the scientists with signs "Stand up for science!" and shouting "Stand up, fight back!"

This is advice we all need to heed as we lurch ever nearer to zero hour and being hurled back decades in critical climate science and other work. It means we also have to be prepared to resist as the climate scientists and columnist Charles Blow have admonished us to do and forge a consistent and unified means of obstruction. This means never accepting Trump or his administration as our own, and fighting in whatever form we can,  every step of the way. Especially by refusing to swallow the media rot that tries to normalize this swine or that we must now "all come together". No, absolutely not! And we have to hope - if the Hamilton elector movement fails - the Dems grow some balls too (especially Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi) and refuse all enticements to "bipartisanship".  Recall former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX) famously said, "Bipartisanship is another name for date rape."

We must be every bit as obstructionist and uncompromising as the Repukes and their followers were after Obama was elected.  Sorry, folks, this is now the Divided States 0f America and it cannot now be otherwise!

See also:

http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/richard-eskow/70295/by-picking-tillerson-and-perry-trump-s-pretty-much-just-trolling-us-now

Gary Johnson Passes The Moronic Wannabe Leader Test

It was startling to see a major third party candidate on live television instantly converted into a clueless  moron. In this case, Gary Johnson - the Libertarian candidate- yesterday  on MSNBC's 'Morning Joe', got this question from Mike Barnacle: "What would you do, if elected President, about Aleppo?"

Johnson suddenly appeared pop-eyed and asked: "What's Aleppo?"

To which Barnacle replied:  "Are you serious?"

Because every sentient being with a consciousness somewhat higher than a kindergartner's knows Aleppo is a besieged city in Syria  and the epicenter of a humanitarian crisis. Indeed, tens of thousands have been killed there after five years of the Syrian Civil War.  Yet Johnson, former Governor of New Mexico, and the Libertarians' presidential hopeful - didn't know that.

On the dooofus scale for presidential disqualification, Johnson's answer puts him on a par with Ben Carson, who in one forum (in 2015) suggested the Baltic states (Croatia, Slovenia etc.) were not part of NATO.  His faux pas also rivals that of Rick Perry who - in a 2012 debate, failed to recall the DOE (Dept. of Energy)  as one  of the main federal agencies.

Let us agree then, that for any given forum - whether formal presidential debate, or even informal appearance on cable TV, there are certain "deal breakers" in terms of  candidate's fitness for office. One of these is failing to exhibit knowledge of basic current events especially in relation to existing world problems, crises or global policies. On this score, Johnson failed the leadership test just as Carson and Perry did earlier.

Johnson attempted to explain his reaction by later saying he "understood the significance of Aleppo but blanked out".  Now, let's process this, please. He is claiming that in an informal setting, on an early morning cable TV  show - usually watched by fewer than 1 million - he lost command of his brain for the duration and reverted to a default zombie condition..

One is then led to ask, assuming Johnson were to actually become President, what we might expect if he had a face off with Vladimir Putin at a high powered meeting on one crisis or other. And let's say Putin asked him point blank what he and his administration intended to do about the Chechen terrorists? Would Johnson "blank out" just then and ask "What's a Chechen?"  Subsequently correcting himself and saying "I know the significance of Chechnya but I blanked out?"  What do you suppose Mr. Putin would think? (Apart from wondering how Americans could be so stupid as to elect this guy to be President.)

Or, suddenly the nation is under nuclear threat from China and the Joint Chiefs advise going to Defcon 2. Will Johnson then blank out and ask: "What's Defcon 2?"  Then, after it's too late blurt out "I REALLY did understand the significance of defcon 2  but blanked out!"

You see where I am going with this? The excuse of blanking out is no excuse at all, period, because anyone in the position of commander -in -chief simply can't afford to do that. You are no longer an average Joe Citizen allowed the luxury of blanking out, forgetting key information, or falling asleep on the job.  You are now responsible directly for the nation's security as that commander -in -chief so can no longer have the luxury of lapses that might be afforded anyone else.

Johnson's spin is not satisfactory, therefore, and that means while he passes the "moron wannabe leader test' he fails the real leader test.  This comes at a time when Johnson has been trying to raise his profile and meet the 15 percent poll threshold (based on 5 national polls) to secure a spot with Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in the debates. Currently, he is hovering at nine percent. One certainly is left to argue  that Johnson's blanking out was perhaps a "mercy killing" for his debate chances. This is given how he'd look blanking out in front of tens of millions if asked, say by Martha Raddatz: "Mr. Johnson, how would you propose to resolve the Spratly Islands dispute with China?"

Even Johnson has acknowledged how he brought himself to such a precarious position. In a different interview yesterday he acknowledged the consequences for a candidate seeming to lack a basic understanding of a major foreign policy issue. He actually  said:

"For those who believe this is a disqualifier, so be it."

Of course, the blatant missteps and interview blunders of one Libertarian presidential candidate will hardly dissuade the high IQ members of Mensa and Intertel from continuing to glamorize Libertarianism as the choice of the brilliant cognoscenti (i.e. that they fancy themselves to be.)  They fetishize this misbegotten ideology because they are anti-statist at the core, and use it as a convenient economic vehicle to denounce everything from taxes for support of social insurance, to climate change. (Not wanting taxes to support gov't research, or have any carbon taxes or rationing.)

But bright though they are, these same high IQ Libbies can't seem to see the paradox of their positions in terms of national governance.  To wit, their entire premise is opposed to any rational and practical governance.  Recall the Libertarian Party Principles state:

“We hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose.”

This has been further amplified via Charles Murray's statement in What it means to be a Libertarian (p. 6):

“It is wrong for me to use force against you, because it violates your right to control of your person....I may have the purest motive in the world. I may even have the best idea in the world. But even these give me no right to make you do something just because I think it's a good idea. This truth translates into the first libertarian principle of governance: In a free society individuals may not initiate the use of force against any other individual or group”

But if one considers the context,  such a “libertarian principle of governance" emerges as an oxymoron! Governance presumes and demands the non-passive act of governing, which means the projection of force for enforcement of laws including for national security.  Someone is invariably and actively setting standards of expected action, and also providing the means to uphold the standards. In other words, force inevitably backs up governance. Why do you think cities maintain police forces, and the nation a large volunteer standing army - along with assorted weapons to control crowds?  It is to sustain coherent and FORCE-ful governance. The libertarians, then, espouse a philosophy which cannot possibly work in the real world - because that world implicitly recognizes and declares government the primary agent of force, i.e. to enforce laws. Look around for a "force-less" government, i.e. which retains adherence and respect for its laws with no use of force.

If governments aren't enabled to enforce their laws , what’s the point? It’s all an exercise in mental masturbation. People can do whatever the hell they want!  Set up sex store emporiums or pot shops next to schools, or sell cocaine  and semi-automatic weapons in open stalls on the sidewalks of major cities!  Freedom thereby becomes perverted into a veritable "free for ALL". In other words, unless governance declares limits to actions - and someone (coercively) enforces governance, a functional society becomes  impossible.

All of this shows that the high IQ Libertarians inhabit a sheltered world of their own with no practical touch points to reality.  In this sense Johnson's blank out breakdown ought to have been a wake up call, but more than likely will just elicit more rationalizations - just as those they've used to defend Ayn Rand.

Thankfully, the chances of Gary Johnson becoming the first Libertarian president are about the same as his forlorn party ever becoming competitive in national politics.

The Phony Texas Voter ID Kerfuffle

Colorado College students yell 'Obamanos!' in 2008 as they march to the polls. Being allowed to show just student photo IDs allowed them to vote - though most came from out of state. 

After we moved from Barbados back to the U.S. in January, 1992, my first voting experience in the country was to cast a vote for Bill Clinton as President in November of that year. But first I had to register to vote in the state of Maryland. Since I’d turned in my drivers’ license for good (legally blind) I had to use another form of ID and that became my U.S. passport which I’d had for nearly 21 years (since entering the Peace Corps).

So it was no biggie. Later, I found it more convenient to get a Maryland alternative (non-drivers’) ID featuring my photo and current address. The process to get it was relatively simple, and entailed going down to the DMV and bringing three acceptable forms of preliminary ID which included: 1) My passport, 2) a copy of my birth certificate, and 3) evidence of a bill paid in my name – with address shown. Total cost was $50. The ID was good for 4 years, and could then be renewed.

On moving to Colorado, in 2000, we learned the ID requirements were even lower and only required a form of paid bill (e.g. utility) with one’s name on it. A passport could also be used. Some 8-10 years later, as Repubs grabbed the state legislature, these laws tightened up and you had to have a verifiable drivers license for an ID – or an alternative non-drivers’ ID with photo (like in MD).

The law by 2008 required you to present SIX different previous or preliminary documents, including Passport or military ID, previous drivers’ license or other state ID, birth certificate or stamped (notarized) copy of such, paid bill, and two other forms (e.g. athletic club photo ID, and –or medical, insurance ID). Total cost $100.  The good thing is that student photo IDs were still   allowed, mainly for out-of-state students attending colleges in Colorado but not residing here. This enormous student vote was major in helping Obama take the state in 2008 (after which, student IDs were disallowed).

The issue then becomes: a) Should special photo ID be required to vote, especially given the statistics for voter fraud (meaning one voter impersonating another) are vanishingly small? and b) If such ID is required should it not be such to encourage the greatest voting participation as opposed to the least?

Evidently Texas, supported by a Supreme court take, has answered yes to (a) and no to (b). Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in issuing a stout rebuttal, has noted the Texas law is “discriminatory”

“The greatest threat to public confidence in elections in this case is the prospect of enforcing a purposefully discriminatory law, one that likely imposes an unconstitutional poll tax and risks denying the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of eligible voters.”

I could not agree more – and Texas ought to be ashamed, but I doubt they will be. What does Ginsburg mean by an “unconstitutional poll tax”? She means that, historically, certain segments of the populace were prevented from voting by imposing a tax at the pools – usually in the vicinity of $1.50 per person, but often larger – up to $5  - used to turn away poor black voters in the Jim Crow south. The idea was to suppress the vote, namely the African-American vote.

In the case of the Texas Voter ID law, LA Times columnist Michael Hiltzik has pointed out that getting satisfactory ID that meets the state’s criteria could cost $75 to $175, “much higher than the $1.50 poll tax outlawed by the 24th amendment in 1964.”  The reason is because for some reason Texas disallows normative PHOTO IDs such as student IDs (you receive while attending university) or Veteran’s Administration IDs – which most other sane states permit. So this is totally nuts.

It’s also ridiculous given the Supreme Court suspended the Wisconsin Voter ID law which was not terribly different from Texas. So what gives?

I believe the court is simply trying to appease Governor Rick Perry, who will likely be running again for President and they don’t wish to antagonize all his core voters that may be for it.  If Perry's elected (God forbid!)  they'd also welcome to the Court more conservos appointed by him. Why else allow this Texas’ nutso ID law to go through but not Wisconsin’s?

In the real and sane world neither of these absurd laws would be proposed because voter fraud is not of such incidence that a photo ID is needed – and even if it is – then just allow ALL forms to be accepted, including for students and veterans, for god’s sake.

The argument has been made in some quarters that “any idiot can get an ID” but this is not strictly true. I saw many people turned away, for example, when I went to file for my Colorado alternative ID – because they lacked one of the six forms of preliminary documents needed.  Even Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Richard Posner, a conservative, admitted he “has never seen his birth certificate and does not know how he would go about ‘scrounging’ it up.” (This was after court colleagues repeated the canard that “anyone can scrounge one up”).

Well, to be honest, many Americans have drivers’ licenses – which qualify – but 20 million (like me) do not. So what are they supposed to do?  Well, they are obliged to bring the preliminary documents in to their DMV, including birth certificates, passports or other verifying materials. But what if they have no passports, and (like most African Americans) were home-birthed so lack birth certificates? Then they are up the creek, so to speak. Or disenfranchised, certainly in Texas.

Even if they DO have all the documents why the hell should they have to shell out up to $175 each for the ID? This may be money they need for meds or groceries – certainly for many impoverished African-Americans as well as poor seniors. That forced payment (which is what it is if they want to exercise their vote) then indeed amounts to a poll tax  - to use Justice Ginsburg’s term.

If we really want people- citizens to vote in this country, we need to stop with these cynical games that defeat the very foundations of our society which is supposed to be a democracy. (Okay, if you want to be technical, allowing the exercise of democracy in A Republic)

Sadly, states like Texas are more interested in how they can suppress the votes than enable them – which, I guess – kind of makes Texas a fascist dictatorship.

Screw the Weak-Kneed, Neolib Dems: Nail Rick Perry's Ass to the Wall!

I am sick and tired of the pussified, wussified Neoliberal Democrats like former Obama advisor David Axelrod,  who have in large measure been responsible for gutting the party and driving many of us away to become independents. For example,  they fail to see or perceive constitutional rights, e.g. Axelrod unhesitatingly came down on Snowden for his revelations - while also now being willing to allow the likes of Texas cornpone Guv Rick Perry to escape accountability. Axelrod recently tweeted that the Texas Democrats ought to leave this jackass alone and not pursue a Grand Jury investigation. The modus operandi of the Neolib Democrats: Go after the good guys and tar them, leave the bad guys alone!

Why should we leave Perry to his devices? The documents show Perry violated state law by having funding removed, to the tune of $7.5 million, from the Public Integrity Unit in Austin. This was done after a DA in heavily Democratic Travis County (with Austin the state capital) was jailed after a drunk driving incident. Perry, just like Dumbya before him, then let the power go to his head and said if the DA didn't resign (so he could install a Gooper) he would veto funding for the unit - clearly a case of political extortion if ever there was one. The DA, of course, realizing what was at stake refused, and Perry make good on his vile threat.

As one of the prosecutors noted this morning (CBS Early Show), this  Public Integrity Unit is the only oversight branch in the state with any potential to keep the renegades like Perry in line. Renegades and cornpones who'd just love to do whatever they hell they want. For example, as has been reported (Denver Post, Aug. 20, p. 18A) at the time Perry carried out his threat the unit was investigating a cancer research institute that was one of Perry's pet projects. (One of its high ranking officials now faces a felony corruption charges. If the Dem DA had been stupid enough to step down, Perry would have replaced her with a pawn who'd have quashed the investigation.)


Further, this knuckle-dragging imp would have made sure no Texas liberal ever got into such a powerful  oversight office again.

Perry, after being indicted, snarked to Fox News:

"This isn't America! We don't use indictments to settle our issues!"

Uh, you need to look up 'Richard Nixon', bozo!  Hell, there are probably any number of other indictments can be made on this turkey to derail his obvious presidential aspirations. (We need another Texas cornpone fool  for President like we need an Ebola outbreak). What else to nail him on to derail his White House bid?

The Dallas Morning News  reported in October, 2011  that more than $16 million of Perry's special fund had gone to companies with substantial links to some of Perry's campaign backers. Meanwhile, "one $4.5 million grant went to an Austin pharmaceutical start-up founded by David Nance who's donated more than $75,000 to the Governor since 2001" (ibid.).

If Texas is any example, one can just imagine the nonstop shenanigans if this guy were to somehow get elected to the Presidency! "Teapot Dome Scandal II" anyone?

One would have thought that two Texans in office would have been at least enough to last a hundred years. But maybe Americans are so taken in by swagger, drawl and brash talk that they would succumb to this dolt. If they do, we can really say 'hasta la vista' to what's left of this country! "Third World America" won't merely be a distant fear but an immediate reality, as Perry plots to make the entire U.S. look like Texas.

All the more reason to ensure a full grand jury investigation and to torch his 2016 plans like Chris Christie's have been.  Plus, let's not forget how Perry made a lot of threatening remarks about then Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke two years ago. (But then American memories are fairly short).

Recall again Perry's words - verbatim- made in Cedar Rapids, Iowa on Aug, 15, 2011:

"If this guy prints more money between now and the election. I don’t know what y'all would do to him in Iowa, but we would treat him pretty ugly down in Texas. Printing more money to play politics at this particular time in American history is almost treacherous, or treasonous in my opinion." 

Treasonous in Texas? Hmmmm.....what does that bring to mind? Well, the thousands of 'Wanted for Treason' posters going up on nearly every telephone pole and bldg. in Big D, on the morning of Nov, 22, 1963, e.g.


 Barely four hours later, Kennedy was shot dead. He took a round to the throat, one to the upper back, and a dum-dum to the head - which exploded inside his skull, sending brain matter spewing out back across the limo. (Jackie desperately lunged across the limo trunk to try to retrieve the expelled skull fragment )

We also know that Perry, from his comments in 2011-12, is a died-in the wool Confederate sympathizer and Secessionist so has no respect for law and order.

 Thus his treason threat is well taken.

Indeed, this man doesn't even know that the 10th amendment to the Constitution is not a carte blanche to have states' rights. It specifically refers to powers (and as Alexander Hamilton elaborated, 'prerogatives') not to rights!

Government Prof. Garry Wills clarified these issues in his landmark book, A Necessary Evil-A History Of American Distrust Of Government, Simon & Schuster, 1999:


"The Ninth Amendment talks of 'rights enumerated' and says 'the people' retain unenumerated ones. The rights in the Ninth are not the rights of the state, which can- strictly speaking - have no rights.

That Perry doesn't know any of this, and even - in one Reepo debate- was unable to name even three government agencies - shows he is unqualified for the highest office in the land.

The indictment now, and the Grand Jury process, is then an excellent means to ensure Perry doesn't get close to any election possibility.

Since this is the case, we cannot allow Perry's previous words or actions to slide here, or try to softsoap them away - as David Axelrod attempted  to do.

The 'United States of Tex-Ass"? Don't Make Me Laugh!

In the lead up to the framing of Lee Harvey Oswald, it's documented how a paid Oswald impostor arrived at a Dallas car dealership in March, 1963 and remarked to a salesman (after denigrating American -made cars): "If someone wanted to give America an enema, all they'd have to do is stick the nozzle right here....in Dallas, Texas!"

The Oswald impostor certainly got the salesman's attention and probably went overboard, though the authors of the new book, Dallas 1963, document how Dallas had become a cesspool of KKK, John Bircher and Confederate hate by late 1963, thanks to the likes of "leading citizens" - such as Ted Dealey (who ran The Dallas Morning News as a prominent, anti-Kennedy hate rag), Bill Criswell- Baptist Preacher who made a thing of preaching racial and political hate, and H.L. Hunt - the oil tycoon - who used his "Facts Forum" as one of the first radio hate platforms, against Catholics, Blacks, Jews ....oh and the Kennedys. (The Reich wing kool aid drinkers at 'The American Spectator' insist Dallas "was never a city of hate" - but then they didn't read the same book I did!)

The authors also noted the level of hate crimes in the city including the practice by Dallas cops of grabbing black men off the streets, hustling them blind -folded into some garage, removing their pants then using thick belts on them and daring them to name the person wielding them. All this perhaps a prelude to several cases where - just before JFK's arrival in November, 1963, one black man was dragged out of his home, had gasoline poured all over him and was set on fire by the "upstanding" disenchanted, anti-liberal yahoos of good ol' Big D.  Of course, this itself was preceded by the infamous incident in which Adlai Stevenson, on a UN visit in October, was smacked with placards and spat upon by anti-UN protestors.

When asked by a reporter from the rival Dallas Times Herald if he hated Dallas, Stevenson- after wiping off a gob of spit and blood from a head wound - replied:

"I don't hate the people of Dallas, I just want to educate them."

Of course, he then warned Kennedy not to come on his planned November trip.(Which was intended to shore up a split between the Texas Democratic party's liberal faction led by Sen. Ralph Yarborough, and the conservative faction led by Gov. John Connolly).

All this is a prelude to the question of whether Dallas and Texas have changed much in the intervening years, at least to the level of minimum civility. Also, how it is that the latest issue of TIME magazine features a 'puzzle' map of Texas on its cover, with all 50 states jack-screwed into it, and the header 'The United States of Texas'.    And then in the sub-header we read:

"Why The Lone Star State Is America's Future"

And I then looked askance, wondering what manner of ignoramus or half-idiot could write such dreck. It either had to be Rick Perry, or some libertarian jackwad who probably just got high on some kind of rope. Well, it turned out it was the latter, a libertarian prof from George Mason University named Tyler Cowen.

Cowen's piece was fairly readable and at least he's honest in parts. It also helps (in the other parts of the article)  if you don't easily have the wool pulled over your eyes by Libertarian propaganda and nonsense about "self reliance".  As I said before in other blogs, if the Libbies really believed this bullshit they'd have their own defense departments and health departments. (Btw, Libertarian icon Ayn Rand's answer was for all communities in the country to "buy enough insurance" to protect themselves from rapes, murders, arson and ordinary accidental fires .)

Is Texas more civilized now than it was in '63 when black men were snatched off the streets and beaten in the dark by white apes with badges and KKK hoods hidden in their trunks? You be the judge. Here are some markers of modern Texas from the pen of Cowen himself (p. 32):

- The state's social services are thin and welfare benefits are skimpy

- Roughly a quarter of residents have no health insurance.

- Texas schools "are less than stellar" and rank in the bottom quintile of U.S. education.

- Rates of murder and rape, as well as property crimes are among the nation's highest.

- Texas  "led the nation as the place the most people got punched or kicked to death in 2012"

Wow! Sounds like Tex-Ass really really progressed since 1963! The place where most people get stomped to death or punched to death! But he left out a number of other aspects such as:

- Half the state is a chemical -fracking nightmare, especially in the region known as "the Barnett shale" where most fracking is ongoing. People are having such problems (respiratory, skin lesions, brain dysfunction etc.)  that it's affecting their health - causing them to move from homes and engendering flammable water (as shown in Gasland II.) Water testing of wells - when it is done, which is seldom - shows: boron, methane, strontium, benzene, and  toluene.

- The state is ground zero for the new "normal" as climate change accelerates to a new tempo. People in the  state will face the same massive fires the Aussies (in New South Wales) are enduring now.  This past summer 97% of the state was in persistent drought.

- As Rachel Maddow noted three nights ago, the new Texas Voter ID law will disenfranchise nearly 1.4 million already registered voters in the state, of whom only 50 so far- may have succeeded in getting what they need before next year's mid terms. Democracy? Hell no!

- A new anti-abortion law passed in Texas will limit abortion clinics to barely 13 across the state. Women who need it will be forced to take a "Mexican prescription" of assorted herbs and chemicals to try and induce abortions themselves - as Rachel Maddow also pointed out. In other words, yeah ladies, go ahead and move to Tex Ass but just hope and pray you don't get raped there and become pregnant! Or at least you can get some of that Mexican concoction if it happens!

- Texas is another one of the states that's disallowed the Medicaid expansion that would have provided health insurance to some 4.3 million needy people mainly in poor families. Now they will have to fend for themselves.

- On the educational scene, Texas is an abomination - leading the charge for textbooks that attempt to deny climate change and evolution, as well as rewriting parts of American history to make it more favorable to the Johnny Reb traitors.

A more recent outrage, as highlighted in a recent piece in salon, is the adoption of a curriculum known as "ResponsiveEd"   founded by Donald R. Howard, former owner of ACE (Accelerated Christian Education). ACE is a fundamentalist curriculum that teaches young-Earth creationism as fact as well as teaching the crappola that Darwin’s theory of evolution was adopted by Hitler ("survival of the fittest") and was responsible for the Holocaust. These morons don't even know that "survival of the fittest" was never used by Charles Darwin but by philosopher Herbert Spencer - who attempted to (falsely) extrapolate evolution to social regimes.

Anyway, Cowen makes sure at least we know (in his own way) that the minimal social  safety net of Texas is what awaits the rest of America if we don't fight now like rabid ferrets to make sure the Neoliberal asswipes don't destroy what's left of the Middle Class. That includes preventing them from cutting the prime programs that now support most of the elderly Middle Class: Social Security and Medicare.

Texas, or what Cowen writes Marshall Whitman once called "America's America" (sic) "is already one of our most unequal states" and "its safety net was already built frayed".  But hey, don't despair! Americans are moving to Texas at the rate of 106,000 a year (net migration) because the cost of living is cheaper! You can buy more home for the buck, and there are no state taxes! Ah, but unsaid is that the wages are generally lower for most paid work, and there are few or no job benefits- so you damned well better have that "untaxed" money saved up in case you need to buy your own health insurance!


Entrepreneurial wannabes also are flocking because the state features "a less regulated climate in which to do business". Cowen invokes this regulatory "freedom" to point to Texas' phenomenal growth (p. 35) as well as it's relatively low (6.4%) unemployment. But who is he fooling? Only the unread.


What is Texas' secret? Economists have summarized the template thusly:

"low wages, low taxes and light regulations"

In other words, applied to the first, wages for most are kept at just state minimum wage level, meaning most Texans with such jobs lack benefits and have to find at least another gig to make ends meet ...to pay their mortgage, buy groceries or get health care.

As for the second, any corporations entering to set up business are given passes on property taxes and other (state) income taxes while those burdens are passed on to the state's citizens. Meanwhile, in order to pay for them, cuts are made to programs including education, school meals, and Medicaid. (Another reason why Rick Perry insisted on no Medicaid expansion.)

The third means that new companies are free to pollute to their hearts' content including chucking toxic runoff (i.e. dioxins, chromium III, potassium perchlorate, toluene etc.) wherever they want and no reg cop will look, as well as easing up on the labor safety regs - so workers may be forced to work under risky conditions and well....if they lose a hand or foot...they will have to take care of it themselves!

Not surprisingly, Texans' health issues have exploded, and as many as 100,000 new cancers are forecast over the next five years, most of which (cancer of the breast, liver, lungs, prostate, bladder) citizens will have to take care of on their own with precious little in the way of medical insurance (which they can't afford given the low quality of 85% of Texas' 1 million great jobs).

The most loathsome thing about this whole hyped up sham is how Perry has not just let many companies go tax-free, but actually showered largesse from his "slush fund" for setting up shop! For example, The Dallas Morning News reported three years ago this October that more than $16 million of Perry's special fund had gone to companies with substantial links to some of Perry's campaign backers.(Ibid.)

Perry himself is a throwback neo-Confederate almost in the old Ted Dealey mold, who - after Obama was re-elected- had also been espousing secession like his Confederate ancestors. The guy is also best known - or perhaps maybe just from my perspective - for issuing hidden threats regarding Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke coming to Texas a couple years ago.  See, for example:

http://branespace.blogspot.com/2011/08/degenerates-may-let-perrys-comments.html

 Cowen's last observation bears repeating:

"Americans heading to Texas and other cheap living states are a bit like the mythical cowboys of our past, self-reliant for better or worse."

Actually, the cowboys existed in a truly more self-reliant world where mega-corporations hadn't yet taken over the food supply with industrial genetic farming, Monsanto techniques, etc. and there still existed wide open spaces- which hadn't been compromised by fracking wells, or corporate redoubts - not to mention million square foot properties owned by rich oilmen, corporate honchos earning 50,000 times more than their workers, and mountains debased to make room for immense play areas for the investment bankers and celebrities.

Today's Americans running to Texas for relief, remind me more of  Tom Joad-  the forlorn, dispossessed share cropper in The Grapes of Wrath. Unable to afford barely a  pot to piss in, his family's only recourse was to try to make it to California where they at least might have a chance.

In short, Cowen's prescription of "moving to Texas" signals a submission and a surrender to the Neoliberal imperative that citizens are no longer entitled to any protections, and the world and nation is owned by the corporatists, the capitalists and their war monger and security spawn. At least I am glad I will likely not be alive to see how this morose narrative fully plays out.  In the meantime, I suggest that we not give in so amicably but fight like Devils so as not to become the lowest common denominator symbolized by Texas and its misplaced priorities.

Pink Slime Defenders Vow to Gobble It In Public!

Pink slime's defenders continue to crawl out of from the woodwork in most of the usual places as we learned today ('Pink Slime Defenders Line Up', WSJ p. B1). According to the latest news, the defenders now include the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture (hmmmmm.....there's gotta be some Bushies left in there like in other agencies) as well as the governors of two states: Rick Perry of Texas, and Terry Branstad of Iowa.

They are evidently all planning a major PR event to gobble this stuff in public (Perry says he might even ingest it raw) to show there ain't nuthin' wrong at all. The aim is clear (op. cit., p. B2) to:

"pressure supermarkets to return ground beef packed with the filler to refrigerator cases"

Hmmmm....then why do I suspect that train already left the station?

Anyway, to try to confer some bona fides on this farce, USDA chief Tom Vilsack is dispatching his No.2, Under secretary Elizabeth Hagen, today, to a facility that produces this crap and located in South Sioux City, NE (one hopes Hagen will be sure to bring enough barf bags since she seems to be the sacrificial lamb). According to Gov. Branstad (ibid.):

"We are going to consume it! We'll do everything we can to set the record straight!"

Well, good luck on that, gubernator! Damn, it's always amazing to see the reactions when powerful government-aligned corporate interests lose the PR war. Hell, I wouldn't be all amazed that if it was toxic sludge instead of pink slime and billions in profits were on the line from padding beef, these fuckers would eat sludge, or shit...to make their points. Then maybe use the tried and true method of gagging themselves later like bulemics do.

The piece notes that "the decision (of supermarkets to pull the additive filler) caught state and federal officials off guard"

Hence they're only now revving up their PR armaments. Evidently, one supermarket outlet has already caved, even before today's planned circus. That's the chain Hy-vee, Inc. which these impressarios of PR impressed to "back off its original plan"

Vilsack himself bloviated about the "difficulty of getting ahead of opposition to a product even if deemed safe by the government" - but that's not much use. We know a lot of products, including GM-designed foods (such as tomatoes with mouse genes) have been deemed safe by the U.S. Food Corporatocracy yet the same foods aren't allowed in most European nations! Why? Because the latter actually care a bit about their citizens and don't see them merely as fodder for the corporate profiteers. This includes toxic chemicals such as bisphenol A- which Canada and most European nations have outlawed but the U.S. gov't continues to drag its ass on. Why?

Because of MONEY! Profits! That's all these fuckers care about! So they will even (like the CDC) approve the toxic sludge associated with Hydro-flourosilic acid (for use in fluouridating water systems) if it means profits to those companies for whom this crap's a spinoff that'd otherwise be wasted. They will even subsidize corn farmers then allow the spinoff crap called high fructose corn syrup to be pumped into any and all foods - thereby massively inducing sugar content and triggering lots of diabetes! The aim is corporate profits, not care for consumers.

Then to top it all off, we are supposed to be on our lonesomes, most of us, in terms of health care when we do get sick from ingesting this shit! So pardon me if most of us don't bite.

Let us hope in the meantime that this PR-pressure pitch fails and most supermarkets stick to their guns.

Finally, is there a possible compromise in which our free marketers could possibly be happy?

Sure! Just LABEL all the ground beef, that's been fillered "Contains PINK SLIME" - then feel free to sell it at will and let people -consumers choose based on that.

Oh, they won't do it....like they wouldn't if GM foods were labelled? Then tough shit, you lose! Go back to the PR drawing boards!

State GOPs Continue Multi-front Attacks on Women

Even as it appeared that after Rush Limbaugh's exposure as a vile swine, the pro-Woman side of America might prevail, subsequent news items disclose this war on the nation's women continues unabated. And it continues on multiple fronts, disclosing that women - especially in the age group 18-29, cannot let their guard down. Because it is clear that the GOP agenda intends to link up with the anti-birth control zealots of the RC Church and condemn them to perpetual chattel if they (GOP-ers) get control of all branches of government again. (Which is possible if 2008 Dem voters slack off and don't come out for Obama in November!)

Consider:

1) In Texas Gov. Rick Perry has suspended all operations of Planned Parenthood which had hitherto provided some $35 million worth of free health care, including free breast, cervix exams. Now, more than 1.6 million poor Texas women will have to do without, though Perry insists he will find other private sources or state monies to make up the slack. And if anyone buys that I have 3,000 acres of Barbados' prime coastline property to sell you at $1 an acre!

The fact is, these women will now likely have to go without at immense future cost to themselves and their families. But....what can you expect in a state whose governor earlier declared Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke guilty of "treason" and had actually 50 years earlier murdered a sitting President (JFK) after plastering "Wanted for Treason" posters all over Big D because he intended to pull out of Viet Nam and oh yes.....remove the oil depletion tax allowance.

2) Women in Arizona, thanks to a bill now nearing passage (The Denver Post, today, p. 5A) in the state's Republican led legislature will be required to prove they are using birth control prescription drug exclusively 'for medications such as acne' - rather than to prevent pregnancy - if they hope to be reimbursed by their insurance companies. If it is discovered they're taking birth control pills to try to impede pregnancies, they will receive not one red cent back.

This is because the Arizona bill will allow any employer - not just religious institutions -to require women to reveal what's being taken and why in order to get reimbursed.

Now, women of America, imagine this on a national scale! If the Repukes claim all branches of gov't in November, it can easily become a national reality. Or better, a nightmare for you!

3) in Virginia, that governor has gone ahead with plans to require any woman seeking an abortion to have an invasive ultrasound, in which a large probe is inserted into her vagina - which many female Virginia protestors have rightly compared to medical rape. This governor, Bob McDonnell, had pulled the bill back after a righteous outcry, but his knuckle- dragger legislature re-approved it without much fanfare. He defends it as a "small price to pay" if a woman is determined to have an abortion. To which I say, 'Bollocks!'

4) In Wisconsin, an "abstinence-only" bill has now been passed 60-34 by that state's Gooper legislature according to a story appearing in yesterday's WSJ ('Abstinence Push Wins in Wisconsin', p. A7). According to Sara Finger, executive director of the Wisconsin Alliance for Women's Health (ibid.):

"This bill gives schools the green light to teach failed and ineffective abstinence -only programs"

Indeed, and one can compare the 47% increase in out of wedlock births in this country to near 0 % in the Netherlands, where kids learn first hand about contraceptives - including condoms- from the age of 5th graders. The Dutch, at least, pragamatists that they are, harbor no illusions on how youngsters will behave and the power of their hormones once set in motion.

Meanwhile, this egregious bill comes barely a week after Utah Reep lawmakers approved the nation's most restrictive sex education bill and a year after North Dakota required that sex ed classes instruct students exclusively on the merits of abstinence. All of which paves the way for "paper virgins" but definitely contributing even more to the explosion of out of wedlock births and likely to unwanted infants.

Lost, of course, are all the fell ways this will impact our nation's long term health, e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2012/03/proper-birth-control-answer-to-out-of.html

Meanwhile, a 2008 federally-commissioned study by the non-partisan Mathematica Policy Research Inc. found that students enrolled in abstinence -only programs were as likely to engage in premarital sex as their peers who weren't enrolled. The difference, of course, is that the peers were more likely to be familiar with and use protection and hence prevent unwanted births, while the condom-averse were not. Hence, this would explain a lot of the increase in births to unmarried under -30 women the past three years.

Even beyond the serious issue of women's autonomy over their bodies stands the larger moral issue of over-population of this planet. The fact is, over-population is aggravating all the most serious environmental problems we face from global warming to the accumulation of toxic wastes to the poisoning of our water from fracking, oil shale drilling. In this sense, humanity's ultimate well-being is threatened by the consequences of an overpopulated world. As one letter writer put it in yesterday's Denver Post:

"No matter what your religion: to pretend not to see the consequences of uncontrolled births, which are all around us, is not just short-sighted, it’s heading toward catastrophe. Religious “freedom” that forces families to have children they cannot afford or care for is not freedom; it is tyranny."

Indeed! But the tragedy is that it seems for every intelligent person (such as Anne Culver, the writer) there is an idiot, usually a male, who writes bollocks such as the following appearing in the same edition, complaining about an earlier DPost piece showing women protesting with signs reading 'Birth control is health care':

"One woman is pictured (mouth agape, perhaps yodeling) with a sign that reads, “Birth Control is Health Care.” Great. Agreed. But so are toothpaste and soap. Does the government owe us these? Aren’t aspirin, vitamins and Band-Aids elements of health care? If so, where does it stop? When everyone gets a pony?" - Kent Karber, Colorado Springs

Note this twit hails from Colorado Springs, redoubt of the Far Right nutcakes and home to such fundie bastions as 'Focus on the Family'.. The guy is obviously an idiot, since he conflates toothpaste and soap with birth control, not understanding all the serious medical conditions (such as ovarian cysts, and endometriosis) that the latter treats ......which bear no similarity to plaque on teeth....or grime on skin.

But this is what we can expect from the other side, most often (I'm ashamed to say) males! (Such as the assholes leaving comments about Sandra Fluke on the C-Span page with her public statements to House Dems.) Makes one wonder if another lineage of American males was born directly from chimps, or maybe orangs or baboons. No, wait, that would be an insult to those primate species.

All of this leaves unanswered the question of why the Repukes have such boners to keep women in thrall, subservient, pregnant....as the planet is overpopulated even more than it is.

One plausible answer was provided by author Russ Bellant in his stunning book, 'Old Nazis, The New Right and The Republican Party', South End Press, Boston, 1991, p. 77. Bellant painstakingly documents how Nazis, former S.S. infiltrated the Republican Heritage Groups and Council from the time of Reagan's ascension in 1980. He provides actual letters written and received as well as how their agenda is spelled out. He also notes a key figure who had established connections many decades earlier, i.e.

"Philip Guarino helped establish the ethnic division of the GOP in 1952. He was vice-chair of the Republican Heritage Groups Council from 1971-75."

By April 8, 1980, Guarino "was a senior member of the Republican Party National Committee, which at the time was concentrating all its efforts on getting Ronald Reagan elected President." (Recall Reagan also gave a nod to these vermin when he visited the grave site of a Waffen S.S. in Bitburg, W. Germany. The PR at the time was that it was "an accident", but don't buy it for a fucking second!) The "ethnic division of the GOP" refers to Ukrainian and Latvian assistants and associates, or members of the extension group affiliated with the German Waffen S.S. which had helped carry out pogroms during WWII- usually butchering Jews and communists in their own nations. (Recall, Hitler often conflated the Jews with Marxists, communists based on the fact Karl Marx was a Jew.)

To make a long story short, part of the GOP agenda dating from this Nazi infiltration, included banning birth control methods (as the Reich Courts did under Hitler) as well as all abortions. We see the same sort of plans now being carried out in the state courts, and no doubt the intent is to parlay these nationwide, in the GOP hopes that they can unseat Obama, while also retaining the House and grabbing the Senate.

Alas, most of these Repuke -Nazi affiliations would have been laid bare if a particular law ('The Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act') were to have passed, but a GOP-controlled congress voted it down in 1998. Had it passed, tens of thousands of top secret documents from many federal agencies would have been declassified and transferred to the National Archives. These would have included the earliest connections of S.S. - Nazis to the Republican Party.

In perspective, as many pundits have tried to parse and explain why or how the GOP has turned so far right, they'd have been provided with all the explanations available in Bellant's book. The Nazi seed having been sown, the far right move as exhibited by today's GOP was all but foretold.

American women, refuse to be GOP-Nazi slaves! Do NOT vote Repuke in any elections this year!

Another Insane "Flat Tax" Plan to Destroy What's Left of the Country!

Well, it didn't take very long for another Gooper to come up with a "flat tax" plan to try to compete with Herman Cain's insane 9-9-9 plan, see e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2011/10/herman-cains-9-9-9-plan-how-to-destroy.html

Here's the deal: the single aspect for anyone to attend to in respect of all flat tax proposals is they are not about taxation at all! Their singular and overriding purpose is to destroy the government's capacity for good, by so severely limiting revenues that the gov't is unable to assist citizens in need - while the flat tax props up a smug, conceited and ovebearing plutocracy which has already seen its median income soar over 275% since 1980 while the 99% have muddled along.

Thus, all flat tax systems have as their primo directive to "starve the beast"! If the "beast" (government) is sufficiently starved, then:

- It can't provide further benefits, and Social Security, Medicare must then be cut

- It can't provide any semblance of affordable health care by moving the privateers (e.g. insurers) out of the way

- It can't support or assist students with lower interest federal loans for college, so they will have to go to private sharks and their variable interest rates instead, and end up in a mass debtor class

- It can't regulate citizens' welfare through environmental or food, sanitation, labor protections, so more people will have to get sick and die - because they sure as shit can't afford private health insurance.

In other words, such plans support and abet a system such as we have now (indeed, make it much worse by allocating even more riches to the wealthiest) wherein government budget cuts of $861 million for families, mothers with chilidren in need of healthcare can occur while the 1% continue to reap $860 million a WEEK via the Bush tax cuts!

Perry's flat tax proposal may be even more degenerate and insane than Cain's as his singular objective (WSJ, 'Perry Joins Flat -Tax Camp', Oct. 26, p. A4) is to reduce government spending to 18% of the economy each year, down from 24% in 2010 and excluding any major defense cuts. If we process this, it means that federal benefits such as Social Security and even VA pensions would have to be halved, Medicare turned into a "Death plan" a la Paul Ryan, and key government agencies such as the EPA converted into coporate shells or disbanded completely.

One of the more insidious aspects of Perry's fell plan is that it enables taxpayers themselves to decide how fast THEY wish to destroy the government and their own future benefits. Thus, taxpayers are allowed the choice of either filing under the current system (e.g. with top marginal rates of 35% - assuming the Bush tax cuts aren't finally repealed at the end of this year), or they can pay his new 20% tax rate.

If taxpayers are clueless enough to opt for the latter, they will send this country into a massive $23 trillion deficit before 2020, though Perry insists he can "balance the budget" by then. He's nuts! The three decade analyses of overly low taxation (e.g. The Financial Times, Analysis (9/15/10 , p. 24) showed the tax cuts applied did not even curtail the secular slowdown in the growth of business structures, rather the slowdowns accelerated to full declines. Worse, growth in real gross non-residential investment barely averaged 1% (compared to 3.5%-4% in high tax years) and "an increasing proportion of the benefits of U.S. tax policy leaked outside the U.S.”

Do people really want to endure more of this bullshit? Haven't they had enough? Haven't college kids had enough of getting screwed with those high interest, variable rate private loans? Haven't homeowners had enough of the mortgage games, as bankers and especially investment bankers - bet on your failure to pay? Isn't it time to tell these fuckers to take a hike?

Perry's plan will also necessitate ripping out at least $2 trillion from Social Security monies to set up "private accounts". (He claims he will give younger wage earners the "option" of private accounts, but he has to know most are so spooked they won't see a red cent of regular S.S. that they will opt in. To the detriment of themselves, as well as everyone already in. Of course, as I noted in a previous blog, if a private account owner loses money on his investments, he can receive no higher Social Security payment than $400 minimum for most private options, such as bruited by the Bush Jr. bunch.)

Perry also claims (ibid.) his 20% corporate tax rate is "aimed at increasing private spending to create more jobs". But again, we know this is also bollocks. The largest private corporations are still sitting on more than $2 trillion in cash, and doing so in the lowest corporate tax environment (as % of GDP) since the 1980s. The way to make these bastards create more jobs is to tax their idle cash, at least at the 35% level, and also tag on a proviso that any jobs dispatched to India or China will see a an extra surtax of 50% of proposed salary on each foreign worker, but applied to the company.

Experts asked to comment on the Perry flat tax plan (ibid.) agreed it "would sharply reduce the revenue to government"

Agian, DOH! Because we know all these "tax" plans are in reality, "starve the beast" plans!

One of the experts, a Senior Fellow at the Tax Policy Center, added (ibid.):

"Two things are very clear: it will lose lots of revenue and it will give a big tax cut to the rich"

As if the rich needed any more!

I mean let's get freakin' real! How many more 'Billy the Kid' tintypes at $2 million each can these GOP wet-nursed assholes buy? How many more blood diamonds? Aren't a hundred ten kt. diamonds enough in their safes? How many more 44,000 sq. ft. homes with 8 jacuzzis? Aren't two main residences (in Long Island and Beverly Hills) enough? Do the fuckers also need two more - one in Aspen (to cavort in the winter, with fake, platinum coated snow boards) and one in Aruba - where they can enjoy $2,000 rose wine wraps each day with their champagne magnums?

I mean WHY does Rick Perry the cowboy clown want to make their lives more opulent while 22 million American kids cry themselves to sleep with hunger each night, while their moms do without their own nutrition so the kids can eat - and granny next door must do without her meds - because it's either them or food?

Haven't we had enough of this bullshit in this country?

The good thing is that the odds of this booger-pickin' asshole winning the nomination are slim and none. The bad thing is there are enough stupid, unread voters in this country (combined with the GOP's draconian campaign to suppress votiing rights) to possibly give him a chance.

Add in some voting machine fraud - such as occurred in Ohio, in 2004- and who the hell knows?

One thing for sure, if either Perry or Cain gets in, far less Romney, things will get a lot uglier than they are now!

It is certainly true that our tax system is unwieldy, hyper-draconian and ridiculous at over 73,000 pages of code, so much so that even IRS tax advisors (according to some GAO reports over the past years) are often found to give conflicting advice on assorted issues. But that doesn't mean we need to simplify it all the way down to a single rate flat tax! One can still achieve a measure of simplicity by disallowing all the loopholes and special dispensations, while alllowing a 3-tier rate system, say 40% for the top 10% of earners, 25% for the next 10% and 15% for everyone else except those earning under $15,000. They pay no tax, as they don't now (if they use the Earned Income Tax credit).

Potential Rick Perry Voters: Knuckledraggers and the Rich

Last night's Repuglican candidate debate was interesting, if only for how Rick Perry and Mitt Romney dominated with....with most of the rest left to stand by as a kind of hapless peanut gallery. This debate (which btw, I read about in today's Denver Post and WSJ, didn't watch) was also notable for providing a snapshot of who the most likely voters for Perry would be in a battle against Barack Obama next year.

Anyway, to fix ideas, Perry was in high dudgeon citing chapter and verse from his new book, Fed Up!, that Social Security was a "Ponzi scheme" and also a "monstrous lie" to America's younger workers. He asserted it was a lie to offer the working young any hope that anything would be there for them. Of course, this is more Perry Bollocks. With even small changes (like raising the payroll tax thresholds a tad higher) S.S. will be there long past 2050.

Of course, what Perry is really all about is the way Social Security's financing is set up - with current workers essentially paying for current beneficiaries. This is what he's calling a "Ponzi scheme" - but in fact he's wrong because a true Ponzi scheme conceals how it provides $$$ to recipients. Thus, Bernard Madoff's early investors were never informed that the money they were getting (some 5 yrs. later) was arriving compliments of the newbie buy-ins, not from any "12%" returns! Nor are people who play the stock casino informed that most big institutional investors are given 'heads ups' on assorted stocks a day in advance - so they have time to bail leaving little guys to be the "dumb order flow" invoked by the Maul St. traders and brokers. That effectively makes the stock market the biggest, cruelest Ponzi Scheme on the planet, for the ordinary Janes and Joes informed that they must have money there to avoid the ghastly fate of having to eat cat food later.

But no one, save an uneducated and ignorant fool, was ever in doubt how Social Security was funded. Indeed, when FDR set up Social Security (read the history of this in the excellent book Social Security and Its Enemies by Max J. Skidmore) he knew the ONLY practical way to make social insurance feasible was to implement it as a payment system via current workers to current retirees. NO other way would work. FDR and his advisors knew that there'd be no political support for any plan that required the monstrous added administrating expense of keeping each worker's eventual pay-in account separate from all others. Nor would most politicos like the "lock box" idea. Besides the concept of using current workers to pay for later beneficiaries was how most other industrial nations, like Germany and the UK, did it. This was known by ALL from the outset, and also that it would be paid for by payroll taxes. (Another reason that Obama's touted "payroll tax cuts" are very much ill-advised, since he's effectively gutting the revenue stream for both Social Security and Medicare...otherwise known in earlier frontier days as "eating your seed corn"!)

In fact, the payroll taxes accumulated as the implementers knew they would, and built up huge cash reserves! (Even more was infused in 1983, after Alan Greenspan proposed a higher payroll tax, to the current 6.2%, to take into account the coming baby boomer onslaught). As recently as 2004 more than $3.3 trillion was in those reserves -the much maligned Social Security Trust fund - which, of course, is exactly why craven politicos have no issues about raiding them, if for no other reason to make deficits look smaller. So if Rick is so exercised over the payment issue, why isn't he going after the thieves who've been raiding it and replacing the monies with IOUs? (Though as finance columnist Jane Bryant Quinn has noted, those IOUs are tied to real bonds which have the same backing - full faith and credit- of the U.S. gov't as regular bonds, though liars and repukes want to try to spin it otherwise.)

The most daft and idiotic comment out of Perry's yap was that "Social Security is by any measure a failure".

Really? So if such a failure, how has it managed to survive for 70 years? How has it managed to keep adminsitrative costs 1/50 of what are charged by Wall Street's private money hutches? More to the point, why or how is it that when polls are repeatedly taken to assess Americans' take on Social Security they are found to be roundly FOR it? (Most often the pros exceed 70%). Thank goodness for Mitt Romney having the sense to respond to Perry's moronic bollocks by saying: "Under no circumstances will I ever say it's a failure...it's working for millions of Americans".

And that includes more than 1 in 5 of those 62 and over who can no longer find employment, so have the fallback position (for them and their families) of taking Social Security starting at age 62. It also includes the millions on disability who absolutely can't work, and so have a survival option.

But under Rick Perry, it looks like all it would take is one Executive order to repeal it and send 46 million people (who depend on it as their main lifeline) into America's streets and dumpsters for food. No wonder that even Karl Rove has said Perry's language is "toxic". Well, it is because it's the surest way I can think of to ensure Obama runs over the GOOPers in a landslide rout next November.

Because no one but a purblind idiot would vote for some looney tune (even a drawling one from Texas) whose main imperative is to destroy what they depend on to live! Oh, let me correct that: Perry's rich corporate tycoon backers who've always hated S.S. will also be sure to gain his vote. They want all those 46 million of S.S. "dependents" to have to take out massive debts to get by....

As for Perry's other statement last night, comparing himself to the Holy Inquisition (which didn't accept Galileo's heliocentric solar system), e.g. "Galileo was out-voted for a spell" ...well that has no bearing on global warming because in any case, science isn't conducted via vote. The scientific consensus on global warming was accomplished by decades of hard-earned research and the consensus itself had to crack multiple fault lines to emerge. Daniel Schrag, professor of geochemistry and director of the Laboratory for Geochemical Oceanography at Harvard has noted that "The breadth that gives the findings weight – 3,000 scientists, reviewers, and government officials were involved – means that consensus had to be reached across broad points of view, including those from countries whose economies are based on oil production"

In any case, the Inquisition didn't "vote" against Galileo's hypothesis, they instead showed him the putative instruments of torture that would be used on him, if he didn't accede to their wishes and admit to them he was wrong. (Oh, and they threatened his sickly mother too!)

Maybe Perry needs to go back to high school to learn the things he never seemed to have in college.