Balance - New England

2008-03-09T19:16:00.000-04:00

2008-03-09T19:15:00.001-04:00

Wal-Mart, McDonald’s = Freeloading Corporatists

2005-04-08T17:39:00.000-04:00

As I was reading about my home state’s plan to charge companies that don’t provide health insurance coverage for their employees, I couldn’t help but notice that Wal-Mart and McDonald’s are 2 of the only 4 companies in Massachusetts that have more than 1,000 employees receiving public health benefits.

According to a 2003 AFL-CIO study, while an average of 66% of employees are covered by their company’s health plan, an atrocious 46% of Wal-Mart employees are covered by its health insurance plan.

And even if you are lucky enough to be part of the 46% minority of Wal-Mart workers who are covered, you’re going to pay an exorbitant about for your coverage: while the average large company employee pays roughly 16% to 25% of their own health insurance premium, at Wal-Mart you will pay an outrageous 42%!

In Massachusetts, this translates to:

An average large company employee will pay roughly between $55 and $86 per month (or, $660 to $1,032 per year) for an individual plan. It’s between $119 and $186 per month (or, $1,425 to $2,232 per year) for a plan insuring a family of 4.

A Wal-Mart worker will pay about $145 per month (or, $1,720 per year) for an individual plan—if you are even covered at all! It’s roughly $313 per month (or, $3,756 per year) for a plan insuring a family of 4.

Who pays for all of these uninsured workers? You bet we do!

You think Wal-Mart has great prices? Just remember, if you shop at Wal-Mart, you’re paying A LOT more for that tool set or pair of shoes than you think. The costs are just cleverly hidden in your own health insurance premium and your tax dollars, so you don’t realize you’re paying it. You pay these increased costs simply because Wal-Mart and McDonald’s are unwilling to play by the rules and pick up their share of the tab for their employees’ health insurance coverage.

What can we do to stop them from taking money from us through our taxes and insurance premiums? DON’T BUY FROM THEM ANYMORE! It’s that simple. Vote with your wallet--make them change by not giving them your hard-earned money!

These companies are bullies that are more than happy to have us, the taxpayers, subsidize their operating costs. Anti-worker Wal-Mart flexes its economic muscle wherever it sets up shop to force its competitors to pay their employees lower wages and benefits in order to compete with Wal-Mart's race to the bottom. With Wal-Mart's growing influence and dominance in the market, this means more and more employees will be paid less, provided less benefits and we, the taxpayers, are left with more and more of the bill.

Bully-Mart: ALWAYS LOW PAY AND BENEFITS. Always. McBully’s: I’m Hatin’ It.

Smart companies have begun to realize that they will see higher productivity from their employees if they are respected and treated well. For it is only when workers feel the company they work for is looking out for their needs that they will be loyal and willing to go above and beyond to contribute back to the company.

WorldCom Ex-CEO Found Guilty

2005-03-15T13:41:00.000-05:00

The Ex-CEO of WorldCom (the company that just kept on stealing) has found Guilty!

The authorities had been looking for this rare, little maggot called Guilty for a long time. Now they can thank ex-CEO Bernard Ebbers for finding it.

Ebbers wanted to keep the maggot for himself, just as he wanted to keep all the money he stole from WorldCom, but it wasn't meant to be.

So, now Mr. Ebbers gets to spend up to 85 years in prison.

Party Down

2004-11-10T18:15:00.000-05:00

Like the Democrats during the 1970s, today's GOP is hidebound and out of touch.

By Benjamin Wallace-Wells

The following article was written before the election, but is incredibly relevant despite that:

In late July, on a gauzy, impossibly hot Washington evening, I met a friend of mine in a quiet sushi restaurant a few blocks from the White House. My friend, a conservative aide to an even more conservative senator, is from the suburbs of Atlanta; his favorite word is "ignorant," by which he means some combination of insufficiently educated and totally deluded, and which he usually uses to describe Bill Clinton's foreign policy, or his ex-girlfriend, or a particularly memorable English professor. On this particular night, though, he was using it, liberally, to describe the Republican congressional approach to policy-making, on issue after issue.

I hadn't expected this line from him. My friend is the kind of tough-minded partisan who screens dates for political affiliation and who says that whenever he gets weeping calls from retired constituents about too-expensive prescription drugs, he thinks to himself, "You should have saved more then, shouldn't you?" A year ago, he was gearing up for a life on the Hill; now, he's taking the LSAT and planning for law school. He won't vote for Bush this year, either, a choice he says was "unthinkable" 12 months ago.

"What's infuriating," he told me, "is that it's hard to know what the party stands for beyond defending a bunch of interests. I mean, look at the leadership--who do you have? Frist? Hack. DeLay? Hack. Hastert? Total hack. I can't figure out if the administration are hacks or just don't care. John Kerry's running on budget deficits--that's supposed to be our fucking issue." He started slamming his hand against the table. "In 15 years, the whole federal budget blows up because of Medicare, this ridiculous prescription-drug benefit that no one even likes, our taxes go through the roof, and the economy breaks down. And this time, it's gonna be our fault."

This has been the summer of Republican discontent--a rare moment of finger-pointing and introspection after some in the party began to examine the sum product of four years in power, and concluded that, judging by their own principles, the GOP should have done much, much better: In late May, the libertarian Cato Institute hosted a conference on the legacy of the Republican revolution of 1994, a decade later. Dick Armey, the retired House Majority leader who helped engineer the 1994 takeover, was the keynote speaker, and he was decidedly glum. The party, he said, has reverted to "doing the wrong things so we can get reelected to the right thing." Newt Gingrich, who followed Armey, told the audience that their revolution had reached a tipping point in the late 1990s, when it had traded in ideology for interest groups. These were criticisms that Gingrich and Armey had been voicing privately for months, but such a public airing had a bracing effect. "When you want to talk to people outside of government to get perspective on how you're doing in terms of conservative principles, you talk to Gingrich, you talk to Armey, and maybe there's a third guy, but I can't think of him right now," a senior aide to a conservative Southern congressman told me in August. "People paid attention."

Within a month, the floodgates seemed to open. The right-wing pundit Robert Novak wrote a June column blasting "runaway spending" by Republicans in Congress. In a July speech before the National Press Club, Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, often described as a possible '08 presidential candidate, tore into his party for a legislative attitude where "nothing can get done unless every Congressman has something to take back to his district." Meanwhile, on the Hill, internecine squabbles had stalled major legislation on energy, tax reform, and highway funds. The Wall Street Journal, interviewing House Speaker Dennis Hastert about the legislative logjam, caught him in a contemplative mood: "The American people don't want us pointing fingers," he told the paper. "They want us to do something."

Yet as Congress closed shop for the summer, divisions between Republicans had meant the House couldn't pass a 2005 budget, a depressing signal of failure. Meanwhile, the percentage of Americans who disapprove of the job being done by Congress, which had been hovering around 40 for the past five years, leapt to 52. Several polls taken in the spring and early summer showed that voters preferred Democratic positions to Republican ones on every single domestic policy issue. And the grinding, bloody fight in Iraq had some of the war's strongest GOP proponents throwing up their hands in disgust at the administration's failure to plan for the post-Saddam occupation. Indeed, by late summer, a few Republicans who could politically afford to--such as retiring Rep. Doug Bereuter (R-Neb.)--were openly questioning the wisdom of the whole venture, as were a majority of the American people.

With John Kerry still leading most campaign polls, conservative despair began to take on a more hysterical tone, and epic scope. "The era of small government is over," warned David Brooks in The New York Times, shortly before the Republican national convention. "We'll let slip a thinly disguised secret," wrote Andrew Ferguson in The Weekly Standard. "Republicans are supporting a candidate that relatively few of them find personally or politically appealing." Even Pat Buchanan, in his vampy style, warned of a coming "civil war" within the party.

Such open hostility subsided during the GOP convention, damped down by the balloons and the president's rising poll numbers. Still, the summer's feud was like a peek inside a volcano: It offered a glimpse of the eventual eruption. The attacks on the party and its leaders came, scattered but forceful, from all parts of the GOP; though most critics shared a bill of complaint, each faction had its own recipe for salvation. The Armey-Novak conservatives wanted the party to renew its commitment to the small-government principles of 1994 and 1980. Brooks and the moderates looked to 1904, to the strong government conservatism of Theodore Roosevelt. Both groups were wishing for a kind of soul transplant: If the party could just reclaim its essence, they hoped, the current drift might be resolved.

But both of these historical analogies are hopeful fantasies about what the GOP might someday become, not reasonable guesses at the near future. The truth is, for all its apparent strength, the modern Republican Party has worked itself into a position of profound and growing decay. Worried Republicans are right to look to the past to help sort out their future. But the right date isn't 1994 or 1904. It's the late 1970s--and the party to look at isn't the Republicans, but the Democrats. Like the Democrats of that period, the current version of the Republican Party is supremely powerful but ideologically incoherent, run largely by and for special interests and increasingly alienated from the broader voting public. Today's GOP is headed for a profound crackup. The only questions are when, exactly, the decline will start--and how long it will last.

Full employment and oil shale

American political parties, like great empires, often seem strongest at the moment before they fall. Just as the principles and ideas that have built the new order triumph, their relevance and practicality begin to fade as new conditions emerge. Yet true believers will cling ever-tighter to the old ways of thought, and those who cling tightest are granted the greatest moral authority. Meanwhile, the constituencies that the ascendant party once rallied to its cause become powers unto themselves: parochial, imperious, demanding, and hard to discipline. Soon party leaders begin to confuse the agenda of their constituencies with the interests of the nation, and the act of governance becomes less a crafting of solutions than a division of the spoils.

This is the state of the GOP today, but it also describes the condition of the Democrats two-and-a-half decades ago. It can be hard to remember these days just how powerful and dominant the Democratic Party was in 1976. Like the Republicans in 2000, they had just elected as president a moderate, evangelical Southern governor, defeating the successor to a morally flawed president by promising to restore integrity to the Oval Office. Like the GOP today, the Democrats found themselves in control of all three branches of the federal government--the Democrats had near-veto-proof majorities in both chambers of Congress--as well as the majority of state legislatures. Organized labor, its power not yet decimated, was squarely in the Democratic camp, while the corporate lobbying sector offered significant support for the simple reason that Democrats ran everything. Just as the GOP in 2000 tended to look at the Clinton administration as an unfortunate detour on the road to a permanent Republican majority, so Democrats in 1976 looked back on the Nixon years as a temporary aberration from the natural order in Washington, one Democrats had and always would dominate. It wasn't just that the party was powerful; the Democrats, returning to the capital in the winter of 1977, thought their principles put them on the right side of history, and the country had come back around to seeing things their way.

But for all the party's political power and institutional strength, it was in an intellectual rut, returning again and again to ideas that had long ago stopped working. Like any party, the Democrats then were a coalition of factions. New Deal economic constituencies (labor, farmers, industrial and energy interests) coexisted with newer liberal-left, socially-conscious groups (environmentalists, rights-conscious black and Hispanic organizations, feminists, Naderites) that had emerged from the tumult of the 1960s. These various factions often disagreed vehemently. Environmentalists clashed with autoworkers over fuel-efficiency standards; building trade unions were at war with civil rights groups over affirmative action. Scoop Jackson Democrats wanted Washington to take a tougher line with our Soviet enemies; human rights doves wanted Washington to take a tougher line against our tyrannical allies, such as Ferdinand Marcos. What all of them could agree on, however, was the vital importance of big government. Each wanted more spending for its programs, more robust regulations, and a stronger hand for Washington in the market to restrain the forces that threatened its own interests. Big government was the glue that held the Democratic coalition together. It was also the moral cause that defined the party, and in 1976, that cause seemed beyond dispute. Even Richard Nixon had created the Environmental Protection Agency and instituted wage and price controls to fight inflation. The argument seemed over. Big government had won.

But of course, the argument was anything but over. An increasing number of voters were becoming aware that government was failing to make much headway against the major problems of the day. The economy remained weak, energy costs were rising, and social chaos was spreading in the cities. A few reform-minded Democrats and intellectuals were starting to rethink the premises of big government liberalism, to wonder if there might be less expensive and bureaucratic--and more effective--means to traditional liberal ends. Carter was inclined to agree with them. But such thinking was anathema to the party's liberal leaders and most powerful interest groups, and they were positioned to stop it.

When Carter took over as president, the nation's most pressing--and consuming--problems were economic. Growth and worker productivity were low, unemployment and federal deficits were high and rising, and, by midway through the president's term, inflation and interest rates were compounding at more than 10 percent annually. Carter's plan was to balance the budget, slashing spending enough to also provide for a $15 billion tax cut which would act as an economic spur. Congress rejected the package, insisting instead on an economic stimulus package (which Carter reluctantly signed) consisting of $15 billion for public works projects, urban aid, and education, the kind of program that reeked of 1933. This pattern was repeated throughout Carter's term, as unions fought the president's calls for voluntary wage controls to combat inflation, and Congress resisted Carter's repeated attempts to balance the federal budget. The president proposed a budget for 1980 designed to restore fiscal austerity and cut spending to keep the deficit for that year under $30 billion. Congress insisted on restoring the cuts, and by the end of the process, the budget was more than $60 billion in the red.

The second great challenge the Democrats faced was an OPEC-induced surge in energy prices. Carter came in with some good and some bad ideas about how to alleviate the energy crisis. Democrats in Congress rebuffed the president's best plan--Carter's attempt to lift the price controls Richard Nixon had imposed on domestic energy. But congressional Democrats eagerly adopted his bad ideas, including the creation of the Department of Energy, which would become perhaps the most dysfunctional agency in Washington. House Speaker Tip O'Neill set up a task force to speed along passage of the authorizing bill, getting the agency running in a matter of months. Congress happily signed on in 1980 when Carter asked it to set up the Synthetic Fuels Corporation. The program ultimately spent $88 billion subsidizing American oil and gas companies to try to extract petroleum out of oil shale, an enterprise only slightly more cost-effective than trying to wring water from a stone. The SynFuels concept dispensed a lot of taxpayer money to a lot of Democratic interest groups but did nothing to solve the energy crisis.

The third major challenge was to halt the continuing increase in crime, poverty, and family breakdown, especially in the cities. Carter put forth a training program for AFDC recipients, an early stab at welfare reform. Congressional Democrats insisted instead on broadening the AFDC beneficiary rolls and threw in another public works program for good measure. Then lawmakers advanced the Humphrey-Hawkins act, a resolution that made government-guaranteed full employment the goal and policy of the United States--this even though no one knew how to guarantee full employment short of expanding expensive and corruption-prone government make-work efforts like the CETA program. The left-liberals held both political power and moral sway: When Reps. Ron Dellums (D-Calif.) and John Conyers (D-Mich.) walked out of meetings with the president because he wouldn't commit to full employment policies for urban blacks, they were cheered for their principle.

But Carter's downfall wasn't assured until a pair of foreign policy bungles in the year before the election. First, the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, which hawks charged was the result of the administration's soft attitude towards Moscow's military threat. Then, in November 1979, the Iranian revolutionaries who had just overthrown the U.S.-backed shah took about 90 hostages in the American embassy in Tehran. After initial negotiations stalled, the State Department, and the party's human rights liberals, wanted Carter to talk with the hostage takers. The Defense Department, and the party's hawkish wing, wanted the president to bomb Iran to force the revolutionaries to give up the hostages. Carter tried a middle course, the disastrous helicopter rescue mission known as Desert One. These two foreign policy failures proved the last straw for neoconservatives and many national security voters, convincing them that the Democratic Party was simply too weak and compromised to defend effectively the nation and helping to drive them to the Republicans.

By 1980, many liberals were in open revolt against Carter, abandoning him to support Ted Kennedy's ultimately-doomed primary challenge even as the public was sending unmistakable signals that it was sick of Kennedy-style big government. The number of Americans who agreed with the statement that "the best government is one which governs least" had risen from 32 percent in 1973 to 59 percent in 1981, and liberal positions on crime and welfare were similarly unpopular. Towards the end of his term, Carter did manage to push through his energy deregulation legislation and to install the monetarist Paul Volcker as Fed chairman. These acts eventually succeeded in bringing down oil prices and the inflation rate--to the political benefit of Carter's successor, Ronald Reagan.

Earmarks and zygotes

Fast-forward a couple of decades, swap a few particulars, and the same patterns fit the current state of the Republican Party in Washington. The GOP came in to office in 2001 with control of all branches of government, and with a similar confidence in their long-term prospects. Over the last few years, such party operatives as Karl Rove, Grover Norquist, and Tom DeLay have cowed Democrats with chesty, blustering talk about a "permanent majority." But like the Democrats circa '76, Republicans entered Washington three years ago under an ideological banner that had already lost its relevance to most Americans.

Twenty years earlier, a policy agenda of tax cuts and smaller government made practical sense for the country. Reagan succeeded in cutting taxes, and his successors, George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton, eventually got government spending under control. By the 2000 election, upper-bracket tax rates had been steady for two decades at a rate far lower than they were through most of the previous 50 years, and the federal government's share of GDP was 18.4 percent, well below where it had been during the Reagan administration. While short-term, broad-based tax cuts still made sense as a recession-fighter, the big challenges America faced--chiefly the unrecognized danger of terrorism and the coming retirement of the baby boom generation--could not be solved with further tax and spending cuts. If anything, the opposite would be called for.

But this budgetary reality had little effect on the movement conservatives who by 2001 dominated the Republican Party. Instead, they embraced the small-government/low taxes paradigm even more tightly, with a moralistic fervor not unlike that which moved liberals in the 1970s to a ferocious defense of big government and high taxes against all logic. Politically, cutting taxes provided for Republicans a unifying force similar to that which spending had provided the Democrats: It was the one policy that almost every part of the often-fractious GOP coalition--libertarians, cultural conservatives, multinationals, small business owners, investors in Wall Street, the energy sector--could agree on. And for the party's strategists, tax cuts were the route to a permanent GOP majority. The promise of a new rate reduction every year--first rate reductions, then dividend cuts, then corporate breaks--would keep K Street pliable. And eventually, a shift in the tax burden from the wealthy and corporations onto the backs of the middle class would (or so the theory held) cool voter demand for more government, thereby undermining the Democrats' reason for being.

Whether or not the GOP's tax strategy will pay dividends this fall is hard to say. On the one hand, the president has been able to warn voters that Kerry will raise taxes (which he will, on upper-income Americans). On the other, $3.25 trillion in long-term tax cuts, mostly for the wealthy, has yielded what has so far been at best an anemic recovery and a half-trillion dollars in structural deficits as far as anyone can reasonably predict. This has meant that voters, by September, preferred a Democrat on the economy over a Republican by 54 percent to 37 percent. The rejection even extends to tax cuts, historically the domestic topic on which the GOP scores the biggest advantage; Gallup polls throughout the summer found voters preferring Kerry to Bush on the issue.

Meanwhile, as tax receipts have plummeted, federal spending has increased by more than 6 percent per year since 2000. Most, if not all, of this spending--for the military, for homeland security, and for prescription drugs for seniors--was necessary and had broad public support. Yet it has panicked conservatives, who cannot accept the historical reality that, as Sebastian Mallaby wrote in these pages last month, when advanced societies grow wealthier, the share of GDP devoted to government inevitably increases ("The Deficit Conquers All," September 2004).

Instead of facing this reality, the average congressional Republican has acted like a preacher hooked on prostitutes, publicly inveighing against the sin while personally wallowing in it. There is no greater measure of spending indiscipline than "earmarks," targeted spending provisions attached to appropriations bill. The number of earmarks has tripled since Republicans took control of the House of Representatives in 1994.

Further crippling the GOP's spending discipline has been the same tendency that affected the Democrats two decades ago: confusing the agendas of its favored interest groups with the interests of the public at large. Where the Democrats created ineffective public works bills and the ludicrous SynFuels program, the Republicans have put forth an energy bill that has collapsed under the weight of its own energy-sector subsidies, and a Medicare prescription-drug benefit so indulgent of the pharmaceutical and HMO lobbies that barely a quarter of seniors support the bill. Meanwhile, energy costs remain high, Medicare premiums are rising, and polls show that on energy and health-care issues, voters prefer Democrats to Republicans by wide margins.

Two decades ago, Democrats granted moral authority to identity-group liberals, who, in their admirable zeal to fight discrimination, soft-pedaled evidence that the country was growing more tolerant, and refused to consider that factors other than racism might explain, say, lagging minority test scores. As a result, Democrats defended unpopular quota-style affirmative-action programs and bilingual education. Today, Republicans bow to the supposed moral superiority of Christian conservatives, who, though living in the most religiously-minded and tolerant country on earth, persist in feeling persecuted. The GOP lets these groups lead them by the nose--even when, as on stem cell research, it puts them in the position of defending the unpopular and morally dubious argument that millions of Parkinson's patients should be denied a major hope for a cure in order to prevent the destruction of a few zygotes with zero chance of ever becoming humans. Two decades ago, Carter's overly cautious foreign policy helped convince millions of security-minded Democrats to abandon the party. Now, Bush's incautious foreign policy may be driving millions of Republicans the other way.

The Republican Mondale

Of course, Carter and Bush are not necessarily bound to the same fate, in part because of their very different personal characteristics. Carter was a micromanager who, while president, famously drew up a schedule for the White House tennis court; Bush says he doesn't bother to read the newspapers. Carter governed by consensus and was prone to abrupt policy changes; Bush makes snap judgments and rarely changes course. But the greatest difference between the two, and the one with perhaps most enduring consequences, lies in their attitude towards the self-destructive, retrograde tendencies within their own parties.

Jimmy Carter fought against his party's worst instincts, lost, and in losing made himself look weak. His failure to win reelection convinced his party's liberal wing not that they should have been more open to Carter's reforms, but that they had been right all along. In 1984, Democrats rejected the progressive centrist presidential bid of Gary Hart in favor of liberal stalwart Walter Mondale, who in turn chose as running-mate a liberal New York congresswoman, Geraldine Ferraro, to form a ticket that carried one state in 50. By 1988, the Democratic landscape started to shift; the party nominated a pragmatist governor, Michael Dukakis, and a conservative Texas senator, Lloyd Bentsen, as his running mate. But Dukakis, tone-deaf on crime and defense, fit too easily into a right-wingers' caricature of a Northern liberal, and he, too, lost badly. It wasn't until 1992 that the party finally put a Southern centrist, Bill Clinton, at the top of the ticket. And it took Clinton eight years of cajoling and fighting with his party's liberal base (who put up big fights over welfare reform and the president's fiscal conservatism) to put the Democrats more-or-less squarely behind moderate policies. Changing a party takes time.

By contrast, George Bush has embraced his party's worst instincts, thereby winning its support and making himself look strong. This image of strength, plus an ineffective opponent, might be enough to win him reelection. But ironically, a Bush win will have the same effect on the GOP as Carter's loss had on the Democrats: It will convince the ideologues that they were right. For that reason, moderate Republicans who truly want to take back their party must secretly hope--indeed, many do--that Bush loses.

A different kind of GOP isn't hard to imagine, at least in the abstract. In The New York Times Magazine last month, David Brooks sketched out a reasonable vision of what he calls "progressive conservatism." Brooks wants the GOP to embrace a slightly larger government, to value balanced budgets as highly as low taxes, to stop doing so many favors for business, and to focus on entitlement reform, national service, improving teacher quality, and promoting marriage in the ghetto. This is the vision of the Republican Party that belongs chiefly to its rump reformist wing: John McCain, Colin Powell, Rudy Giuliani, and others. It's not a bad platform, and Brooks is probably right that the Republicans would command more votes and run the country better if they hewed more closely to it.

But there are two problems with this vision. First, Brooks's "progressive conservatism" is far closer to the majority Democratic position than the Republican one. Second, it is almost impossible to see the current GOP accepting it any time soon, even if Bush loses in November. A Bush defeat--especially if it is accompanied by Republican loss of the Senate--would certainly lead to some version of the "civil war" Pat Buchanan and others have warned of. In that war, McCain and other moderates will enjoy some "I told you so" authority. But it is hard to exaggerate how weak, small, and out of step the moderates are with the rest of the party machinery--even with those who are furious with the GOP leadership. It's hard to imagine Tom DeLay waking up in January and suddenly deciding to become a champion of bipartisanship. Dennis Hastert and Bill Frist are probably not going to stop giving business lobbies the run of Congress--with two decades of history and habit pointing them the other way. The Cato Institute and the Heritage Foundation are not likely to abandon the low-tax/small government agenda that lured all of their scholars and is written into their bylaws. Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh aren't suddenly going to turn into reasoning pragmatists, even-handedly comparing economic models and different proposals for school reform. Perhaps most importantly, with virtually all of Congress running for reelection in politically safe districts where they need only draw the votes of stalwarts, it's hard to imagine GOP voters insisting on an immediate, rapid change in ideological direction.

Political parties don't abandon their most cherished ideas, break with their most powerful interests, or dump their most entrenched leaders for high-minded civic reasons. They do so only when they lose elections again, and again, and again. And if history's any guide, that is going to be the eventual fate of today's Republican Party.

Benjamin Wallace-Wells is an editor of The Washington Monthly.

Worst President Ever

2004-10-23T19:28:00.000-04:00

Lies, Lies and More Lies

2004-10-09T16:03:00.000-04:00

Want to stop the lies, liars and the lying liars who tell them? Tired of being perpetually lied to, day after day? Sick of hearing the liars say we should "stay the course" when you know so much is going so wrong because the liars are telling so many lies?

Then, VOTE FOR CHANGE NOVEMBER 2ND! You have the power to fire the liars purportedly representing us!

Click HERE to view a short video clip demonstrating why we must vote the liars out of office.

You will need QuickTime Player installed to view the above video clip. If you do not yet have QuickTime Player, click HERE to download it for free.

Cheney The Liar

2004-10-06T13:55:00.000-04:00

Above: Edwards and Cheney the Liar sat together at a "prayer breakfast" February 1, 2001. Cheney the Liar said at the breakfast, "Congressman Watts, Sen. Edwards, friends from across America and distinguished visitors to our country from all over the world, Lynne and I are honored to be with you all this morning."

LIAR!

Above: Cheney the Liar is standing on the left, next to Senator Edwards, as the junior Senator from North Carolina, Elizabeth Dole, is sworn into office, January 2003.

LIAR!!

Contrary to what Cheney the Liar said in the debate last night, of COURSE Edwards and Cheney the Liar have met before!! What a pathological LIAR!

Click HERE to learn more about how Cheney lies.

The Emperor Has No Clothes!

2004-10-02T14:18:00.000-04:00

Holy crap, Thursday's presidential debate was HILARIOUS!

It was hysterical to watch such a lopsided debate--with Shrub just repeating himself over and over and over...making awkward gestures, facial expessions...and showing the world what he truly is--a rich, selfish, bratty son who knows ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT ANYTHING!

To watch Kerry is to see true leadership and intelligence, which is no more abundantly obvious than when he's in the same room as Shrub discussing the issues.

Hell, I had to check to make sure I hadn't mistaken the challenger for the incumbent Shrub was so unpresidential! Shrub is our current president? Kerry is the challenger? WHAT?

Click HERE to learn more about the 1st debate.

Apathetic Incompetence

2004-10-01T18:39:00.000-04:00

On September 30, 2004, President George Bush went on national television to debate foreign policy with Senator John Kerry.

Did he look like someone you’d trust with your future? Did he seem decisive? Did you feel reassured? Did he seem clear, coherent, credible?

DID HE SEEM AS IF HE EVEN HAD A CLUE?

John Kerry has demonstrated he has the courage, compassion and credibility to lead this country during a difficult time. We trust him to take the job seriously.

THE EXCUSE PRESIDENT

2004-09-15T16:00:00.000-04:00

Excuses, excuses, excuses...

President Shrub blames everything and everyone else for anything that goes wrong.

As John Kerry said today, "This president has created more excuses than jobs"!

"The president wants you to believe that this record is the record of the victim of circumstances, the result of bad luck, not bad decisions," Kerry said in his speech. "Well, Mr. President, when it comes to your record, we agree -- you own it."

"He chose and he chose and he chose, and every single time it was middle-class Americans who paid the price," Kerry said. "George Bush accomplished all this in only four years. Imagine what he could do in another four years."

"His is the excuse presidency -- never wrong, never responsible, never to blame ... no, it's not our fault; no, there's nothing wrong; no, we can't do better; no, we haven't made a single mistake," Kerry said.

Shrub is the EXCUSE PRESIDENT

Click HERE to learn more about Dubya's excuses.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt

2004-09-12T22:25:00.000-04:00

"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power."

-- President Franklin D. Roosevelt

September-October Surprise

2004-09-04T17:42:00.000-04:00

Well, here it comes--don't say you never considered such a cynical attempt from President "Dubya" Hoover to win the upcoming election because nobody predicted it.

It's now being reported that the capture of Osama Bin Laden is near...woa! I'm shocked! 2 months or less before the election and they miraculously capture Bin Laden!!!!

Shrub, Rove et. al. are the creepiest, most repulsive creatures ever to walk this earth who will stop at nothing to get their hands on power and money. I have nothing but pure hatred and vitriolic anger for this disgusting and nauseating administration.

People--wake up!! These guys will stop at NOTHING to gain power!! When will you finally wake up and see it! The truth is staring you right in the face!! They have no interest in your well being nor mine--only power and money...it's that simple.

Please, for your sake--for everyone's sake--WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Click HERE to find out more about this revolting story.

Yoshi Tsurumi - Shrub's Harvard Economics Professor

2004-09-03T17:31:00.000-04:00

Yoshihiro Tsurumi is an expert of International Business Strategy, International Trade and Investment, International Transfer of Technology, and U.S.-Japan Comparisons of Economic, Industrial, and Corporate Structures.

He is a scholar in the fields of industrial policy, international transfer of technology and global business. He is a leading consultant to the International Monetary Fund and many government and multinational firms.

He is currently a Zicklin School of Business professor of marketing at CUNY (City University of New York).

Tsurumi was also one of President Shrub’s professors at Harvard Business School from 1973 to 1974.

What does he think of Shrub?

He remembers Shrub as an "intellectually shallow, pathological liar without any moral compass." He states, "either he was clowning in class or if he’s called on (I often do that) he makes all kinds of flippant statements. Very shallow. Most of all those flippant statements are nonsensical. But often he revealed his strong biases against the medical, Medicare, social security anything the United States has built up since the Great Depression."

He goes on to say Shrub was, "terrible. Intellectually very shallow. But more importantly immature, but lacking the sense of responsibility, compassion, always indulging in denials when he is called on in his lies. And lies came very easily to him. For example, one statement that he made still stuck with me. We were discussing how the United States Government should help the lower income group or people on the fixed pension to adjust themselves to the high energy costs during the oil crisis, to bring in the fairness into the US economic policies. And he raised the issues and he said, “People are poor because they are lazy.” Those are the lies."

Funny thing how Shrub is PROUDLY, EXTREMELY LAZY and yet--he somehow got his greedy little hands on a lot of money! Gee, how did that happen?

Click HERE to listen to the interview these quotes are taken from.

Above: Yoshihiro Tsurumi, economics professor at CUNY-Zicklin School of Business.

Click HERE for a piece of an interview with Yoshi Tsurumi taped just this morning (9/3/04). He comments on Shrub's acceptance speech last night and goes on to say Shrub shouldn't be 'president' of ANY type of organization, much less the United States.

Finally, you know how Shrub is really good at getting others to do his dirty work for him? Tsurumi explains how our Commander in Chief used to do the same exact thing at Harvard. And Tsurumi does some dirty work himself by grading the President’s acceptance speech. Click HERE to listen to the clip.

Open Letter to Shrub

2004-08-28T18:00:00.000-04:00

From Michael Moore of the movie, "Fahrenheit 9/11," the following is an open letter he wrote to President Shrub:

Thursday, August 26th, 2004

It Takes Real Courage to Desert Your Post and Then Attack a Wounded Vet

August 26, 2004

Dear Mr. Bush,

I know you and I have had our differences in the past, and I realize I am the one who started this whole mess about "who did what" during Vietnam when I brought up that "deserter" nonsense back in January. But I have to hand it to you on what you have uncovered about John Kerry and his record in Vietnam. Kerry has tried to pass himself off as a war hero, but thanks to you and your friends, we now know the truth.

First of all, thank you for pointing out to all of us that Mr. Kerry was never struck by a BULLET. It was only SHRAPNEL that entered his body! I did not know that! Hell, what's the big deal about a bunch of large, sharp, metal shards ripping open your flesh? That happens to all of us! In my opinion, if you want a purple heart, you'd better be hit by a bullet -- with your name on it!

Secondly, thank you for sending Bob Dole out there and letting us know that Mr. Kerry, though wounded three times, actually "never spilled blood." When you are in the debates with Kerry, turn to him and say, "Dammit, Mr. Kerry, next time you want a purple heart, you better spill some American red blood! And I don't mean a few specks like those on O.J.'s socks -- we want to see a good pint or two of blood for each medal. In fact, I would have preferred that you had bled profusely, a big geyser of blood spewing out of your neck or something!" Then throw this one at him: "Senator Kerry, over 58,000 brave Americans gave their lives in Vietnam -- but YOU didn't. You only got WOUNDED! What do you have to say for yourself???" Lay that one on him and he won't know what to do.

And thanks, also, Mr. Bush, for exposing the fact that Mr. Kerry might have actually WOUNDED HIMSELF in order to get those shiny medals. Of course he did! How could the Viet Cong have hit him -- he was on a SWIFT boat! He was going too fast to be hit by enemy fire. He tried to blow himself up three different times just so he could go home and run for president someday. It's all so easy to see, now, what he was up to.

What would we do without you, Mr. Bush? Criticize you as we might, when it comes to pointing out other men's military records, there is no one who can touch your prowess. In 2000, you let out the rumor that your opponent John McCain might be "nuts" from the 5 years he spent in a POW camp. Then, in the 2002 elections, your team compared triple-amputee Sen. Max Cleland to Osama bin Laden, and that cost him the election. And now you are having the same impact on war hero John Kerry. Since you (oops, I mean "The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth!") started running those ads, Kerry's poll numbers have dropped (with veterans, he has lost 18 points in the last few weeks).

Some people have said "Who are you, Mr. Bush, to attack these brave men considering you yourself have never seen combat -- in fact, you actively sought to avoid it." What your critics fail to understand is that even though your dad got you into a unit that would never be sent to Vietnam -- and even though you didn't show up for Guard duty for at least a year -- at least you were still IN FAVOR of the Vietnam War! Cowards like Clinton felt it was more important to be consistent (he opposed the war, thus he refused to go) than to be patriotic and two-faced.

The reason that I think you know so much about other men's war wounds is because, during your time in the Texas Air National Guard, you suffered so many of them yourself. Consider the paper cut you received on September 22, 1972, while stationed in Alabama, working on a Senate campaign for your dad's friend (when you were supposed to be on the Guard base). A campaign brochure appeared from nowhere, ambushing your right index finger, and blood trickled out onto your brand new argyle sweater.

Then there was the incident with the Crazy Glue when your fraternity brothers visited you one weekend at the base and glued your lips together while you were "passed out." Though initially considered "friendly fire," it was later ruled that you suffered severe post traumatic stress disorder from the assault and required certain medicinal attention -- which, it seems, was provided by those same fraternity brethren.

But nothing matched your heroism when, on July 2, 1969, you sustained a massive head injury when enemy combatants from another Guard unit dropped a keg of Coors on your head during a reconnaissance mission at a nearby all-girls college. Fortunately, the cool, smooth fluids that poured out of the keg were exactly what was needed to revive you.

That you never got a purple heart for any of these incidents is a shame. I can fully appreciate your anger at Senator Kerry for the three he received. I mean, Kerry was a man of privilege, he could have gotten out just like you. Instead, he thinks he's going to gain points with the American people bragging about how he was getting shot at every day in the Mekong Delta. Ha! Is that the best he can do? Hell, I hear gunfire every night outside my apartment window! If he thinks he is going to impress anyone with the fact that he volunteered to go when he could have spent the Vietnam years on the family yacht, he should think again. That only shows how stupid he was! True-blue Americans want a president who knows how to pull strings and work the system and get away with doing as little work as possible!

So, to make it up to you, I have written some new ads you can use on TV. People will soon tire of the swift boat veterans and you are going to need some fresh, punchier material. Feel free to use any of these:

ANNOUNCER: "When the bullets were flying all around him in Vietnam, what did John Kerry do? He said he leaned over the boat and 'pulled a man out of the river.' But, as we all know, men don't live in the river -- fish do. John Kerry knows how to tell a big fish tale. What he won't tell you is that when the enemy was shooting at him, he ducked. Do you want a president who will duck? Vote Bush."

ANNOUNCER: "Mr. Kerry's biggest supporter, Sen. Max Cleland, claims to have lost two legs and an arm in Vietnam. But he still has one arm! How did that happen? One word: Cowardice. When duty called, he was unwilling to give his last limb. Is that the type of selfishness you want hanging out in the White House? We think not. Vote for the man who would be willing to give America his right frontal lobe. Vote Bush."

Hope these help, Mr. Bush. And remember, when the American death toll in Iraq hits 1,000 during the Republican convention, be sure to question whether those who died really did indeed "die" -- or were they just trying to get their faces on CNN's nightly tribute to fallen heroes? The sixteen who've died so far this week were probably working hand in hand with the Kerry campaign to ruin your good time in New York. Stay consistent, sir, and always, ALWAYS question the veracity of anyone who risks their life for this country. It's the least they deserve.

Yours,

Michael Moore

mmflint@aol.com

www.michaelmoore.com

P.S. George, I know you said you don't read the newspaper, but USA Today has given me credentials to the Republican convention to write a guest column each day next week (Tues.-Fri.). If you don't want to read it, you and I will be in the same building so maybe I could come by and read it to you? Lemme know...

Poverty in U.S. Grows

2004-08-26T19:31:00.000-04:00

Some 1.3 million Americans slid into poverty in 2003 as the ranks of the poor rose 4 percent to 35.9 million, with children and blacks worse off than most, the U.S. government said on August 26, 2004. Despite the Bush-purported "economic recovery," the percentage of the U.S. population living in poverty rose for the third straight year to 12.5 percent--the highest since 1998--from 12.1 percent in 2002, the Census Bureau said in its annual poverty report. The widely cited scorecard on the nation's economy showed one-third of those in poverty were children.

This is the third year in a row that the number of people living in poverty rose--cooincidence that is exactly the number of years Shrub has been in office? You can certainly draw your own conclusions on that.

Click HERE to learn more about how the middle class is sinking into poverty to the delight of the greedy.

John Edwards, our next Vice President

2004-07-29T18:10:00.000-04:00

If you didn't get the opportunity to watch John Edwards as he accepted his Vice Presidential nomination last night, click HERE to do so.

If you prefer, you can just listen to the audio by clicking HERE.

Barack Obama and Ilana Wexler

2004-07-28T20:50:00.000-04:00

If you watch or listen to just a few people's words from the Democratic National Convention, 2 that I would wholeheartedly recommend are:

Barack Obama is a very moving and exceptionally bright Democratic Senatorial candidate from the state of Illinois. He is the son of a Kenyan and Kansan and has a very compelling story to tell. Click HERE to watch him tell it. If you prefer, you can just listen to the audio of his speech by clicking HERE.

The other very short speech I highly recommend listening to was delivered by Ilana Wexler, the 12-year-old founder of the national "Kids for Kerry" organization. Click HERE to watch Ilana. If you prefer, you can just listen to the audio of her short speech by clicking HERE.

More Public Servants and Celebrities

2004-07-27T20:11:00.000-04:00

Today, while again working at the Democratic National Convention here in Boston, I spotted a few more public servants and others who many are familiar with.

Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), who represents the 6th Congressional District of California covering all of Marin County and part of Sonoma County north of San Francisco deep in the heart of the famous California wine country and towering Redwood trees, took time to talk with a few of us volunteering at the Ritz Carlton-Back Bay. It wasn't a lengthy conversation, but she definitely left a really positive impression on me!

Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who was the first female to take this post, also took a few moments to say "hi, how are you?" as she headed out of the hotel after attending a Women's Luncheon there.

Here are some of the people I spotted today:

Above: Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright (1997-2001).

Above: Rep. Lynn Woolsey, Democratic Congresswoman from California.

Above: Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Democratic Congresswoman from Ohio.

Above: Rep. Henry Waxman, Democratic Congressman from California.

Above: New York State Democratic Attorney General Eliot Spitzer.

Above: Dave Barry, humor columnist from the Miami Herald.

I also saw Robert Novak, infamous conservative columnist.

Public Servant and Celebrity Sightings

2004-07-26T17:25:00.000-04:00

On a lighter note...

While I was working my first shift at the Democratic National Convention here at the Ritz Carlton-Back Bay in Boston today, I spotted or came in contact with the following public servants and celebrities:

Above: James Carville, author, Democratic Political Advisor/Analyst, CNN Political Commentator and co-host of CNN's show, "Crossfire."

Above: Rep. John Lewis, Democratic Congressman from Georgia who fought for Black Civil Rights with the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr in the 1960s.

Above: Larry King, host of CNN's show, "Larry King Live."

Above: Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Democratic Congresswoman from California.

Above: Paul Begala, author, Democratic Political Advisor/Analyst, CNN Political Commentator and co-host of CNN's show, "Crossfire."

Above: Rep. Harold Ford, Jr., Democratic Congressman from Tennessee.

Above: Tom Delonge of the band, "Blink 182."

Above: Rep. Robert Matsui, Democratic Congressman from California.

Above: Rep. Patrick Kennedy, Democratic Congressman from Rhode Island, and son of Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts.

Above: Mark Warner, Democratic Governor of Virginia.

Above: Anita Hill, infamous figure from the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings.

Above: Gary Hart, former Senator from Colorado.

Above: David S. Broder, Washington Post Political Writer.

The Victims of War

2004-07-20T17:53:00.000-04:00

Above: Iraqi child with extreme hydrocephalus, and defects of cerebral nerves.

Above: Iraqi child with extreme hydrocephalus, and defects of cerebral nerves.

Above: Severe malformation of face. This condition is sometimes refered to as 'Zyklopie.'

HAVE YOU HAD ENOUGH?

These Iraqi children have had enough war, too!!

They are suffering from birth defects resulting from their parents' exposure to radioactive dust from exploded American and British shells manufactured with depleted uranium.

What is depleted uranium? It's essentially nuclear waste. While the term 'depleted' implies it isn't particularly dangerous, in fact, this waste product of the nuclear industry is 'conveniently' disposed of by producing deadly weapons.

Depleted uranium is chemically toxic. It is an extremely dense, hard metal, and can cause chemical poisoning to the body in the same way as can lead or any other heavy metal. However, depleted uranium is also radiologically hazardous, as it spontaneously burns on impact, creating tiny aerosolised glass particles which are small enough to be inhaled. These uranium oxide particles emit all types of radiation, alpha, beta and gamma, and can be carried in the air over long distances.

Depleted uranium was first used on a large scale in military combat during the 1991 Gulf War, and has since been used in Bosnia in 1995, in the Balkans war of 1999 and, most recently, in the 2003 Iraq war.

These children now have to live with our hasty decisions to load our weapons up with depleted uranium and bomb the countries they're born into. This is SERIOUS AND VERY REAL, people, and not even the top public official in the United States can admit our most recent invasion of Iraq was wrong. LOOK AT THESE PHOTOS--look at what our government's decisions do to people!

If you didn't previously experience even a shred of doubt about war and, more specifically, the 2003 war in Iraq, ask yourself what the children in the photos above think of war.

Don't Be A Sucker for Corporate Propaganda

2004-07-16T20:47:00.000-04:00

Take a look at THIS SHORT VIDEO to learn a little bit about how to arm yourself against today's sophisticated propaganda, which is commonly called "public relations" or "advertising."

Learn how propaganda firms manipulate the news, information and public opinion in an attempt to shape your behavior and to ensure you consume and purchase as many "things" as possible.

Don't let these propaganda firms manipulate you any more! Click HERE to learn how it works and what you can do to arm yourself against propaganda.

Click HERE to learn more about John Stauber and The Center for Media and Democracy, which he founded.

New Movie: "The Corporation"

2004-07-16T19:35:00.000-04:00

The following is a description of the new movie, "The Corporation," which recently hit movie theatres in the U.S., the U.K. and Australia after becoming an unprecedented box office hit in Canada:

One hundred and fifty years ago, the corporation was a relatively insignificant entity. Today, it is a vivid, dramatic and pervasive presence in all our lives.

Like the Church, the Monarchy and the Communist Party in other times and places, the corporation is today’s dominant institution. But history humbles dominant institutions. All have been crushed, belittled or absorbed into some new order. The corporation is unlikely to be the first to defy history.

In this complex and highly entertaining documentary, Mark Achbar, co-director of the influential and inventive MANUFACTURING CONSENT: NOAM CHOMSKY AND THE MEDIA, teams up with co-director Jennifer Abbott and writer Joel Bakan to examine the far-reaching repercussions of the corporation’s increasing preeminence.

Based on Bakan’s book The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power, the film is a timely, critical inquiry that invites CEOs, whistle-blowers, brokers, gurus, spies, players, pawns and pundits on a graphic and engaging quest to reveal the corporation’s inner workings, curious history, controversial impacts and possible futures.

Featuring illuminating interviews with Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore, Howard Zinn and many others, THE CORPORATION charts the spectacular rise of an institution aimed at achieving specific economic goals as it also recounts victories against this apparently invincible force.

In THE CORPORATION, case studies, anecdotes and true confessions reveal behind-the-scenes tensions and influences in several corporate and anti-corporate dramas. Each illuminates an aspect of the corporation’s complex character.

Among the 40 interview subjects are CEOs and top-level executives from a range of industries: oil, pharmaceutical, computer, tire, manufacturing, public relations, branding, advertising and undercover marketing; in addition, a Nobel-prize winning economist, the first management guru, a corporate spy, and a range of academics, critics, historians and thinkers are interviewed.

LEGAL “PERSON"

In the mid-1800s the corporation emerged as a legal “person.“ Imbued with a “personality“ of pure self-interest, the next 100 years saw the corporation’s rise to dominance. The corporation created unprecedented wealth. But at what cost? The remorseless rationale of “externalities”—as Milton Friedman explains: the unintended consequences of a transaction between two parties on a third—is responsible for countless cases of illness, death, poverty, pollution, exploitation and lies.

THE PATHOLOGY OF COMMERCE: CASE HISTORIES

To more precisely assess the “personality“ of the corporate “person,“ a checklist is employed, using actual diagnostic criteria of the World Health Organization and the DSM-IV, the standard diagnostic tool of psychiatrists and psychologists. The operational principles of the corporation give it a highly anti-social “personality”: It is self-interested, inherently amoral, callous and deceitful; it breaches social and legal standards to get its way; it does not suffer from guilt, yet it can mimic the human qualities of empathy, caring and altruism.

Four case studies, drawn from a universe of corporate activity, clearly demonstrate harm to workers, human health, animals and the biosphere. Concluding this point-by-point analysis, a disturbing diagnosis is delivered: the institutional embodiment of laissez-faire capitalism fully meets the diagnostic criteria of a “psychopath.”

MINDSET

But what is the ethical mindset of corporate players? Should the institution or the individuals within it be held responsible?

The people who work for corporations may be good people, upstanding citizens in their communities—but none of that matters when they enter the corporation’s world. As Sam Gibara, Chairman of Goodyear Tire, explains, “If you really had a free hand, if you really did what you wanted to do that suited your personal thoughts and your personal priorities, you’d act differently.“

Ray Anderson, CEO of Interface, the world’s largest commercial carpet manufacturer, had an environmental epiphany and re-organized his $1.4 billion company on sustainable principles. His company may be a beacon of corporate hope, but is it an exception to the rule?

MONSTROUS OBLIGATIONS

A case in point: Sir Mark Moody-Stuart recounts an exchange between himself (at the time Chairman of Royal Dutch Shell), his wife and a motley crew of Earth First activists who arrived on the doorstep of their country home. The protesters chanted and stretched a banner over their roof that read, “MURDERERS.“ The response of the surprised couple was not to call the police, but to engage their uninvited guests in a civil dialogue, share concerns about human rights and the environment and eventually serve them tea on their front lawn. Yet, as the Moody-Stuarts apologize for not being able to provide soy milk for their vegan critics’ tea, Shell Nigeria is flaring unrivaled amounts of gas, making it one of the world's single worst sources of pollution. And all the professed concerns about the environment do not spare Ken Saro Wiwa and eight other activists from being hanged for opposing Shell's environmental practices in the Niger Delta.

The Corporation exists to create wealth, and even world disasters can be profit centers. Carlton Brown, a commodities trader, recounts with unabashed honesty the mindset of gold traders while the twin towers crushed their occupants. The first thing that came to their minds, he tells us, was: “How much is gold up?“

PLANET INC.

You’d think that things like disasters, or the purity of childhood, or even milk, let alone water or air, would be sacred. But no. Corporations have no built-in limits on what, who or how much they can exploit for profit. In the fifteenth century, the enclosure movement began to put fences around public grazing lands so that they might be privately owned and exploited. Today, every molecule on the planet is up for grabs. In a bid to own it all, corporations are patenting animals, plants, even your DNA.

Around things too precious, vulnerable, sacred or important to the public interest, governments have, in the past, drawn protective boundaries against corporate exploitation. Today, governments are inviting corporations into domains from which they were previously barred.

PERCEPTION MANAGEMENT

The Initiative Corporation spends $22 billion worldwide placing its clients’ advertising in every imaginable—and some unimaginable—media. One new medium: very young children. Their “Nag Factor“ study dropped jaws in the world of child psychiatry. It was designed not to help parents cope with their children’s nagging, but to help corporations design their ads and promotions so that children would nag for their products more effectively. Initiative Vice President Lucy Hughes elaborates: “You can manipulate consumers into wanting, and therefore buying your products. It’s a game.“

Today people can become brands. And brands can build cities. And university students can pay for their educations by shilling on national television for a credit card company. And a corporation even owns the rights to the popular song “Happy Birthday.” Do you ever get the feeling it’s all a bit much?

Corporations have invested billions to shape public and political opinion. When they own everything, who will stand for the public good?

THE PRICE OF WHISTLEBLOWING

It turns out that standing for the public good is an expensive proposition. Ask Jane Akre and Steve Wilson, two investigative reporters fired by Fox News after they refused to water down a story on rBGH, a synthetic hormone widely used in the United States (but banned in Europe and Canada) to rev up cows’ metabolism and boost their milk production. Because of the increased production, the cows suffer from mastitis, a painful infection of the udders. Antibiotics must then be injected, which find their way into the milk, and ultimately reduce people’s resistance to disease.

Fox demanded that they rewrite the story, and ultimately fired Akre and Wilson. Akre and Wilson subsequently sued Fox under Florida’s whistle-blower statute. They proved to a jury that the version of the story Fox would have had them put on the air was false, distorted or slanted. Akre was awarded $425,000. Then Fox appealed, the verdict was overturned on a technicality, and Akre lost her award. [For more information on the case see www.foxbghsuit.com]

DEMOCRACY LTD.

Democracy is a value that the corporation just doesn’t understand. In fact, corporations have often tried to undo democracy if it is an obstacle to their single-minded drive for profit. From a 1934 business-backed plot to install a military dictator in the White House (undone by the integrity of one U.S. Marine Corps General, Smedley Darlington Butler) to present-day law-drafting, corporations have bought military might, political muscle and public opinion.

And corporations do not hesitate to take advantage of democracy’s absence either. One of the most shocking stories of the twentieth century is Edwin Black’s recounting IBM’s strategic alliance with Nazi Germany—one that began in 1933 in the first weeks that Hitler came to power and continued well into World War II.

FISSURES

The corporation may be trying to render governments impotent, but since the landmark WTO protest in Seattle, a rising wave of networked individuals and groups have decided to make their voices heard. Movements to challenge the very foundations of the corporation are afoot: The charter revocation movement tried to bring down oil giant Unocal; a groundbreaking ballot initiative in Arcata, California, put a corporate agenda in the public spotlight in a series of town hall meetings; in Bolivia, the population fought and won a battle against a huge transnational corporation brought in by their government to privatize the water system; in India nearly 99% of the basmati patent of RiceTek was overturned; and W. R. Grace and the U.S. government’s patent on Neem was revoked.

As global individuals take back local power, a growing re-invigoration of the concept of citizenship is taking root. It has the power to not only strip the corporation of its seeming omnipotence, but to create a feeling and an ideology of democracy that is much more than its mere institutional version.

© Copyright 2003 - 2004, Big Picture Media Corporation MMIII

Click HERE to locate where THE CORPORATION is playing at a theatre near you!

Click HERE to watch the movie trailers.

The Corporation wins Audience Award at Sundance. Read More

Fox News: UNfair & UNbalanced

2004-07-15T08:13:00.000-04:00

Fox News is clearly a propaganda machine for the radical conservative agenda, but it continues to use the slogan "Fair & Balanced." Finally, Fox News is being challenged.

Featuring "interviews with former Fox employees and leaked policy memos written by Fox executives," the film "Outfoxed" is "an obsessively researched expose" by Hollywood director Robert Greenwald, who shows how the network "distorts its coverage to serve the conservative political agenda of its owner, the media tycoon Rupert Murdoch."

In one scene, Fox News's chief White House reporter Carl Cameron is shown hamming it up with President Bush, telling the president that his wife was campaigning for the Bush-Cheney ticket.

As LA Times columnist Tim Rutten wrote, Fox has become "the most blatantly biased major American news organization since the era of yellow journalism." The movie highlights a trend whereby the broader right-wing media is parroting the conservative line on everything from the war to the economy to coverage of the presidential campaign – leaving facts and objectivity by the wayside.

"Outfoxed" examines how media empires, led by Rupert Murdoch's Fox News, have been running a "race to the bottom" in television news. This film provides an in-depth look at Fox News and the dangers of ever-enlarging corporations taking control of the public's right to know.

The film explores Murdoch's burgeoning kingdom and the impact on society when a broad swath of media is controlled by one person.

Media experts, including Walter Cronkite, Jeff Cohen (FAIR) Bob McChesney (Free Press), Chellie Pingree (Common Cause), Jeff Chester (Center for Digital Democracy) and David Brock (Media Matters) provide context and guidance for the story of Fox News and its effect on society.

This documentary also reveals the secrets of Former Fox news producers, reporters, bookers and writers who expose what it's like to work for Fox News. These former Fox employees talk about how they were forced to push a "right-wing" point of view or risk their jobs. Some have even chosen to remain anonymous in order to protect their current livelihoods. As one employee said "There's no sense of integrity as far as having a line that can't be crossed."

Click HERE to watch the movie trailer.

Click HERE to learn more about "Outfoxed," or to purchase the DVD.

Massachusetts Legislature: Health Care is a Constitutional Right

2004-07-14T15:05:00.000-04:00

Massachusetts has taken a HUGE step toward protecting the health of the citizens of this great Commonwealth as much as it protects automobiles registered here.

This has been one of the great insurance protection hypocrisies of our time: states that require compulsory auto insurance but have no such requirement for the basic human need for health insurance--they leave it to the private sector to protect its citizens' health. We all know how well THAT works given that 44 million Americans lack health insurance and 8 out of 10 of those 44 million people come from WORKING FAMILIES!

The role of government is to fill in the gaps that the private sector neglects, and health care has become one of those gaps. It's about time government steps in to do what the private sector is incapable of--to ensure adequate health care is a RIGHT, not just a priviledge.

Hopefully, more states will follow Massachusetts' lead. Here is a reprint of the story from the Boston Globe and boston.com:

Legislature Approves Health Care Coverage as a Constitutional Right

By Jennifer Peter, Associated Press, 7/14/2004 14:25

BOSTON (AP) Comprehensive and affordable health care coverage would become a constitutionally protected right for all Massachusetts citizens under an amendment overwhelming approved Wednesday by the House and Senate.

If approved by lawmakers again during the 2005-2006 session, the question would go before voters in November 2006. If successful, the state would then develop a specific plan for providing and paying for health care, which would again go before voters, in November 2008 at the earliest.

"We're trying to provide justice in health care so that every single citizen has a health care plan," said Sen. Steven Tolman, D-Boston. "It is the citizens of Massachusetts that we are all looking out for here."

Because the amendment was initiated by a citizens' petition, it required support from only 51 of the 200 state representatives and senators as part of the constitutional convention. The vote, however, was overwhelming with lawmakers supporting the right to health care 143-41.

The amendment states that "it shall be the obligation and duty of the Legislature and executive officials...to enact and implement such laws as will ensure that no Massachusetts resident lack comprehensive, affordable and equitably financed health insurance coverage for all medically necessary preventive, acute and chronic health care and mental health care services, prescription drugs and devices."

Following the vote, Senate President Robert Travaglini, D-Boston, adjourned the constitutional convention that began earlier this year with the much-debated approval of a ban on gay marriage that would simultaneously legalize civil unions if approved again by the Legislature during the next two-year legislative session and by voters in the fall of 2006.

The adjournment effectively killed amendments that would have led to the election of judges an initiative fueled by a high court decision that legalized gay marriage and made it more difficult for citizens to put policy questions on the ballot.

July Surprise?

2004-07-08T17:33:00.000-04:00

According to The New Republic, several Pakastani official sources have confirmed that the Bush Administration has not only increased pressure recently on the Pakastani government to find and/or kill Osama Bin Laden and other "high-value targets" (HVTs) but has also set a deadline of July 26, 27 or 28 in which to do so.

Why July 26-28? That's when the Democratic National Convention will be in full-swing here in Boston.

According to an official with Pakistan's powerful Inter-Services Intelligence, a White House aide told Lieutenant General Ehsan ul-Haq last spring that "it would be best if the arrest or killing of [any] HVT were announced on twenty-six, twenty-seven, or twenty-eight July."

This despicable administration will stop at NOTHING to gain power. They see the Kerry-Edwards ticket increasing their lead on them and they don't like it. They'll do anything to try to ensure the reelection of the incompetent, bumbling Bush. Well, the gig's up, Shrub! The secret's out!

Keep your eye on this story. If nothing happens by the end of the Democratic National Convention, it doesn't mean we won't see an August, September or October surprise.

Click HERE to read the article from The New Republic.

In John Edwards' words...

2004-07-07T14:59:00.000-04:00

“Today, under George W. Bush, there are two Americas, not one: One America that does the work, another America that reaps the reward. One America that pays the taxes, another America that gets the tax breaks. One America that will do anything to leave its children a better life, another America that never has to do a thing because its children are already set for life. One America -- middle-class America - whose needs Washington has long forgotten, another America - narrow-interest America - whose every wish is Washington's command. One America that is struggling to get by, another America that can buy anything it wants, even a Congress and a President.”

“I've been fighting this fight my whole life. For 20 years, I have sat in courtrooms across from these people. I have been an advocate for families and their children against armies of lawyers. I've won most of those battles. In the Senate, I fought for the Patients' Bill of Rights, against big HMOs, against big insurance companies. I fought to bring down prescription drug costs for every American, against big drug companies. I fought to do something about drug company advertising on TV when others weren't willing to do it. I fought to create energy independence in this country.”

“I believe the backbone of the American economy is the hard work, determination, and ingenuity of the middle class, not the insiders. I believe the way to grow the economy is to grow and strengthen the middle class, not shrink its size and add to its burdens. I believe the way a rich nation gets richer is by giving all its citizens the chance to get richer, not by only helping those like me who've already succeeded beyond our wildest dreams. I believe the way to create new wealth is by rewarding work and responsibility, not coddling the privileged and going soft on executives, accountants, and analysts who squander other people's money.”

“For every man and woman who is worried about paying their bills; for every child who needs health care and a strong school to go to, and for every American who waits for the 1st and the 15th of every month -- together we will end this era of anxiety. We will replace the crass politics of greed and the current politics of rage with a new politics of opportunity.” (As Prepared, Des Moines, IA, 12/29/03)

Click HERE to listen to Edwards' speech in South Carolina. Real Audio Player Required

It's Kerry-Edwards!!

2004-07-06T10:55:00.000-04:00

Kerry-Edwards for One America

Click HERE to learn more about how this dynamic duo will work for all of US, not just the wealthy and powerful.

Happy 4th of July

2004-07-04T10:04:00.000-04:00

"War President," is a mosaic of Shrub made from the faces of American soldiers who have died in Iraq. The artist is identified only as "Joe."

Average American CEO

2004-07-03T18:06:00.000-04:00

In 1980, the average American CEO made 42 times more than the average hourly worker.

In 1990, the average American CEO made 85 times more than the average hourly worker.

In 2000, the average American CEO made 531 times more than the average hourly worker!!!

"Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"

--Boston attorney Joseph Welch as he questioned Sen. Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin at the Army-McCarthy hearings, which was the beginning of the end of Sen. McCarthy's Communist witch-hunt rampage; June 9, 1954

Class-Action Discrimination Case Against Wal-Mart

2004-06-24T19:43:00.000-04:00

The following is an excerpt from an Associated Press article published June 22.

Click HERE to learn more about this vital case against Wal-Mart, one of the biggest abusers of today's greedy corporate environment in America.

Judge approves class-action discrimination case against Wal-Mart

By David Kravets, Associated Press, 6/22/2004 11:31

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) A federal judge on Tuesday approved class-action status for a sex-discrimination lawsuit against Wal-Mart Stores Inc. that has become the largest private civil rights case in U.S. history.

It could represent as many as 1.6 million current and former female employees of the retailing giant.

The suit alleges Wal-Mart created a system that frequently pays its female workers less than their male counterparts for comparable jobs and bypasses women for key promotions.

Wal-Mart, the nation's largest private employer, sought to limit the scope of the lawsuit that was filed three years ago.

Bridging the Gap for Health Care

2004-06-12T15:18:00.000-04:00

Mark your calendars now: next SATURDAY, JUNE 19TH, tens of thousands of people--those who have health insurance and those who don't, those who fear losing coverage and those who have too little--will join together across the country to bridge the gap in health care.

I find it ironic and maddening that most states in this country have compulsory auto insurance and yet there is NO PLACE in the United States where health insurance is compulsory for everyone!! Our cars are more protected than our own health!

Click on the image above to learn why your participation in this movement is so important.

In the last 60 seconds, 5 people lost their health care coverage.

By this time tomorrow, 7,000 more will lose theirs.

8 out of 10 of the 44 million people who lack health insurance come from WORKING FAMILIES.

It's a national problem. We need a national solution. It's going to take a national action to help achieve it.

Click HERE to find an event near you to participate in Saturday, June 19th (there are currently 108 events scheduled in 40 states, with more being added by the hour).

Click HERE to learn more about the Bridging the Gap for Healthcare movement.

Reagan's Lies Will Live On, Too

2004-06-08T21:24:00.000-04:00

The following are excerpts from an article written by George Hesselberg which I think presents an interesting perspective on the 40th President of the United States:

"Ronald Reagan, with his twinkling eyes and rouged cheeks, had a way of making people feel good, though there were often some hidden costs involved.

The exaggerations continue, even after his death."

"Besides spawning a couple of generations of right-wingers whose idea of public service was to find a way to cut benefits to poor people, Reagan gave astrologers some short-term credibility and was the best speech-giver the White House has ever seen.

(And while he was a hero to some of the elderly, he also, in 1983, signed into law a bill taxing Social Security benefits and increasing the retirement age.)"

"It [a list of Reagan's lies] was included in the September 2003 Washington Monthly, which printed a few of Reagan's doozies: His 1980 statement that "trees cause more pollution than automobiles do," his claim that he had served as a photographer in a U.S. Army unit assigned to film Nazi death camps (he never left Hollywood), and his claim in 1986 that "we did not, repeat, did not, trade weapons or anything else for hostages, nor will we."

But the whopper that became legend, and was used to usher in welfare policy changes, is the story of the "welfare queen" living a life of lavish leisure while collecting welfare.

Reagan frequently told a version of the story in speeches, beginning in 1976, of the "Chicago welfare queen" who had 80 names, 30 addresses, 12 Social Security cards, and collected benefits for "four nonexisting husbands," bilking the government out of "over $150,000."

Suddenly, the enduring image of a person on welfare became a black woman in a mink coat driving a Cadillac to pick up her welfare checks.

The real "Chicago welfare queen" used two aliases to collect $8,000 and didn't get away with it."

"The media tried to debunk it [Reagan's "welfare queen" lie], but it had mutated into common knowledge by the time a newspaper reporter, David Zucchino, of the Philadelphia Inquirer, spent a year with two welfare mothers in that city. The result in 1996 was a highly praised book, "The Myth of the Welfare Queen."

Click HERE to read the article in full.

NAACP Boycott of South Carolina

2004-06-05T16:36:00.000-04:00

The display of the Confederate flag is costing South Carolina big-time.

The illuminated flag flies on the South Carolina State House grounds in Columbia near the Confederate Soldier monument and is located just 200 feet from the African-American Monument.

As James Gallman, president of the South Carolina Conference of Branches of the NAACP, said: "The racial attitudes that permeate the halls of government in South Carolina refuse to give way to more enlightened thinking. The common thread between this issue and the Confederate flag debate is the blatant disrespect for people of color in South Carolina."

PLEASE...I URGE YOU to join the NAACP in the South Carolina boycott until this symbol of racism and bigotry is removed from a position of sovereignty. Please do not travel to South Carolina and do not spend your hard-earned money there. I've talked previously about "voting with your wallet," and this is the quintessential opportunity for you to voice your opposition to this racist, hurtful and humiliating symbol in South Carolina.

There is no need for South Carolina to cling to and perpetuate its racist past. Until the state decides to take a bold and courageous stand against this symbol, racism and xenophobia will continue to flourish in South Carolina.

Above: The Statehouse in Columbia, South Carolina

Click HERE to learn more about the NAACP boycott of South Carolina.

Click HERE to learn more about the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

NAACP TO CONTINUE SOUTH CAROLINA ECONOMIC SANCTIONS

Kweisi Mfume, President & CEO, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), today said the economic sanctions being imposed on the South Carolina tourism industry would continue until the state General Assembly votes to remove the Confederate flag from a position of sovereignty.

"While the South Carolina General Assembly has taken an important step toward removing the Confederate flag from atop the Statehouse, actions by both the House and Senate fall far short of bringing finality to this issue," said Mfume.

Over the weekend and early today, NAACP officials met with legislative leaders in South Carolina in an attempt to convince the General Assembly to approve a consensus on legislation to remove the flag from a position of sovereignty.

"It is now time for the South Carolina General Assembly to amend the Senate proposal to remove the flag and approve one of three options: encase the flag in the Confederate relic room at the University of South Carolina, erect a granite and bronze monument emblazoned with an emblem of the flag or display the flag as one of several carried by South Carolinians during battle in the major wars."

The NAACP has worked to have the Confederate flag removed from a position of sovereignty since it was first flown atop the statehouse in 1962.

"Unfortunately," Mfume said, "the South Carolina legislature has chosen to avoid seriously working to resolve this issue until now. But the House vote to illuminate the flag on a 30-foot flagpole on the statehouse grounds was an insult and a slap in the face of all people who want an end to the division of the races in South Carolina over this issue. It's now up to the state Senate."

Mfume said the battle over the Confederate flag was always more than an issue of simply taking it down from the statehouse. The NAACP Board of Directors approved a resolution in 1999 that called for "the removal and relocation of the Confederate battle flag to a place of historical rather than sovereign context."

James Gallman, president of the South Carolina Conference of Branches of the NAACP, said: "The racial attitudes that permeate the halls of government in South Carolina refuse to give way to more enlightened thinking. The common thread between this issue and the Confederate flag debate is the blatant disrespect for people of color in South Carolina."

The South Carolina tourism industry has lost more than $100 million since economic sanctions were enforced beginning January 1, 2000. Many national and regional organizations and entertainers have canceled meetings in the state, including: the National Association of Federal and Postal Employees, the New York Knickerbockers basketball team, the American Bar Association, Southeast Conference United Church of Christ, the National Urban League, Progressive National Baptist Convention, and the Association of American Colleges and Universities.

Founded in 1909, The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) is the nation's oldest and largest civil rights organization. Its half-million adult and youth members throughout the United States and the world are the premier advocates for civil rights in their communities, conducting voter registration drives and monitoring equal opportunity in the public and private sectors.

Contact: NAACP Office of Communication 410-486-9227

"Make Gentle The Life of This World" - RFK

2004-06-03T17:54:00.000-04:00

"It is simple to follow the easy and familiar path of personal ambition and private gain. It is more comfortable to sit content in the easy approval of friends and of neighbors than to risk the friction and the controversy that comes with public affairs. It is easier to fall in step with the slogans of others than to march to the beat of the internal drummer--to make and stand on judgments of your own. And it is far easier to accept and to stand on the past, than to fight for the answers of the future."

- Robert F. Kennedy

"Bush Is Incompetent" -Rep. Nancy Pelosi

2004-05-22T11:03:00.000-04:00

You go, girl!

FINALLY...the liberal counter-attack machine is taking shape! While Howard Dean may have planted the seeds, various members of the liberal and progressive communities are growing our message to counter what has long been a conservative-controlled debate.

U.S. Representative and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco amplified the progressive sentiments regarding Bush by making the following observations:

"The emperor has no clothes. When are people going to face the reality? Pull this curtain back!"

"The situation in Iraq and the reckless economic policies in the United States speak to one issue for me, and that is the competence of our leader. These policies are not working. But speaking specifically to Iraq, we have a situation where -- without adequate evidence -- we put our young people in harm's way."

"I believe that the president's leadership in the actions taken in Iraq demonstrate an incompetence in terms of knowledge, judgment and experience in making the decisions that would have been necessary to truly accomplish the mission without the deaths to our troops and the cost to our taxpayers."

"Rocket-propelled grenades, not rose petals, greeted them. Instead...of Iraq being a country that would readily pay for its own reconstruction...we're up to over $200 billion in cost to the American people."

PELOSI DID NOT BACK DOWN, even when asked if her comments would undermine Bush's abilities as commander in chief: "His [Bush's] activities, his decisions, the results of his actions are what undermines his leadership, not my statement. My statements are just a statement of fact."

Click HERE to learn more about Rep. Pelosi.

Celebration in Cambridge

2004-05-17T20:46:00.000-04:00

As the birthplace of the slavery abolition movement and a key constituency contributing to equal rights for women during a time when, by law, they were subservient to men who were--again, by law--"head and master" of households with unilateral control of property owned jointly, the great Commonwealth of Massachusetts is yet again paving the way for the civil rights of another group of people: gay and lesbian people.

I can assure you, everything is the same as it always has been here--nothing has changed. The sun still rose above the horizon...people still grumbled as they got out of bed to go to work on a Monday morning...the phones still ring...the dishes are still waiting to be put in the dishwasher...the drivers are still notoriously rude...the subway trains are still running...the Red Sox are still scheduled to play in Tampa Bay tomorrow...and the residents of Massachusetts will still turn in this evening for a night's rest.

It was a totally normal yet historic day in the state I call home.

The following are scenes from this morning's early hours here in Cambridge, which was the first city in the United States to legally accept civil (NOT religious) marriage applications from same-sex couples:

Above: Cambridge City Hall lawn, Central Square - Sunday evening, May 16, 2004

Above: Cambridge City Council Chambers

Above: Some of the very first applicants for a civil marriage license in Cambridge City Hall

Gap Inc. Admits To Sweatshops

2004-05-13T15:06:00.000-04:00

By admitting they haven't done enough to ensure humane working conditions and wages at the factories around the world that make their clothes, Gap Inc. has turned a lot of heads and ears its way.

Gap has also compiled, for the first time, a 2003 Social Responsibility Report detailing how it will work to improve the lives of the people who make their clothing. Click HERE to download and read the report (Adobe Acrobat Reader required).

Gap is moving in the same direction more and more companies are: that is, AWAY from the asinine theory that doing whatever it takes to make a buck is more important than taking care of your employees and customers.

As Gap's CEO states, "We feel strongly that commerce and social responsibility don’t have to be at odds." In fact, a company that practices social responsibility and ensures its employees are happy will see much higher productivity and profits than those that don't.

This requires a company to see a bigger picture that is difficult to create in today's intense environment of meeting quarterly short-term goals. The Gen-X founders of Google.com so eloquently said that running your company on the basis of quarterly short-term goals demanded by the stock market is like someone who is trying to lose weight stepping on a scale every half-hour--it just doesn't work! Long-term goals including taking care of employees and customers is what delivers big returns for everyone, including stockholders.

It's time more American companies realize that GREED IS COUNTERPRODUCTIVE and understand the value of happy employees. They should take a lesson from Gap, Costco, Ben & Jerry's, or any of the other companies making social responsibility a priority--it's the future of American business.

Here's an article from this morning's Boston Metro newspaper:

IN AN UNUSUAL display of corporate candor, Gap Inc. acknowledged that many of the overseas workers making the retailer’s clothes are mistreated and vowed to improve often shoddy factory conditions by cracking down on unrepentant manufacturers.

The San Francisco-based owner of the Gap, Old Navy and Banana Republic stores made the comments yesterday in its first ever “social responsibility” report — a 40-page document.

“We feel strongly that commerce and social responsibility don’t have to be at odds,” Gap CEO Paul Pressler told a small gathering of shareholders yesterday at the company’s annual meeting.

Gap is uncovering thousands of violations at 3,009 factories scattered across roughly 50 countries. “Few factories, if any, are in full compliance all of the time,” the report said.

Workplace activists who have long chided Gap for making its clothes at so-called “sweatshops” praised the merchant for shedding light on rampant abuses that have been haunting the clothing industry for years. AP

New Movie: "Super Size Me"

2004-05-07T10:29:00.000-04:00

"Last year, Morgan Spurlock decided to eat all his meals at McDonald's for a month. For 30 straight days, everything he took in—breakfast, lunch, dinner, even his bottled water—came from McDonald's. Spurlock recorded the results on camera for his film Super Size Me, which won the Best Director prize for documentaries at this year's Sundance Film Festival.

Super Size Me is also a kind of shock/horror movie, as viewers see the 33-year-old Spurlock's physical condition collapse, day by day. "My body just basically falls apart over the course of this diet," Spurlock told Newsweek. "I start to get tired, I start to get headaches; my liver basically starts to fill up with fat because there's so much fat and sugar in this food. My blood sugar skyrockets, my cholesterol goes up off the charts, my blood pressure becomes completely unmanageable. The doctors were like, 'You have to stop.'" In one month on the fast-food regime, he gained 25 pounds." - excerpt from Craig Lambert's article in Harvard Magazine

Click HERE to go to the movie's website to learn more about it.

Click HERE to find out which movie theaters near you are playing "Super Size Me."

Invisible Legacies

2004-05-04T16:31:00.000-04:00

There are histories that we, in the year 2004, don't fully comprehend. We are probably AWARE of the legacies of race in our country, but we fail to internalize them and acknowledge that these histories have lead to huge disparities between white people and people of color.

I think the article below best illustrates how this works. I wouldn't normally reprint the entire article on this blog, but I felt it too important not to include every single word.

Please take a few minutes to read the following short article and to contemplate it. Click HERE to go directly to the article on the Common Dreams website.

Climbing the White Escalator

by Betsy Leondar-Wright

"America is a meritocracy," my father always told me. The harder he worked, the more money he got: clear cause and effect. From individuals' prosperity or poverty, he believed he could determine their effort and talent. Therefore the poor black people in a nearby city clearly hadn't applied themselves.

My father had a legacy that he couldn't see, a legacy he only got because he is white. His ancestor, John Prescott, came from England in 1638. The Massachusetts Bay Colony granted him land in Central Massachusetts something no people of color got -- and he built the first sawmill there. As far as I can tell, none of his descendants have ever been poor. Some of my ancestors moved west to Ohio in the 1800s, where they may have received land under one of the Homestead Acts government programs closed to people of color.

My father is a World War II-era veteran, and he went to graduate school on the GI Bill. Most veterans of color were unable to access these education benefits. The few black colleges were swamped with applicants, and most other colleges accepted white students only. Job training programs in the South were segregated and under local white control. African Americans were one-third of the WWII vets in the South but got one-twelfth of the job training slots.

My parents bought our first house with a Veterans Administration mortgage. The cheap subsidized mortgages of that era could not be used in mixed-race neighborhoods, or in inner cities. Because most banks issued only government-subsidized mortgages, most WWII veterans of color had to remain renters.

My father's parents got Social Security old-age benefits, which spared my father from supporting them. This enabled him to pay for our college educations. Social Security initially excluded domestic and agricultural workers, which meant that most people of color did not qualify in the first decades of the program. The minimum wage still excludes agricultural workers. The parents of today's middle-aged people of color typically had to support their own parents, and so couldn't save for college tuition as easily as my parents saved for mine.

Of course effort and talent make a difference in climbing the staircase to prosperity. But for most white men, the staircase has been an escalator powered by public assistance. I saw this in my own family. My father had a relative who was unambitious, sweet but slow-thinking. He got a middle-management job and stayed in it for decades, and lived in the same small house until he retired with a pension. He was carried gently up the escalator, ending up lower than my dad, who put a lot of effort into climbing and so reached upper management. That was the range for college-educated WASP men of their generation: middle-management and small homes, or high-level jobs and big homes. They started in the middle of the staircase and got help to rise. Working-class white men may have started at the bottom, but in that era they had opportunities and assistance to climb upward.

Historically, for people of color, the escalator has been broken. Sometimes they have had to hike up a fast-moving down escalator. No matter how hard they worked, they rarely got the same rewards as white people. Their wages were lower, and many neighborhoods and schools were closed to them. In some eras and places, laws and violence kept them off the staircase to prosperity entirely.

Civil rights legislation has allowed people of color to step onto the staircase. But there's no GI Bill today. The more recent government programs open to people of color, such as welfare and Food Stamps, have been tiny compared with the vast assets conferred on whites by the Homestead Acts and the GI Bill. And these recent programs have only helped with immediate living expenses, not college, home ownership, or other assets that provide security for coming generations. People of color have recently become homeowners in greater numbers thanks mostly to their own savings, without the kind of substantial government assistance that white families got in the 1950s and 1960s.

Government boosts for white people were invisible to my father. He opposed government hand-outs as destroying incentives to strive, without considering the hand-outs his family had received. In truth, prosperity comes from a mixture of individual effort and assistance from family and government. America won't be a meritocracy until the escalator rises at the same speed for everyone.

Betsy Leondar-Wright (bleondar-wright@faireconomy.org) is the Racial Wealth Divide communications director at United for a Fair Economy.

Hypocrisy in Iraq

2004-04-30T18:32:00.000-04:00

Ah, yes. The U.S. government invaded Iraq because their "weapons of mass destruction posed an imminent threat to us." OOPS! Nope, that wasn't it because there WERE no weapons of mass destruction. Lie #1.

Since that reason didn't suffice, the reason the U.S. government invaded Iraq became "to free the Iraqi people"--to "give democracy to the people of Iraq"--to "stop the torture Saddam Hussein was inflicting on his own people." OOPS! As this video clip shows, that cannot be the reason, either. Lie #2 (these lies are just WAY too easy to list!).

There is now video proof of U.S. soldiers torturing and humiliating Iraqi prisoners. As Ahmad Taher, 24, a student at Baghdad's Mustansiriyah University said, "Americans claim that they respect freedom and democracy — but only in their country."

I guess Bush & Co. didn't invade Iraq to free the Iraqi people from anything.

So, remind me again, WHY DID WE INVADE IRAQ?

Above: One Iraqi prisoner was told to stand on a box with his head covered, wires attached to his hands. He was told that if he fell off the box, he would be electrocuted, the Army says. Photo: CBS

Click HERE to view the video clip of the report. You'll need the Real One player to view the video. Click here to download your free copy of Real player if you don't already have it..

Claim vs. Fact: Razing the Rhetoric

2004-04-29T22:19:00.000-04:00

Here's a tool to help you dissect the conservative rhetoric you hear every day and find facts...TRUTH!

"The Claim vs. Fact database, found at www.claimvfact.org, contains more than 400 separate quotes on all kinds of issues from top conservatives including Bush administration officials, members of Congress and Fox News personalities. The database contrasts these quotes with well-documented facts. And you don't have to take their word for the facts they cite – in as many places as possible, they include direct Web links to primary source materials."

Click HERE to go to the Claim vs. Fact database and learn TRUTH now!

How To Predict The 2004 Election

2004-04-28T13:41:00.000-04:00

Mark Shields tells you how to predict the Presidential election in November. Click HERE to find out how "you, too, can be a prophet, sage and seer."

Clowning Around

2004-04-25T19:00:00.000-04:00

It appears Dubya McDonald is in WAY over his head.

Tax Burden Shifting off Wealthy onto Everyone Else

2004-04-24T21:17:00.000-04:00

Tax cuts? Where?

Under the disguise of a "tax cut," Bush has actually raised taxed on most of us. The only people who have experienced real cuts are the people who need tax cuts the least--the super wealthy and powerful.

Click HERE to learn more about yet another piece of the Bush propoganda machine.

Bush Tax Cuts = Tax Shifts

Click HERE to read the full report from United for a Fair Economy.

I think billionaire Warren Buffet says it best: "if class warfare is being waged in America, my class is clearly winning."

Diebold: "Complete Idiots"

2004-04-23T22:59:00.000-04:00

As computer scientists, professors, state and federal lawmakers express their concerns about the integrity of "paperless" and unverifiable voting, Diebold just makes excuses for its inability to produce reliable machines.

These e-voting machines are as easy to hack and manipulate as your home computer. Is this what we, as a democracy, have resorted to? If we get, say, 90% of all the votes counted, that's OK. Or, maybe it's 80% counted. What's the number? This is how the business-world measures itself: 100% is not attainable, so it sets an arbitrary number for its definition of "success".

Why shouldn't this apply to our votes and our democratic government? Because 100% is the only acceptable number of votes that count! Anything less than 100% would ensure we do not live in a democracy.

When will we finally abandon the idea that government should be run like a business? A business has the luxury of choosing its market. Our government is for ALL of us. It doesn't have the ability to pick and choose its "customers."

I guess the problems we're seeing with private companies creating and running our e-voting machines should be expected when we try to run government like a business, then. These problems may be within the acceptable range in the business world, but they're an abomination to our democratic government.

Click HERE to learn more about this evolving story.

Above: Protesting outside the California Secretary of State's office in Sacramento. AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli

PLEASE go to VerifiedVoting.org to find out what's currently being done to ensure a paper trail for every vote cast on e-voting machines. Demand your public officials mandate paper ballots on all e-voting machines in your state: click HERE to learn how your state is currently addressing this problem.

On a satirical note, I thought I'd highlight the following quote from the President of Diebold: "We're not idiots, though we may act from time to time as not the smartest," Diebold President Robert J. Urosevich told California regulators investigating the company's performance.

Learning Free From Money-Hungry Media

2004-04-19T20:32:00.000-04:00

I just learned about the website, AskQuestions.org, and thought I'd share this amazing resource with you.

AskQuestions.org practices “bottom-up” journalism by inviting the public to submit questions. The most popular questions are handed over to professional researchers and reporters, who then come back to provide us facts, statistics...truth!

This is your opportunity to ask questions about anything you want to know about--to learn more about the world around you without the media TELLING YOU what you need to learn about.

Go ahead...check it out! Go to www.askquestions.org, or click HERE to start learning more without the pop-culture media prescribing to you what you should and should not know. Increase your awareness now! Have fun...ENJOY!

Wildlife Sanctuary: Luxury Hotel Plans

2004-04-16T16:04:00.000-04:00

Aldabra is a small ring of islands isolated in the middle of the Indian Ocean where wildlife that doesn't survive elsewhere on the planet flourishes.

Aldabra is actually the world's largest raised coral atoll, which makes all it contributes to the world that much more unique and precious.

This fragile ecosystem is now threatened with plans to build a hotel on Aldabra by the Seychelles government.

Above: Aerial view of Aldabra, the world's largest raised coral atoll.

The reason animals and plants flourish here is because humans have not interfered with it. Now that a luxury hotel is planned, the atoll's incredible ability to provide for wildlife may be in serious jeopardy.

Click HERE to learn more about this disturbing possiblity and what is being done about it.

Here is an excerpt from the article:

"VICTORIA (Reuters) - Isolated in the middle of the Indian Ocean, the world's largest raised coral atoll, Aldabra, is the land that time forgot.

Thousands of giant tortoises, exterminated across most of the world, roam the inhospitable terrain.

Huge robber crabs -- the world's largest terrestrial arthropods -- measuring up to 3 ft in length, scour the beaches, climbing up coconut palms and ripping open coconut shells with their massive pincers.

White throated rails, the last surviving flightless bird of the Indian Ocean -- a region famous for the now extinct dodo -- wander amid the dense scrub.

Hawksbill and green turtles come in their thousands to breed on the shores of the atoll. In decline almost everywhere else, the numbers returning to Aldabra are rising each year.

Accommodating 200 plant species onshore and waters teeming in sharks, ray, groupers and other exotic fish, Aldabra, along with the Galapagos islands, is one of the world's greatest surviving natural treasures.

"Aldabra is a very special place because it is virtually untouched by the modern world," says Guy Esperon, warden of Aldabra.

"Its remoteness from the rest of the world has ensured the survival and protection of all of the species on Aldabra," he adds.

But conservationists say this fragile ecosystem is now under threat with plans to build a hotel on Aldabra by the Seychelles government, which administers the atoll."

NOT shopping at Wal-Mart

2004-04-14T20:15:00.000-04:00

You've decided you don't want to shop at Wal-Mart anymore as a way to "vote with your wallet." You'd prefer to spend your money elsewhere. But where do you shop for those essentials Wal-Mart sells at a price you can afford?

I've got two suggestions: Costco and BJ's Wholesale.

Both companies sell the essentials you need at low prices. And, unlike Wal-Mart, provide better wages, twice as many of their employees (vs. Wal-Mart's) are covered under their company health insurance plans and they allow their workers to share in the profits of the company.

Click HERE to locate a Costco store near you.

Or, click HERE to locate a BJ's Wholesale club near you.

James Goldsborough of the San Diego Union-Tribute wrote an article about the recent defeat of Wal-Mart in Inglewood, California. He provides us with some insight as to why the Inglewood win over Wal-Mart is so important and how it has implications for Wal-Mart (and all the other bullying companies that exploit everyone they can to "make a buck") across the country.

Click HERE to read Goldsborough's article.

Here's an excerpt:

"Last month, The Wall Street Journal compared Wal-Mart with Costco, another large retailer and grocer. It pointed out that Costco, in contrast to Wal-Mart, "is held up as a retailer that does it right, paying well and offering generous benefits" to employees.

Costco draws criticism from Wall Street for sharing its success with its employees, reported the Journal. "Public companies need to care for shareholders first," said a Wall Street analyst critical of Costco, noting that Costco stock traded at only 20 times earnings compared with Wal-Mart's 24 times. "Costco runs its business like it is a private company," sniffed this critic.

To that, Costco President and CEO Jim Sinegal replied, "I happen to believe that in order to reward the shareholder in the long term, you have to please your customers and workers."

The Wall Street critic, like so many in corporate America today, just doesn't "get it."

Low-Wage Jobs Fail 30 Million Americans

2004-04-13T09:58:00.000-04:00

Here's a book to consider borrowing from your local public library: in The Betrayal of Work: How Low-Wage Jobs Fail 30 Million Americans, the author, Beth Shulman, states what countless Americans already know to be true--working hard doesn't necessarily mean you'll be rewarded for your labor.

Shulman traveled the country to talk with the invisible working poor so that we would have the opportunity to read about how America's returning to ancient and failed serfdom capitalism is affecting intelligent, hard-working people--like the janitor who made $6 an hour after working for the same company for 8 years and got fired when she and others asked for a raise. Unfortunately, this story is not unique in America's greedy capitalist environment today.

Learn more about the book, The Betrayal of Work: How Low-Wage Jobs Fail 30 Million Americans by clicking HERE. Or, go to your local public library and borrow it.

Click HERE if you'd like to purchase this book.

Quotable

2004-04-12T20:17:00.000-04:00

"Our progress as a nation can be no swifter than our progress in education. The human mind is our fundamental resource."

- John F. Kennedy

Billionaires For Bush

2004-04-10T10:04:00.000-04:00

"Billionaires For Bush" may sound like a group that endorses the Bush administration.

Au contraire, actually. Billionaires for Bush is an organization that makes fun of the super-wealthy who only care about themselves, which is the very group Bush targets for his support.

You may see this very sarcastic and funny performance group at a demonstration near you. Just look for the people dressed in black ties and gowns (see photo below).

Click HERE to learn more about this hilarious protest group.

Above: Billionaires For Bush protesting the selfish and greedy in New York

Hybrid Cars: Demand is HIGH, but where's the supply?

2004-04-08T09:21:00.000-04:00

Typical of the American automobile industry, it's dragging its feet by not producing hybrid cars at a rate that keeps up with demand. There are thousands of people on waiting lists to buy fuel efficient hybrid gasoline-electric cars...and demand is even stronger during these times of record-high gas prices!

When will the American car industry wake up and meet the demand for low emission, fuel-saving vehicles? They need only look at profits Toyota and Honda are making by giving the car-driving public what they want in hybrid cars.

Above: The Toyota Prius, one of a few low emission, fuel-efficient hybrid cars on the market today

Click HERE to learn more about the American automakers' sluggish response to the high demand of hybrids.

Victory For The People!

2004-04-07T09:41:00.000-04:00

Yesterday, residents of Inglewood, California voted against Wal-Mart building a supercenter store in their community. This is a HUGE win for Inglewood, as Wal-Mart spent more than $1,000,000.00 on their campaign to build in Inglewood while opponents of Wal-Mart spent just a fraction of that.

Residents were convinced of the truth--that Wal-Mart drives out small, independent businesses in the community, increases automobile traffic which amplifies suburban sprawl and pollution in the area, pays their employees minimum wage with little or no opportunity for advancement and will not let their workers protect themselves by unionizing.

Inglewood said "no" to the behemoth Wal-Mart--a trend that is becoming more and more commonplace in America (San Diego refused Wal-Mart and so did the city of Chicago, recently).

Click HERE to learn more about the Inglewood "David vs. Goliath" victory over Wal-Mart.

Fed Up with Wal-Mart

2004-04-06T10:25:00.000-04:00

Inglewood, California residents will vote today on the fate of a proposed Wal-Mart in their city.

Wal-Mart is attempting to bypass environmental, urban development and zoning laws in order to build in Inglewood. Residents are not buying their sales pitch.

Wal-Mart will not allow its workers to unionize. They are able to offer their shoppers rock-bottom prices because they don't pay their store employees a living wage. How can anyone live off of the average $6.10 an hour Wal-Mart pays its "sales associates" (or, $12,688 per year if they are permitted to work full-time)?

Click HERE to read more about the Inglewood store initiative and Wal-Mart's bullying tactics.

Or, click HERE to go to the website, "Wal-Mart Blows," and learn more about this disgusting and cruel company.

Blood Diamonds

2004-04-04T14:36:00.000-04:00

This is 14-month-old Marie Koroma, playing with a marble.

Part of Marie's left arm was cut off by rebels in Sierra Leone when she was 3 months old. Photo by Joe Ledford of the Kansas City Star.

Sierra Leone is a country in West Africa whose most important export is diamonds. Greed and the desire to control this valuable commodity caused civil war to break out in Sierra Leone.

Tactics used in this civil war caused by greed resulted in Marie's amputation. Unfortunately, hers is not an isolated story. Thousands upon thousands of children (and civilian adults) have lost their limbs for the desire to control the diamond trade in Sierra Leone.

Above: Freetown, Sierra Leone: A two-year-old girl who lost her arm when rebels from the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) opened fire on a group of fleeing civilians. The little girl's grandmother, on whose back she was strapped, was killed in the incident.

You might ask, "what can I do to help?"

I'd suggest there are many ways you can help:

1. If you purchase diamonds, make sure you purchase from a jeweler who has joined the Jewelers for Clean Diamond Imports. Click HERE to check the list for a local jeweler.

2. Spread the word about these atrocities--tell everyone you know about what's happening to children in Sierra Leone! The more we learn about the consequences of our purchases, the more we can take action with our wallets.

3. Learn more about the situation in West Africa--go to your local public library, or research on the internet. The following websites may be helpful: Human Rights Watch's "Sierra Leone: A Call for Justice", PBS's "Sierra Leone: Truth and Reconciliation", Amnesty International's "Conflict Diamonds", and The Campaign to Eliminate Conflict Diamonds.

More on "smart purchasing" of products and how you can influence policy to right injustices as a consumer by "voting with your wallet" in upcoming posts.

REVERSING PLEDGE, BUSH LETS OPEC BILK AMERICANS

2004-04-03T09:21:00.000-05:00

As a presidential candidate in 2000, George Bush pledged to use his "political capital" to influence OPEC when gas prices soared, saying that during a crisis, a president, "ought to get on the phone with the OPEC cartel and say, 'We expect you to open your spigots" (1). But with gas prices soaring in the United States (2), newspapers report the White House now says the president refuses to "personally lobby oil cartel leaders to change their minds" (3).

With the president refusing to do anything about the situation, OPEC opted this week to cut supply to further inflate gas prices and bilk American consumers (4). While Saudi Arabia's ambassador told the White House yesterday that his country supposedly opposed higher oil prices, the president's refusal to use his close relations with the Saudi government gave the Saudis a pass to support the OPEC production cut (5). Despite the Saudi effort to keep American energy prices high - and despite their ties to terror groups (6) - the President continues to insist that Saudi Arabia is "our friend" (7).

During his term, the president has pursued other policies that help enrich the oil industry, which has given him more than $3 million since 2000 (8). For instance, his tax legislation actually created a massive tax incentive for consumers to purchase gas-guzzling SUVs over fuel efficient hybrid cars (9). Meanwhile, the first budget President Bush introduced after taking office tried to cut 37%, (almost $200 million), out of federal research on renewable energy and energy efficiency programs (10).

Sources:

1. "OPEC to cut back despite high prices", Washington Times, 04/01/2004.

2. "Surging Gas Prices Pump Up Political Debate", Los Angeles Times, 03/31/2004.

3. "Bush Refuses to Lean on Oil Cartel", Miami Herald, 04/01/2004.

4. "OPEC cut to oil output likely to keep prices near record levels", Dallas Morning News, 04/01/2004.

5. "Saudi envoy plays nice with White House on oil supply", USA Today, 4/02/2004.

6. "The Saudi Connection", US News and World Report, 12/15/2003.

7. President Bush Vows to Bring Terrorists to Justice, 05/15/2003.

8. OpenSecrets.Org

9. "SUV, truck owners get a big tax break", Detroit News, 12/18/2002.

10. "Proposed Bush Budget Cuts Renewables and Energy Efficiency Programs", Resources for the Future, 04/11/2001.

This post is from misleader.org.

Visit Misleader.org to learn more about Bush Administration distortion.

Wal-Mart Exploiting the Elderly

2004-04-02T15:31:00.000-05:00

Just when you think Wal-Mart couldn't stoop any lower, they do!

Annie Lee Martin, an 82-year-old resident of Inglewood, California, was recently the target of a public relations blitz for a new Wal-Mart proposed to be built in Inglewood.

Since Wal-Mart was meeting a lot of resistance to its new store proposal, they thought they'd do whatever they could to influence public opinion in their favor--but they did it at the expense of Annie Martin.

As Annie was leaving a supermarket near her home, she was photographed by a sort-of "Wal-Mart papparazzi." They then, in turn, used her photograph on a postcard which was mailed out to residents in the area.

The postcard also featured what seemed to be a glowing letter of recommendation by Martin for the Wal-Mart project that stressed the boon of jobs for youth the initiative would bring – another attempt by the retail giant to paint the measure as a local economic windfall as well as put a folksy, African-American face on an increasingly heated battle over the fate of development in Inglewood. Martin has adamantly denied the quotes in the Wal-Mart "PR postcard."

Click HERE to learn more about how Wal-Mart will exploit everyone it can to make a buck.

Click HERE to learn more about a book called "How Wal-Mart Is Destroying America (and the World) and What You Can Do about It" by Bill Quinn. You may wish to purchase it or borrow it from your local library if you're interested in reading more about this disturbing company.

Massachusetts Tops U.S. Tech Index

2004-04-01T09:18:00.000-05:00

The great state of Massachusetts remains the state best positioned to take advantage of the high-technology economy, according to The Milken Institute.

Massachusetts was the only state to score higher than 80 out of 100 and was well ahead of No. 2 California, while less than 1 point separated California from No. 4 Maryland.

Like the 2002 study before it, the new survey found a link between how well a state scores in the index and its per-capita income. Moreover, the researchers contend that the more a state invests in technology and develops technology businesses, the better off its citizens will be.

"If they don't become part of the knowledge economy, they risk some very large dislocations among their population," Ross DeVol, director of regional economics for the Milken Institute, told Reuters.

Massachusetts wasn't the only New England state that fared well: Connecticut was #10, Rhode Island was #11, New Hampshire was #12 and Vermont was #22. Rhode Island and Vermont made the biggest gains in the country over 2002, moving up 10 and 9 spots respectively.

Click HERE for the complete state rankings (Adobe Acrobat Reader required).

Progressive Radio Network Launches Today

2004-03-31T16:22:00.000-05:00

Welcome to the LEFT side of the radio dial!

As mentioned in a previous post, Air America launched today and no matter where you live, you can listen to the shows live if you have an internet connection.

Click HERE to listen to shows like "The O'Franken Factor" with Al Franken, or "The Majority Report" with Janeane Garofalo.

It's full of satire, comedy (think 'The Daily Show' on Comedy Central or Saturday Night Live's 'Weekend Update' with Tina Fay and Jimmy Fallon) and, just as important, Air America is finally getting our progessive message out into the mainstream.

So, go ahead and give it a try--click HERE to start listening live!

I have added a permanent hyperlink to the live stream of Air America on the right-hand side of this page for added convenience.

If the above links are not working (I've heard demand has been pushing Air America's servers to the limit), click HERE for an alternative live stream.

If you live in one of the following cities or areas, you can listen to Air America on AM radio:

New York - WLIB 1190 AM
Los Angeles - KBLA 1580 AM
Chicago - WNTD 950 AM
Portland, OR- KPOJ 620 AM
Inland Empire, CA- KCAA 1050 AM
Minneapolis MN - WMNN 1330AM

...more cities and stations to come very soon!

Fresh, Natural, Organic Food

2004-03-30T15:31:00.000-05:00

Do you want fresh, locally grown, organic food, but don't know where to find it?

The map on the website, LocalHarvest.org, makes it easy to find family farms, farmers markets and other sources of sustainably grown food in your area. Just click here to go to the website. Then click on the map to zoom in, or search with their search form for quick results.

LocalHarvest maintains a definitive and reliable "living" public nationwide directory of small farms, farmers markets, and other local food sources. Go ahead and check it out--click here!

You may also want to find out if there is a Whole Foods Market near where you live. More and more people are buying their groceries from Whole Foods, which is now the fastest-growing grocery store chain in the country.

Click here to go to the Whole Foods website to learn more about them. Or, click here for a listing of Whole Foods stores (just click on your state at the top of the page).

High Electric Bill...MUST be growing Pot!

2004-03-28T18:07:00.000-05:00

Imagine going about your daily routine only to be stopped by the police with a search warrant in hand.

Now imagine, knowing you have done nothing wrong and after letting them search your home and go through your private property, that you find out the reason they got a search warrant was because you have a high electric bill.

When you ask how that can be, the police state that you were under suspicion of growing marijuana.

Sound bizarre? Well, that's exactly what happened to a family in California recently.

Click here to learn about how having a high electric bill can lead to authorities suspecting that you're growing a marijuana farm.

Bush Makes Fun of Not Finding WMD

2004-03-26T15:39:00.000-05:00

Bush thinks it's funny that no Weapons of Mass Destruction have been found in Iraq despite the fact that over 500 U.S. soldiers have died, that countless innocent Iraqi civilians have been killed and that we, the taxpayers, have paid over $80,000,000,000.00 because he said there were WMD.

Click HERE to learn more about Bush's despicable "joke."

Progressives Are Laughing--And Getting Our Message Out, Too!

2004-03-26T14:32:00.000-05:00

Thanks to all the whacked-out material Bush and the conservatives have given us, political satire is on the rise and it's not what it used to be.

The tide has turned: the "crazy conservative" is now all the rage! Click here to learn more about how "progressives are busily bridging the humor-and satire-gaps that once separated liberals from Rush Limbaugh and his countless imitators. Comedy, one of the biggest weapons in the progressive arsenal, is once again (remember Mort Sahl, Lenny Bruce, Second City) being used to effectively get the liberal message out in fresh, irreverent ways."

"Most promising is that Maher, Al Franken and others like Michael Moore and the Texas populist Jim Hightower are using humor to expose conservatives for what they truly are--mean-spirited, hyperbolic, and hypocritical."

"According to a January Pew Research Center survey, 20 percent of those under 30 receive their political news from places like Saturday Night Live and The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Since late-night comedy, more often than not, skewers the right, the young are hearing a brief against President George W. Bush, and watching these shows not-too-subtly support causes like gay rights, reproductive freedom, alternative energy sources and Internet privacy."

"Bill Maher, star of HBO's Real Time, for example, lambasts Bush for refusing to send troops to Haiti "unless they start doing something there that is really dangerous, like letting gays marry."

Above: Bill Maher, host of Real Time on HBO, Fridays at 8pm Eastern.

"And the level of liberal comedy activity is rising quickly. On March 31, Air America, a progressive radio network, will launch a new 24-hour radio program in three cities, including New York, with hosts ranging from comedian Al Franken ("The O'Franken Factor") and Janeane Garofalo to rap artist Chuck D., Nation author Laura Flanders and former Daily Show writer and co-creator Lizz Winstead."

Note about Air America: Live streaming of Air America Radio shows, along with show archives, will be available at www.airamericaradio.com. Air America Radio is in negotiations with satellite television and satellite radio providers. These national services will allow potential listeners to tune in anywhere in the country.

Discover Socially Responsible Investing (SRI)

2004-03-23T16:16:00.000-05:00

Are you interested in investing, but want your money to go into companies that understand their primary responsibilty is to maximize the public good resulting from doing business and NOT "doing whatever it takes to make a buck?" Would you like to invest in companies that promote corporate behavior which fosters a more just and sustainable world?

If you'd like to learn more about Socially Responsible Investing (SRI), I'd suggest an exploration of the following websites:

Social Funds.com - features over 10,000 pages of information on SRI mutual funds, community investments, corporate research, shareowner actions, and daily social investment news.

Social Investment Forum - a national nonprofit membership organization promoting the concept, practice and growth of socially responsible investing.

Domini Social Investments - an investment firm specializing exclusively in socially responsible investing.

Social Investment Organizaton (Canadian) - a national network committed to integrating social responsibility and environmental sustainability with investment.

KLD Research & Analytics - promotes global socially responsible investing by providing superior corporate social research products and services to institutional investors.

Wal-Mart Busted for Disability Discrimination - AGAIN!

2004-03-22T12:42:00.000-05:00

Click HERE to learn more about how Wal-Mart has yet again proven it will exploit anyone and everyone it can in order to make a buck.

This time, it's by discriminating against the hiring of people with disabilities.

Houston Schools Zero Dropout Rate ("Texas Miracle") A Lie

2004-03-22T09:53:00.000-05:00

Houston's school leaders' arms have been so twisted to reflect decreasing dropout rates that they decided to make up fake numbers to keep their jobs and collect bonuses. They were reporting that their urban schools had NO dropouts. Was this a "Texas Miracle" or a BIG, TEXAS-SIZED LIE? Of course, it was a lie. Click here to learn more about why and how they did it.

This is the school district both President Bush and Secretary of Education Rod Paige have held up as the national showcase for accountability and the model for the federal No Child Left Behind law.

Is this what we want as a model for schools across the entire country? Would we rather our school leaders lie about the state of our schools and go into complete denial than face the challenges and work collectively, with our teachers who know our students best, toward actually improving education?

Bush and Paige have serious contempt for education, which is not uncommon among conservatives. Click here to learn why the right-wing hates public education.

Walter Cronkite: In Defense of Liberalism

2004-03-21T20:02:00.000-05:00

Walter Cronkite wrote this article to John Kerry. His message: BE A PROUD LIBERAL!

Rumsfeld Caught On Video

2004-03-19T16:30:00.000-05:00

You've probably heard the Bush administration, in recent weeks, deny using the term "imminent threat" in the months leading up to the Iraq invasion.

Here's a video clip of Bush's own Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, caught right on national television blatantly lying about it and then being confronted with the quotes spoken directly from his mouth in September of 2002 using the terms "imminent threat" and "immediate threat" to describe Iraq's weapons capabilities.

If you can't believe your eyes and ears the first time, click here to see it again.

How can this arrogant and deceitful behavior be defended? How can we trust this administration to tell the truth?

Corporate Greed Unchecked

2004-03-18T22:40:00.000-05:00

THIS is what happens when greed taints the market.

Dennis Kozlowski, former Tyco chairman and former CFO, Mark Swartz, looted the company of some $600,000,000.00 while they were in charge.

They thought it was OK to steal from the company they headed because they felt they deserved it. Thanks to their abundant greed, they are now two of many "poster boys" for corporate excess. Dennis, Mark and all the other CEOs and execs still out there who loot the companies they are supposed to be serving fail to comprehend that they DO NOT deserve ANY amount of stolen money no matter how important they perceive themselves.

Kozlowski's and Swartz's actions are prime examples of greed's negative impact on the market. Greed causes unnatural amounts of money to be funneled into the hands of a few. Left unchecked and unregulated, greed will eventually cause the markets to implode, collapse and lead to the erosion of the middle class to near extinction.

Above: Defendants Mark Swartz (left) and L. Dennis Kozlowski (right) of Tyco Int'l. Photo from CBS News.

More on the current greedy financial environment in America to follow in upcoming posts.

BUSH DISHONESTY TAKES CENTER STAGE

2004-03-17T09:01:00.000-05:00

President Bush attacked his opponents yesterday, saying, "If you're going to make an accusation, you ought to back it up with facts." (1) But on everything from the economy to national security, this high standard stands in sharp contrast to the president's own behavior.

On Iraq, President Bush said before the war that Iraq "recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa" (2) despite the CIA previously warning the White House not to make this factually inaccurate statement (3). He also said there was "no doubt the Iraqi regime continues to possess the most lethal weapons ever devised" (4) despite receiving repeated warnings that there was little hard evidence Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction after 1991 (5). He even said that "we found the weapons of mass destruction" when none had been found (6).

On economic policy, President Bush said that, with his tax plan, "by far the vast majority of the help goes to the people at the bottom end of the economic ladder." (7) In fact, according to Congress' bipartisan Joint Committee on Taxation, households making less than $40,000 - roughly the bottom half of the economic ladder - would receive only 10 percent of Bush's income tax cut.

On the budget, President Bush said, "This nation has got a deficit because we have been through a war." (8) He said this two months after his own budget acknowledged that his economic policies and tax cuts for the wealthy - not the war - were what created the largest deficits in American history. (9)

Sources:

1. Remarks by President Bush and Prime Minister Balkenende of the Netherlands in a Photo Opportunity, 03/16/2004.

2. State of the Union, 01/28/2003.

3. "Bush Aides Disclose Warnings From CIA", Washington Post, 07/23/2003.

4. President Says Saddam Hussein Must Leave Iraq Within 48 Hours, 03/17/2003.

5. "Doubts, dissent stripped from public Iraq assessment", Mercury News, 02/09/2004.

6. Interview of the President by TVP, Poland, 05/29/2003.

7. "Serial Exaggerators", Fair.Org.

8. President Discusses Plan for Economic Growth in Ohio, 04/24/2003.

9. "Secrets of S-3", GovExec.com, 02/12/2003.

This post is from misleader.org.

Homer Simpson Gets His Tax Cut

2004-03-16T11:06:00.000-05:00

Click here to learn a bit about how this satirical cartoon speaks some truth.

Image from Inequality.org.

Socialists Grab Power From Conservatives In Spain

2004-03-14T20:08:00.000-05:00

I wouldn't normally highlight a big story like this except for the fact that Spain's is the first national election taking place in a country that supported the Iraq war last year.

The governing right-of-center Popular Party suffered a loss of 35 seats in the Spanish Congress while the opposition Socialist Party gained 39 seats in today's elections. High voter turnout (about 76%) translated into this massive political power swing in Spain.

Leading up to the elections today, the Popular Party seemed to have cleared the way for a narrow win. But, the bombing of Madrid's commuter trains last week and the indication afterward that it may have been retaliation for the Spanish government's support of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq resulted in high voter turnout and the ousting of the governing party's power. The attack revived public opposition to Spain's presence in Iraq. The people of Spain, like the British people, were adamantly opposed to the invasion with some 90% of Spaniards disagreeing with Prime Minister Aznar and his Popular Party's position to support the United States.

The above photo was taken during a silent march through central Barcelona on Friday, March 12. The sign reads, "Could this picture have cost us 200 deaths?" referring to the 200 people who died in the Madrid train blasts. Below that it says, "No More Lies - No More Deaths - No More War." Photo from Reuters.

Is voter reaction in Spain an isolated event? Or, is it an indication of a broader, growing world-wide resentment for the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq?

Si usted entiende español, chasque aquí para ir al periódico más grande de España, El Pais, y leer más sobre las elecciones.

Advocacy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

2004-03-12T18:18:00.006-05:00

Persons with disabilities are one of the most overlooked and forgotten groups in our country. Find out the resources your community provides to those with disabilities. Help increase the independence and mobility of your differently-abled yet courageous neighbors.

Please consider visiting the following not-for-profit group websites and making a donation of time or money, if possible:

Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund

Disability Rights Advocates

Independent Living Institute

"As long as we regard our disabilities as tragedies, we will be pitied. As long as we feel ashamed of who we are, our lives will be regarded as useless. As long as we remain silent, we will be told by others what to do."

- Adolf Ratzka, 2003

There Is No Such Thing As A "Free Market"

2004-03-12T16:46:00.000-05:00

Click here to learn about this charge put forth by Thom Hartmann.

The Computer Ate My Vote!

2004-03-12T13:01:00.000-05:00

Have you heard of e-voting, yet? How about the company Diebold?

If not, you're bound to hear more about how Diebold's AccuVote-TS machines used for electronic voting in a growing number of states have serious security flaws prone to hackers. Just as important, these e-voting machines do not, by default, provide voter-verifiable paper ballots to counteract the ill-will of hackers.

Having a paper-trail to confirm votes in the event of a recount may seem like a no-brainer to you and me, but Diebold has so far resisted adding affordable, voter-verifiable paper ballots unless coerced to do so by the states in which their machines are used.

To date, secretaries of state in California, Nevada, Vermont and Washington have taken steps to make certain each citizen's vote will be recorded on paper. Those are democrats and republicans, showing this is not an issue of partisanship but of safeguarding our democracy.

You can help ensure your vote will be counted by contacting your state election officials to demand a paper-trail on all e-voting machines used in your state. Spread the word--make everyone you know aware of Diebold's failure to protect our votes on their machines. Find out how your state is addressing this problem by going to the website, verifiedvoting.org, and "Select Your State" on the left-hand side of the page.

As True Majority states, "Taking the simple step of demanding a voter verified paper trail is both affordable and practical—and will allow our nation to use touch-screen voting for the benefits of easily accommodating multiple languages, arrangements for people with disabilities and more. But currently, computer voting systems are too vulnerable to tampering and failure to risk this year’s elections."

Working and Poor in the USA

2004-03-11T10:11:00.000-05:00

For generations, Americans shared a tacit understanding that if you worked hard, you could earn a livable income and provide basic security for yourself and your family. That promise has been broken. More than 30 million Americans--one in four workers--are stuck in low-wage jobs that do not provide the basics for a decent life.

Click for Page 2 of this article.

Click for Page 3 of this article.