The Corporatization of America.

Those on the political right incessantly condemn government while, at the same time, promoting “privatization” – another word for corporatization.  What they want is to eliminate all forms of public regulation and turn all of our government affairs over to large corporations. 

They have a good start.

In the U.S., our health care and pharmaceutical industries have long been privately-owned and controlled.  This despite the fact that taxpayers provide large research grants to these companies to help them develop their products.  And over the past 30 years, we’ve seen increased privatization and control of the food chain, schools, prisons, even the military.  The mercenary company, Blackwater (aka Xe), has become a household word for its role in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Indeed, some reports state that there are as many mercenaries working for the U.S. in those wars as there are government troops.  We’ve even seen our government award patents (and the resulting control) to corporations for genetic discoveries, including plant hybrids even though they were often subsidized by our government.  Perhaps the greatest threat of this privatization nonsense is to our water supplies. 

Appearing on Christiane Amanpour’s CNN program, Robert Kennedy, Jr. stated that this is becoming a very big concern throughout the world.  He stated that water is one of the biggest bargaining issues for peace between Israelis and the Arab world.  And, according to Kennedy, the issue we’re seeing in the Middle East is now becoming a very big issue in the western U.S.  For example, as the result of urban and irrigation pressures, the Colorado River now runs dry before it hits the ocean.  Lake Powell, which provides water for Las Vegas, is projected to be dry in 20-50 years.  In addition, much of the prime farmland in California now lacks water for irrigation because of the demand on reservoirs.  Of course, some suggest that the solution is to give control of water supplies to private corporations. 

This is a very bad idea.

This privatization stupidity has gone so far that some want corporations to take over public lands, public parks and public buildings.  In the state of Arizona, the Republican-controlled legislature has already cut millions from education, tourism and public safety in its attempts to balance the budget while simultaneously cutting taxes.  Yet those measures haven’t been sufficient.   So the Republicans are actually promoting legislation that would force the state to sell all state-owned public buildings to individuals or corporations and lease them back.  The result would be to literally hand billions to the buyers at the expense of the taxpayers who paid to build them.

If the choice is between a well-regulated government and greedy corporations (think AIG, Goldman-Sachs, BankofAmerica, et al), which would you want to control your fate? 

Democrats still need to grow a pair.

Since Bill Clinton left office, the Democratic Party has been searching for a large dose of testosterone.   When Barack Obama won the Democratic nomination, it seemed that the party had finally found someone who had the vision, the intelligence and the strength to stand up to an opposing party that is united in its support of corporations and the wealthy. 

That may be true, but it’s becoming increasingly difficult to tell.

Despite a large majority in the House and a 60-member caucus in the Senate, the Democrats once again seem weak and incapable of governing.  The health care reform bill is exhibit A.  In its current form, the Senate bill will mandate that everyone purchase insurance from private corporations more interested in increasing their profits than controlling costs and provide health care coverage for their customers. 

It’s time for President Obama and Congressional Democrats to drop their futile attempts at bipartisanship and pull together.  If they don’t, Sarah Palin and the Tea Party may have a better chance of reaching majority status in the future than Democrats. 

According to a new NBC-Wall Street Journal poll, they’re currently more popular.

The real scandal surrounding Tiger Woods.

For days we’ve been treated to “news” stories speculating about Woods’ infidelity and the consequences of his alleged indiscretions.  Why?  Personally, I could care less if Woods had one affair or a hundred.  He’s human.  And like all humans he has flaws. 

Instead of wondering about Woods’ future, we should be wondering why the news media has devoted endless hours to this story when the same media could not devote a few hours to investigate the Bush administration’s claims that led to the ill-advised invasion and occupation of Iraq.  We should wonder why the news media spends more time covering the personal indiscretions of political candidates than the issues they espouse.  We should wonder why the news media gives equal access to representatives of the far right and far left without examining the accuracy of their claims.

Following the death of Walter Cronkite, many journalists reported Cronkite’s philosophy that a news organization’s responsibility is to tell people what they need to know.  Not what they want to know.  Too bad none of them seem to share that philosophy.

Going Rogue with the truth.

I haven’t purchased Sarah Palin’s best-selling rant and I won’t.  I don’t need to.  Before it was dissected by the Associated Press and others, I already knew it would be filled with hate and lies.   

How did I know?

During last year’s presidential campaign, no one was more sarcastic, mean-spirited and uninformed than Sarah Palin.  And no one told more lies.  In fact, I vowed to send an email to Senator John McNasty every time I found his campaign to be less than truthful.  Unfortunately for me, my vow resulted in writing an email virtually every day of the campaign.  Some days, I sent 3, 4 or more.  Many of those emails were in response to Ellie Mae Clampett’s, er, Sarah Palin’s speeches.  From her constant refrain that Obama was “palin’ around with terrorists” to her attacks on his having been a community organizer to her rants about the media (the disaster that was her CBS interview wasn’t her fault, it was Katie Couric’s) Palin revealed virtually every character flaw known to man.  Or woman.

It seems that Palin is such a rogue that she refuses to rely on traditional sources for her information.  Instead, she draws her political wisdom from Joe the Plumber (who’s neither a plumber nor named Joe), Rush Limbaugh and Glenn “crocodile tears” Beck. 

In Sarah’s mavericky mind, not even her running mate or his campaign staff grasped the real issues.  After all, her running mate was merely a U.S. Senator while she was the former mayor of Wasilla and a hockey mom.  If only they wouldn’t have held her back, the country would be much better off today with her at the helm after she had disposed of that wrinkly old bald guy who dared to put his name in front of hers on the ballot.

For me, the real question regarding Palin is why anyone would buy her book or bother to fact check it – unless they enjoy fantasy and fiction. 

“An electronic Pearl Harbor”

Last Sunday, a report by Steve Kroft on 60 Minutes discussed the threat of cyber terrorism.

At the center of his report, Kroft interviewed Jim Lewis who directs the Center for Strategic and International Studies. According to Lewis, the United States has already experienced “an electronic Pearl Harbor.” Lewis continued, “Some unknown foreign power, and honestly, we don’t know who it is, broke into the Department of Defense, to the Department of State, the Department of Commerce, probably the Department of Energy, probably NASA. They broke into all of the high-tech agencies, all of the military agencies, and downloaded terabytes of information. Someone was able to get past the firewall and encryption devices of one of the most sensitive U.S. military computer systems and stay inside for several days,” he stated. The system he referred to is the CENTCOM network, which is our military’s control center for fighting wars. Lewis said that the hackers sat inside the network, tracking information and documents “like they were part of military command.” According to Lewis, this is the “most significant” breach of security ever “acknowledged by the Pentagon.”

Proof that the Obama administration is weak militarily and soft on terrorism? No, wait!

Christian paranoia and Internet myths

I recently received a chain email from multiple independent sources.  The email states that the ACLU – deemed to be a bunch of radical commies by so many conservative and religious groups – had filed a lawsuit to have all cross-shaped headstones removed from military cemeteries. 

Sounds terrible, doesn’t it?  And it would be if there was even a shred of truth to it. 

The same email also tells of another lawsuit that would end prayer in the military.  “Navy chaplains can no longer mention Jesus’ name in prayer thanks to the wretched ACLU and our new administration,” it warns.  Again, this is a fiction of someone’s imagination. 

To ensure that as many people as possible circulate these falsehoods, the email continues by asking recipients to “please pass this on after a short prayer.  Don’t break it.”  And like sheep, thousands, perhaps millions, of people have added their contacts to the email and passed it on without checking the facts. 

In this case, the email is likely intended as payback to the ACLU for its past actions in protecting the civil rights of minorities.  Politically conservative Christians are still seething that the ACLU blocked them from surrounding us all with Christian prayer and sayings.  They are furious that they have been prevented from striking down the Constitution’s establishment clause in order to declare this a Christian nation.  They are frustrated that they are not permitted to abridge the freedom and rights of non-Christians. And they believe that Christianity is under attack. 

None of this justifies their attempts to spread political and religious paranoia. 

Indeed, such emails are beyond reprehensible.  And by making false and unsubstantiated accusations, they are decidedly un-Christian.  Worse yet, they rely upon the good and caring nature of individuals to unsuspectingly circulate and perpetuate the accusations.

That said, the people who unwittingly pass along such false and misleading information must also be held culpable.  They are guilty of assuming the worst and not taking the time to check for the truth.  In the case of the aforementioned email, it took me less than 30 seconds of research to determine that it was false.

The Chamber of (Republican) Commerce.

Recently, the CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce was interviewed on NPR.  He went to great lengths to convince listeners that the Chamber is bi-partisan. 

That’s a little difficult to believe since the Chamber seems to support every single Republican position.  Indeed, when I once did some work for the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, the Chamber proudly hosted speeches by each of the Republican candidates for Governor.  It refused to allow the Democratic candidate to speak to its members.  And, of course, the Chamber endorsed a Republican.

The U.S. Chamber is now spending $300,000 a day on network TV commercials to kill health care reform using the scare tactics that are so favored by Republicans and the insurance industry.  That alone is not terribly surprising, or revealing.  What IS revealing is the commercial’s voiceover.  Although I don’t know his name, the voiceover talent is the very same one used in every single attack ad for the Republican National Committee.  You know, the guy who, sounding like the voice of darkness, asks you to call your representatives and tell them “we just can’t afford health care reform” or whatever scary legislation the Democrats have proposed today.  Whenever, wherever Republicans want to verbally attack an idea, they use his voice. 

The choice of the voice talent is no coincidence.  It indicates that the Chamber is working in concert with the Republican Party.  If the Chamber really wanted to keep the appearance (or at least the sound) of bi-partisanship, it should have selected another voice to try to scare us.  

The Chamber claims to represent more than 3 million members (the number is actually 200,000) and small businesses as well as large corporations.   Yet, almost without exception, the positions endorsed by the Chamber benefit large corporations and the Republican Party at the expense of small businesses and entrepreneurs.  The Chamber’s position on health care reform is no different.

Obama’s Third War

Recently, the Obama administration declared a new war – a war on Fox News.  Although I don’t entirely agree with the Obama administration’s action, I certainly understand it.  News organizations have a responsibility to present facts in an unbiased manner and to clearly distinguish opinion from news.  Fox News does neither.

Indeed, the network itself claims that only a few hours a day are news.  It refers to the rest of its programming as “conversations.”  During these “conversations,” Fox News allows Hannity, Beck, O’Reilly, et al and their guests to make unsubstantiated claims or wild allegations against the administration and other Democrats.  Then it “reports” those claims and allegations during its “newscasts” and on its “news” crawls.  The network has even sponsored and promoted one-sided political events such as “tea parties” and “9-12” demonstrations.  These are not the actions of a legitimate news organization.

Moreover, compared to assaults on the press by some of its predecessors, the administration’s response to Fox News is actually quite mild.  For example, President George W. Bush not only refused access to reporters and organizations deemed antagonistic to his agenda, the Bush administration produced propaganda disguised as “news” stories and provided them to local TV and radio stations.  It paid journalists to present White House talking points.  It even tried to limit funding for public radio and TV unless their reporting became friendlier to the Bush White House.

Unlike some of the Bush administration’s actions, the snub of Fox News does not raise any constitutional issues.  It is not censorship.  The Obama administration is not telling Fox News what it can say or report.  The administration simply limited press invitations to representatives of actual news organizations.   Although it may be unwise to antagonize any media outlet, it is not unconstitutional.

Liberal media bias?

Since the days of Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew, conservatives have been fond of blaming MSM (mainstream media) for interfering with their agenda.   They contend that most news outlets are run by liberals and therefore biased against conservatives. 

Really? 

The vast majority of media outlets are owned by just five conglomerates (CBS, Disney, General Electric, News Corp, and TimeWarner).  Who do we have to thank for the ever-shrinking number of media owners?  Well, conservatives of course. 

For example, during the Reagan administration, Congress passed the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984 which deregulated cable TV rates.  As a result, cable rates skyrocketed 25-30 percent through 1986-1988.  Then, following the Newt Gingrich-led Republican Revolution, Congress passed the Telecommunications Act of 1996.  Conservatives sold the bill as a way to increase competition and lower consumer costs (Does that sound familiar?).  But like most Republican legislation, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 did the exact opposite.   Following its passage, cable TV rates have jumped more than 40 percent and the number of cable system owners dropped dramatically. 

Prior to deregulation, there were thousands of cable systems.  Today, five corporations (Comcast, TimeWarner, Cox, Charter and Cablevision control the lion’s share of the market – more than 50 million households.   In addition, two companies (DirecTV and Dish) control satellite TV serving than 31 million households, three media giants own all of the cable news networks, five corporations dominate Internet news, and one corporation (Clear Channel) owns 900 radio stations. 

Such large media conglomerates can hardly be accused of liberal bias.  Indeed, the exact opposite is more likely to be true.  Certainly many of the News Corp–owned media promote conservative points of view.   And combined with the demise of the Fairness Doctrine, it has become increasingly easy for these behemoths to control public opinion (and therefore legislation). 

Could that be the real reason behind deregulation?

If Sarah Palin is “Going Rogue”, what the heck is Michelle Bachmann doing?

The Republican Congresswoman from Minnesota doesn’t claim to see Russia from her doorstep.  But she does claim to see conspiracies throughout the Obama administration.  For example, she believes that the Census is a liberal plot to identify Republicans so they can be rounded up and placed in internment camps – a concept that was even too crazy for Glenn Beck.  That’s right, that Glenn Beck.  The one who fills an hour a day on Fox Noise crying crocodile tears for his so-called lost America; an America where everyone is white, Christian, heterosexual and Republican. 

Since it’s not easy to out-crazy Glenn Beck, this Congresswoman certainly has earned closer examination – preferably by people in white coats.

Bachman’s official website states that “In only her first term, Congresswoman Bachmann developed a reputation as a ‘principled reformer’ who stays true to her conservative beliefs while pushing for real reform of the broken ways of Washington.”  Well, if that’s true, in her second term she’s developed a reputation as a loon. 

As evidenced by her stand on the Census, Bachmann has supported every wacky idea put forward by right wing media hosts, and a few that are even too wacky for them.  Further, she seems to see liberal conspiracies around every corner.  On Hardball with Chris Matthews she said that “I am very concerned that he [Barack Obama] may have anti-American views.”  She went on to say, “I wish the American media would take a great look at the views of the people in Congress and find out – are they pro-America or anti-America?”

She claims that “evolution is a theory that has never been proven” (except by 99.9 percent of all scientists).  Of global climate change, she says “Carbon dioxide is “natural; it is not harmful…”  She finds it unnecessary to “create an arbitrary reduction in something that is naturally occurring in the Earth.”  Therefore, she believes the Cap and Trade Bill is unnecessary.   Of health care reform, she said “What we have to do today is make a covenant, to slit our wrists, be blood brothers on this thing.  We have to do whatever it takes to make sure this doesn’t pass.”  Finally, in regard to Iran, Bachmann says that a nuclear strike “shouldn’t be taken off the table.”

It appears that Bachmann sees herself as the Minnesota version of Sarah Palin.  And like Sarah, she needs to put together a book of her exploits.  I’d like to suggest a title:  Instead of “Going Rogue”, it could be “Going Insane”.