Vivá Venezuela!

Obama has failed to fulfill the hopes of the majority of the global population. He has not and will not change foreign policy for the better - the United States remains an imperial power bent on exerting its political and economic will on a global basis.

The most recent round of Venezuela/ALBA bashing is full of lies, half-truths and is nothing more than pure propaganda. Whether it be FOX, the NY Times, or the Washington Post, all of these media outlets and many others are marching to the same orders - a smear campaign by the international elite against Venezuela/ALBA and, by extension, socialism in general.

Nevertheless, the facts are clear. From an article by professor Anthony DiMaggio:

[Hugo] Chávez's popularity, as American journalists begrudgingly admit, is based upon his willingness to put the needs of Venezuela's poor masses ahead of those of business elites. This does not mean that he's a saint or that political repression should not be a serious concern for those living throughout the hemisphere. No political leader deserves a blank check to consolidate political power. But what seems to escape U.S. leaders is that Venezuelan democracy assigns the task of holding leaders accountable to the people of Venezuela, rather than to "enlightened" U.S. elites.

Chávez's "Bolivarian Revolution" is indeed wildly popular in amongst Venezuelans. He is succeeding in promoting a plethora of social welfare programs paid for by the country's oil export revenues. Chávez is spearheading efforts to promote gender equality, government sponsored health care, universal higher education, increased state pension funding, land redistribution, and an expansion of public housing, amongst other programs. Chávez's welfare revolution is significantly improving the lives of the citizenry. A 50 percent increase in social welfare spending from 1999-2005 (in the first 6 years of Chávez's presidency) was accompanied by decreases in infant mortality, an increase in school enrollment an increase in individual disposable income, and a decrease in poverty. From 1997-2005, the national poverty rate fell from 56 to 38 percent of the population. By 2005, an estimated 50 percent of the Venezuelan people enjoyed government health care, while the same number also enjoyed government food subsidies. The Bolivarian Revolution, one should remember, also took place under fairly stable economic growth, ranging from 6-18 percent of GDP a year from 2004-2008. This trend stands on its head the assumptions of U.S. reporters that socialist policies are a major obstacle to economic stability and prosperity.

Which side are you on?

The crisis in Iran rumbles on. It is an irrelevancy whether the incumbent or the loyal opposition won the Iranian presidential "election". The charade which took place under the watchful eye of the Islamic theocracy was in no way a democratic exercise - no one can "win" an election conducted under a system of government repression and religious intolerance, whichever candidate received the most votes. To consider this the main issue is to ignore the other great camp involved in the ongoing struggle - that of the Iranian people themselves, by definition unrepresented by other faction of the autocratic Islamic regime, however much some now identify with one side's victory.

The position of revolutionary socialists must be support for the Iranian people and support for their uprising against the Islamic Republic, regardless of the election results. We cannot and should not give support to the moderate elements of the Iranian ruling class centred around the butcher Mousavi; but it is not his installation as president of Iran that we seek, it is the complete transformation of Iranian politics and society. Whether they know it or not, this is the logical conclusion to the mass movement of the Iranian demonstrators emerging as we speak: the recapturing of the state by civil society and the growth of national democratic structuers and an independent space for the development of the Iranian workers' movement.

The confusion hampering the British left's response to the Iranian revolt is understandable. Ahmadinejad is often lazily touted as an anti-imperialist figure, the beloved of Iran's rural poor. His popularity, not to mention the specific policies of his rule (regardless of how welcome his redistributive domestic agenda may be, compared to the alternative) is, if not unimportant, then a small matter when compared to the other side of the coin. The Iranian state remains a cruel and oppressive regime, its army and police and medieval ideology an obstacle not simply to the prospect of a humane and democratic socialist society, but also of the basic human rights - whether to trade union organisation or cultural expression - which serve as the threatened but surviving bedrock of the modern liberal state.

A friend of mine who helped set up a proxy server for the protestors, while looking through images of Iran's popular culture before the downfall of the Shah, was pleasantly surprised by the familiar, even Western images he saw. Although in the glorious perspective of an English liberal student he hoped "we'll get Iran back into miniskirts and cocaine" as a result of the current struggle (having 'missed out' on the 1980s, he's hoping Iran undergoes the full-blown revolution of discos and yuppies) there was considerable truth to his remark that Iran is "more modern and revolutionary give than most give them credit for". Prior to 1979, and even now despite the last thirty years of fundamentalism, Iran's status as one of the most economically developed and culturally 'Westernised' societies in the Middle East is obvious. The Islamic Republic has not changed this; despite its problems, Iran is more than suited to liberal democracy, a possibility brutally cut short by the Islamists during the revolution.

But a full-blown Westernisation of Iran is not the 'best' the people can hope for. The choice does not lie between the thugs of Ali Khamenei and complete integration into the world market as a 'democratic' supplier of oil and regional support to the United States. Indeed, it is to the early days of the Iranian revolution that we in the left can look for hope that Iran will realise the falsity of this choice. Then, the shuras emerged as embryonic centres of popular power and decision-making. Perhaps in their massive mobilisation against the regime's lies, the people of Iran will once again realise that the same strength which allows them to defy the regime can also be wielded to run society itself - that the democracy of the street and the mass meeting can not only topple governments, but replace them.

Nevertheless, the immediate hope of the left throughout the international community must be the fall of the mullahs, and the disarming of its police forces and its soldiers by the people. So long as the protests enjoy the support of hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, they can risk ignoring the possibility of direct repression - but to resolve the conflict it is necessary that the weapons of the Islamists are neutralised. Too often, the 'support' extended by Western revolutionary socialists to struggling peoples in the Global South does not extend beyond words, however important they may be. But there are things we can do. Whether that is to help make internet access and communication available to the demonstrators, send messages of support to the Worker-communist Party of Iran's 24 'New Channel TV' (via wpibriefing@gmail.com), lobby our MPs and governments to isolate the regime (not ignore its problems, as Obama's administration has done, in the expectation of the uprising's defeat and his unwillingness to hamper future negotiations over Iran's nuclear programme) or to join protests against the Islamic Republic outside its embassies in our own states, we have a responsibility to lend a helping hand.

Book 'em, Greenspan

Alan Greenspan wrote a guest piece in the Economist magazine this month. He paints a rather grim picture which, from the perspective of political economy, there seems no way out.

Book equity is the amount of money banks have in reserves. Book assets basically the asset value of the loans they have made. The ratio of book equity to book assets basically tells the percentage of loans outstanding versus cash on hand. This is called "book capital".

As can be seen from the chart to the right, the current average book capital for US banks is around 10%. This means for every $1 in cash, the bank has $10 in asset liens secured by loans made. This is different than the value of the loans because the value of the assets fluctuate over time whereas the value of the loan is fixed at the time the loan was made. This is called "mark-to-market" valuation (Fair Value Accounting Standards, US SEC).

For instance, if a home mortgage loan is made for $50,000 and the home (asset) goes up in value to $55,000, the asset value is $55,000. If the value of the home declines to $45,000, the asset value is $45,000.

It is not difficult to see the problem we currently face. Banks have loaned at a ratio of 10:1, the housing market valuations have declined by 20%, the stock market by 35% and the bond market has also tanked. So, in essence, the assets of many banks have declined not only below the value of the original loans, but have even declined more than the amount of cash they have on hand.

For instance, Joe the Plumber Bank (JP Bank) has $100 in cash and $1,000 loans backed by assets at the beginning of 2007. JP borrowed $500 from Lenny Bruce Bank (LB Bank) to make some of those loans, and another $300 from the Fed. JP assets decline by 20%, leaving him with $100 in cash, $800 in assets and $800 in debt, with $1,000 in loans outstanding. JP Bank has $200 in losses to write-off. This is double the cash on hand. JP is therefore insolvent.

From the Greenspan article:

To avoid this scenario, many banks are holding onto cash so they can pay their creditors and prevent losses. They are afraid to invest money in assets which show no sign of a rebound.

How much extra capital, both private and sovereign, will investors require of banks and other intermediaries to conclude that they are not at significant risk in holding financial institutions’ deposits or debt, a precondition to solving the crisis?

The insertion, last month, of $250 billion of equity into American banks through TARP (a two-percentage-point addition to capital-asset ratios) halved the post-Lehman surge of the LIBOR/OIS spread. Assuming modest further write-offs, simple linear extrapolation would suggest that another $250 billion would bring the spread back to near its pre-crisis norm. This arithmetic would imply that investors now require 14% capital rather than the 10% of mid-2006. Such linear calculations, of course, can only be very rough approximations. But recent data do suggest that, while helpful, the Treasury’s $250 billion goes only partway towards the levels required to support renewed lending.

Government credit has in effect acted as counterparty to a large segment of the financial intermediary system. But for reasons that go beyond the scope of this note, I strongly believe that the use of government credit must be temporary. What, then, will be the source of the new private capital that allows sovereign lending to be withdrawn? Eventually, the most credible source is a partial restoration of the $30 trillion of global stockmarket value wiped out this year, which would enable banks to raise the needed equity.

[...]

Even before the market linkages among banks, other financial institutions and non-financial businesses are fully re-established, we will need to start unwinding the massive sovereign credit and guarantees put in place during the crisis, now estimated at $7 trillion. The economics of such a course are fairly clear. The politics of draining off that much credit support in a timely way is quite another matter.

18-Dec-2008. Greenspan, Alan. Banks need more capital. The Economist.

So what is Greenspan saying here?

First, banks need to be better capitalized, in other words, have more money in the bank. Since US Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke is a follower of Greenspan, literally and figuratively, this explains why the TARP money was basically given to the banks to hoard in their vaults.

Second, confidence in the solvency of banks needs to be restored in order to 1) ensure they lend to each other, and 2) the interest rates they charge do not make the cost of borrowing so expensive that it would drive up rates across the board, or be too costly, thereby freezing borrowing. If it costs banks more to borrow than they will make on the spread, they will loose money on the transaction.

Third, the government, e.g. the Federal Reserve and the US Treasury, are acting as lenders of last resort. This is what is meant by "counter party". Basically, its the same as a parent co-signing for a car loan for his teenager. This gives the lender confidence that, in the event the primary borrower cannot pay, the loan doesn't go into default because daddy will pay the bills. Only in this case, the government doesn't have money in the bank, but it does have the power of taxation.

Fourth, and almost unbelievably, Greenspan says that the credit crisis can only be resolved by recapitalizing assets via a stock market increase of over $30 trillion plus an "unwinding" of over $7 trillion in "sovereign credit" (the $7 trillion is the money provided by the US and other governments via the TARP and other, similar vehicles - Greenspan seems to be somewhat re-defining "sovereign credit" here). Greenspan is basically saying forget the real economy, forget about stagnation in capital investment, the financial sector fueled by Friedman monetary policy must be relied upon to bring us out of this mess.

Rest assured that this kind of thinking is not very different from that which guided the policies of the Hoover administration. Although Greenspan aggressively decreased interest rates in the run-up to the current speculative bubble (something 1930s Fed policy attempted to prevent), the idea that we need to drain credit support as soon as possible is very much in line with the orthodox economic ideology that guided both the Hoover administration and the Greenspan gang. Undoubtedly this thinking will result in massive resistance to government investments in non-defense spending, such as Obama's public works initiative.

Comment Rules

I know I've posted these before. However, if you want to leave a comment, here are the rules:

Bannable offenses:

1. Don't be offensive or insulting
2. Don't use ad hominem attacks
   
3. Don't use profanity
4. Don't spam every post or reply

Annoyances:

1. Stick to a point, don't rant on a lot of different topics
2. Reference your facts with real sources (not Wikipedia, not other bloggers, unless they reference an original source)
3. Avoid red baiting - I'm interested in rational debate and consider exploration of all political currents interesting and valuable
4. If you must bait me, please do it with style, tact and grace. To quote Goethe, “A man's manners are a mirror in which he shows his portrait.”

Cheers,
RiR

Financial Implosion

Anyone who has read my blog for several years will have seen that I've covered the financial markets regularly and based on a socialist analysis of the finanicalized capitalists system, was able to provide arguments for what we now see unfolding.

John Bellamy Foster and Fred Magdoff have written an excellent summary in the current issue of the Monthly Review. I've included an excerpt below and encourage all to visit the link and read the whole article.

Again, if you have any money in a retirement account and have the ability to choose your investment plan, you should seriously consider putting it in something as close to cash as possible, such as a money market fund, TIPS fund or REIT fund. Bond funds are risky but better than equities. Real estate is also a huge risk.

Good luck and Merry Christmas! Remember, Jesus was the original Communist, or so I've heard. Throw the moneychangers out of the temple! :)

Financial Implosion and Stagnation
Back To The Real Economy

But, you may ask, won’t the powers that be step into the breach again and abort the crisis before it gets a chance to run its course? Yes, certainly. That, by now, is standard operating procedure, and it cannot be excluded that it will succeed in the same ambiguous sense that it did after the 1987 stock market crash. If so, we will have the whole process to go through again on a more elevated and more precarious level. But sooner or later, next time or further down the road, it will not succeed… We will then be in a new situation as unprecedented as the conditions from which it will have emerged.
—Harry Magdoff and Paul Sweezy (1988) 1

“The first rule of central banking,” economist James K. Galbraith wrote recently, is that “when the ship starts to sink, central bankers must bail like hell.”2 In response to a financial crisis of a magnitude not seen since the Great Depression, the Federal Reserve and other central banks, backed by their treasury departments, have been “bailing like hell” for more than a year. Beginning in July 2007 when the collapse of two Bear Stearns hedge funds that had speculated heavily in mortgage-backed securities signaled the onset of a major credit crunch, the Federal Reserve Board and the U.S. Treasury Department have pulled out all the stops as finance has imploded. They have flooded the financial sector with hundreds of billions of dollars and have promised to pour in trillions more if necessary—operating on a scale and with an array of tools that is unprecedented.

In an act of high drama, Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke and Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson appeared before Congress on the evening of September 18, 2008, during which the stunned lawmakers were told, in the words of Senator Christopher Dodd, “that we’re literally days away from a complete meltdown of our financial system, with all the implications here at home and globally.” This was immediately followed by Paulson’s presentation of an emergency plan for a $700 billion bailout of the financial structure, in which government funds would be used to buy up virtually worthless mortgage-backed securities (referred to as “toxic waste”) held by financial institutions. 3

The outburst of grassroots anger and dissent, following the Treasury secretary’s proposal, led to an unexpected revolt in the U.S. House of Representatives, which voted down the bailout plan. Nevertheless, within a few days Paulson’s original plan (with some additions intended to provide political cover for representatives changing their votes) made its way through Congress. However, once the bailout plan passed financial panic spread globally with stocks plummeting in every part of the world—as traders grasped the seriousness of the crisis. The Federal Reserve responded by literally deluging the economy with money, issuing a statement that it was ready to be the buyer of last resort for the entire commercial paper market (short-term debt issued by corporations), potentially to the tune of $1.3 trillion.

Yet, despite the attempt to pour money into the system to effect the resumption of the most basic operations of credit, the economy found itself in liquidity trap territory, resulting in a hoarding of cash and a cessation of inter-bank loans as too risky for the banks compared to just holding money. A liquidity trap threatens when nominal interest rates fall close to zero. The usual monetary tool of lowering interest rates loses its effectiveness because of the inability to push interest rates below zero. In this situation the economy is beset by a sharp increase in what Keynes called the “propensity to hoard” cash or cash-like assets such as Treasury securities.

Fear for the future given what was happening in the deepening crisis meant that banks and other market participants sought the safety of cash, so whatever the Fed pumped in failed to stimulate lending. The drive to liquidity, partly reflected in purchases of Treasuries, pushed the interest rate on Treasuries down to a fraction of 1 percent, i.e., deeper into liquidity trap territory. 4

Facing what Business Week called a “financial ice age,” as lending ceased, the financial authorities in the United States and Britain, followed by the G-7 powers as a whole, announced that they would buy ownership shares in the major banks, in order to inject capital directly, recapitalizing the banks—a kind of partial nationalization. Meanwhile, they expanded deposit insurance. In the United States the government offered to guarantee $1.5 trillion in new senior debt issued by banks. “All told,” as the New York Times stated on October 15, 2008, only a month after the Lehman Brothers collapse that set off the banking crisis, “the potential cost to the government of the latest bailout package comes to $2.25 trillion, triple the size of the original $700 billion rescue package, which centered on buying distressed assets from banks.”5 But only a few days later the same paper ratcheted up its estimates of the potential costs of the bailouts overall, declaring: “In theory, the funds committed for everything from the bailouts of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and those of Wall Street firm Bear Stearns and the insurer American International Group, to the financial rescue package approved by Congress, to providing guarantees to backstop selected financial markets [such as commercial paper] is a very big number indeed: an estimated $5.1 trillion.”6

Despite all of this, the financial implosion has continued to widen and deepen, while sharp contractions in the “real economy” are everywhere to be seen. The major U.S. automakers are experiencing serious economic shortfalls, even after Washington agreed in September 2008 to provide the industry with $25 billion in low interest loans. Single-family home construction has fallen to a twenty-six-year low. Consumption is expected to experience record declines. Jobs are rapidly vanishing. 7 Given the severity of the financial and economic shock, there are now widespread fears among those at the center of corporate power that the financial implosion, even if stabilized enough to permit the orderly unwinding and settlement of the multiple insolvencies, will lead to a deep and lasting stagnation, such as hit Japan in the 1990s, or even a new Great Depression.

24-Dec-2008. Foster, John Bellamy. Financial Implosion and Stagnation. Monthly Review.

Dreams of Red Havana

From an op-ed piece by Roger Cohen:

Since visiting Cuba a few weeks ago, I’ve been thinking about the visual assault on our lives. Climb in a New York taxi these days and a TV comes on with its bombardment of news and ads. It’s become passé to gaze out the window, watch the sunlight on a wall, a child’s smile, the city breathing.

In Havana, I’d spend long hours contemplating a single street. Nothing — not a brand, an advertisement or a neon sign — distracted me from the city’s sunlit surrender to time passing. At a colossal price, Fidel Castro’s pursuit of socialism has forged a unique aesthetic, freed from agitation, caught in a haunting equilibrium of stillness and decay.

Such empty spaces, away from the assault of marketing, beyond every form of message (e-mail, text, twitter), erode in the modern world, to the point that silence provokes a why-am-I-not-in-demand anxiety. Technology induces ever more subtle forms of addiction, to products, but also to agitation itself. The global mall reproduces itself, its bright and air-conditioned sterility extinguishing every distinctive germ.

more...

Roger goes on to describe how Paris has succumbed to the modern spectacle, something that his visit to Havana made quite clear to him. I've often heard the same said about New York City, that since the 1980s it has become just facade of its former unique "city-ness", and now just another billboard for the same retail culture that dominates American suburbia.

Roger is also right in highlighting the addictive nature of what he calls agitation - whether it be in the form of computers, IM, cell phones, blackberries, iPods, television, radio, road-rage or what-have-you.

I think the agitation comes from the dual alienation these technologies, activites and public spaces foster, alienation from other humans as well as alienation from oneself. Though much modern technology, from the cell phone to automobiles and blogs, promise to bring people together and foster communication, they in fact cause a profound alienation between people. All communication becomes mediated communication, a non-physical, disconnected and ultimately unsatisfying communication that does little to reify our identity nor foster a true sense of connectedness or community with those around us.

This is what we want and need, it is a physical and emotional need intrinsic to the human condition. We become agitated because it is impossible to attain via these forms. Just as consuming products or eating fast-food does not "fill us up" - nor do these commiditized forms of communication fill us up. They promise to fill us up, but leave us empty, making us crave more, while at the same time making us afraid to forge real connections.

Ultimately we are left empty, afraid and alone; impotent to change because we are not even concious that another world is possible; until we see that one is, like Roger did.

Worker's Anger in Chicago Strike

As the economy worsens, American workers begin find their voice.

CHICAGO — The scene inside a long, low-slung factory on this city’s North Side this weekend offered a glimpse at how the nation’s loss of more than 600,000 manufacturing jobs in a year of recession is boiling over.

Workers laid off Friday from Republic Windows and Doors, who for years assembled vinyl windows and sliding doors here, said they would not leave, even after company officials announced that the factory was closing.

Some of the plant’s 250 workers stayed all night, all weekend, in what they were calling an occupation of the factory. Their sharpest criticisms were aimed at their former bosses, who they said gave them only three days’ notice of the closing, and the company’s creditors. But their anger stretched broadly to the government’s costly corporate bailout plans, which, they argued, had forgotten about regular workers.

“They want the poor person to stay down,” said Silvia Mazon, 47, a mother of two who worked as an assembler here for 13 years and said she had never before been the sort to march in protests or make a fuss. “We’re here, and we’re not going anywhere until we get what’s fair and what’s ours. They thought they would get rid of us easily, but if we have to be here for Christmas, it doesn’t matter.”

The workers, members of Local 1110 of the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, said they were owed vacation and severance pay and were not given the 60 days of notice generally required by federal law when companies make layoffs. Lisa Madigan, the attorney general of Illinois, said her office was investigating, and representatives from her office interviewed workers at the plant on Sunday.

08-Dec-2008. Davey, Monica. In Factory Sit-In, an Anger Spread Wide. New York Times.

Obama's Team of Rivals

So much for change? I guess we shouldn't be surprised. However, with the right-leaning group he's putting in place, is the world really better off than it would have been with McCain? Perhaps in the short run, but certainly not in the long run if one is looking for an end to the dictatorship of capital.

From MRZine (Jeremy Scahill):

As Barack Obama's opus, Team of Rivals, continues its rolling debut, the early reviews are in and the "critics" are full of praise for the cast:

"[T]he new administration is off to a good start."
-- Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell

"[S]uperb . . . the best of the Washington insiders . . . this will be a valedictocracy -- rule by those who graduate first in their high school classes."
-- David Brooks, conservative New York Times columnist

"[J]ust about perfect. . . ."
-- Senator Joe Lieberman, former Democrat and John McCain's top surrogate in the 2008 campaign.

"[R]eassuring."
-- Karl Rove, "Bush's brain"

"I am gobsmacked by these appointments, most of which could just as easily have come from a President McCain . . . this all but puts an end to the 16-month timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, the unconditional summits with dictators, and other foolishness that once emanated from the Obama campaign . . . [Hillary] Clinton and [James] Steinberg at State should be powerful voices for 'neo-liberalism' which is not so different in many respects from 'neo-conservativism.'"
-- Max Boot, neoconservative activist, former McCain staffer.

"I see them as being sort of center-right of the Democratic party."
-- James Baker, former Secretary of State and the man who led the theft of the 2000 election.

"[S]urprising continuity on foreign policy between President Bush's second term and the incoming administration . . . certainly nothing that represents a drastic change in how Washington does business. The expectation is that Obama is set to continue the course set by Bush. . . ."
-- Michael Goldfarb of the neoconservative Weekly Standard

"I certainly applaud many of the appointments. . . ."
-- Senator John McCain

"So far, so good."
-- Senator Lamar Alexander, senior Republican Congressional leader.

Hillary Clinton will be "outstanding" as Secretary of State
-- Henry Kissinger, war criminal

Rahm Emanuel is "a wise choice" in the role of Chief of Staff
-- Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, John McCain's best friend

Obama's team shows "Our foreign policy historically is not partisan."
-- Ed Rollins, top Republican strategist and Mike Huckabee's 2008 campaign manager

"The country will be in good hands."
-- Condoleezza Rice, George W. Bush's Secretary of State

Socialists invest in jobs, Capitalists invest in greed

China's response to the world economic crisis seems a lot better than the capitalist response. Now all they have to do is eliminate all the sweatshops.

From People's Weekly World:

China, hit by the current global economic crisis, with some foreign-operated plants closing down, took immediate, emergency action. Its State Council approved a $586 billion public works program to build new low-cost homes, mass transit and airports. The program will employ tens of thousands of unemployed workers and at the same time build or repair urgently needed infrastructure like bridges, roads and tunnels.

At the top of the agenda is rebuilding Sichuan Province, devastated by an earthquake that left millions homeless. (What a striking contrast to the abandonment of Hurricane Katrina victims by the Bush administration).

The Asian stock market soared 5.6 percent in response to China’s initiative and stocks in Hong Kong and Shanghai rallied strongly.

The New York Times pointed out that unlike China’s rescue package, our recently approved $700 billion bailout “helped strengthen bank balance sheets” but did not “mandate new lending or support specific investment projects in the United States.”

Because of their fanatical right-wing “free market” ideology, Bush and fellow Republicans are fighting tooth and nail against any steps to restrict corporate greed or government action to get our “real” economy going and growing.

The administration is using the bailout to help financiers who created the crisis but it has not slowed the plunge toward a deep recession. Last month 240,000 jobs were lost and the jobless rate zoomed to 6.5 percent. Meanwhile the bankers are using our tax dollars to buy up rival banks rather than free up credit to help jumpstart the economy.

The Times points out that “Beijing maintains far more control over investment trends than Washington does so it has greater flexibility to increase investments and counter a sharp downturn.”

In other words, China’s government has the power to command that these socialized institutions allocate resources to head off a depression.

China’s President Hu Jintao is scheduled to meet Nov. 15 with President-elect Barack Obama. Obama would do well to study China’s bold initiative. We do not have socialism and our banks are certainly not nationalized. But the people are losing patience as they watch their jobs, retirement accounts, and employer-provided health care go up in smoke. They are going to demand strong action to help the folks on Main Street.

Link

Chavez: We Must Forgive Palin as Christ Would

Universally demonized on the US & UK press, President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela continues to call it like we all see it:

CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) — Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez called vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin a "poor thing" who didn't know what she was saying when she called him a dictator.

Friday's verbal attack was the latest in long history of creative insults by Chavez — but was not unprovoked.

In an interview with the U.S. Spanish-language network Univision aired Tuesday, Palin remarked that "through negotiations or sanctions, if necessary, we can pressure dictators like Hugo Chavez to make it clear that they cannot mess with the United States whenever they feel like it."

Speaking at an event to inaugurate a thermoelectric plant, Chavez said he had heard of Palin's remarks.

"The poor thing, you have to feel sorry for her," he said with a dismissive wave of his hand. Palin, he said, is "a beauty queen that they've put in the role of a figurine."

Chavez said one must do as Christ did: "Forgive her, for she knows not what she says."

Republican presidential candidate John McCain's choice of Palin as his running mate surprised the nation and prompted questions about her qualifications to serve as vice president. The McCain campaign had no comment on Chavez' comment.

Palin, the governor of Alaska, says she would take the lead as vice president in energy policy, overall government reform and working with families who have special-needs children.

Candidates turned my face to Jell-O

If Obama wins, will he respond to these types of incidents with accountability? I think it is quite clear that McCain will not. After Nov 4 is when the hard work begins for all activists.

From Socialist Worker:

Nassau County police injured several people in their assault on antiwar protests outside the presidential debateNassau County police injured several people in their assault on antiwar protests outside the presidential debate

WHILE BARACK Obama and John McCain were getting makeup touchups for their Wednesday night debate at Hofstra University, in Hempstead, N.Y., police outside made sure that the voices of antiwar veterans wouldn't be heard.

Officers of the Nassau County Police Department reacted with reckless violence to a protest organized by Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) outside the debate site. Among several people injured in the assault, former Army Sgt. Nick Morgan was knocked unconscious and his cheekbone broken when he was trampled by a police horse.

"We were there to force the issue that the leaders of this nation are not listening to or are not caring about veterans," said IVAW member Matthis Chiroux, who was among several veterans and activists arrested. "And they couldn't have done a better job of proving us right. They stomped my friend Nick's face into Jell-o. I put this on both candidates, on the major press and on the Nassau County police."

[...]

17-Oct-2008. Herschel, Lucy. Antiwar vets attacked by police outside debate. Socialist Worker.

Biden Bursts Palin's Bubble

I just read this op-ed by Bob Herbert of the NYT and thought it did a great job encapsulating bobble-head Palin's rhetoric during the US vice-presidential debate.

The most surprising thing for me was how impressed I've become with Joe Biden. He was awesome. His analysis and politics were, for the most part, dead-on and he was convincing, and he showed a sensitive side. I never knew much about Joe Biden before that night, but now I do and I'm proud and happy he is part of our nation's government.

Its time to turn back the clock on 28 years of conservative neo-liberal economic policies started by Reagan, continued by Clinton and the Bushies. Certainly a McCain/Palin Whitehouse would starkly highlight the irrationality and failure of capitalism for everyone to see, as they have already seen in Latin America and the rest of the LDCs.

But their mismanagement would bring about upheaval and conflict, and drive us deeper into environmental crisis than any sane person ought wish to go. Not only that, but the fascist tendencies of the Right's methods, such as torture and repression of leftists, will certainly entrench itself further in the enforcement apparatus (CIA, FBI, etc) under McCain/Palin.

For these reasons and more I am adamantly supporting the Obama/Biden ticket.

Palin's Alternative Universe, Bob Herbert, New York Times:

Sarah Palin is the perfect exclamation point to the Bush years.

We’ve lived through nearly two terms of an administration that believed it could create its own reality:

“Deficits don’t matter.” “Brownie, you’re doing a heckuva job.” “Those weapons of mass destruction must be somewhere.”

Now comes Ms. Palin, a smiling, bubbly vice-presidential candidate who travels in an alternate language universe. For Ms. Palin, such things as context, syntax and the proximity of answers to questions have no meaning.

In her closing remarks at the vice-presidential debate Thursday night, Ms. Palin referred earnestly, if loosely, to a quote from Ronald Reagan. He had warned that if Americans weren’t vigilant in protecting their freedom, they would find themselves spending their “sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was like in America when men were free.”

What Ms. Palin didn’t say was that the menace to freedom that Reagan was talking about was Medicare. As the historian Robert Dallek has pointed out, Reagan “saw Medicare as the advance wave of socialism, which would ‘invade every area of freedom in this country.’ ”

Does Ms. Palin agree with that Looney Tunes notion? Or was this just another case of the aw-shucks, darn-right, I’m-just-a-hockey-mom governor of Alaska mouthing something completely devoid of meaning?

Here’s Ms. Palin during the debate: “Say it ain’t so, Joe! There you go pointing backwards again ... Now, doggone it, let’s look ahead and tell Americans what we have to plan to do for them in the future. You mentioned education, and I’m glad you did. I know education you are passionate about with your wife being a teacher for 30 years, and God bless her. Her reward is in heaven, right?”

If Governor Palin didn’t like a question, or didn’t know the answer, she responded as though some other question had been asked. She made no bones about this, saying early in the debate: “I may not answer the questions the way that either the moderator or you want to hear.”

The problem with Ms. Palin’s candidacy is that John McCain might actually win this election, and then if something terrible happened, the country could be left with little more than an exclamation point as president.

After Ms. Palin had woven one of her particularly impenetrable linguistic webs, Joe Biden turned to the debate’s moderator, Gwen Ifill, and said: “Gwen, I don’t know where to start.”

Of course he didn’t know where to start because Ms. Palin’s words don’t mean anything. She’s all punctuation.

This is such a serious moment in American history that it’s hard to believe that someone with Ms. Palin’s limited skills could possibly be playing a leadership role. On the day before the debate, the commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, Gen. David McKiernan, made an urgent appeal for more troops, saying the additional “boots on the ground,” as well as more helicopters and other vital equipment, were “needed as quickly as possible.”

The morning after the debate, the Labor Department announced that the employment situation in the U.S. had deteriorated even more than experts had expected. The nation lost nearly 160,000 jobs in September, more than double the monthly losses in July and August.

Conditions are probably worse than even those numbers indicate because the government’s statistics do not yet reflect the response of employers to the credit crisis that has taken such a hold in the last few weeks.

Where is the evidence that Governor Palin even understands these complex and enormously challenging problems? During the debate she twice referred to General McKiernan as “McClellan.” Neither Ms. Ifill nor Senator Biden corrected her.

But after Senator Biden suggested that John McCain’s answer to the nation’s energy problems was to “drill, drill, drill,” Ms. Palin promptly pointed out, as if scoring a point, that “the chant is ‘Drill, baby, drill!’ ”

How’s that for perspective? The credit markets are frozen. Our top general in Afghanistan is dialing 911. Americans are losing jobs by the scores of thousands. And Sarah Palin is making sure we know that the chant is “drill, baby, drill!” not “drill, drill, drill.”

John McCain has spent most of his adult life speaking of his love for his country. Maybe he sees something in Sarah Palin that most Americans do not. Maybe he is aware of qualities that lead him to believe she’d be as steady as Franklin Roosevelt in guiding the U.S. through a prolonged economic downturn. Maybe she’d be as wise and prudent in a national emergency as John Kennedy was during the Cuban missile crisis.

Maybe Senator McCain has reason to believe that it would not be the most colossal of errors to put Ms. Palin a heartbeat away from the presidency.

He’s got just four weeks to share that insight with the rest of us.

4-Oct-2008. Herbert, Bob. Palin's Alternative Universe.

When Fascists Attack

Fascist violence has been on the rise world-wide, with an outbreak of racists violence and murder spiking on September 11th in Bolivia. Hundreds of indigenous supporters of president Evo Morales, men, women and children, were beaten and whipped by racist gangs supported by the right-wing elites. In the worst attack, at least 30 campesinos were mowed down by machine gun fire while trapped on a bridge. Hundreds are still missing.

In other areas, fascists rioted in the streets, people were beaten and tortured, then forced to denounce Morales on their knees, dripping with blood, while they were recorded on video.

Bolivian fascist groups have been on the rise for several years, their level of violence increasing markedly in 2008.

What is the response from the Bush administration (with support from the US media)? To put Bolivia on the "narco-terrorist" list and call Evo Morales a "weak and desperate" leader. We can only expect more of the same from the war-monger McCain.

Say no to fascist racism! Say no to even tacit support of these thugs! Say yes to support of the rights of indigenous people, democracy and socialism!

From Green Left Weekly:

The violence was an attempt to impose by force what was lost at the ballot box.

Violently assaulting civilians, police officer and soldiers, occupying and burning public buildings, blowing up gas pipelines, and blockading roads were among the tactics of the pro-neoliberal forces of the opposition, which utlitised fascist shock troops of racist armed youth gangs, such as the Santa Cruz Youth Union (UJC).

The worst violence occurred on September 11, with the massacre in Pando of unarmed indigenous campesinos — including children and pregnant women — who were marching against the racist violence. It was carried out by paramilitaries created and controlled by Pando prefect Leopoldo Fernandez, since arrested over the atrocity.

At least 30 people were slaughtered, with more than 100 still missing.

Bolivia: Indigenous government defies US-backed fascists

From Worker's World:

Pando’s (Bolivia) prefect (governor) hired a gang of paramilitary criminals—some reports say from Brazil—who opened fire on a gathering of mostly Indigenous peasants on Sept. 11. As many as 30 people, all unarmed peasants, were killed near the capital city of Cobija. (BBC) This massacre was the most blatant crime in a series of attacks on buildings housing offices of the central government and popular organizations.

Facing fascist attack, Morales fights back

From the AP:

Gov. Leopoldo Fernandez of Pando province is being charged with genocide in what President Evo Morales calls an ambush of his supporters last week that left at least 15 dead and 37 injured.

Morales announced the arrest at a news conference Tuesday.

Bolivia governor arrested on genocide charges

Bush DOT To Track All Cars

Mary E Peters

The U.S. Department of Transportation has been handing millions of dollars to state governments for GPS-tracking pilot projects designed to track vehicles wherever they go. So far, Washington state and Oregon have received fat federal checks to figure out how to levy these "mileage-based road user fees."

Now electronic tracking and taxing may be coming to a DMV near you. The Office of Transportation Policy Studies, part of the Federal Highway Administration, is about to announce another round of grants totaling some $11 million. A spokeswoman on Friday said the office is "shooting for the end of the year" for the announcement, and more money is expected for GPS (Global Positioning System) tracking efforts.

Iraq Vets Rage Against the Machine in Denver

The pro-socialist punk band Rage Against the Machine staged a free concert in Denver the night of August 27th. Attended by nearly 10,000 people, thousands of protesters, led by Iraq war vets marched on the Democratic National Convention to demand an end to the war.

From Rocky Mountain News:

BRIGHTON AND 44TH -- A massive group of at least 2,000 chanting, shouting, sign-waving protesters are marching down Brighton Boulevard escorted by police in what is easily the largest such protest Denver has seen during this convention.

Employees at the Coors Field reportedly were told after 4 p.m. to evacuate because a protest was approaching.

The march, organized in conjunction with a free Rage Against the Machine-headlined music festival at the Denver Coliseum, is cosponsored by Iraq Veterans Against the War and Tent State University.

About 50 Iraq veterans are leading the march to the Pepsi Center, followed by thousands of mostly young protesters carrying signs denouncing the war. More protesters continue to stream from the coliseum, where nearly 10,000 watched Rage urge them to join the march.

From CommonDreams:

DENVER - August 28 - Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) led a non-violent march of 8,000 allies, including members of Rage Against the Machine, to the front entrance of the Pepsi Center. There they delivered a letter containing their three points of unity to the Obama campaign's veteran staff. IVAW's three points of unity are:

1. Immediate withdrawal of all occupying forces from Iraq
2. Full benefits and healthcare for returning veterans
3. Reparations to the Iraqi people
   

IVAW is calling on Senator Obama to allow an IVAW representative to read the letter to the delegates.

Senator Obama's veterans' liaison, Phil Carter, told IVAW that they could expect a response from the Senator's campaign staff regarding their request. IVAW plans to hold Senator Obama's campaign team to their word.

*IVAW members Jared Hood, Jeff Key and Josh Earle are available for comment throughout the day.

Jared Hood, who lives here in Denver, served as a specialist in the Colorado Army National Guard from 2004-2007. During that time he served in Camp Navistar, Kuwait and Vilseck, Germany.

Josh Earl served as a Military Police Specialist in Iraq from 2003-2004 with the Denver-based 220th Military Police Company of the Colorado Army National Guard.

Jeff Key, a former Marine Corp lance corporal, served in Iraq in 2003. Mr. Key currently performs his one-man show, The Eyes of Babylon, which tells his story as a Marine in Iraq, in theaters across the country. He was also one of the IVAW members to speak with Obama's veterans' liaison on Aug. 27.

Disney makes health care unaffordable

From CNN:

ANAHEIM, California (AP) -- Cinderella, Snow White, Tinkerbell and other fictional fixtures of modern-day childhood were handcuffed, frisked and loaded into police vans Thursday at the culmination of a labor protest that brought a touch of reality to the Happiest Place on Earth.
"Tinkerbell" and other Disney characters were handcuffed Thursday in a protest outside the gates of Disneyland.

"Tinkerbell" and other Disney characters were handcuffed Thursday in a protest outside the gates of Disneyland.

The arrest of the 32 protesters, many of whom wore costumes representing famous Disney characters, came at the end of an hour-long march to Disneyland's gates from one of three Disney-owned hotels at the center of a labor dispute.

Those who were arrested sat in a circle on a busy intersection outside the park holding hands until they were placed in plastic handcuffs and led to two police vans while hundreds of hotel workers cheered and chanted.

The protesters were arrested on a misdemeanor count of failure to obey a police officer and two traffic infractions, said Sgt. Rick Martinez of the Anaheim police. They were cited and released, Sgt. Chris Schneider said.

Bewildered tourists in Disney T-shirts and caps, some pushing strollers, filed past the commotion and gawked at the costumed picketers getting hauled away. The protest shut down a major thoroughfare outside Disneyland and California Adventure for nearly an hour.

"It's changing my opinion of Disneyland," said tourist Amanda Kosato, who was visiting from north of Melbourne, Australia. "Taking away entitlements stinks."

The dispute involves about 2,300 maids, bell hops, cooks and dishwashers at three Disney-owned hotels: the Paradise Pier, the Grand Californian and the Disneyland Hotel.

The workers' contract expired in February and their union says Disney's latest proposal makes health care unaffordable for hundreds of employees and creates an unfair two-tier wage system. The union also says Disney wants to create a new category of part-time employees who would receive greatly reduced benefits.

"The other hotels around the area all have health care that is provided by the boss and have been able to get wage increases," said Ada Briceno, president of Unite Here Local 681, which represents the workers.

"At the other hotels in the same classification, for the same work, the workers get paid $2 to $3 an hour more."

Disney spokeswoman Lisa Haines said Disney and the union are in negotiations and nothing has been finalized. She said workers have protested 14 times but sat down to negotiate only 11 times in the past six months.

"Clearly we're disappointed that Unite Here Local 681 has spent more time protesting," she said. "Publicity stunts are not productive and are extremely disruptive to the resort district."

Before the arrests, the picketers marched and chanted outside Paradise Pier, holding signs that read, "Disney is unfaithful," and "Mickey, shame on you." They were joined by community activists and religious leaders from local churches.

Luz Vasquez, who works in the bakery at Disneyland Hotel, said she can't afford to lose many of her benefits. She said it's already hard to care for her three grandchildren and aging mother while earning $14.32 an hour.

"Disneyland is being unfair with us because we're fighting for our health care and they're trying to take it away," said Vasquez, 45. "They're trying to cut our hours and take away our seniority."

Co-worker Diane Dominguez, 50, said she was worried about losing health care because of the heavy labor involved in lifting mattresses, moving furniture and making dozens of beds a day. She also said rising prices and the cost of gas were eating into her salary of $11.11 an hour.

"The most important is health care. We need that and they want to take it away," she said.

At the heart of the issue is a free health care plan that has been provided to Disney hotel workers through a trust fund that Disney and other unionized hotels in the area pay into.

Briceno said that in exchange for the free medical plan, union members agreed in previous contracts to a lower wage for hotel workers in the first three years of their employment.

But Disney now wants to eliminate the free health plan for new hires and wants to create a new class of workers who put in less than 30 hours a week, said Briceno. Those part-time workers would receive no sick or vacation pay and not be given holidays, she said.

The company also wants to increase the number of hours full-time employees must work before qualifying for the health plan, she said.

"At the end of the day what it means is that workers are going to be priced out of health care," she said.

Haines said the majority of other employees at Disneyland pay for a share of their health plan, even though the resort shoulders about 75 percent of the overall cost. She said it's important to negotiate a contract that's fair to those other unions, too.

"We do remain hopeful that we can reach an agreement that's both fair and equitable, providing that union leadership is reasonable and realistic in its approach," Haines said.

McCain Aid Paid $800,000 by Georgian Government

From People's Weekly World news:

The conflict in Georgia has cast a spotlight on both John McCain’s ethics and on his ability to exercise good judgment in a time of crisis.

McCain’s longtime business partner and current chief foreign policy adviser, Randy Scheunemann, lobbied the senator on 49 occasions during a three year period while being paid $800,000 by the right-wing government of the former Soviet Republic of Georgia.

In numerous speeches this week McCain has ranted and raved against Russia’s role in the current conflict in Georgia. Positioning himself to the right of even the Bush administration, he has said that he believes the Russian leadership to be “far more dangerous” than the president believes it to be.

Precisely because of this posturing, the payments by the Georgian government to McCain’s partner raise ethical questions about the connection between Scheunemann’s personal finances and his advice to McCain who has seized on the current conflict as a campaign issue.

Barack Obama has called for a “review” of U.S. agreements with Russia but, unlike McCain, said, “We seek a future of cooperative engagement with the Russian government, and friendship with the Russian people.”

If McCain was hoping that escalation of tensions in Georgia would boost his campaign, he definitely was not hoping for what seems to be happening now: More and more media outlets are beginning to focus on the McCain-Scheunemann relationship.

The Seattle Times is reporting that on April 17, a month and a half after Scheunemann officially stopped working for Georgia, his partner and the only other member of his firm, took another $200,000 from Georgia to continue lobbying McCain.

The maneuvering amounts to McCain functioning on behalf of paid foreign agents and, at the same time, using helping create international tension to benefit his campaign for the presidency.

“Scheunemann’s work as a lobbyist poses valid questions about McCain’s judgment in choosing someone who – and whose firm – are paid to promote the interests of other nations,” said New York University law professor Stephen Gillers.

Brian Rogers, a spokesman for the McCain campaign admitted to the Los Angeles Times: “This is an issue that he (McCain) has been involved with for well over decade.”

A report in the Bloomberg News noted that McCain’s strong condemnation of Russia’s military action against Georgia as “totally, absolutely unacceptable” reflects long-standing ties between McCain and hard-line conservatives such as Scheunemann, an aide in the 1990’s to then-Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott.

Numerous press reports on Scheunemann are turning up more and more disturbing background information:

Scheunemann, who also ran McCain’s 2000 campaign foreign policy operation, has, like McCain, supported regime-change in Iraq and NATO membership for all of the former Soviet republics. McCain sponsored or co-sponsored every one of the four bills and resolutions regarding Georgia that Scheunemann told him to sponsor.

Scheunemann, it turns out, was one of the ring leaders of the neo-con drive to go to war with Iraq. Before the U.S. invaded, he was chairman of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq. Prior to that he was a leader of the Project for the New American Century, an outfit that said nine days after the Sept. 11 attacks, that the terrorists were linked to Iraq. Those claims, of course, were later proven false.

Support Obama

Folks, Obama is getting tons of negative press, as expected, from the US right-wing controlled media.

Sure, he is no socialist, but realistically, it is NOT in the interest of the world working-class for the Republican's to consolidate their stranglehold on the American imperial system.

Sure, all Obama offers a kinder-gentler capitalism - GOOD! I'd rather that then an invasion of Venezuela, for instance.

Finally, any movement to the left by the American ruling elite is going to pay out for the working classes and working class movement.

That is why I am supporting Obama.

From the AFL-CIO:

Sen. Barack Obama has pledged to fight for working families, and he has the record and the policy proposals to back it up.

Check out new fact sheets that spell out what Obama would do as president in two crucial areas: education and the building trades.

When it comes to education, Obama has a record of supporting full funding for No Child Left Behind, increased special education funding and expanding Pell Grants to enable more students to attend college.

He supports forgiving student loans for teachers and opposes taking away funds from the public school system through private voucher programs.

Obama’s education plan includes:

• More funding for early childhood education and Head Start, so children are ready for school.
• Reforming and fully funding the No Child Left Behind Act so it supports, rather than punishes, schools that need help.
• Providing scholarships, mentoring and training to help recruit and retain teachers.
• Supporting after-school activities and special education.
• Helping make college more accessible for all families through grants, loans, tax credits and full funding for community colleges.

Obama has earned the endorsement of the AFT and the School Administrators union for his strong support of public education.

He also will support good jobs in the building and construction industry. As a church-based community organizer, Obama helped neighborhoods recover after being devastated by steel mill closings, so he understands the importance of protecting workers and making sure they have good jobs.

As a senator, Obama has been a strong supporter of prevailing wage laws and of investing in America’s infrastructure.

A co-sponsor of the Patriot Employers Act, Obama has fought to reward companies that keep good jobs here and support workers’ rights to a fair wage, health coverage, retirement security and the ability to form unions. And as an Illinois state senator, Obama voted for numerous bills ensuring workplace safety, prevailing wages and responsible bidder requirements for public contracts.

The AFL-CIO Building and Construction Trades Department, a coalition of 13 unions in the industry, gave Obama its endorsement earlier this summer.

To rebuild an economy that works for everyone, we need to make sure that all families can send their children to public schools that are safe, well-staffed and well equipped so they can get the education they deserve at all stages of life. We also need to make sure we’re creating good jobs with good pay and an infrastructure that can support economic growth. Obama has the plans that will help create prosperity and make sure it’s shared by everyone.

To find out more about where Obama stands on the issues that matter most, check out Meet Barack Obama.

Mediocre McCain

From Rex Nutting of MarketWatch:

Since last January, Sen. Obama's fitness for the presidency has been the only question that matters in American politics. The pollsters and pundits agree that if Obama can show the voters that he's up to the job, he'll win. If not, he won't.

But that begs another question: Is McCain fit to lead America?

That question hasn't been asked, nor has it been answered.

The assumption seems to be that McCain's years of experience in the military and in Congress of course give him the background and tools he'd need in the White House. As Britney might say, "Duh! For sure he's qualified!!! He's Mac!!!"

But is that true? Does McCain have the right stuff?

A careful look at McCain's biography shows that he isn't prepared for the job. His resume is much thinner than most people think.

Here are some reasons why McCain would be a mediocre president.

Lack of accomplishments
Like the current occupant of the White House, McCain got his first career breaks from the connections and money of his family, not from hard work.

The son and grandson of Navy admirals, he attended Annapolis where he did poorly. Nevertheless, he was commissioned as a pilot, where he performed poorly, crashing three planes before he failed to evade a North Vietnamese missile that destroyed his plane. McCain spent more than five years in a prison camp.

After his release, McCain knew his weak military record meant he'd never make admiral, so he turned his sights to a career in politics. With the help of his new wife's wealth, his new father-in-law's business connections and some powerful friends had made as a lobbyist for the Navy, he was elected in 1982 to a Congress in a district that he didn't reside in until the day the seat opened up. A few years later, he succeeded Barry Goldwater as a senator.

McCain hasn't accomplished much in the Senate. Even his own campaign doesn't trumpet his successes, probably because the few victories he's had still rankle Republicans.

His campaign finance law failed to significantly reduce the role of money in politics. He failed to get a big tobacco bill through the Senate. He's failed to change the way Congress spends money; his bill to give the president a line-item veto was declared unconstitutional, and the system of pork and earmarks continues unabated. He failed to reform the immigration system.

Every senator who runs for president misses votes back in Washington, so it's no surprise that McCain and all the others who ran in the primaries have missed a lot of votes in the past year. But between the beginning of 2005 and mid-2007, no senator missed more roll-call votes than McCain did, except Tim Johnson, who was recovering from a near-fatal brain aneurysm.

Shallow
McCain says he doesn't understand the economy. He's demonstrated that he doesn't understand the workings of Social Security, or the political history of the Middle East. He doesn't know who our enemies are. He says he wants to reduce global warming, but then proposes ideas that would stimulate -- not reduce -- demand for fossil fuels.

McCain has done one thing well -- self promotion. Instead of working on legislation or boning up on the issues, he's been on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" more than any other guest. He's been on the Sunday talk shows more than any other guest in the past 10 years. He's hosted "Saturday Night Live" and even announced his candidacy in 2007 on "The Late Show with David Letterman."

McCain has not articulated any lofty goals. So far, his campaign theme has mostly been "McCain: He's None of the Above."

In the primaries, he campaigned on "I'm not that robotic businessman, I'm not that sanctimonious hick, I'm not that crazy libertarian, I'm not that washed-up actor, I'm not that delusional 9/11 guy." In the general election, he's emphasized that he's not that treasonous dreamer.

No leadership
McCain has frequently taken on near-impossible missions that go against the grain of his party. It's the basis of his reputation as a maverick. But McCain has never been able to bring more than a handful of Republicans along with him on issues such as campaign finance reform or immigration. Democrats on the Hill have accepted McCain's help on some issues, but except for a few exceptions (John Kerry and Joe Lieberman), they've never warmed to him.

To achieve anything as president, McCain would have to win over two hostile parties: The Democrats and the Republicans.

Living in the Sixties
McCain is still fighting the Vietnam War. But he's not fighting the real historic war, which taught us the folly of injecting ourselves into a civil war that was none of our business. We learned that, in a world where even peasants have guns, explosives and radios, a determined and popular guerrilla force can defeat a modern army equipped with the mightiest technology if that army has no vital national interest to protect.

Instead, McCain is fighting an imaginary Vietnam War, where a sure victory could have been achieved with just a little more bombing, just a little more "pacification," just a little more will to win at home. This fantasy clouds McCain's judgment on foreign policy.
Most of the other high-profile politicians who fought in Vietnam -- Colin Powell, Chuck Hegel, John Kerry, and Jim Webb -- aren't stuck in the past, and they don't view the Iraq War as a chance to get Vietnam right.

No principles
After years of honing a reputation as a guy who'll say the truth regardless of the political consequences, McCain has crashed the Straight Talk Express. On almost every issue where he took a principled stand against the Republican line -- taxes, immigration, oil drilling, the Religious Right -- he's changed his views.

We ought to like politicians who change their mind when the facts change; it shows maturity, judgment and flexibility. But politicians who change their mind to suit the prevailing winds show the opposite.

The bottom line
Successful presidents come from two molds: visionaries, or mechanics. The visionaries -- think Reagan or FDR -- see what others can't and say 'Why not?" to inspire the country. The mechanics -- think LBJ or Eisenhower -- know the ins and outs of government and are able to harness the power of millions of humans to accomplish great things, or at least keep the wheels from coming off.

McCain fits neither style. He's neither a dreamer, nor a detail guy. His major accomplishment, in Vietnam and in the Senate, has been merely to survive.

Just surviving doesn't make you're a hero, or a decent president. America needs to do more than survive the next four years.

South Korea Attacks Union Leaders

South Korean president Lee Myung-bak's Grand National Party (GNP) has consistently shown its fascist tendencies, but this time it has crossed the line unambiguously for all to see. The GNP, much like the us GOP (interestingly similar name in this time of globalization), has implemented a brutal anti-working class agenda for the past two decades. The majority of the leaders of the GNP had been leaders in previous reactionary parties including those which ran the country during the dictatorships of the 60's and 70's.

Now they are trying to destroy the labor movement in that country.

From LabourStart:

About ten days ago, the South Korean government issued arrest warrants for the leaders of the country's trade union movement. Among those named were the President, Vice President and General Secretary of the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU), as well as leaders of affiliated unions. The KCTU Vice President was arrested by police and she's now being held at the Youngdeungpo Police Station.

The others are still at large. Police have encircled the union headquarters in Seoul.

The “crime” these trade union leaders are accused of committing is this: in early July, they called for a general strike. The South Korean government, in defiance of universally recognized human rights standards (including ILO conventions) has decided that this strike was illegal.

The KCTU has asked us all to take a moment and send off a strong message of protest to the South Korean government. LabourStart has launched a major new online campaign to do precisely that. Please go here now to send off your message:

http://www.labourstart.org/kctu