Print

[Frenchfry]

Warning: A new intrusive swarm coming our way!

Get ready, America, for here comes "the next latest and greatest thing in aviation." Wow, what could it be? Maybe the airlines are going to drop all of their ridiculous ripoff fees. That'd be great!

No, no, not that kind of aviation. Also, you probably won't find this breakthrough so great. It's the arrival and proliferation of "unmanned vehicle systems," soon to be buzzing around in the airspace of your own town.

Yes, drones, right here at home. Those very same, tiny, pilotless, remote-controlled, undetectable planes that the CIA has been secretly using to spy on and bomb people in Pakistan and elsewhere are headed to your and my local police departments, FBI offices, and… well, who knows who else will have these "latest and greatest" toys? All we know is that Congress – under pressure from Boeing, Northrop Grumman, and other big drone peddlers – directed the Federal Aviation Agency earlier this year to open up civilian air space to thousands of them by 2015. And, in their wisdom, our loosy-goosy lawmakers provided no regulation of who can have drones, how many, or for what purposes.

So, prepare to be pestered and monitored, for police agencies and corporate interests are said to be abuzz about getting their own. The first ones are expected to be used for high-altitude surveillance, which is worrisome enough, but a Texas sheriff's office that already has bought a "ShadowHawk" drone says it might outfit the little buzzer to fire tear gas and rubber bullets.

No worries, though, for the drone industry's lobbying group has drafted a two-page code of conduct urging purchasers to "respect the privacy of individuals."

How nice. Only, it's a voluntary code… and totally unenforceable. For more information about this invasive swarm, contact the Electronic Privacy Information Center: www.epic.org.

"Conduct code for unmanned aircraft is unveiled," www.yahoo.com, July, 3, 2012.
http://www.jimhightower.com/node/7805

[Frenchfry]

How greedy can global bankers get?

I, for one, am tired of hearing complaints that our giant, bailed-out banks have simply taken the money and run, giving nothing back to society.

That's why I'm so pleased that a new economic analysis from English tax experts has put the lie to this canard. Their study reveals that Barclays, Citibank, Goldman Sachs, HSBC, JPMorgan Chase, and other rescued giants have, in fact, been phenomenally helpful to many people in deep need. In particular, during 2010 alone, such bankers helped people move at least $21 trillion in wealth from the U.S. and other nations into tax havens like the Cayman Islands. Yes, these compassionate bankers created a handy financial channel so folks like us can dodge our tax bills.

What? You say you don't have an offshore bank account and that this is just another scam for the superrich? Well, now, that's your problem – it's not the bankers' fault that you lack the wealth to qualify for their benevolent assistance.

Good grief, the malevolence of these bankers is unfathomable. First, their greed destroyed the jobs and middle-class dreams of millions of workaday people. Then, we had to bail them out, while we were forced to take more cuts in wages, thus plunging millions into poverty. And they repay us... how? By foreclosing on our homes, secretly jacking up our interest rates, laundering money for terrorists, and helping the shameless
über-wealthy hide trillions of dollars in the black holes of offshore accounts to escape paying the taxes they owe to America – money desperately needed to rebuild the middle class.

These soulless scoundrels would steal the nickels off a dead man's eyes – and their avaricious abuse is pushing people to the point of parading guillotines down Wall Street. To see the full report on their tax-dodging scam, go to TaxJustice.net.

"A money 'black hole': rich hide at least $21 trillion in tax havens, study shows,"
www.msnbc.com, July 23, 2012.
http://www.jimhightower.com/node/7806

[Frenchfry]

America's incredibly meek media

Bizarrely, the CEOs of America's highly-conglomerated news sources keep trying to jack up profits by shedding the editors and reporters who actually create their product.

Not to worry, though, for a new breed of political editors has arisen to guide reporters. Who are these new, green-eyeshaded overseers of what's allowed in our daily dose of political news? The candidates and officeholders whom the media supposedly cover. Yes, newspapers are outsourcing a key part of their political coverage to the coverees!

For example, both Obama and Romney insist that their staffs be allowed to edit any interviews or quotations that are to appear in print. Holy Joseph Pulitzer! What reputable news source would ever agree to giving politicians the right to delete, rephrase, and otherwise sanitize their public comments? Answer: Bloomberg News, National Journal, New York Times, Politico, and… well, just about all that claim to be the "legitimate" press. The Romney campaign even requires reporters who interview any of Mitt's five sons to use only quotes censored by his press office.

For these public figures to demand such Orwellian control is outrageous, but for the media to go along is disgraceful. "It's not something I'm particularly proud of," says a National Journal reporter. Proud of? How about ashamed of? How about turning in your press pass? "We don't like the practice," weaseled the New York Times' managing editor. How pathetic! If a powerhouse paper like the Times doesn’t like it, then just refuse to do it.

Luckily, some – such as the National Journal – have now been embarrassed into finally saying "no" to this blatant censorship. To help stiffen the Jello backbones of other so-called "news" sources, connect with Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting: www.fair.org.

"Latest Word On the Trail? I Take It Back," The New York Times, July 16,
2012.

"National Journal Bars Quotations Tweaked by Sources," The New York Times,
July 23, 2012.
http://www.jimhightower.com/node/7807

[Frenchfry]

MT is taking a long time to load....I thought I broke the site.


Protecting political insiders from our First Amendment

Ah, it’s August – time for the presidential nominating conventions!

This grand testimonial of our citizens’ rights and liberties will begin with the Republicans in Tampa. Flags are being mounted, majestic music is being arranged, uplifting speeches are being scripted – and, as has now become normal for these spectacles of democracy-in-action, heavily-armed police repression of our cherished First Amendment rights is being ordered.

Of course, the delegates, candidates, lobbyists, and billionaire funders inside the GOP’s convention bunker will be perfectly free (as they should be) to gild the promises and lies that will frame their presidential campaign. They will not be bothered by the 4,000 riot-geared police that authorities will deploy around Tampa. However, any outsider citizens who come to practice the hallowed freedoms of public assembly and speech at the convention will be welcomed by a thoroughly un-American police state.

In May, at the behest of national Republican officials, Tampa’s mayor and council passed a temporary ordinance to suspend our First Amendment and authorize a crackdown on protesters. Warning ominously that a few vandals might get out of control, the ordinance tries to force all citizen demonstrators into a few restricted parade routes and what amounts to “protest pens.” Preemptive detainments, indiscriminate mass arrests, and police infiltrations of peaceful protest groups can be expected. Ironically, that’s the kind of autocratic excess that led to the American Revolution itself.

The city’s top lawyer recently barked that, “troublemakers… will not be tolerated.” But the real troublemakers are those inside the hall – and inside a police system that’s being used to stomp on the very freedoms that America is supposed to embrace and encourage. What's coming down in Tampa this month is not what Madison, Jefferson, and the others meant by liberty.
http://www.jimhightower.com/node/7808

[Frenchfry]

Insider tips profit biggest hedge funds

The high-rollers who run Wall Street's top hedge funds essentially gamble with other people's money, betting billions of dollars on such stuff as whether XYZ Corporation's third-quarter profits will be one point lower than forecast. Doing this, they assert, is genius work, entitling them to be paid more than anyone else. Two years ago, for example, each of the top 10 hedge fund dealers averaged $175 million in pay – or about $84,000 an hour!

Sure enough, their bets on corporate performance usually turn out to be winners. How do they do that? Are they really Einsteins – or is something else in play?

Something else. The New York Times reports that a handful of big hedge funds have been systematically receiving insider tips from corporate analysts working at Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, and other Wall Street stock brokerages. These analysts, who are experts on the inner-workings of particular corporations, have quietly been sending periodic insider updates on corporate performance to a few favored funds. The under-the-table updates reveal such key information as whether XYZ's corporate profits are heading up or down, or whether management changes or other corporate surprises are in the works.

The insights of these analysts are supposed to be released only on a set date to the public at large, so no one investor gets an advantage. But the internal documents of the big hedge funds show that they’re getting an early peek, allowing them to make their investment bets before ordinary investors know what's going on. With these tips, the funds make a killing, while non-privileged small investors often take a hit.

Like Las Vegas hustlers, high-strutting hedge fund whizzes aren't brilliant or deserving – and certainly not ethical. They're getting rich by gaming the system.

"Surveys Give Big Investors Early View From Analysts," The New York Times,
July 16, 2012.
http://www.jimhightower.com/node/7809

[Frenchfry]

Our rights versus authoritarian wrong

One of the juiciest ironies of Tampa’s newly-minted law to suppress protest at the upcoming Republican National Convention is that it bans the carrying of water pistols by protesters. However, thanks to Florida’s nutty right-wing governor, anyone with a concealed-weapon permit is free to tote an actual bullet-firing pistol! Apparently, the authorities really do consider blood to be thicker than water.

Even nuttier is the fantasy of convention organizers that they can lock down the feisty and essential American spirit of political protest with a rash of ridiculous liberty-repressing laws. Among their ordinances is a directive that thousands of demonstrators squeeze their public expressions into short “parade routes” and out-of-the-way “viewing areas.” This is as futile as King George III demanding that American revolutionaries march into battle by lining up in neat rows to be shot down by his Redcoats.

A spokesman for one protest group says flatly that its members will pick their own spots to assemble and have their say: “We [Americans] were born with the right to move freely from place to place and speak our minds,” he rightly points out. Also, a poor people’s coalition is setting up a “Romneyville” on private property in Tampa, providing what it calls “a kind of refuge” against the government’s attempt to box-in its protest of policies that are increasing poverty all across America.

The opposite of courage is not cowardice – it’s conformity. What makes America great are courageous folks like these who refuse to go along with authoritarians and elites who always demand that we surrender our most basic liberties to protect them from speech they don’t want to hear. To keep up with this never-ending battle of rights versus wrong, go to the National Lawyers Guild’s website at www.nlg.org.

"To Prepare for Convention, Tampa Restricts Protests,"
www.nytimes.com, July 23, 2012.
http://www.jimhightower.com/node/7810

[Frenchfry]

The GOP is galloping away from conservative… to crazy

If you thought that right-wing politicos couldn't get any goofier – take a peek at "Texas on Cruz Control."

Ted Cruz is America's latest tea party darling. He just pulled off a contortion in Texas that few would've thought humanly possible: he got to the right of Gov. Rick Perry – himself a former tea party darling who's such a far-out know-nothing that he's best known for putting the goober in gubernatorial. In the recent Republican primary, however, Cruz squinched himself Houdini-like into even-further-out political positions than Perry has taken, thus defeating the guy whom Perry wanted to be the Party's nominee for a seat in the U.S. Senate.

How far out is he, you ask? One of the white-hot talking points Cruz used to fire-up the narrow extremists who now control the Texas GOP is that he will, by God, defend America's golf courses! You might not have realized that golf course defense is a burning national issue crying out for U.S. Senate attention, but such deep vigilence is apparently what makes Cruz a tea party fave. He says that he has ferreted out a diabolical United Nations plot to "abolish 'unsustainable' environments, including golf courses."

Attention Patriots: grab your putters and rush to your local links, for the UN is coming! To burnish his crazy bonafides, Cruz adds that, "The originator of this grand scheme is George Soros."

While Cruz promises to save American golfers from this tea party boogeyman, he says he also intends to save all of us from Social Security – by turning our retirement money over to the altruistic geniuses of Wall Street. Oh, let's get rid of unemployment benefits, too, because, explains Professor Cruz, helping the jobless increases unemployment.

Cruz is what's happening to the Republican Party nationally – veering off from conservative… to crazy.

"Five Things Everyone Should Know About GOP Senate Candidate Ted Cruz," www.thinkprogress.org, July 31, 2012.

"Crazy Down in Texas," www.huffingtonpost.com, July 31, 2012.
http://www.jimhightower.com/node/7811

[Frenchfry]

A Wall Street devil gets religion

Hallelujah and Holy Smokes – the biggest sinner on Wall Street has repented!

He is Sandy Weill, the deal-maker who turned our banks into financial "supermarkets" that tie us everyday customers to the profiteering schemes of global speculators.

In the late 1980s, Weill went on a decade-long merger binge, taking over Travelers Insurance, Smith Barney, and several other powerhouses of high finance, culminating in 1998 with his grabbing of Citibank. The empire was named Citigroup, Weill was paid a king's ransom, and he was hailed as a genius. Only one problem: His conglomerated entity was illegal.

After the financial collapse of 1929 led to the Great Depression, the Glass-Steagall Act was passed to protect people's deposits by prohibiting banks from also gambling in stocks, insurance schemes, etc. Picky-picky, said Weill, who simply hired a hoard of lobbyists to get Washington to legalize his illegal structure by repealing the pesky law he was blatantly violating.

In 1999, Congress dutifully nixed Glass-Steagall, and Wall Street promptly rushed to amalgamate more Citigroups, thus creating the "too-big-to-fail" system that – only eight years later – did indeed fail. Weill's "genius" forced a multitrillion–dollar bailout on us taxpayers (including $45 billion for Citigroup itself). By then, though, the genius had retired with so much money he could afford to air-condition hell.

But now – approaching 80 and perhaps hoping to avoid that destination – Weill has suddenly become a born again convert to the gospel of Glass-Steagall, calling for today's megabanks to be "split up" so they are "not too big to fail." Wow – redemption! Note, though, that Saint Sandy is not returning any of the millions he pocketed from his devilish scheme – just in case he really does need to buy that air conditioner.

"The Big Banker's Change of Heart," The New York Times, July 27, 2012.

"Citigroup's ex-CEO does about-face on big banks," Austin American Statesman, July 26, 2012.

"Deal Maker Now Doubts Megabakns," The New York Times, July 23, 2012
http://www.jimhightower.com/node/7812

[Frenchfry]

Munching fish and chips with Mitt
Wednesday, August 8, 2012

At last, we have a clear sign that Mitt Romney really is "a man of the people!"

The proof of his populist pudding came on his recent political foray to Jolly Old England. While in London, the multimillionaire financier and presidential hopeful showed his common touch by chowing down with about 250 local folks on a humble meal of fish and chips, served up in paper cones. Wow – down home!

Well, not exactly. "Folks" mischaracterizes Mitt's crowd, since the ticket price for the chow-down was $25,000 to $75,000 per head. For fish and chips! As one somewhat surprised attendee noted, "It was the most expensive halibut in town." And the donors were not truly locals, but American financiers who're top executives working in the London financial district for the biggest Wall Street and British banks, hedge funds, and such private equity outfits as Romney's own money machine, Bain Capital.

They were drawn to Mitt's political flame because, one, he hails from their self-centered and self-serving world and, two, he fully embraces their sad complaint that public criticism and the push for more regulation of elite bankers has gone too far. With tongue-clucking empathy, Romney assured these privileged ones that America's Dodd-Frank banking reforms were "unnecessary" and "overly burdensome" – and he would repeal them.

However, the timing of his denunciation of U.S. policywas off, for – like Wall Street – such British banks as Barclay's and HSBC are presently ensnared in public scandals involving massive consumer ripoffs and gross ethical violations. Still, in this ornate ballroom, with millionaire's munching the food of the commoners, any outrage from actual commoners was, as one muncher said dismissively, just "background noise."

Yeah, that's Mitt's crowd all right. Power to the 1%!

"Romney Fund-Raisers in London Draw Banking Crowd," The New York Times," July 27, 2012.
http://www.jimhightower.com/node/7813

[Frenchfry]

Welcome to the GOP's Theological Nutland

While it's hard to fathom right-wing nuttiness, it's sure not hard to find it these days.

We saw it in full bloom recently when it popped right out of the head of Todd Akin, the GOP's senate candidate in Missouri. The learned Congressman gave America a twisted tutorial on the imaginary science of "legitimate rape," including an astonishing assertion of medical mojo. Akin explained that raped women don’t get pregnant because – again, speaking scientifically – the female body has ways "to shut that whole thing down."

Whoa! Screamed Mitt Romney and the entire Republican hierarchy, as they rushed to declare Akin out-of-bounds and… well, nutty.

But wait – guess who's presently co-sponsoring legislation with Akin to impose this theological witchcraft on America's women? Why, it's Romney's choice to be our vice president, Paul Ryan! And guess which party has just fully embraced Akin's nuttiness by including his absolutist "no-abortion-even-in-the-case-of-rape" provision in its national platform? Yes, the Romney-Ryan Republicans. Yet, that same party's panicked poobahs have pronounced Akin's views so extreme that he should withdraw from the Missouri Senate race. Excuse me, but – logically speaking – doesn't that mean Ryan should also withdraw from his race?

Of course, in the fantasy universe of the far right, logic is an alien intruder, barred from interfering with either approved doctrine or political expediency. Indeed, here's their idea of logic: Todd Akin, a devout worshipper of junk science, is a member of the House Committee on Science.

And if you find that surreal, let me add that it's hardly the only illogical perversion in the doctrinal right's carefully-constructed NutLand – Michele Bachmann, for example, is a member of the House Intelligence Committee.

"The Sexual Spirit of '76," The New York Times, August 23, 2012.

"Just Think No," The New York Times, August 23, 2012.

"A Politician Whose Faith Is Central to His Persistence," The New York Times, August 22, 2012.

"Paul Ryan's 'legitimate' problem," Santa Fe New Mexican, August 24, 2012.
http://www.jimhightower.com/node/7833

[Frenchfry]

Where's the ethical balance of America's scales of justice?

Is it really "fair and balanced"? I don't mean the ridiculous Fox TV channel, whose right-wing ranters mock their own PR slogan – but, rather, a network that actually matters in our society: America's legal system.

To check the balance of the scales of justice, look at how the system treats the very rich… and the poor. As we've seen, Wall Street barons have grossly fattened themselves by running frauds and scams that wreaked trillions of dollars in damages to working families, homeowners, and taxpayers – yet not a single one of them has been indicted or even seriously pursued by the law. More recently, such corporate profiteers as GlaxoSmithKline have paid billions of dollars in fines for serious criminal acts, but the executive crimals who pulled these capers have skated free without ever being charged.

Now, meet Gina Ray, who is neither a CEO nor a serious offender, but a hard-hit, low-income American. She's one of hundreds who're being jailed, not by the police, but by a growing network of corporate fee-chasers empowered by state legislatures to fine and imprison poor people who've committed minor infractions. Ms. Ray, an unemployed 31-year-old in Rural Alabama, got caught-up in this privatized probation system over a speeding ticket. Her problem mushroomed, and she was unable to pay, so the corporatized legal system locked her up and hit her with company fees for each of the 40 days she was behind bars. Her original $179 ticket has now surpassed $3,000. She was not told that she has a right to a court-appointed lawyer or offered any alternatives to more fines and jail. "We hear a lot of 'I can't pay the fee,'" says one of the private prosecutors, adding chillingly that, "It is not our job to figure that out,"

For more information, contact Southern Center For Human Rights: www.schr.org.

"Fraud Cases Often Spare individuals," The New York Times, August 8, 2012.

"As Banking Titans Reflect on Errors, Few Pay Any Price," The New York Times, August 2, 2012.

"Poor Land in Jail as Companies Add Huge Fees for Probation," The New York Times, July 3, 2012.
http://www.jimhightower.com/node/7830

[Frenchfry]

The Ryan-Romney flim-flam ticket

Let's talk budget! Yes, the wonky wonderland of the federal budget, with page after page of numbers – what fun, eh?

No. Most people would prefer a root canal to a budget discussion (indeed, I've heard that some dentists use a recording of budget numbers to anesthetize their root-canal patients – everything from the neck up goes quickly numb). But Paul Ryan is different. The GOP's vice presidential nominee is touted as Mr. Budget, a guy who gets excited by running his fingers through fiscal things. That's why the Washington cognoscenti have declared him to be "serious," rather than just another political opportunist riding the right-wing wave of tea party ridiculousness.

Being branded as "serious" means never having to admit you're a flim-flam man. Thus, the widely-ballyhooed Ryan Budget is called "honest" and "responsible" by insiders who obviously haven't run the numbers on it. The non-partisan Tax Policy Center, however, has tallied Ryan's budgetary giveaways to the rich and takebacks from the middle-class and the poor. Far from balancing the federal budget, as the self-proclaimed deficit hawk claims, the analysts found that Ryan's plan increases the federal deficit. And not by a little, but by about $2.5 trillion! So, yes, he is serious – serious as a snake bite.

Then there was Ryan's explosive admission recently that the budget plan of his presidential partner, Mitt Romney, is also a con game. Despite Romney's repeated assertion that – by golly – his nifty plan will balance the federal budget in only eight years, Ryan confessed that they didn't really know that, because, "we haven't run the numbers on that specific plan."

What? Hello – a budget is nothing but numbers – numbers that have, in fact, been run! Otherwise, it's not a budget, it's just a political hoax.

"An Unserious Man," The New York Times, August 20, 2012.

"We Haven't Run The Numbers": The Startling Paul Ryan Admission Getting Little Attention," www.alternet.org, August 15, 2012.
http://www.jimhightower.com/node/7829

[Frenchfry]

The GOP rejects, then embraces, and now is stuck with Todd Akin

Hail, hail the GOP gang's all here – so let us now welcome Rep. Todd
Akin back into the fold!

Todd, the present Republican nominee for a Missouri U.S. Senate seat, was coldly cast aside by his own partisan flock just a few weeks ago because well, because he's truly goofy. He's the "legitimate rape" guy who put forth a theory of voodoo "science" that would prevent even pregnant rape victims from being allowed abortions. If a woman endures a "legitimate" rape, explained this member of – believe it or not – the U.S. House science committee, her body would magically generate some sort of occult hormone that would prevent her from becoming pregnant. Thus, spake Todd, any woman who gets pregnant from an unwanted sexual "encounter" – even a violent one forced upon her – has not experienced a legitimate rape and must bear the rapist's child.

Oh, cried every GOP politico from Mitt Romney to the county dogcatcher, this is too weird even for us, so Todd must resign as our party's nominee, forthwith! Only he didn't. And guess what? The moral purists who so loudly reviled Akin a few weeks ago are now hugging him, tucking campaign checks in his sordid coat pockets, hoping he'll win so they – and he – can take over the U.S. Senate. What's a little rape compared to political expediency?

But – whoops – Todd wasn't through with his goofiness binge. Now, a video has surfaced in which Mr. Legitimate Rape-Man doubles as Mr.
Legitimate Discrimination-Man. Asked at a public meeting why a woman shouldn't get equal pay for doing the same work as a man, the guy who would be senator explains – on video – that free enterprise means that corporations are free to discriminate in what they pay women – or people of color, immigrants, older workers, or others.

Keep talking, Todd – we're all listening.
http://www.jimhightower.com/node/7858

[Frenchfry]

Who's feeding the Bush puppy?
by Jim Hightower

Guess what? George Bush is back!

Not "Poppy" Bush, as George H.W. was known. Nor the George known simply as "W." Rather, farther down the family tree, a brand new Bush is trying to use his powerful family name and connections to sprout a career in the rich soil of right-wing Texas politics. Meet George P. Bush – already dubbed "Puppy."

Son of former-Florida governor Jeb, this 36-year-old has been a corporate lawyer, a private equity hustler, and is presently in energy investments. But lately, George P has been working the family rolodex for his fledgling effort to grab the statewide office of land commissioner.

He has already sacked up about $1.4 million – a wad of start-up cash that would have been impossible to get if his name was George P. Bust. Practically all of this bankroll came from family (including $50,000 from Uncle W) or from special interest donors long tied to the Bush political network, including donations of $10,000 to $65,000 each from seven Texas oil operators and assorted far-right-wing billionaires.

Among his billionaire backers are Bob Perry, a Houston-based housing developer, and Harold Simmons, a Dallas-based waste-disposal baron. Both dumped tens-of-millions of dollars into the GOP's ferociously-negative attack ads against Barack Obama last year. Also, both are infamous pay-to-play corporatists who like to buy into up-and-coming politicians who can be trusted to deliver governmental favors to them over the long haul. So it's not for nothing that they are the two biggest donors nourishing young Bush's run for this little-known Texas office.

George P has the pure Bush pedigree and is already on the corporate leash. One watchdog group tracing the money interests feeding and training this pup is Texans for Public Justice. Find them at www.tpj.org.

"George P. Bush," www.wikipedia.org, February 7, 2013.

"George P. Bush, Political Activist, Entrepreneur & Public Servant," www.apbspeakers.com, February 7, 2013.

"Dynasty's Rolodex Delivers $1.35 Million to George P. Bush," www.tpj.org, January 17, 2013.
http://www.jimhightower.com/node/7961

[Frenchfry]

Silicon Valley's latest speculative bubble
by Jim Hightower

Get ready for the rapture! Not the religious kind, but a financial rapture being promised to us by the holy spirits of Silicon Valley.

Actually, making a financial killing is the religion of the Valleyites, and top tekkies there are currently in a quasi-religious swoon over what they prophesize to be the Next Big Thing for America. Ready for what they're offering as our economic salvation? Online gambling. Hallelujah! Multibillions of dollars, they exult, will flow like manna from heaven as everyday gambling sweeps across the land through our iPads and even our cell phones.

Gambling is to be as simple as buying an e-book, they brag. No need to go to a casino, or anywhere for that matter – you'll have the convenience of placing bets right from the comfort of your own La-Z-Boy, while enjoying the whole experience with your "virtual friends." Oh, how nice. Virtual, as in not actual. Gosh, I hope you are as ecstatic about this I am.

Ecstatic or not, here it comes. With visions of new tax revenue flowing like a mighty river from the munificent gods of mass online wagering, Delaware, Nevada, and New Jersey are already tweaking their laws in a rush to bring this effervescent "industry" streaming into the lives of their residents.

Meanwhile, top Siliconners from Amazon, Apple, and Google are excitedly investing in the exuberance of this phenomenon. "Everybody," says the co-founder of MySpace, "is really anticipating this becoming a huge business." The game maker Zynga has jumped out front with an ad promoting its first online betting game, urging everyone to, "Live the dream!"

Hmmm – notice the proliferation of such fuzzy concepts as exuberance, anticipation, and dream. Is anything about this prophecy of a new "industry" real – or are they just conjuring up another speculative bubble?

"Tech Industry Sets Its Sights On Gambling," The New York Times, February 18, 2013.
http://www.jimhightower.com/node/7969