Print

[Frenchfry]

Vanity Fair pulls back the curtain on SAIC, the largest government contractor you've never heard of. Science Applications International Corporation has a workforce of 44,000, annual revenues that reached $8 billion in 2006, and a list of current and former board members that reads like a who's who of political and military heavyweights. How is it that even though "several of SAIC's biggest projects have turned out to be colossal failures," the company always manages to get paid?

Video here:
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/expose/episode204/watch.html

[riar]

DEMOCRATS CAVE IN TO BUSH FEARMONGERING
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
by Jim Hightower

Once upon a time, America had a strong president who reassured the American people that, “We have nothing to fear but fear itself.”
Now we have a weak president who tells us that we must be fearful of all things all the time, using fear as a political pump to inflate his own ego and power. He even color codes fear for us, always keeping the colors flame hot. This summer, he used the scorching rhetoric of fear to cow congressional Democrats, scaring them into rubber-stamping a blatant subversion of our constitutional liberties.
Fanning the fears of terrorist attacks, Bush stampeded Democrats to rush through a law letting the White House eavesdrop on your and my phone calls and emails without bothering to get search warrants. This new warrantless spying law gives the attorney general carte blanch to order that any of our international calls or electronic messages be monitored if he decides on his own that we might be communicating with someone who might be outside the U.S. who might or might not have even vague connections to some terrorist group.
Yes, this means that our precious privacy is in the grasping hands of Alberto “See no Evil” Gonzales. He can click into entire telecommunications networks to intercept millions of innocent messages without having to show probable cause of illegal activity.
Congress ceded this extraordinary reach to the executive even though there’s a perfectly-functioning, quick-responding court in place to authorize surveillance of legitimate terrorist suspects – and to do it constitutionally. Bush's law is not about protecting Americans from terrorists, but about protecting the Bush-Cheney regime from the Constitution.
It’s arrogant nonsense for the Bushites to assort that they’re above the law – but it’s shameful cowardice for scaredy-cat Democratic leadership to go along with it.


“The Fear of Fear Itself,” The New York Times, August 7, 2007
“Stampeding Congress, Again,” The New York Times, August 3, 2007
“Wartime power grabs require beautiful sunsets,” USA Today, August 7, 2007
“Bush Signs Law to Widen Reach for Wiretapping,” The New York Times, August 6, 2007
“Wielding the Threat of Terrorism, Bush Outmaneuvers the Democrats,” The New York Times, August 7, 2007

Hey Frenchfry, is this from the Hightower Report? He's pretty good. Sounds like Hightower. You a subscriber?

[Frenchfry]

AMERICA’S GAPING ECONOMIC DIVIDE
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
by Jim Hightower


What happened to the good ol’ American notion of the common good – the idea that we’re all in this together, trying to build a strong, unified society by fairly sharing the economic gains that all of us help produce?
Oh, sure, we’ve always had the rich and the poor, but at least we’ve tried in the past to narrow that gap, recognizing that a cohesive democratic society – a morally secure society – is dependent on maintaining both a vibrant middle class and a broad perception of fairness. Today, the Powers That Be – both corporate and governmental – have abandoned all pretense of shared sacrifice, shared gains, and a shared future. The very, very rich are being made ever and ever richer, and they are sailing blithely away from the rest of us, no longer moored to America’s egalitarian ideals.

The latest indicator of this extreme change in our nation’s guiding ethic comes from faireconomy.org, which analyzes CEO pay, perks, and pensions. Their latest survey finds that the chieftans of Fortune 500 corporations averaged $10.8 million each in pay in 2006 – more than 364 times the annual paychecks of the average U.S. worker! On top of this, CEOs salted away an average of $1.3 million in pension gains in 2006, and they averaged another $438,000 in such freebies as personal travel on corporate jets, country club fees, and even corporate payment of their taxes.

Well, assert the CEO clique, we run huge corporations and are simply being paid accordingly. However, faireconomy.org compared the 20 highest paid U.S. chief executives to the 20 highest paid in Europe. The European chiefs took only one-third as much pay – even though they ran companies that generated $19 billion more in sales than the U.S. companies.

The ever-spreading pay gap has become a sundering chasm in our society. To learn more about it and to see some proposals for bridging this dangerous fissure, go to www.faireconomy.org.


“Executive Excess 2007,” Institute for Policy Studies/ United for a Fair Economy, 2007

[riar]

Vanity Fair pulls back the curtain on SAIC, the largest government contractor you've never heard of. Science Applications International Corporation has a workforce of 44,000, annual revenues that reached $8 billion in 2006, and a list of current and former board members that reads like a who's who of political and military heavyweights. How is it that even though "several of SAIC's biggest projects have turned out to be colossal failures," the company always manages to get paid?

Video here:
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/expose/episode204/watch.html

Here's the entire trail on how they get paid. How all the private for-profit contractors are getting paid for nothing in Iraq: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/16076312/the_great_iraq_swindle.

It's really long to read but it really nails the same companies that are under investigation right now and will not give the money back. $12 billion has been shipped to Iraq so far. $8.8 billion is totally unaccounted for. What a racket. Private corps. getting fat on the U.S. Treasury.

[Frenchfry]

HEY, CLINTON: BE A DEMOCRAT!
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
by Jim Hightower

Good grief! What is it about corporate Democrats that make them such meek and weak Democrats?

Oh, yeah… I guess it’s that corporate yoke they wear.

Take the party’s present front-runner for president, Sen. Hillary Clinton. Facing a hobbled and dispirited Republican opposition, she has a chance to stand forthright for America’s workaday majority, to rally ordinary folks to take their county back from the moneyed elites, and to move America forward with a bold vision of grassroots economics.

So, who has she turned to for an economic brain trust? Wall Street! Business Week magazine reports that a handful of investment bankers are meeting regularly to “refine” Clinton’s position on key economic issues.

This might explain the senator’s recent major policy speech in which she essentially promised to be a milquetoast, don’t rock-the-boat, cautious insider if she gets elected. She pledged to “work within the system” and to make “principled compromises.” Wow. That’ll really excite America’s hard-hit working stiffs, won’t it? Those are Republican-like code words to reassure Wall Street – not to launch a resurgence of democratic progress.

Bizarrely, Clinton cited FDR and LBJ as her models of political pragmatism and accommodation. “They got big things done,” she declared, “because they knew it wasn’t just about the dream, it was about the results.”

Actually, no. They got big things done because they dared to dream big, dared to go right to the people with their big dreams… and dared to take on the power elites to realize those dreams. In fact, Roosevelt earned the bitter enmity of Wall Street with his populist proposals. But instead of trying to appease the bankers and speculators by waving the flag of compromise, FDR said: “I welcome their hatred.”

Come on senator, come on Democrats – it’s time to be Democrats again!



“With a New Speech, Clinton Lays Out Goals as President,” The New York Times, September 3, 2007
“The Candidates On Wall Street,” www.businessweek.com, April 2, 2007

[Frenchfry]

PITY TEXAS
Friday, September 21, 2007
by Jim Hightower

Oh, woe is me! Sometimes it’s hard to be a Texan, and now is one of those times, for we are about to be inundated with political devils of our own making.

With the unraveling of the Bush regime in Washington, hordes of former Texas residents who’ve been working with him are threatening to move back. Start with Karl Rove, who has resigned as George W’s chief political hatchet man, claiming he needs to spend more time with his family. Who knew this thug even had a family? Does he mean the Mafia? He’s rumored to he heading to Fredericksburg, a beautiful place filled with nice people. What did they ever do to him to warrant such an affliction? Word is that good folks there are stocking up with cattle prods and cans of Raid to ward off Rove nastiness. Their saving grace might be that Karl is so enmeshed in the Jack Abramoff and Justice Department scandals that he’s likely to be spending a lot of time with Washington grand juries, with little time to bother the locals.

Meanwhile, here comes Alberto! Bush’s disgraced attorney general is expected to return to Houston – if he can recall where it is. Maybe the memory-challenged Gonzales will be refreshed by the change of scenery and finally remember what he was doing the past six-and-a-half years, including his role in illegal spying, torture memos, and the political firings of U.S. attorneys. Perhaps he’ll even recall what he did with our Constitution – it would be nice to get it back.

There are so many other Bushite acolytes who will be descending on us Texans, plus George himself. His palatial presidential library is already being readied for him in Dallas, presumably to be filled with his White House records – all marked top-secret and completely blacked out.

Oh, God! What if “Buckshot” Cheney moves here, too? Who else but Halliburton, based in Houston, would be willing to accept the snarling old autocrat?
Pity Texas. We’re doomed.

[Frenchfry]

USDA: A BROTHEL FOR AGRIBUSINESS
Monday, September 24, 2007
by Jim Hightower

Our federal regulatory agencies – designed to protect consumers, workers, and the environment from corporate profiteers – have instead become brothels on wheels, going to any length to accommodate profiteers.

One of the rolling accommodators is the U.S. agriculture department, which has been especially servile to Monsanto and other biotech giants involved in messing with the very DNA of our foods and feed crops. Monsanto makes a weedkiller called Roundup, but in addition to killing weeds, this toxic stuff also tends to kill the very crops that the weeds are crowding out.

Take alfalfa. Monsanto's white-smock lab techs have genetically altered alfalfa seeds to produce plants that – guess what? – absorb heavy doses of Roundup without dying. This means more sales of Monsanto's herbicide, while also creating a market for its "Roundup Ready" alfalfa seeds. Our ag department gave this Frankenseed its blessing two years ago without even doing an environmental impact assessment! The agency simply assumed that the enviro and economic impacts were not significant, essentially taking the word of the profiteer, Monsanto.

A watchdog group called the Center for Food Safety, however, was not so easy. It sued USDA for abrogating its regulatory responsibility – and a federal judge has now agreed. He said that USDA was "cavalier" in its quick OK, that it had not adequately considered the fact that the altered seed would contaminate organic alfalfa fields, and that the increased use of the herbicide would create superweeds. In a telling comment, the judge wrote: "One would expect that some federal agency is considering whether there is some risk to [genetically] engineering all of America's crops..."

Yeah... one would expect. But our government has become an accommodator, not a regulator. To learn more, call the Center for Food Safety: 202-547-9359.



"Agriculture Department Violated Law, Judge Rules," New York Times, February 14, 2007.
"Environmental regulation: U.S. courts say transgenic crops need tighter scrutiny," www.checkbiotech.org, February 27, 2007.
"Federal Court finds USDA Erred in Approving Genetically Engineered Alfalfa Without Full Environmental Review," Center for Food Safety Press Release, February 14, 2007.
"Federal court halts genetically engineered alfalfa, field trials," www.naturalfoodmerchandiser.com, February 20, 2007.
"Ruling Mat Block Biotech Alfalfa Planting," Pew initiative of Food and Biotechnology, February 20, 2007.

[Frenchfry]

THE HIGH COST OF LOW PRICES
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
by Jim Hightower


Mothers and fathers all across the country have been recoiling in horror at the news that some Chinese-made toys they’ve been buying for their little ones contain lead paint. These are not cheapie toys, either – they bear such labels as Mattel and Disney, and they’re sold in Toys “R” Us, Wal-Mart, and other mainline stores. Why in the world would these corporations allow lead paint on products for children?
Can you say: Profits?

For years, U.S. companies have rushed to China to get the toys they sell to us, because in China, labor is dirt cheap, environmental rules are ignored, and product safety regulations are not enforced. In other words, by taking shortcuts on the manufacturing of toys, the corporations get the products on the cheap, yet still sell them at relatively high prices to us – that’s a shortcut to big profits.

In fact, this is the Wal-Mart model that has been hailed as the Glorious Global Model – go to China for your products and constantly pressure suppliers there to keep cutting costs… no matter what the ultimate cost. The mantra of globalization is cheap-cheap-cheap. And lead paint is far cheaper than unleaded. Never mind that lead is toxic, especially for small children – it is linked to mental retardation and behavioral problems.

Do you really think that Wal-Mart, Mattel, and the rest don’t know this? Of course they do. Do you think they were innocents, totally unaware of what their Chinese suppliers have been using for paint? The best you can say about them is that the profiteers didn’t care enough to ask, didn’t care enough to test. Just get the product cheap, that’s all that matters.

The flow of dangerous products from China is not a surprise, nor is it the fault of the Chinese system. It is the inevitable result of a corporate globalization system that mistakes low prices for low cost. Someone always pays.



“Why Lead In Toy Paint? It’s Cheaper,” The New York Times, September 11, 2007

[SMASH]

Let's start a new government office and have a "Toy Czar", that should fix it.

[Frenchfry]

WAR ON TERRORISTS GETS GOOFIER
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
by Jim Hightower

“In order to stop terrorists from destroying America’s democratic freedoms, we will destroy America’s democratic freedoms ourselves.”

That seems to be the official slogan of Washington’s goofy war on terrorism. Not only has George W attacked the wrong country in his surreal war, but his administration also continues to shut down our Constitutional liberties here at home. They have secretly seized everything from library records to the emails of innocent Americans, suppressed the right to peaceful assembly and free speech, suspended the core legal right of habeas corps, and generally asserted an autocratic authority to rule by executive fiat.

Now comes another goofy directive from on high – this one to suppress the right to the free expression of religion. In the name of battling terrorist, the Bureau of Prisons (or BOP) has decreed that chaplains in every federal prison must systematically purge their chapel libraries of all religious books, CDs, videos, and other materials that are not on the approved list. Calling this purge the “Standardized Chapel Library Project,” BOP says it relied on “experts” to choose 150 books for each of 20 religions. Who are these experts? BOP won’t say.

Libraries that had thousands of religious texts, have had their shelves decimated. The censorship is necessary, snapped a BOP official, in order to “assure reliable teachings.” Hello… this is government dictating religious teachings – a Constitutional no-no.

Ah, the officials cluck, but we’re protecting you from prisoners who might read some inflammatory Muslims materials and be converted to terrorists. Hmmm… but BOP’s list excludes such writings as “Living Positively” by Pastor Robert Schuller – are they calling that a militant text?

Perhaps the strategy of the Bushites is to show the terrorist that we can be nuttier that they are. Now, that’s really scary.




“Prisons Purge Books on Faith From Libraries,” The New York Times, September 10, 2007

[Greg Chamberlain]

Do you think you are wasting your time in Monroe?  Maybe 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue would be a good fit for you.  Seriously, considering your political savvy.

Why would French Fry want to work in the Ronald Reagan Building?

[SMASH]

Do you think you are wasting your time in Monroe?  Maybe 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue would be a good fit for you.  Seriously, considering your political savvy.

Why would French Fry want to work in the Ronald Reagan Building?

Come on, French Fry might be a leftie with socialist tendancies but I would never sentence anyone to that type of cruel and unusual punishment. It's just not human.

Peace.

[John Kopke]

From what I gather from the Dem debate last night the top three are moving
away from cut and run with they can't guarantee we'll be out of Iraq by the end
of their first term. Apparently it all depends on the situation on the ground and
the effect it would have on the geopolitical situation in the middle east. 

Are we to assume they have suddenly been won over to the arguments of the Bush
administration?  Why are they no longer willing to pull the plug on a "lost war"?

On another subject here is something I found very disturbing. Candidates were asked:
 
If we knew there was a large bomb planted in a major city, and by chance, we had
captured the number three AQ leader, whom knew where the bomb located, would
you authorize torture to obtain the information. Answer. No.  Very politically correct
don't you think?

Well I may be a crazed right winger, but is BOOM really the better choice?

[Frenchfry]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul-arch.html

[Frenchfry]

AN EARLY AND EXCLUSIVE PRIMARY
Thursday, September 27, 2007
by Jim Hightower

The top presidential candidates of both political parties are meeting with voters in a key primary, promising to help them on the issues they care about.

Are they in Iowa? No. New Hampshire? Uh-uh. California? Nowhere near it. So, where?

Wall Street.

While regular citizens won’t start voting on the presidential contenders until January, an intensive, closed-door primary has already been taking place inside the confines of investment banks, hedge funds, and other financial institutions in Manhattan. Reporters are not allowed in, candidates don’t issue press releases about their appearances, and there is no disclosure about what the presidential wannabes pledge to these elite banking interests in order to gain their financial backing. It’s strictly a private campaign – albeit with enormous public impact.

Bear Stearns, for example, has had its own presidential tour, summoning seven major candidates to its Midtown headquarters for exclusive presentations and Q&A sessions with its managing partners. If you’re just a plain ol’ voter, you’d be lucky to get a handshake with any of these aspirants, but this financial conglomerate can command its own little tête-à-tête with Romney, Clinton, Giuliani, Obama, Thompson, and others.

Business Week magazine reports that these Wall Street barons not only want to get commitments on issues like global trade and tax cuts, but they also use the private sessions to measure the candidates’ ability to “make smart decisions in times of uncertainty, a trait bankers and traders prize in themselves.”

Wait a minute! Aren’t these the same people who brought us Enron, NAFTA, offshoring, exorbitant credit card fees, dependency on oil, pension collapses, and other “smart decisions?” Indeed, isn’t Bear Stearns itself butt deep in the ongoing subprime mortgage disaster? Why should anyone listen to them?



“The Candidates On Wall Street,” www.businessweek.com, April 2, 200