Month: October 2011

Just the beginning

by digby

Click here for a great slide show.

.

Virtually Speaking with Joan McCarter and … me

by digby

Join the legendary McJoan and me for a wide ranging conversation about the week’s politics, starting at 6pm leftcoast time.

Should be fun!

.

We’re both right but you’re wrong

by digby

This is so disturbing on so many levels that I’m just going to let it speak for itself.

When you have Dick Cheney heartily endorsing your methods, tactics and results but demanding an apology for misleading the people into believing that you didn’t agree with him, you should know that you are so far down the rabbit hole you may never get back out again.

.

The psychological toll of joblessness
by David Atkins (“thereisnospoon”)

The Washington Post has a good article today on the psychological toll to America of high unemployment:

Joel Sarfati, a counselor for the Washington area’s long-term unemployed, has seen it all: Foreclosures, substance abuse, family battles and – worst of all – widespread depression that some experts say has reached startling proportions since the recession.

About 9 percent of Americans were defined as clinically depressed in data released last year by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, compared to an estimated 6.6 percent in data collected in 2001 and 2002.

“You’re 45, 50 years old, you’ve worked hard for the past 25 years, and all of the sudden you’re on the street, or your friends disappear like unemployment is a disease they can catch,” said Sarfati, the executive director of 40Plus of Greater Washington, an organization that brings together unemployed middle-aged professionals for job training, resume building and much needed moral support. “As this thing gets more drawn out, we see more and more people fall into a deep funk or dark place.”

As President Obama and Republican leaders argue over the best way to reduce 9.1 percent unemployment and revive a near-flatlining economy, less attention has been paid to the widespread emotional and psychological damage caused by long-term unemployment — and the drain it has on government resources and workforce productivity.

With an estimated three-quarters of the 14 million unemployed Americans out of work for more than six months and fully half out of work for more than two years, many jobless Americans are falling into despair as repeated attempts to find work come up short.

When people lose their jobs, they often are optimistic as they embark on a search for a new one, according to Ronald Kessler, a professor of health-care policy at Harvard Medical School and an expert on psychiatric disorders and data. “But after a while they get worn down and discouraged, and that’s when you start to see the mental health problems. And for the U.S., that time is now.”

And, of course, the global austerity fetish has been actively harmful as well. Not only is austerity adding to the unemployment toll, it is also making it harder for the nation’s unemployed to cope with the mental health issues associated with losing a job:

Many of these unemployed Americans cannot afford to seek professional help because they lost their employer-provided health insurance with their jobs. At the same time, federal, state and local governments have cut back on spending for mental health clinics and outreach in response to budget crises spawned by the bad economy.

It could get even worse if Medicaid funding of mental health services is put on the chopping block later this fall, as a congressional “supercommittee” hunts for spending cuts to help reduce the federal budget deficit. Medicaid is the main source of funding of public mental health services for young people and adults, accounting for nearly half of state mental health budgets, according to the National Alliance on Mental Illness.

The nation faces “a silent mental health epidemic,” according to Carl Van Horn, a professor of public policy and economics at Rutgers and head of the Heldrich Center.

“Losing a job is more than just a financial crisis for people,” Van Horn said. “It creates numerous other damage, stress, anxiety, substance abuse, fights and conflicts in the family and feelings of embarrassment and depression.”

This will lead to more suicide and more homelessness, issues that America has already mostly swept under the rug and pretended don’t exist.

Of course, America is not the only industrialized nation dealing with high unemployment. But it is the only industrialized nation with such a pathetic social safety net, especially when it comes to mental health assistance. It’s also the only nation that culturally treats unemployment as though it were the fault of the job seeker, rather than the fault of the society that cannot find them productive work at a living wage.

But I guess as long as people have the freedom to steal billions of dollars skimming off the economy in speculative schemes, America will continue to be the greatest nation on earth. As we all know, the best way to judge a society is by how it treats its most fortunate.

.

Wary of London

by digby

I missed this yesterday. Seems important.

I suppose it doesn’t exactly surprise me that the government would conflate peaceful protests with rioting. But it’s fairly amazing they are willing to say it out loud to a famous and highly respected journalist:

.

More Perry “bluster”

by digby

So Rick Perry had a hunting camp called “Ni**erhead” and nobody’s really sure when he changed the name of it. But don’t worry, the same popular reporter who assured us that Perry doesn’t really mean the crazy things he says has vouched for him once again:

So, we can dispense with all that. It was just “bluster” as she previously characterized his secessionist talk. Nothing to see here at all.

I do wonder if maybe this next one might be a problem though. I’m sure he doesn’t mean it the way it sounds because he’s such a nice guy and all, but still…

Texas Gov. Rick Perry said Saturday that he would consider sending U.S. troops into Mexico to combat drug-related violence and stop it from spilling into the southern United States.

“It may require our military in Mexico,” Perry said in answer to a question about the growing threat of drug violence along the southern border. Perry offered no details, and a spokesman, Robert Black, said afterward that sending troops to Mexico would be merely one way of putting an end to the exploding cartel-related violence in the region.

Good thing there’s no history of the US invading Mexico so we don’t have to worry about relations between the two countries being strained by such adorable Perryisms.

.

Stop the presses

by digby

The New York Times is so excited about this story that they have three top flight political reporters on it. Seriously:

Chris Christie’s political advisers are working to determine whether they could move fast enough to set up effective political operations in Iowa and New Hampshire in the wake of a relentless courtship aimed at persuading Mr. Christie, the governor of New Jersey, to plunge into the race for the Republican presidential nomination, according to operatives briefed on the preparations.

Mr. Christie has not yet decided whether to run and has not authorized the start of a full-fledged campaign operation. But with the governor now seriously considering getting in, his strategists — many of them veterans of Rudolph W. Giuliani’s 2008 campaign — are internally assessing the financial and logistical challenges of mounting a race with less than 100 days until voting is likely to begin.

What about Sarah Palin, huh? I need to know her latest passing thoughts on running too? How about Frederick of Hollywood Thompson? I hear he’s awake from his nap.

This is what passes for political news. People are talking about what the logistics are for Chris Christie if he decides to enter the race. I’m riveted.

.

Government Poltroons

by digby

I read this typically bellicose Max Boot piece with a surge of bile in my throat. I know people like this have been around forever, but I am still gobsmacked that they feel so comfortable throwing this stuff out there like it’s common sense. There’s a lot of that going around with the Al-Awlaki matter:

A few civil libertarians are raising questions about whether the U.S. government had the right to kill an American citizen without a trial….That’s like asking if it was lawful to kill Confederate soldiers at Gettysburg. Like the rebels during the Civil War, Awlaki and Khan gave up the benefits of American citizenship by taking up arms against their country. They, and other Al Qaeda members, claim to be “soldiers” in the army of Allah; it is only fitting that their avowed enemy, the Great Satan, would take their protestations seriously and treat them just like enemy soldiers. If it’s lawful to drop a missile on a Saudi or Egyptian member of Al Qaeda, it’s hard to see why an American citizen should be exempt.

Reams and reams have been written about the relative morality of war and the state killing of its own citizens. I’m not going to answer that question. But the United States had, up until now, established some pretty clear guidelines in these matters.

I’ll let Kevin Drum spell it out. He points out the obvious, which is that the state would have many options other than sending in a drone plane if Al-Awlaki were living in the United States. Indeed, it would be required to use those other methods since we don’t generally believe that the they’ve “declared war” on their government. If they did, we’d be looking at a whole lot of dead militia members and Tea Partiers who use those words all the time.

Kevin writes:

The Civil War analogy suggests that even if Awlaki had been living within the United States he would have been fair game for a presidential assassination merely for belonging to a group that calls itself an offshoot of al-Qaeda.

In fact, I doubt that Boot believes this. He does not, in truth, think that President Obama can empower the FBI to roam the country and gun down American citizens who are plotting against us, whether they belong to al-Qaeda affiliates or not. He’s merely using the Civil War analogy because it was handy and seemed like it might sound plausible to readers who didn’t think about it too much.

I don’t know what Boot believes and it wouldn’t surprise me if he really does think the president has the right to order the killings of anyone — who Max Boot thinks is worthy of killing. The rub, of course, is when he disagrees about the target. Police states always present that one little problem, don’t they?

These fatuous arguments are all over the place as adherents seek to justify something that is happening without any serious debate or legal justification. Kevin is confident that Presidents are unlikely to abuse this manufactured right to kill US citizens, but I’m a paranoid sort and I don’t think a free people should ever take that chance. But we are in full agreement here:

But there are good and sound reasons that presidents are constrained in their ability to unilaterally kill U.S. citizens, regardless of where they live, and we allow these bright lines to be dimmed at our peril. Unfortunately, the war on terror has made poltroons out of every branch of government. The president hides behind the post-9/11 AUMF, using it as a shield to justify any action as long as it’s plausibly targeted at al-Qaeda or something al-Qaeda-ish. Congress, which ought to pass a law that specificially spells out due process in cases like this, cowers in its chambers and disdains any responsbility. And the courts, as usual, throw up their hands whenever they hear the talismanic word “war” and declare themselves to have no responsibility.

If the president wants the power to kill U.S. citizens who aren’t part of a recognized foreign army and haven’t received a trial, he should propose a law that spells out when and how he can do it. Congress should debate it, and the courts should rule on its constitutionality. That’s the rule of law. And regardless of whether I liked the law, I’d accept it if Congress passed it, the president signed it, and the Supreme Court declared it constitutional.

However, none of that has happened. The president’s power in this sphere is, in practical terms, whatever he says it is. Nobody, not liberals or conservatives, not hawks or doves, should be happy with that state of affairs.

Zactly.

.

An excellent beginning
by David Atkins (“thereisnospoon”)

The official list of grievances of the General Assembly of Occupy Wall Street:

As we gather together in solidarity to express a feeling of mass injustice, we must not lose sight of what brought us together. We write so that all people who feel wronged by the corporate forces of the world can know that we are your allies.

As one people, united, we acknowledge the reality: that the future of the human race requires the cooperation of its members; that our system must protect our rights, and upon corruption of that system, it is up to the individuals to protect their own rights, and those of their neighbors; that a democratic government derives its just power from the people, but corporations do not seek consent to extract wealth from the people and the Earth; and that no true democracy is attainable when the process is determined by economic power. We come to you at a time when corporations, which place profit over people, self-interest over justice, and oppression over equality, run our governments. We have peaceably assembled here, as is our right, to let these facts be known.

They have taken our houses through an illegal foreclosure process, despite not having the original mortgage.
They have taken bailouts from taxpayers with impunity, and continue to give Executives exorbitant bonuses.
They have perpetuated inequality and discrimination in the workplace based on age, the color of one’s skin, sex, gender identity and sexual orientation.
They have poisoned the food supply through negligence, and undermined the farming system through monopolization.
They have profited off of the torture, confinement, and cruel treatment of countless animals, and actively hide these practices.
They have continuously sought to strip employees of the right to negotiate for better pay and safer working conditions.
They have held students hostage with tens of thousands of dollars of debt on education, which is itself a human right.
They have consistently outsourced labor and used that outsourcing as leverage to cut workers’ healthcare and pay.
They have influenced the courts to achieve the same rights as people, with none of the culpability or responsibility.
They have spent millions of dollars on legal teams that look for ways to get them out of contracts in regards to health insurance.
They have sold our privacy as a commodity.
They have used the military and police force to prevent freedom of the press. They have deliberately declined to recall faulty products endangering lives in pursuit of profit.
They determine economic policy, despite the catastrophic failures their policies have produced and continue to produce.
They have donated large sums of money to politicians, who are responsible for regulating them.
They continue to block alternate forms of energy to keep us dependent on oil.
They continue to block generic forms of medicine that could save people’s lives or provide relief in order to protect investments that have already turned a substantial profit.
They have purposely covered up oil spills, accidents, faulty bookkeeping, and inactive ingredients in pursuit of profit.
They purposefully keep people misinformed and fearful through their control of the media.
They have accepted private contracts to murder prisoners even when presented with serious doubts about their guilt.
They have perpetuated colonialism at home and abroad. They have participated in the torture and murder of innocent civilians overseas.
They continue to create weapons of mass destruction in order to receive government contracts. *

To the people of the world,

We, the New York City General Assembly occupying Wall Street in Liberty Square, urge you to assert your power.

Exercise your right to peaceably assemble; occupy public space; create a process to address the problems we face, and generate solutions accessible to everyone.

To all communities that take action and form groups in the spirit of direct democracy, we offer support, documentation, and all of the resources at our disposal.

Join us and make your voices heard!

There are those who will argue that this list is far too broad and inclusive for a specifically anti-Wall Street protest. While those critiques are understandable from a certain point of view, they miss the point of airing a set of grievances. Goals, which should be specific to dealing with the financial sector if they are to have a chance of fulfillment, are not the same as grievances. This list is powerful, not least because it addresses the myriad ways in which big business and the financial sector are destroying society, piece by piece. In terms of raising consciousness, it is important for the average person to realize that anger with Wall Street is about much more than bailouts, income inequality and massive bonuses. It’s about the way the relentless pursuit of the next quarter’s profits at the expense of all else warps the social fabric of a democracy.

The General Assembly in this well-considered document has hearkened back to a much older and more florid declaration that similarly began with a statement of principles and a list of grievances.

It is an important beginning. The General Assembly has lit the match. Now it’s up to America at large to understand what is at stake, and turn a protest into a revolution.

If the needless arrest of 700 protesters yesterday, including small children doesn’t inflame passion to help take our democracy back, it’s hard to know what will.

.