In the spirit of the season...
I had the opportunity last week to attend an all school Christmas sing-along at the Beautiful Boy's elementary school, and other than the usual kicking myself (deservedly so) in the fanny for spending too much time at work and missing too many of such things for my two lovely older children, it was one of those sweet moments when you realize how really precious life is. I spend an awful lot of time whining in this blog about how much better we could have it (and will continue to do so), but, truth be told, we as a nation are very blessed.
To wit: I stood in the school's cafeteria with the Beautiful Girl and watched as the children sang carol after carol with gusto, with sheer joy, and with the abandonment only five to ten-year-olds can have. Watching the excitement on their faces--Christmas is only days away, Winter Break starts in a few minutes, they're juiced on the sugar from their class parties--was a wonderful sight to behold, reminding me that America still has grand promise, and as long as we keep breeding (doubt that one's going away), we always will. Toward the end of the program, as the students and teachers were singing an increasingly disorganized "Twelve Days of Christmas," it dawned on me that at that moment, I had not a care in the world. It also dawned on me that, though not all of these children will succeed in life, the vast majority will, and for some odd reason this comforted me. Because some day these kids will take my place, and my neighbors' place, and my co-workers' place, and you know what? America will keep going, and though not all of them will, I'm sure there will be enough of them who will keep fighting the good fight that so many do to make this an even better country, an even more righteous country, and to look out for the least of their brothers. And that is a very good, and very hopeful, notion.
So...in the words of the jolly fat man in the red suit, "Happy Christmas to all, and to all a good night."
Peace,
emaycee
Thursday, December 23, 2010
Friday, December 17, 2010
Ghosts appear and fade away
It's not that I don't think the Kwame Kilpatrick saga is one of the most important stories in recent Detroit history. It's not that I don't think The Detroit Free Press did one hell of a job in rooting out the the story and making it public--and doing one hell of a service for the city of Detroit. It's not even that I don't think this week's story about the charges levelled at Kilpatrick and his cronies by U. S. Attorney Barbara McQuade doesn't merit the front page coverage it received.
But it reaches a point where you wonder what is overkill and what, if any, good all of the coverage (five full pages worth) does. Kwame Kilpatrick is already out of office. Kwame Kilpatrick is already in jail. I suppose that if all or some of McQuade's charges result in conviction, Kwame Kilpatrick will spend more time in jail. His cronies will also spend time in jail. And this will accomplish...what? It's not that I don't think they deserve it, but I don't think more jail time on top of time already being served is worthy of five pages of coverage. And the time Kilpatrick serves will be as big of a deterrent to future Detroit politicians as...the death penalty is to future murderers. Everyone thinks they will be the one to get away from it.
And...one wonders what five pages of coverage would have done to educate people about healthcare reform. Or five pages on the Bush tax cuts. Or five pages on the candidates we recently elected. I just don't see where the Free Press' recent coverage of the charges levelled against Kilpatrick and his cronies does all that much to make the lives of ordinary people better, how it is anything more than one of those "ooh, this will win us some newspaper award for hard hitting coverage that covers next to nothing" pieces. A page or two would have been fine. The rest is overkill, taking space (and one would assume resources) that might actually make a difference in people's lives.
It's a good story. It's a safe story. But in the end, I don't think it's going to add one iota to make Detroit a better city or Michigan a better state.
Peace,
emaycee
But it reaches a point where you wonder what is overkill and what, if any, good all of the coverage (five full pages worth) does. Kwame Kilpatrick is already out of office. Kwame Kilpatrick is already in jail. I suppose that if all or some of McQuade's charges result in conviction, Kwame Kilpatrick will spend more time in jail. His cronies will also spend time in jail. And this will accomplish...what? It's not that I don't think they deserve it, but I don't think more jail time on top of time already being served is worthy of five pages of coverage. And the time Kilpatrick serves will be as big of a deterrent to future Detroit politicians as...the death penalty is to future murderers. Everyone thinks they will be the one to get away from it.
And...one wonders what five pages of coverage would have done to educate people about healthcare reform. Or five pages on the Bush tax cuts. Or five pages on the candidates we recently elected. I just don't see where the Free Press' recent coverage of the charges levelled against Kilpatrick and his cronies does all that much to make the lives of ordinary people better, how it is anything more than one of those "ooh, this will win us some newspaper award for hard hitting coverage that covers next to nothing" pieces. A page or two would have been fine. The rest is overkill, taking space (and one would assume resources) that might actually make a difference in people's lives.
It's a good story. It's a safe story. But in the end, I don't think it's going to add one iota to make Detroit a better city or Michigan a better state.
Peace,
emaycee
Oxymorons
So my congressman, Mike Rogers, R-MI, has been named to head the House committee on Intelligence. Considering that every word he utters is like watching an episode of "Idiots on Parade," isn't Mike Rogers, Intelligence Committe Head, a bit of an oxymoron?
Yeah, it's a cheap shot, but a well-deserved cheap shot.
Peace,
emaycee
Yeah, it's a cheap shot, but a well-deserved cheap shot.
Peace,
emaycee
Trust me, sweat the small stuff
This piece was little more than a blurb regarding Unions protesting PulteGroup (the company name sounds like something out of 1984, doesn't it?) events ostensibly to force congressional hearings on how PulteGroup used federal money. It ends up reading like what it basically is: a corporate press release. The CEO, Richard Dugas, didn't show up to speak at the Detroit Economic Club luncheon because he had a "business conflict" (read: too chickenshit to face the protestors). The company spokesman said the unions were waging a "campaign of intimidation and false information against PulteGroup...." (read: we know the republican playbook well--make a generic accusatory claim because the press is too lazy to actually check it out). The piece closes with the usual, PulteGroup bemoaning that unions are actually trying to make employees lives better (read: can you believe the gall? they actually want decent wages and benefits!).
It's probably seems petty, but what bothers me most about the piece is that PulteGroup, through its spokesman, is actually given a face, while unions are basically a generic boogeyman. And this is a narrative that's been going on a long while, and one that if we don't change, our economic well-being is only going to worsen.
Peace,
emaycee
It's probably seems petty, but what bothers me most about the piece is that PulteGroup, through its spokesman, is actually given a face, while unions are basically a generic boogeyman. And this is a narrative that's been going on a long while, and one that if we don't change, our economic well-being is only going to worsen.
Peace,
emaycee
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Class Warfare III
At least this one isn't a surprise. The Detroit News proudly bills itself as a conservative stink tank....
Apparently old Nolan thinks (if you can call what he does "thinking") that the public sector unions should follow the suit of certain private sector unions and sell out their brothers and sisters so the rich can get richer, and the rest of us can continue to fall farther and farther behind. Thanks, but no fucking thanks.
All unions need to stay strong and not accept bad deals from greedy corporations whose wants will only continue to grow if they don't. There is nothing good that comes from unions accepting job cuts, wage cuts, or benefit cuts--and it only empowers corporations that don't have to deal with unions to offer their people the same bad deals.
This is not, as Finley claims, a matter of profits. Frankly, it is a matter of needs versus wants, with the needs being jobs, decent wages, and good benefits, and the wants being unadulterated greed.
Public sector employees need to start reminding the people of this country that they provide valued and vital services, and that they're worth every penny of what they get paid. Can you afford private school for your kids? Can you afford a private security detail? Can you afford to pave the roads you drive on? If not (about 95% of us), then sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up.
Game, set, match...emaycee.
Peace,
emaycee
Class Warfare II
Swear to God, I woke up this morning and it was raining bullshit...from the pages of the Free Press.
In fairness to Wonk, he makes a a valid point: while the auto industry's comeback is very welcome news, we can no longer depend on it here in Michigan (or any other community dependent upon the auto industry) to be the cureall it once was. But then...but then...he has to get into the beltway conventionalism, which in short means "survival of the fittest" which is really short for the wealthy elite, which leaves somewhere around 95% of us fucked. He says Michigan has to switch from "big" to "smart" (good luck with that, considering we just elected the republicans to overwhelming majorities, and if you look up stupid in the dictionary there's a picture of the gop elephant next to it). Here's how he defines "smart": "more people will be left to their own devices" (what the fuck?...is this a nation or Robert Redford in Jeremiah Johnson?), "government will be doing less" (again, what the fuck?...with their utter incompetence--and even more important, their complete lack of concern for the welfare of others--the private sector makes the public sector look like an anal retentive book collector , I somehow doubt most Americans want to end up like some third world nation with children starving in the streets), and "the most dramatic cuts in public employment and services are yet to come"(ditto...why is it always the middle class and the poor who are expected to accept job losses and cuts in needed services? for what, so we can give out more corporate welfare? for what, so the wealthy can put more money in the bank?).
Over the years I've learned that you can't argue with stupid, but when it comes to defending the middle class you can't give up, either.
Peace,
emaycee
In fairness to Wonk, he makes a a valid point: while the auto industry's comeback is very welcome news, we can no longer depend on it here in Michigan (or any other community dependent upon the auto industry) to be the cureall it once was. But then...but then...he has to get into the beltway conventionalism, which in short means "survival of the fittest" which is really short for the wealthy elite, which leaves somewhere around 95% of us fucked. He says Michigan has to switch from "big" to "smart" (good luck with that, considering we just elected the republicans to overwhelming majorities, and if you look up stupid in the dictionary there's a picture of the gop elephant next to it). Here's how he defines "smart": "more people will be left to their own devices" (what the fuck?...is this a nation or Robert Redford in Jeremiah Johnson?), "government will be doing less" (again, what the fuck?...with their utter incompetence--and even more important, their complete lack of concern for the welfare of others--the private sector makes the public sector look like an anal retentive book collector , I somehow doubt most Americans want to end up like some third world nation with children starving in the streets), and "the most dramatic cuts in public employment and services are yet to come"(ditto...why is it always the middle class and the poor who are expected to accept job losses and cuts in needed services? for what, so we can give out more corporate welfare? for what, so the wealthy can put more money in the bank?).
Over the years I've learned that you can't argue with stupid, but when it comes to defending the middle class you can't give up, either.
Peace,
emaycee
Class Warfare I
More brilliant analysis from the pages of the Free Press...shocking.
Tax-cut deal "should" (quotes mine) help Michigan, Susan Tompor tells us. How does she figure this? Well, we're a state that sells stuff, so people having more money in their pockets is good for Michigan. (Cue incorrect answer buzzer) Wrong! Since the tax rates are already in place, you will be taxed at the same rate as before. You will not be taking home any more money. The payroll tax decrease will probably bring an extra tank of gas a month (half a tank if you drive an SUV)--and this will stimulate what? Will bring in how many jobs? And as for the wealthy, well they just put their money in the bank and history shows tax cuts have never done anything to stimulate the economy. And the kicker? If you make less than $20,000 dollars a year (roughly one in three American workers) you will likely see a tax increase.
But never fear, Tompor cites several financial analysts who are more than happy to continue their roles as toadies for wall street and tell you how good this tax cut will be for stimulating Michigan's economy. And these people are right about as often...as the doofuses who write the paper's daily horoscope column. Good times...if you're wall street, a corporation, or a trust fund baby.
Just more horseshit from our mainstream media.
Peace,
emaycee
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Why Howard Dean could be the next President of the United States
Okay--it's a longshot. And while most Presidential bids against sitting Presidents are quixotic at best, I always remember Eugene McCarthy in 1968, who sent Lyndon Johnson packing. It can happen.
The Democratic base has given up on Barack Obama. Wealthy donors are planning on withholding donations from Obama. Liberals and Progessives are itching for an intraparty fight for the soul of the party. If you think about it--especially with some of the names being bandied about to challenge Obama from the left (Grayson, Feingold--Liberal stalwarts, both, but neither with the slightest chance of upending Obama)--Howard Dean is the logical choice. Who has fought harder for Progessive values over the last several years than Howard Dean? From his Democracy for America political action committee, to his constant support for the Public Option, to his leadership at the DNC resulting in massive Democratic gains (okay, so the 50 state strategy didn't work out quite as planned--give me a little leeway here), to, hell, his speaking out today against Obama's tax cut capitulation, Howard Dean is the only Democrat with a chance to upend Obama.
Is he as Progessive as Bernie Sanders? No. Is he a better option than President Obama? Good God, yes. And I'm telling you, all it takes is one victory--the Iowa caucus. It's not impossible--an engaged base could push him over the top.
As to questions of his electability on the national level...I think Dean would face a much less hostile press, a much more invigorated base, and a much smarter blog field, as evidenced by this piece. But the real kicker is...Sarah Palin.
Anybody who doesn't think Sarah Palin is going to run for President in 2012 is living in a fantasy. You don't announce on TV that you can beat the sitting President if you're not planning on running. You don't run off to Haiti to increase your compassionate conservative cred if you're not planning on running for President.
And, mark my words, Sarah Palin will be the republican nominee in 2012. Romney and Huckabee couldn't even beat fucking Grandpa McCain in 2008, and I see no way they can match her fundraising or devoted following. Pence and Daniels might appeal to the base, but, again, zilch on the fundraising and both are so boring the national media would ignore them. Pawlenty is a joke. And even republicans aren't stupid enough to elect Newt Gingrich, who shares as much of a chance as I do of being the next President of the United States. Trust me, tea party nation and the base loves Ms. Palin, and they don't care if she can't win the national election--she toes the party line (see also, Ken Buck, Christine O'Donnell, Sharron Angle--the goofy bastards gave up control of the Senate on these losers, and they'll do it nationally, too). Frankly, I think the Obama administration knows this every bit as well as I do, and it's why they are not afraid to piss off the base and capitulate. Face it, no matter the disdain we currently have for President Obama, if Sarah Palin is the nominee, Liberals and Progressives will go into batshit overdrive to see that she is not the next President.
And this, in a nutshell, is how Howard Dean becomes the next President: challenge Obama from the left based on his Liberal credentials, win in Iowa, face Sarah Palin for the Presidency, ride the coattails of a terrified base, and send Palin's ass back to Alaska between her legs (truthfully, Palin would probably carry North Carolina and Indiana, might carry Virginia and Florida, but those are about the only states that Obama won in 2008 that she could turn red, and that will still leave her far short of electoral votes to win).
Ta-da! And happy days would be here again....
Peace,
emaycee
Reality Bites
I really like Robert Reich--he and Paul Krugman seem to be about the only pundits of note (plenty of less notheworthy company) who consistently espouse the common sense of the Liberal agenda in matters economic. But sometimes...
It could just be my having had it with all these Liberal pundits who keep insisting what Obama should do (he won't), but we can't even end the temporary Bush tax cuts for the wealthy and by some fucking miracle we're going to get a 70% tax rate on the nation's richest folks? Get real, for Christ's sake.
Want to enact a Liberal economic policy? Get Liberals elected who will be receptive to such policies. Anything else is mere talk, and as we found out so succinctly from President Obama, talk is cheap.
Peace,
emaycee
It could just be my having had it with all these Liberal pundits who keep insisting what Obama should do (he won't), but we can't even end the temporary Bush tax cuts for the wealthy and by some fucking miracle we're going to get a 70% tax rate on the nation's richest folks? Get real, for Christ's sake.
Want to enact a Liberal economic policy? Get Liberals elected who will be receptive to such policies. Anything else is mere talk, and as we found out so succinctly from President Obama, talk is cheap.
Peace,
emaycee
Friday, December 10, 2010
emaycee loves Bernie
When you look up the word bad-ass in the dictionary, future editions will feature a picture of Bernie Sanders next to the definition. Because this--Bernie Sanders mock filibuster of President Obama's capitulation, eight and one half hours worth, of a fucking Democrat standing up for us, telling the world that "we can do better" is the epitome of fucking bad-ass. (With help from Sen. Brown and Sen. Landrieu--Mary Landrieu? What the fuck?)
Liberals, Progressives, Democrats who belong to the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party haven't had much to celebrate these past few months, but this, this we can celebrate.
As Martin Luther King, Jr. so eloquently stated, "We must accept finite disappointment, but never lose infinite hope."
Sen. Sanders is doing his part to keep our infinite hope alive.
Peace,
emaycee
Too fucking funny
Though it bothers me to a degree that Wal-Mart has decided to cut their $1 (a whole fucking dollar--goddamn, now they can put the kids through Harvard!) premium pay for working Sundays--because it's another example of the working men and women of this country getting fucked out of money so the wealthy elite can have more (come on--with the "talented" leadership this company has they can't make up a lousy couple of thousand dollars a year per store? Sounds to me more like talentless leadership), I understand how they can justify it. Nobody does it any longer, and most companies stopped many years ago (I've been in retail nearly 30 years and both of the companies I have worked for stopped when I was still a young buck).
No, what really bothers me is the narrative that Wal-Mart is trying to create--they're not the bad guys, the greedy workers are. "We regularly review our compensation programs, and are confident Wal-Mart's pay and benefits are as good if not better than other retailers," the article quotes a company spokesman as saying. Really? Isn't that comparable to someone saying they're the best cabbage farmer in Alaska? In the end, who really gives a fuck? Cabbage still sucks and so does the state of Alaska.
And the media helps them: take a good look at the title of the article. "Chain to cut Sunday wages." Chain? Jesus H. Christ, Wal-Mart isn't a just a chain, it's the fucking biggest company in the world. Why wasn't the title of the article "Wal-Mart to cut Sunday wages"? How many people do you supposed read the headline and moved on, thinking it was just another Billy Bob's Grits and Shits?
Am I just paranoid or are we really fucked?
Peace,
emaycee
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Can't stop my wondering...
Can anybody think of a good reason to read Huff Post anymore? Between frivolity (divorce.com or Blackberries r' Us), the umpteen pieces about what Obama needs to do (he won't, so spare us and give us a real alternative), and the too numerous to mention articles about some New Age Nirvana, what's the point? It might as well be Time or Newsweek.
If you're thinking about watching The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell in the hopes that it will be another good jolt of Liberalism like Rachel Maddow or Keith Olbermann, skip it. Tonight he had a feature on Obama's "compromise" on the Bush tax cuts, and it was like watching Bill O'Reilly argue with a liberal--O'Donnell (who is in favor of the capitulation, believing it to be the best deal Obama could get) had four guests and never let any of them make their points before cutting in with why they were wrong. It was brutal--had I been one of the guests, it would be the last time I'd ever be on the show. Who the fuck thought this show was a good follow-up to Maddow and Olbermann?
Can anyone think of a Democrat with national prominence from the last few years who we can be prouder of than Elizabeth Edwards? May she rest in peace....
My eldest (the talented writer in the family) sent me this heartbreaking article from Mother Jones which, unfortunately, is all too familiar for those of us who live in and around the great city of Detroit. Callousness, corruption, greed, tragedy--and more children dead that shouldn't be. When will it end? Is it even possible to find solutions? Long, but well worth the read.
Why is it that outside of liberal bloggers Rep. Jan Schakowsky's alternative to the Catfood Commission's recommendations has received very little media attention? It's fair, it doesn't put the burden of fixing America's fiscal disasters on the backs of the poor and middle class, and would put a signigicantly bigger dent in the deficit than the shit Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson are pushing. Her plan should be front page on every newspaper, every magazine, and the top story on every news show--and is further proof of how the wealthy elite control our media, and the continuing crushing of the poor and middle class in the continuing class war that Reagan and his cronies engineered in the 1980s.
Can anybody begin to imagine a republican President having a news conference and berating his party's base? Does anyone but me wonder what the fuck President Obama was thinking when he did it today? Alas, I only have my usual retort: fuck you, next idiot please!
Can I get a witness? A-fucking-men!
Peace,
emaycee
If you're thinking about watching The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell in the hopes that it will be another good jolt of Liberalism like Rachel Maddow or Keith Olbermann, skip it. Tonight he had a feature on Obama's "compromise" on the Bush tax cuts, and it was like watching Bill O'Reilly argue with a liberal--O'Donnell (who is in favor of the capitulation, believing it to be the best deal Obama could get) had four guests and never let any of them make their points before cutting in with why they were wrong. It was brutal--had I been one of the guests, it would be the last time I'd ever be on the show. Who the fuck thought this show was a good follow-up to Maddow and Olbermann?
Can anyone think of a Democrat with national prominence from the last few years who we can be prouder of than Elizabeth Edwards? May she rest in peace....
My eldest (the talented writer in the family) sent me this heartbreaking article from Mother Jones which, unfortunately, is all too familiar for those of us who live in and around the great city of Detroit. Callousness, corruption, greed, tragedy--and more children dead that shouldn't be. When will it end? Is it even possible to find solutions? Long, but well worth the read.
Why is it that outside of liberal bloggers Rep. Jan Schakowsky's alternative to the Catfood Commission's recommendations has received very little media attention? It's fair, it doesn't put the burden of fixing America's fiscal disasters on the backs of the poor and middle class, and would put a signigicantly bigger dent in the deficit than the shit Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson are pushing. Her plan should be front page on every newspaper, every magazine, and the top story on every news show--and is further proof of how the wealthy elite control our media, and the continuing crushing of the poor and middle class in the continuing class war that Reagan and his cronies engineered in the 1980s.
Can anybody begin to imagine a republican President having a news conference and berating his party's base? Does anyone but me wonder what the fuck President Obama was thinking when he did it today? Alas, I only have my usual retort: fuck you, next idiot please!
Can I get a witness? A-fucking-men!
Peace,
emaycee
Preach it, Sister!
Perhaps because we're of nearly the same age--and I'm sure her world weary cynicism about all things concerning the Democratic Party plays a part as well--Digby has rapidly become my favorite Liberal blogger. This piece is one of the best I've read from anyone in a while, mostly because she puts into words what I've felt for a long time: comparing the government's financial situation to that of a family is not just stupid, but it's dangerous, and does as she says, get us into trouble. (Can't begin to count the number of idiots who have written letters to the Free Press over the past couple of years making this same comparison--I usually have to keep myself from gagging when I read them.) One of the few points the piece doesn't make, is very few families who are tightening their belts these days are doing so at the risk of losing their job or blowing a job opportunity--I mean, seriously, no one's showing up at their office job in ratty clothes to save a buck, no one's letting the car run out of gas so they can't make the job interview to cut a few pennies, and no one's not buying paper and postage so they can't send out their resumes to shave off a few more cents. Let's face it--you've got to spend money to make money in a family, and the government shouldn't be short shrifting money at the expense of jobs and job creation.
She also calls the government should be run as a business as the second stupidest metaphor, which I would actually rate as the worst. For one, with the utter incompetence we've witnessed over the past couple of years on Wall Street, in the banking industry (AIG, Lehman Bros.), the automotive industry (GM, Chrysler)--and let's not forget MCI and Enron from the early part of the decade--um, this is how we want government run? Not to mention that if we run it like a business that means the President would be paid hundreds of millions of dollars, Governors tens of millions of dollars, ad infinitum...for really being cheerleaders pushing a bunch of platitudes that do nothing to increase efficiency. And let's not forget--there are NO civil rights in a business. Don't think so? Try writing a letter to your company's president in which you tell him in no uncertain terms he's a fucking idiot--my guess is you wouldn't have a job for long. But you can write a letter to the President of the United States using that same wordage, and no one can strip you of your citizenship (though you'd probably end up on the Secret Service's shit list).
In short, the country can ill afford simple minds with simple plans...pretty much a description of the republican party/tea party nation, now that I think of it.
Peace,
emaycee
She also calls the government should be run as a business as the second stupidest metaphor, which I would actually rate as the worst. For one, with the utter incompetence we've witnessed over the past couple of years on Wall Street, in the banking industry (AIG, Lehman Bros.), the automotive industry (GM, Chrysler)--and let's not forget MCI and Enron from the early part of the decade--um, this is how we want government run? Not to mention that if we run it like a business that means the President would be paid hundreds of millions of dollars, Governors tens of millions of dollars, ad infinitum...for really being cheerleaders pushing a bunch of platitudes that do nothing to increase efficiency. And let's not forget--there are NO civil rights in a business. Don't think so? Try writing a letter to your company's president in which you tell him in no uncertain terms he's a fucking idiot--my guess is you wouldn't have a job for long. But you can write a letter to the President of the United States using that same wordage, and no one can strip you of your citizenship (though you'd probably end up on the Secret Service's shit list).
In short, the country can ill afford simple minds with simple plans...pretty much a description of the republican party/tea party nation, now that I think of it.
Peace,
emaycee
Monday, December 6, 2010
President Chickenshit
Here's a surprise--President Chickenshit caved again and the American people are the big losers. No jobs will come of this, wages will not increase, and the economic recovery will continue to putter along. Just another kick in the teeth to the Democratic party and its fervent base supporters.
Does anybody really believe Obama is going to fight the tax cuts for the wealthy two years from now? Does anybody really believe Obama is going to fight for anything that benefits the 98% of Americans who aren't wealthy? Does anybody really believe Obama is going to ever fight for anything of value for the American people without giving everything away in some half-assed hope for bipartisanship?
And while we're at it, I've had it with articles like this one, where some fucking genius tells us what Obama should do, or needs to do. Fucking forget it--it's been two years and Obama hasn't shown once that he's going to do anything that's popular with the base of the party, or in the best interest of the American people.
Can anyone tell what the Democratic Party is supposed to stand for anymore? Between the Catfood Commission (horrible idea from the start), Dick Durbin capitulating already on Social Security, and 14 Democratic Senators signing on to their support for the Catfood Commission's recommendations, what are we? Near as I can figure, we're the party of mediocrity--hey, we won't help you, but we won't fuck you over as bad as the republicans. Woo-fucking-hoo--can't wait to waste another vote in 2012.
My vote for Obama in 2008, without a doubt, is now the most disappointing vote of my life (not that I had much choice--Grumpy McCain and Dopey Palin would have been catastrophic). Time to take down the Obama poster in the Beautiful Boy's bedroom--is he someone I really want my son to emulate?
Methinks not.
Peace,
emaycee
Sunday, November 21, 2010
A long December
Man, it just keeps getting more depressing....
With "Liberal" media like this, who needs enemies? Jesus Christ, the Catfood Commission's recommendations don't make me queasy, they make me feel hopeless for the country's future. There is nothing in them except more gifts for the wealthy. What part of the American people aren't interested in cuts, raising the retirement age, and favor raising the ceiling on Social Security's imposition of taxes don't these ignorant mother fuckers understand? For the life of me, is there no one who understands that we couldn't care less about the deficit? It's fucking jobs, fucking jobs, fucking jobs. Period.
Even more depressing is this--Republicans are now more trusted on Social Security than Democrats. The people who want to destroy it, or turn it over to the whims of the hookers and coke crowd on wall street is more trusted than the party that created it and has saved it for nearly eighty years--think about that. Ahem...maybe it's best you don't.
There's more: the gop has blocked an extension of unemployment benefits for what will probably be the first of many times (and they don't even have control of the House yet) which means there's a good chance the children of nearly two million families won't be seeing presents from Santa under their trees this year--and since spending drives our economy, it will likely be in park for a while longer. Seven hundred billion in tax cuts for the wealthy, but no Christmas presents for the kids of the middle class--and Americans decided to put these pinheads in charge for the next two years. I would have thought...coke and hookers for wall street on one hand...goodies from Santa on the other...would have been a no brainer, but what the fuck do I know? I just actually, you know, give a fuck about my fellow Americans. More important that Obama is a one-term President (not that he doesn't deserve it) than the poor and middle class, uh, eat.
Finally, this piece and this one, show us that we're about to be taken to the cleaners again by the "less taxes on the wealthy mean jobs and prosperity for the rest of us" crowd. No evidence, no past success, but we'll be suffering with less for the great lie. I lived through Reagan's trickle down bullshit, lived through George W.'s less taxes on millionaires is good economic policy, and all I saw through both of them was the wealthier getting wealthier, and the rest of us stagnating. You'll pardon fucking me if I just can't fucking wait for the next round--I'll probably end up with a cut in pay and no health benefits so my company's CEO can own ten houses instead of six. In my favorite words...fuck you, next idiot please!
But the week wasn't entirely lost (brace yourselves): a Free Press columnist, Brian Dickerson, actually calls out republicans for their lie about the cost of Obama's recent trip to Asia--though, being a professional columnist and all, he doesn't call them liars. Nope, he just calls them fucking idiots (in a nice professional columnist sort of way). Good times....
How pathetic is that? The only hope I can find is a relatively calm column chastising republicans for their idiocy. In the immortal words of one Boz Scaggs: "Danger, there's a breakdown dead ahead...."
Peace,
emaycee
With "Liberal" media like this, who needs enemies? Jesus Christ, the Catfood Commission's recommendations don't make me queasy, they make me feel hopeless for the country's future. There is nothing in them except more gifts for the wealthy. What part of the American people aren't interested in cuts, raising the retirement age, and favor raising the ceiling on Social Security's imposition of taxes don't these ignorant mother fuckers understand? For the life of me, is there no one who understands that we couldn't care less about the deficit? It's fucking jobs, fucking jobs, fucking jobs. Period.
Even more depressing is this--Republicans are now more trusted on Social Security than Democrats. The people who want to destroy it, or turn it over to the whims of the hookers and coke crowd on wall street is more trusted than the party that created it and has saved it for nearly eighty years--think about that. Ahem...maybe it's best you don't.
There's more: the gop has blocked an extension of unemployment benefits for what will probably be the first of many times (and they don't even have control of the House yet) which means there's a good chance the children of nearly two million families won't be seeing presents from Santa under their trees this year--and since spending drives our economy, it will likely be in park for a while longer. Seven hundred billion in tax cuts for the wealthy, but no Christmas presents for the kids of the middle class--and Americans decided to put these pinheads in charge for the next two years. I would have thought...coke and hookers for wall street on one hand...goodies from Santa on the other...would have been a no brainer, but what the fuck do I know? I just actually, you know, give a fuck about my fellow Americans. More important that Obama is a one-term President (not that he doesn't deserve it) than the poor and middle class, uh, eat.
Finally, this piece and this one, show us that we're about to be taken to the cleaners again by the "less taxes on the wealthy mean jobs and prosperity for the rest of us" crowd. No evidence, no past success, but we'll be suffering with less for the great lie. I lived through Reagan's trickle down bullshit, lived through George W.'s less taxes on millionaires is good economic policy, and all I saw through both of them was the wealthier getting wealthier, and the rest of us stagnating. You'll pardon fucking me if I just can't fucking wait for the next round--I'll probably end up with a cut in pay and no health benefits so my company's CEO can own ten houses instead of six. In my favorite words...fuck you, next idiot please!
But the week wasn't entirely lost (brace yourselves): a Free Press columnist, Brian Dickerson, actually calls out republicans for their lie about the cost of Obama's recent trip to Asia--though, being a professional columnist and all, he doesn't call them liars. Nope, he just calls them fucking idiots (in a nice professional columnist sort of way). Good times....
How pathetic is that? The only hope I can find is a relatively calm column chastising republicans for their idiocy. In the immortal words of one Boz Scaggs: "Danger, there's a breakdown dead ahead...."
Peace,
emaycee
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Stupid is as stupid does
I couldn't begin to explain this--in the just completed midterms, the LGBT community doubled their support of republican candidates over 2008. Now Terkel's piece makes a few good points--some LGBT constituents no doubt voted their pocketbooks, and some have to be disappointed by the inability of the Obama administration to make many inroads on LGBT issues. But still...how in the hell can any LGBT member vote for a party that routinely denies their lifestyle is hard-wired, will never vote for any issue of concern for their lifestyle (discrimination, DADT, hate crimes), and will fight to their death to make sure same-sex marriage never happens anywhere? How can you deny your basic self that way? How can disappointment or money be more important than your basic civil rights? How in the hell can you vote for a party that hates you? Hell, I'd be willing to bet that if someone proposed sending all LGBT Americans to Madagascar and ridding America of LGBTs forever, 90% of republicans would be in favor.
Swear to God--it's as if America is on the verge of a nervous breakdown. And when it occurs, it isn't going to be pretty.
Peace,
emaycee
Swear to God--it's as if America is on the verge of a nervous breakdown. And when it occurs, it isn't going to be pretty.
Peace,
emaycee
Just give me money, that's what I want...
Every year since I moved to the great state of Michigan, the Free Press runs a business piece on the top places to work in southeast Michigan. And also every year, they do a poll on what are the most important workplace factors to employees...and every year, pay and benefits end up at the bottom (only 48% this year considered it an important factor, trailing direction, execution, conditions, career, and managers). And every year...I am amazed. I mean truthfully, the only reason I work is that I get paid--if someone would pay me the pittance I get paid to sit on my ass at home, I'm outta there.
I never really understood it until I read Matthew Stewart's The Management Myth. In a nutshell, Shepherd discusses one Frederick Winslow Taylor, who in the 1920s was commissioned by the Rockefellers to find out what motivates workers to be more productive. Taylor's research initially showed that what motivates workers to be more productive is money. The Rockefellers, being the greedy bastards they were (are), were less than pleased (surprise, surprise) with the outcome. So Taylor, keenly aware of where his paycheck was coming from, rigged the process so the outcome became "workplace culture" (anyone stuck working for a corporation these days is all too familiar with this bullshit). Though Taylor's work has been thoroughly discredited through the years, management still continues to subscribe to the false outcome (again, surprise, surprise--more for the top, less for the people who actually do the work)--and people, being the lemmings that far too many of us are, have pretty much succumbed to the falsehood.
A couple of things I'd like to see in future polls (about as likely as me doing a vertical jump and landing on the moon--the business pages are for businesses, not truth, justice, and the American way): 1) A breakdown of the salaries for which people thought culture (or its derivatives) was more important than pay and benefits--it seems entirely possible that someone making six figures plus would find money less important than someone making $35-40,000 a year. 2) Some follow-up questions, such as: If you had the outside means, would you do your job for free? What if your company cut your pay $10,000 (needless to say, we'd need to leave minimum wage workers out of this question because they'd basically be working for free) per year (or $25,000 to $50,000 for people making $100-200,000 per year): Would money be more important than the other factors at that point? Would you look for a new job? Would you work as hard? Would you still consider your company a great workplace? 3) And how to explain this: only 46% of those polled thought their pay was fair for the work they do, and even less (32%) thought favorably of their benefit package. How can you reconcile money not being more important than culture when you don't think you're being paid (or receiving benefits) fairly?
In the end, I think this is just another case of flawed polling, and the working class getting fucked in the continuing class war.
Peace,
emaycee
I never really understood it until I read Matthew Stewart's The Management Myth. In a nutshell, Shepherd discusses one Frederick Winslow Taylor, who in the 1920s was commissioned by the Rockefellers to find out what motivates workers to be more productive. Taylor's research initially showed that what motivates workers to be more productive is money. The Rockefellers, being the greedy bastards they were (are), were less than pleased (surprise, surprise) with the outcome. So Taylor, keenly aware of where his paycheck was coming from, rigged the process so the outcome became "workplace culture" (anyone stuck working for a corporation these days is all too familiar with this bullshit). Though Taylor's work has been thoroughly discredited through the years, management still continues to subscribe to the false outcome (again, surprise, surprise--more for the top, less for the people who actually do the work)--and people, being the lemmings that far too many of us are, have pretty much succumbed to the falsehood.
A couple of things I'd like to see in future polls (about as likely as me doing a vertical jump and landing on the moon--the business pages are for businesses, not truth, justice, and the American way): 1) A breakdown of the salaries for which people thought culture (or its derivatives) was more important than pay and benefits--it seems entirely possible that someone making six figures plus would find money less important than someone making $35-40,000 a year. 2) Some follow-up questions, such as: If you had the outside means, would you do your job for free? What if your company cut your pay $10,000 (needless to say, we'd need to leave minimum wage workers out of this question because they'd basically be working for free) per year (or $25,000 to $50,000 for people making $100-200,000 per year): Would money be more important than the other factors at that point? Would you look for a new job? Would you work as hard? Would you still consider your company a great workplace? 3) And how to explain this: only 46% of those polled thought their pay was fair for the work they do, and even less (32%) thought favorably of their benefit package. How can you reconcile money not being more important than culture when you don't think you're being paid (or receiving benefits) fairly?
In the end, I think this is just another case of flawed polling, and the working class getting fucked in the continuing class war.
Peace,
emaycee
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Teach your children well
And whatever you do, keep them away from traditional media....
As I've noted before, I really enjoy Leonard Pitts' columns, and don't necessarily always agree with him--but in this one, he's just a little too defensive, and a lot mistaken.
I never really thought much about whether or not Keith Olbermann made political donations, but if I had, I probably would have been more surprised that he didn't make contributions to Liberal leaning candidates than the fact that he has. Mr. Pitts seems to be overly bothered by Olbermann's contributions, but for the life of me, I can't figure out why. Keith Olbermann--like Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, or even a peon like the Detroit News' Nolan Finley and his appearances at tea party functions--is not committed to the appearance of impartiality. He is an advocate for the cause of Liberalism, much as the previously noted conservative commentators are advocates for whatever bullshit is passing as thought in republican/tea party circles these days. The claim that he was supposed to have asked permission is, frankly, silly. If Keith Olbermann was peddling conservative drivel like the aforementioned dolts, I wouldn't watch ten seconds of his show. I watch because he's Liberal--and I expect him to put his money where his mouth (so to speak) is.
In the end, I think Mr. Pitts outrage is more his own embarrassment than an integrity issue. I could be mistaken, but I don't recall him writing a column complaining about the O'Reillys and Hannities making political contributions (for the record, I have no problems with them making donations either, other than being a good waste of cash). Perhaps this is because it's much easier to debunk the arguments they make (and about the supposed Liberal media bias) because they live in an alternate reality (which means more or less, they believe it, it's true, facts be damned). It's a lot harder to debunk Mr. Olbermann (or Rachel Maddow or Ed Schulz) for spending the last several years showing us again and again how the media have failed the American people again and again--and in the interest of impartiality, have let a false narrative worsen the lives of Americans, and lessen our nation.
Peace,
emaycee
As I've noted before, I really enjoy Leonard Pitts' columns, and don't necessarily always agree with him--but in this one, he's just a little too defensive, and a lot mistaken.
I never really thought much about whether or not Keith Olbermann made political donations, but if I had, I probably would have been more surprised that he didn't make contributions to Liberal leaning candidates than the fact that he has. Mr. Pitts seems to be overly bothered by Olbermann's contributions, but for the life of me, I can't figure out why. Keith Olbermann--like Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, or even a peon like the Detroit News' Nolan Finley and his appearances at tea party functions--is not committed to the appearance of impartiality. He is an advocate for the cause of Liberalism, much as the previously noted conservative commentators are advocates for whatever bullshit is passing as thought in republican/tea party circles these days. The claim that he was supposed to have asked permission is, frankly, silly. If Keith Olbermann was peddling conservative drivel like the aforementioned dolts, I wouldn't watch ten seconds of his show. I watch because he's Liberal--and I expect him to put his money where his mouth (so to speak) is.
In the end, I think Mr. Pitts outrage is more his own embarrassment than an integrity issue. I could be mistaken, but I don't recall him writing a column complaining about the O'Reillys and Hannities making political contributions (for the record, I have no problems with them making donations either, other than being a good waste of cash). Perhaps this is because it's much easier to debunk the arguments they make (and about the supposed Liberal media bias) because they live in an alternate reality (which means more or less, they believe it, it's true, facts be damned). It's a lot harder to debunk Mr. Olbermann (or Rachel Maddow or Ed Schulz) for spending the last several years showing us again and again how the media have failed the American people again and again--and in the interest of impartiality, have let a false narrative worsen the lives of Americans, and lessen our nation.
Peace,
emaycee
Across the Pond
Congratulations, our British neighbors! Thanks to your prime minister David Cameron's austerity measures, you, too, can live the American Dream: working two or three jobs for a pittance in wages, for a company that will want to have a say in every aspect of your private life and make your job as tedious as possible without giving you any say in it, living just above the poverty level while the wealth of your nation will be concentrated on the few. And even better, watching the wealthy and their enablers (you know who are are--just take that wealthy guy's penis out of your mouth and speak up with pride at your pitiful financial state despite all the blowjobs) tell you it's all your own damn fault.
Enjoy!
Peace,
emaycee
Enjoy!
Peace,
emaycee
The revolution will not be televised
Or even occur, for that matter.
It seems the Catfood Commission has laid out some "bold" ideas--bad ideas would be a more apt description. In fairness, the odds of this passing even the Catfood Commission itself is slim, but let's take a peek at some of these "ideas:" 1) Increase Social Security retirement age--Why? Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit. 2) Eliminate popular tax deductions such as the child tax credit and mortgage interest--see end point. 3) Cut income tax rates from 35% to 23%--because that worked so fucking well under George W., with the deficit setting records, the slowest job growth since fucking Hoover, and wages stagnating. What the fuck? 4) Raise gas tax 15 cents a gallon--see end point, again. 5) Freeze pay of most (one assumes big shots and congress would be exempt) federal employees for three years and cut federal work force by 10%--once again, at end point. 6) Limit or end the tax-free status of employer-provided healthcare--end point.
The endpoint: does anyone but me notice a theme here? The entire fucking exercise is on the backs of the middle class and one would be hard pressed to find one area where the wealthy are going to have to cut anything--and stand to only get wealthier. In a few words, fuck you, next idiot please! Who the fuck hired these people--the Koch brothers? Thank God for Nancy Pelosi, who may be the only sane politician left in this country, who said the ideas as set forth are "unacceptable." This set of proposals is utter bullshit and continues those of us who make up the middle class on the losing side of the class war.
Want more proof the revolution is finito? The gutless Obama administration has already given up the next two years and intends to play defense. Yeah, that ought to inspire us to get out and vote in 2012. The bankers are already licking their chops for the incoming republican house--hard to imagine the banks could fuck us over even more than they did under George W., but thanks to Citizen's United, there's even more money to be had by republicans for fellating the bankers at our expense. Oh, and Heath Shuler is still mulling a run against Pelosi for minority leader, calling Pelosi's tenure "unacceptable." Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha--if the Democratic Party wants to head to its extinction, it really needs to listen to people like Shuler.
I really like this piece about rebuilding the Democratic Party, but after 34 years of watching it fail to live up to its ideals, I'm not holding my breath. Charlie Brown may have never given up hope that Lucy would actually let him kick the damn football, but I pretty much have.
Peace,
emaycee
It seems the Catfood Commission has laid out some "bold" ideas--bad ideas would be a more apt description. In fairness, the odds of this passing even the Catfood Commission itself is slim, but let's take a peek at some of these "ideas:" 1) Increase Social Security retirement age--Why? Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit. 2) Eliminate popular tax deductions such as the child tax credit and mortgage interest--see end point. 3) Cut income tax rates from 35% to 23%--because that worked so fucking well under George W., with the deficit setting records, the slowest job growth since fucking Hoover, and wages stagnating. What the fuck? 4) Raise gas tax 15 cents a gallon--see end point, again. 5) Freeze pay of most (one assumes big shots and congress would be exempt) federal employees for three years and cut federal work force by 10%--once again, at end point. 6) Limit or end the tax-free status of employer-provided healthcare--end point.
The endpoint: does anyone but me notice a theme here? The entire fucking exercise is on the backs of the middle class and one would be hard pressed to find one area where the wealthy are going to have to cut anything--and stand to only get wealthier. In a few words, fuck you, next idiot please! Who the fuck hired these people--the Koch brothers? Thank God for Nancy Pelosi, who may be the only sane politician left in this country, who said the ideas as set forth are "unacceptable." This set of proposals is utter bullshit and continues those of us who make up the middle class on the losing side of the class war.
Want more proof the revolution is finito? The gutless Obama administration has already given up the next two years and intends to play defense. Yeah, that ought to inspire us to get out and vote in 2012. The bankers are already licking their chops for the incoming republican house--hard to imagine the banks could fuck us over even more than they did under George W., but thanks to Citizen's United, there's even more money to be had by republicans for fellating the bankers at our expense. Oh, and Heath Shuler is still mulling a run against Pelosi for minority leader, calling Pelosi's tenure "unacceptable." Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha--if the Democratic Party wants to head to its extinction, it really needs to listen to people like Shuler.
I really like this piece about rebuilding the Democratic Party, but after 34 years of watching it fail to live up to its ideals, I'm not holding my breath. Charlie Brown may have never given up hope that Lucy would actually let him kick the damn football, but I pretty much have.
Peace,
emaycee
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
No, really--Hitler says 'Jews are the salt of the earth'
As one might expect from a newspaper that once killed a union (so much for it being a liberal rag--if memory serves, liberals support unions), the Free Press is having an orgasm over the coming destruction of the labor union movement at the hands of the new gop majority.
But this, well this is just a bit much: "The U. S. Chamber of Commerce released exit poll data showing just more than half the electorate believes it will hurt the economy if unions have more say in how business operates."
What the fuck? I mean--superlatively--what the fuck? How in the world can any knowledgeable reporter take this poll seriously? The fucking chamber of commerce? The one that's the most anti-worker, pro-corporate, pro-wall street organization in the world? As someone who, you know, actually has a brain, the first thing I thought upon reading this was, "How come the chamber of commerce didn't ask people as they left the polls if they thought their wages would be hurt by unions having more say in how business operates? Or their benefit levels?" It's no surprise people don't support unions when they're given polling data that's dubious at best, and a lie at worst by an organization that actively seeks to see that they get paid as little as possible and have as few benefits as possible, lest the CEOs might make a few dollars less.
For the record, I actually believe the chamber's poll results. I also believe that the end of the world is near, and it will come at the hands of an obese, balding, forty-three year old Texan who will destroy the earth by blowing mountains of flame out of his ass....
Peace,
emaycee
But this, well this is just a bit much: "The U. S. Chamber of Commerce released exit poll data showing just more than half the electorate believes it will hurt the economy if unions have more say in how business operates."
What the fuck? I mean--superlatively--what the fuck? How in the world can any knowledgeable reporter take this poll seriously? The fucking chamber of commerce? The one that's the most anti-worker, pro-corporate, pro-wall street organization in the world? As someone who, you know, actually has a brain, the first thing I thought upon reading this was, "How come the chamber of commerce didn't ask people as they left the polls if they thought their wages would be hurt by unions having more say in how business operates? Or their benefit levels?" It's no surprise people don't support unions when they're given polling data that's dubious at best, and a lie at worst by an organization that actively seeks to see that they get paid as little as possible and have as few benefits as possible, lest the CEOs might make a few dollars less.
For the record, I actually believe the chamber's poll results. I also believe that the end of the world is near, and it will come at the hands of an obese, balding, forty-three year old Texan who will destroy the earth by blowing mountains of flame out of his ass....
Peace,
emaycee
Mere words cannot describe
Every now and again, I read an article that, literally, makes me want to throw up--for the sheer audacity of its bullshit, the factual misrepresentation, and the jeopardy for which it throws its readers into. Business articles are, by nature, pro business. This business article is pro bullshit.
Susan Tompor--whose main claim to fame is writing some of the lamest business articles I have ever seen (we're talking brutal--my six-year-old has more sense than she does)--makes the entirely false claim that the Republican win makes an extension of the Bush-era tax cuts more likely. No, no, no. It makes the the extension of the tax cuts for the wealthy more likely--Democrats never, never, never claimed to want to end all of the tax cuts. Just the ones for the wealthy--who, by the way, are the reason we're in this mess.
According to Tompor--and the several wall street toadies she quoted for the article--this will be good for the stock market, and therefore good for all of us. Tompor even goes so far as to tell us that the wealthy--you know, the ones who fuck us over every day at our jobs and in our government--will better be able to commit money to small business if their taxes don't increase. How does she know this? She must have pulled it out of her fat ass because there is no empirical evidence anywhere on this fucking planet that supports that statement. Not a fucking one--and the fucking Free Press actually wasted space on this fucking pinhead.
No, the only thing the republican takeover of the House means is that it's back to business as usual for wall street--gambling your 401k money on Ponzi schemes and jeopardizing millions of Americans livelihoods. Anyone who believes differently is a fool. The rich can afford to lose millions in the market--we cannot. Hedge fund managers, investment firms, wealth managers, traders, hookers, and coke dealers--for these folks, the extension of the Bush-era tax cuts is a win. For the rest of us...think back to the fall of 2008.
Perhaps the aspect of the article that bothers me the most, though, is the way that the tax cuts for the middle class are an afterthought. We spend the money that drives this economy, we do the actual work (as opposed to sitting on your ass and pretending that you know what you're doing) that drives this economy, we start the small businesses that drive this economy--and in Susan Tompor's world (and the republicans' world as well), we're merely an afterthought.
Kind of makes me wonder who's really paying Ms. Tompor's salary....
Peace,
emaycee
Sunday, November 7, 2010
How not to read the tea leaves
You have to love the naivete of The Detroit Free Press. Apparently, their editorial staff paid absolutely no attention during this past election cycle, and cannot read the basic polls that have been cast over the past few days.
They are right--Michigan's new Governor, Rick Snyder, does need to keep the GOP's super majority in check, and focus solely on the economy. The odds of this happening, however, are about the same as me hitting a five hundred foot home run off of Tim Lincecum: absolute zero. They cannot be foolish enough to think that a party that found Mike Castle, Lisa Murkowski, and Bob Bennet too liberal for their tastes is going to be satisfied with a moderate republican in the Governor's mansion; Snyder has to know that if he doesn't toe the radical right line, he's going to face a challenge in 2014 from the far right. And can anybody imagine the chamber of commerce or all the outstate special interest groups who poured millions into Snyder's campaign settling for anything but the utter destruction of the working class and the poor in Michigan (less taxes and less government aid and all that bullshit, that you know, only keeps our state running so we're not as backwoods, as say, the shithole that is Mississippi)?
But beyond their wishful thinking, was their total misread of the national electorate: "But the dangers of overreaching (the primary lesson of the from the first two years of Barack Obama's presidency) should be prominent in everyone's mind." Really? I mean, what the fuck, really? Obama overreached? On fucking what? If they're stupid enough to believe that had Obama and the Democrats passed a public option, told wall street to go fuck itself on bonuses, passed real immigration reform, passed a stimulus that actually had teeth and infrastructure improvements that created real jobs, that Democratic voters would have still stayed home, they have no business analyzing the hairs on my ass, let alone what lessons we learned from Obama's first two years.
No--know what should really concern Snyder? The fact that a whopping 45% of registered voters turned out for this past week's midterms. What happens in 2012 when those numbers go back up to 60%--and the kids and the minorities and the liberals turn out again? That supermajority could (key word) shrink awfully fast.
I will give the Free Press' Stephen Henderson credit for getting this right--the performance of the Michigan Democratic party was beyond brutal, and its Chairman, Mark Brewer, should be sent packing. The only thing Brewer deserves credit for is leading us to the worst ass-kicking in history--he pulled off the nearly impossible and led us to defeat in every major office in the entire fucking state! Well done, Mark (you fucking idiot)! Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out....
Peace,
emaycee
Now I know, we've been had
Wonder how all of those "independents" who voted republican last Tuesday, worried about the partisan rancor of the Democrats (Aside--what the fuck?), looking for bipartisanship, looking to the republicans to boost our dismal economy, feel about this: Mitch McConnell, the Senate's republican leader, saying his party's main goal was to make certain Barack Obama was a one-term President.
Note he said nothing about increasing employment. Note he said nothing about decreasing the federal deficit. Note he said nothing about smaller government, helping small businesses, or, even abortion or gay rights. Nope, their number one agenda is defeating President Obama.
For all those who voted thinking republicans might be different this time, I have but one word: SUCKERS!
Just so you know, when two years down the road the economy is still shit, wall street is still running rampant, the government's size is still the same, the federal deficit is higher, and your precious tax dollars have been wasted on "investigations," IFUCKING VOTED DEMOCRAT BECAUSE I'M NOT A FUCKING IDIOT!
Thanks, and have a bitchin' two years....
Peace,
emaycee
Sing a song of sixpence....
Sunday silliness...
OBAMA
(Sung to the tune of Ritchie Valens' "Donna")
Obama, Obama
Obama, Obama
I had a dream
Obama was his name
Since he took office
It's never been the same
Cause I love my dream
Obama, where can you be? Why can't you see?
Public option is gone
Wall Street still rules the roost
We're left all alone
Corporations still give us the boot
Cause he never gave liberals a whirl
Obama, where can you be? Why can't you see?
Well, Obama, you promised change
And all liberals got was the screw
All the effort and all the time, wasted on you-ou-ou
I had a dream
Obama was his name
He played it safe
When republicans got mean
Can you save us, Howard Dean?
Obama, where can you be? Why can't you see?
Obama, Obama
Obama, Obama
Peace,
emaycee
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Cutting through the bullshit
Republicans have done a masterful job through the years of turning truth into falsehood and having it become conventional wisdom. Nolan Finley again tries to use his "gee, shucks, I was there, these people aren't racists, it's all the Democrats fault for pointing out the truth" bullshit once again, and I'm sure it'll fly with the tea partiers, the conservatives, and the traditional media, but somebody has to hold their feet to the fire.
I'm proud to be that somebody.
The reason I fear this narrative from republicans is because of how well they've used it on gay issues in the past. It isn't about hatred of gays--it's a religious difference, it's standing up for traditional values, it's "love the sinner, hate the sin"--(Aside: what the fuck?). And now it's the same for the racism charges: we just don't like Obama, we have black friends, we work with black people who are really nice, my favorite player in name the sport is black.
No. No. No. The first sign is their defensiveness on the issue. The second is their trying to play it down just as they did the gay issues. And finally it's their claim that they're just like everybody else, mainstream Americans. Oh, really? Because I've been on this planet for fifty-one years now and to tell you the truth, I haven't met all that many people who are all that much alike. Sure there are people who like baseball, and the color blue, and watching the leaves change color in the fall, but when you really break it down, people are as diverse as snowflakes--even if they share the same genes, no two of them are exactly alike. So when somebody tells me they're just like everybody else, I get worried, good and worried, that maybe I'm dealing with someone who doesn't watch things very carefully, who doesn't think things through, and who has no business governing a nation as diverse as ours, that leads a world as diverse as ours.
Toward the end of his piece, Finley says, "There's an astonishing arrogance in the Democratic response. They can't see that it's the way they governed that has turned off voters." Fortunately, for those of us who use our brains, there's an astounding idiocy in Finley's worldview, and our hope for the future. As many people turned out to vote against Democrats, an equal amount stayed home because they were disappointed or disgusted with the party's leadership on issues concerning them--eventually, those people will return, having already seen through the conservative/tea party/republican bullshit and send them packing.
My guess is, old Nolan will never even see it coming.
Peace,
emaycee
After the deluge
I have to admit, in retrospect, the fifty state strategy championed by Howard Dean when he was the chair of the DNC turned out to be a bust. It seemed good in theory: better to have a Democrat with you fifty percent of the time on congressional votes than zero from a republican. In reality, the conservative wing of the Democratic party succeeded only in watering down legislation, and in the end, torpedoing our chances in the just completed midterms.
Ari Berman has written a good piece for The New York Times in which he says the Democrats should boot the Blue Dogs--and he's exactly right. They have added nothing to the party except grief, don't champion the poor and the middle class, and frankly, stand for nothing the Democratic party is supposed to stand for. We could get a lot more done with a smaller but cohesive caucus.
A good start would be to elect Nancy Pelosi as minority leader. She is the one Democratic leader who stood up for our principles, and actually accomplished quite a bit. Should Heath Shuler decide to oppose her, crushing his candidacy would be a big help.
Tim Kaine needs to be out as chair of the DNC--his reign has been a disaster from the get go (the Governor races in Virginia and New Jersey in 2009 should have been a rather obvious warning sign). Fuck the moderates--they always lead us to defeat and half-assed legislation. We need a party champion--would love to see someone like either Alan Grayson or Russ Feingold take on the job, but I doubt we'll see either.
On the bright side, for as big of an ass kicking as we took last Tuesday, it appears we have 190 seats in the House (and a generally more supportive 190 seats for the progressive agenda) which means we only need 28 seats to take back the majority next election. Not likely, but not impossible either.
Further, for all the talk about returning to the blue/red political map of 2004, remember this: liberals didn't turn out, minorities didn't turn out, and young voters didn't turn out. My guess is after two years of republican "investigations," gridlock, and nothing accomplished to help the economy, they all turn out again in 2012. Will the traditional media be telling us in 2012 that we've returned to the 2008 map?
We can only hope....
Peace,
emaycee
Ari Berman has written a good piece for The New York Times in which he says the Democrats should boot the Blue Dogs--and he's exactly right. They have added nothing to the party except grief, don't champion the poor and the middle class, and frankly, stand for nothing the Democratic party is supposed to stand for. We could get a lot more done with a smaller but cohesive caucus.
A good start would be to elect Nancy Pelosi as minority leader. She is the one Democratic leader who stood up for our principles, and actually accomplished quite a bit. Should Heath Shuler decide to oppose her, crushing his candidacy would be a big help.
Tim Kaine needs to be out as chair of the DNC--his reign has been a disaster from the get go (the Governor races in Virginia and New Jersey in 2009 should have been a rather obvious warning sign). Fuck the moderates--they always lead us to defeat and half-assed legislation. We need a party champion--would love to see someone like either Alan Grayson or Russ Feingold take on the job, but I doubt we'll see either.
On the bright side, for as big of an ass kicking as we took last Tuesday, it appears we have 190 seats in the House (and a generally more supportive 190 seats for the progressive agenda) which means we only need 28 seats to take back the majority next election. Not likely, but not impossible either.
Further, for all the talk about returning to the blue/red political map of 2004, remember this: liberals didn't turn out, minorities didn't turn out, and young voters didn't turn out. My guess is after two years of republican "investigations," gridlock, and nothing accomplished to help the economy, they all turn out again in 2012. Will the traditional media be telling us in 2012 that we've returned to the 2008 map?
We can only hope....
Peace,
emaycee
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Thank you, America!
Contrary to what you may believe, the midterm election results of yesterday did not allow you to "take back your country." Nope, what you did was hand the keys back to the same bozos who let corporations and Wall Street run crazy and nearly destroyed the middle class--and now you've given them the power to finish the job. Well fucking done America!
For a great perspective on the disaster that Barack Obama has been for Democrats and the Liberal agenda, please read this--I think it perfectly sums up my thoughts that Obama is a great campaigner for himself, not so much for the rest of us.
Can somebody please shut up people like Evan Bayh, Paul Begala, and Mark Penn? The last thing Obama or the Democrats need is to be centrists. Here are the facts: young people did not turn out to vote, minorities did not turn out to vote, and Liberals did not turn out to vote. These are among the most Progressive members of our coalition. The Blue Dogs lost better than 50% of their races--the Progessive caucus won 94% of their races. And we need to tack right? Fuck you, next idiot please! And shame on Arianna Huffington for running two of those bullshit pieces--with Liberals like that, who needs republicans?
Don't believe you got swindled by the republicans? Watch this: I was literally screaming at her while she was on the tube last night. It was all bullshit--this election was bought and paid for by corporations, their fellators (yes, you, chamber of commerce) and wall street, so the republicans could do their bidding at our expense. Period.
Looking for a silver lining? The two states that usually lead the way for Liberals, New York and California, had the good sense to stay the course, electing, respectively, a Democratic Governor and two Democratic Senators and a Democratic Governor and a Democratic Senator. All is not lost....
Keep up the fight, never quit--we're the good guys and eventually, we will prevail for all of America, not just old, white people....
Peace,
emaycee
For a great perspective on the disaster that Barack Obama has been for Democrats and the Liberal agenda, please read this--I think it perfectly sums up my thoughts that Obama is a great campaigner for himself, not so much for the rest of us.
Can somebody please shut up people like Evan Bayh, Paul Begala, and Mark Penn? The last thing Obama or the Democrats need is to be centrists. Here are the facts: young people did not turn out to vote, minorities did not turn out to vote, and Liberals did not turn out to vote. These are among the most Progressive members of our coalition. The Blue Dogs lost better than 50% of their races--the Progessive caucus won 94% of their races. And we need to tack right? Fuck you, next idiot please! And shame on Arianna Huffington for running two of those bullshit pieces--with Liberals like that, who needs republicans?
Don't believe you got swindled by the republicans? Watch this: I was literally screaming at her while she was on the tube last night. It was all bullshit--this election was bought and paid for by corporations, their fellators (yes, you, chamber of commerce) and wall street, so the republicans could do their bidding at our expense. Period.
Looking for a silver lining? The two states that usually lead the way for Liberals, New York and California, had the good sense to stay the course, electing, respectively, a Democratic Governor and two Democratic Senators and a Democratic Governor and a Democratic Senator. All is not lost....
Keep up the fight, never quit--we're the good guys and eventually, we will prevail for all of America, not just old, white people....
Peace,
emaycee
I'm baaaaacccckkkkk....
On Monday November 1, 2010, forty-three seasons of disappointment came to a thunderous end with the victory of the San Francisco Giants in the World Series. It was an exhausting three weeks, and worth every minute of it. Forty three years! Think about that: none of my three kids were born when my love affair with the Giants began, my Beautiful Girl was ten years away from her wondrous existence, I still believed the Catholic Church was a force for good, and the Democratic Party hadn't even made the slightest dent in my conscienceness.
What a long strange trip it's been.
For posterity: I had to work on the eventful evening, and as the last inning approached, I had to make a decision. Do I stay at work to watch the end (major depressing thought as I don't particularly care for either my job or the company I work for) or try to make it home before the last out? I opted for the latter and headed home. In a most unusual twist, the Giants decided not to have a tortuous last inning and I was barely five minutes into my drive home when the last out occurred. Now many people would have been disappointed by this, but as I drove, for some odd reason, I remembered when my love for the Giants first began at age eight, and lying in my bed listening to their games with Russ Hodges (HR call: "Bye, Bye, Baby!") and Lon Simmons (HR call: "And you can tell it goodbye!") on my family's little black transistor radio (yes, kids, back in the day most games weren't on TV) and for some odd reason it seemed entirely poetic that I would be listening to their first ever World Championship on the radio. What goes around, comes around....
Baseball, as life, is a beautiful game.
Peace,
emaycee
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
You get what you vote for...
This is a quote from our future disastrous Governor: "The most terrifying words you can hear are, 'I'm from Lansing, and I'm here to help.' "
While I understand it's popular these days to blame the government for everything (all evidence to the contrary--it's corporate America who's to blame), what exactly are we to make of this statement? Rick Snyder will soon be living in Lansing--does this mean he doesn't intend to help? If so, why would anyone consider voting for him? Does this mean he's already signalling that he's an incompent boob (what a fucking surprise coming from a republican) and won't be able to help? If so, why would anyone vote for him? Why would the Free Press deign to publish such a quote? To be cute? To continue their quest to appeal to scared, old, white people--the only ones left who may still think their newspaper is relevant?
Can I be the only person in Michigan who finds this quote from a candidate for Governor of Michigan incredibly disturbing?
Just wondering....
Peace,
emaycee
One Nation
From USA Today: "We're fired up, and we're fighting for jobs and justice," said Cheryl Albright.... "We believe this is the real America. Look at all this diversity," she said. "This is not like the tea party. They call themselves the real America; we're the real America, too."
Not "too." We're the real American period. The tea party is not the real America in any way. It's scared, old, white people, period.
Nice of the Free Press to run a blurb on the One Nation rally--and an entire article on the recent tea party rally in D. C. Also like the "thousands" marched for One Nation in D.C. and "tens of thousands" marched for the tea party. By whose fucking count?
The Free Press fails yet again. And for the record, the sky is blue....
Peace,
emaycee
Friday, October 1, 2010
Where were you when we needed you?
Where the fuck was this poll when we were going through the whole Healthcare reform debacle? A full 40% of Americans think the new healthcare law didn't go far enough, while a mere 20% doesn't want the government involved in healthcare. This is a massive case of media and polling failure--in short, a large majority of Americans (factoring in the 30% who approve of the new law) want a greater government involvement in our healthcare system. How much better of a chance would the public option have had with these numbers (though with the jellyfish spinal columns of too many Dems it is hard to judge)?
Special thanks to the Free Press for publishing their article on page 18A--one can see that their readers' needs and opinions are obviously not a priority (or they must really need the revenue from the healthcare industry ads).
Note to republicans: good luck keeping the House in 2012 with the strategy of repealing healthcare reform....
Peace,
emaycee
Special thanks to the Free Press for publishing their article on page 18A--one can see that their readers' needs and opinions are obviously not a priority (or they must really need the revenue from the healthcare industry ads).
Note to republicans: good luck keeping the House in 2012 with the strategy of repealing healthcare reform....
Peace,
emaycee
Just a little bit more
A short while ago I wrote a blog about the motion before the Michigan Supreme Court on setting a time limit on submitting new evidence. There were a couple of interesting articles in the Free Press this week discussing said amendment--which I mention only because both are excellent examples of why this piss poor motion should be dismissed.
One is by Jeff Gerritt--who has the admirable job of being the Free Press' ombudsmen for prisoners (and what a fun job that must be in our current tea party hate-filled nation). He points out the case of one Dwayne Provience, who was convicted in 2001 of murder, but thanks to the Michigan Innocence Clinic, his wrongful conviction was overturned. Had the current motion for time limits been in effect, Mr. Provience would still be in prison for a crime he did not commit. Mr. Gerritt is exactly right when he explains that keeping innocent people out of prison is a far more compelling moral claim than the expense of "frivolous" (bet Mr. Provience doesn't think his new evidence was frivolous) new evidence claims.
The second was a piece by the always thoughtful Leonard Pitts (if any op-ed writer is writing finer pieces than Mr. Pitts in America today, I've yet to find him)--on the plight of one Anthony Graves, who recently won a new trial in what may be another in an unfortunate cycle of convicting innocent people of murder. Mr. Pitts aptly points out that outraged citizens demanding the death penalty for outrageous crimes may be a compelling case for abolishing the death penalty--emotion gets in the way of reason, logic, and fairness. And I might add, even worse, putting innocent people to death.
Just sayin'....
Peace,
emaycee
One is by Jeff Gerritt--who has the admirable job of being the Free Press' ombudsmen for prisoners (and what a fun job that must be in our current tea party hate-filled nation). He points out the case of one Dwayne Provience, who was convicted in 2001 of murder, but thanks to the Michigan Innocence Clinic, his wrongful conviction was overturned. Had the current motion for time limits been in effect, Mr. Provience would still be in prison for a crime he did not commit. Mr. Gerritt is exactly right when he explains that keeping innocent people out of prison is a far more compelling moral claim than the expense of "frivolous" (bet Mr. Provience doesn't think his new evidence was frivolous) new evidence claims.
The second was a piece by the always thoughtful Leonard Pitts (if any op-ed writer is writing finer pieces than Mr. Pitts in America today, I've yet to find him)--on the plight of one Anthony Graves, who recently won a new trial in what may be another in an unfortunate cycle of convicting innocent people of murder. Mr. Pitts aptly points out that outraged citizens demanding the death penalty for outrageous crimes may be a compelling case for abolishing the death penalty--emotion gets in the way of reason, logic, and fairness. And I might add, even worse, putting innocent people to death.
Just sayin'....
Peace,
emaycee
Ain't it funny how time slips away...
My Lord, it's October already...
The Free Press ran your basic puff piece on Bob King, the new President of the UAW. Overall the article was fair, and, to my mind, points out King's strong points (namely, tying all workers across the globe together, making social justice a key platform)--there's never anything wrong with a puff piece on the good guys.
No, what I wanted to point out from the piece is this comment by Paul Kersey, director of labor policy for the Mackinac Center for Public Policy (i.e., conservative think tank) concerning King's push for the union to have a bigger share of the auto industry's success: "Companies ought to be profitable. Bob King seems to want to treat this as a rainbow to prosperity now that the storm is over...and I think it is very premature."
What the fuck? No argument from me that companies need to be profitable. But you know what? So do employees--there aren't many of us who do the shit we do for free. And when exactly would be the right time? A year? Two years? My guess is that Paul Kersey, being the corporate fellator he is, would suggest never. Certainly haven't seen a lot of CEOs in the auto industry waiting for their share--when they wait, so should the UAW. When the execs don't, neither should the UAW. Bob King is right on the money (so to speak here): the time is now.
Peace,
emaycee
The Free Press ran your basic puff piece on Bob King, the new President of the UAW. Overall the article was fair, and, to my mind, points out King's strong points (namely, tying all workers across the globe together, making social justice a key platform)--there's never anything wrong with a puff piece on the good guys.
No, what I wanted to point out from the piece is this comment by Paul Kersey, director of labor policy for the Mackinac Center for Public Policy (i.e., conservative think tank) concerning King's push for the union to have a bigger share of the auto industry's success: "Companies ought to be profitable. Bob King seems to want to treat this as a rainbow to prosperity now that the storm is over...and I think it is very premature."
What the fuck? No argument from me that companies need to be profitable. But you know what? So do employees--there aren't many of us who do the shit we do for free. And when exactly would be the right time? A year? Two years? My guess is that Paul Kersey, being the corporate fellator he is, would suggest never. Certainly haven't seen a lot of CEOs in the auto industry waiting for their share--when they wait, so should the UAW. When the execs don't, neither should the UAW. Bob King is right on the money (so to speak here): the time is now.
Peace,
emaycee
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Questions, I Got Questions
Some depressing news--the poverty rate in the U.S. is at its highest in 16 years. Ummmm.....why do you suppose it is that for as much as republicans are hammering Democrats on the economy, they're not mentioning this fact? Don't you think the Dems would be pounding the republicans on this were the shoe on the other foot? Don't you think this speaks volumes about where the republicans' interest lies?
The Free Press occasionally runs a pair of pieces on their op-ed page(s), called "Opposing points of view" which are sometimes interesting (and sometimes not). This week's dealt with a proposal to limit appeals of conviction to one year (with our shoddy justice system, I didn't even have to read the opposing views to know where I stood--against!). The first piece, by David A. Moran of the Michigan Innocence Clinic, is a well written and compelling argument against setting a time limit. The opposing piece, by Wayne County Prosecuting Attorney Kym Worthy, argues in favor of the time limit because, of all things, justice demands finality. While I have no doubt that some sort of finality is important, shouldn't the real goal of our justice system be to make sure we aren't incarcerating innocent people? Or how about not wasting thousands of taxpayer dollars incarcerating innocent people? Or, hell, even making sure that we have the actual guilty criminals behind bars and not continuing their crimes on our streets? Why is it that it sure as hell seems prosecutors are a lot more interested in adding another victory notch to their belt on their way to running for higher office than justice?
I've read this piece by Brian Dickerson and I'm honestly not sure what point he's making about the tea party--I'm not even sure it's necessarily your usual mainstream media goop about the tea party. Outwardly, he is discussing the success of the tea party and its seeming lack of leaders, but is he subtly questioning this assumption? How come he never made mention of the New Yorker's Jane Mayer's piece about the Koch brothers' stealth financial support of the tea party? How come there was no mention of Dick Armey's Freedomworks and their behind the scenes structuring of the tea party? No idea, but I have a feeling he missed a good opportunity to educate his readers.
Quote of the week: "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross." Often attributed to the first American Literature Nobel Laureate, Sinclair Lewis (interesting discussion of the source of the quote here), has anyone seen or heard a quote that better sums up the tea party ("Fucking idiots!" doesn't count)? Check this out for its "newfound" ties to the religious right....
Peace,
emaycee
The Free Press occasionally runs a pair of pieces on their op-ed page(s), called "Opposing points of view" which are sometimes interesting (and sometimes not). This week's dealt with a proposal to limit appeals of conviction to one year (with our shoddy justice system, I didn't even have to read the opposing views to know where I stood--against!). The first piece, by David A. Moran of the Michigan Innocence Clinic, is a well written and compelling argument against setting a time limit. The opposing piece, by Wayne County Prosecuting Attorney Kym Worthy, argues in favor of the time limit because, of all things, justice demands finality. While I have no doubt that some sort of finality is important, shouldn't the real goal of our justice system be to make sure we aren't incarcerating innocent people? Or how about not wasting thousands of taxpayer dollars incarcerating innocent people? Or, hell, even making sure that we have the actual guilty criminals behind bars and not continuing their crimes on our streets? Why is it that it sure as hell seems prosecutors are a lot more interested in adding another victory notch to their belt on their way to running for higher office than justice?
I've read this piece by Brian Dickerson and I'm honestly not sure what point he's making about the tea party--I'm not even sure it's necessarily your usual mainstream media goop about the tea party. Outwardly, he is discussing the success of the tea party and its seeming lack of leaders, but is he subtly questioning this assumption? How come he never made mention of the New Yorker's Jane Mayer's piece about the Koch brothers' stealth financial support of the tea party? How come there was no mention of Dick Armey's Freedomworks and their behind the scenes structuring of the tea party? No idea, but I have a feeling he missed a good opportunity to educate his readers.
Quote of the week: "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross." Often attributed to the first American Literature Nobel Laureate, Sinclair Lewis (interesting discussion of the source of the quote here), has anyone seen or heard a quote that better sums up the tea party ("Fucking idiots!" doesn't count)? Check this out for its "newfound" ties to the religious right....
Peace,
emaycee
Woo-Hoo!
A very beautiful thing happened today--despite its flaws, despite our disappointment, some very good pieces of the Affordable Care Act went into effect today, including one that benefits my family personally: if I choose to leave my shit job tomorrow, whatever company hires me will not be able to have its health insurance company deny coverage to the Beautiful Boy because he has a pre-existing condition. To which I have one thought: biiiitttttccccchhhhhinnnnnnn'.
Oh, and one other short thought: fuck the health insurance industry!
Peace,
emaycee
Oh, and one other short thought: fuck the health insurance industry!
Peace,
emaycee
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
What He Said
Bill in Portland Maine has written a compelling and easy to understand piece on why it is vital for Democrats to hold their noses and get out and vote on November 2nd: because your very survival and any hope you have for progress in America depends upon it. Period.
Preach it brothers and sisters!
Peace,
emaycee
Preach it brothers and sisters!
Peace,
emaycee
My Healthcare Horror Story
For those not familiar, a few months back the Beautiful Boy was diagnosed with ADHD. No big deal--working with his doctor, and to an extent, his school, we started him on medication. It has gone very well (though certainly not perfectly)--his condition has improved markedly. Also for those not familiar, like many medications, one can eventually plateau with ADHD medication and need to switch to another prescription to reignite the brain. This is what happened to the Beautiful Boy.
Like any good parents, we noticed he was slipping, took him to his doctor, who also noticed and wrote a new prescription. Off to the pharmacy, and voila, he'd be on the road to stability again.
Not so fast, bucko....
I dropped the prescription at the pharmacy that my company requires me to use or else pay exorbitant prices at 11:00 am on a Tuesday. By five o'clock I was told that it had yet to be authorized. By six-thirty, I was told I'd have to wait until tomorrow because the woman who had to authorize it was off at five.
Keep in mind, we're dealing with the health of a five year old here.
We went through the same rigamarole on Wednesday. On Thursday, the Beautiful Girl got a call from our doctor's office (but not the insurance company who had to authorize it) telling us the claim had been denied. So she made a trip to the doctor, got a new prescription, and it was finally filled on Thursday, more than 48 hours after we originally had dropped off the prescription. The reason it was denied? Well, we didn't find that out until the Tuesday after the original drop off when we received a letter from the company telling us that the medication wasn't approved for children under six years of age. Of note: neither was the last medication he was on, and they approved that one. Also of note: he turns six in a month.
The reason I mention this is because there are people fighting tooth and nail against National Health Insurance by claiming that the government would fuck it up. Really? Worse than the insurance company handled our claim? At no time did we have access to the insurance company, at no time were we notified of the current status of our claim, and even worse, they have banker's hours...who the fuck lives in a five o'clock world anymore? I can guarantee you that if the government ran it we would, at the very least, have a helpline to call to expedite our claims and can absolutely guarantee that people would be on the job past five o'clock.
So for all those who claim the government would fuck up our healthcare, I have but one retort: Fuck you, next idiot please!
We need National Health Insurance, and we need it now. Still don't think so? Check out this piece: health insurance companies are stopping offering coverage to children because of the law that goes into effect tomorrow requiring them to cover children with pre-existing conditions.
May all insurance companies and their executives rot in hell.
Peace,
emaycee
Monday, September 20, 2010
Why I'm Going to Vote and Vote Democrat in November
So President Obama is on the road and touting what he's done as well as asking--rightly--exactly what the republicans and their Taliban friends in the tea party are going to do to fix the economy (short answer: nothing!).
The night President Obama was elected, I told the Beautiful Girl that if he turned out to be a disappointment for Progressives, I would probably be the most discouraged voter in history. Guess what? Pretty much every time I look at Obama it's like remembering the girl you never asked out and wondering what would have been had you actually had the courage to ask her. There's just a sinking feeling in the chest. (Note: this only works when you're single--when you're in a good relationship, you don't think about her anymore....)
Still, for all the anguish, can you imagine what it would be like if McCain and that fucking moron Palin had won? Jesus Christ, it would be anarchy at best and utter chaos at worst. I mention this because of the results of some polling in the Free Press--69% of Michiganders oppose raising the age to receive Medicare (26% favor); 52% favor eliminating the cap on payroll taxes to strengthen Social Security (31% oppose); 49% favor letting the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy (42% oppose)...are you sensing a pattern here? Do these sound like conservative ideas? And yet, we're preparing to elect a man by a wide margin from a party that opposes all of these positions supported by a vast majority of Michiganders. What the fuck?
And this is why I'll be voting and voting Democrat this fall--to help protect us from ourselves.
Or as Walt Kelly's Pogo opined: "We have met the enemy and he is us."
Peace,
emaycee
The night President Obama was elected, I told the Beautiful Girl that if he turned out to be a disappointment for Progressives, I would probably be the most discouraged voter in history. Guess what? Pretty much every time I look at Obama it's like remembering the girl you never asked out and wondering what would have been had you actually had the courage to ask her. There's just a sinking feeling in the chest. (Note: this only works when you're single--when you're in a good relationship, you don't think about her anymore....)
Still, for all the anguish, can you imagine what it would be like if McCain and that fucking moron Palin had won? Jesus Christ, it would be anarchy at best and utter chaos at worst. I mention this because of the results of some polling in the Free Press--69% of Michiganders oppose raising the age to receive Medicare (26% favor); 52% favor eliminating the cap on payroll taxes to strengthen Social Security (31% oppose); 49% favor letting the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy (42% oppose)...are you sensing a pattern here? Do these sound like conservative ideas? And yet, we're preparing to elect a man by a wide margin from a party that opposes all of these positions supported by a vast majority of Michiganders. What the fuck?
And this is why I'll be voting and voting Democrat this fall--to help protect us from ourselves.
Or as Walt Kelly's Pogo opined: "We have met the enemy and he is us."
Peace,
emaycee
An Analogy
Say you get home late from work one night, and you're starving. Just have to have something to eat...but, it's a few days before payday and all that's in the house is bread and peanut butter. With no funds, a quick jaunt to the grocery store or Taco Bell is out of the question, so you settle for a peanut butter sandwich. It may not be mouth watering, it may not be what you wanted, but it gets the job done.
Now switch to a couple of days after payday. You come home starving again, but you've had a chance to do some grocery shopping and you've got some steaks in the fridge, the fixing for some tacos, some pork chops, hell, you've even got some hot dogs and a can of Hormel chili for the quick meal in case you're too tired to cook. Now, are you going to have a peanut butter sandwich on this night? Hell no! You're going to eat good.
For those idiots out there like Christine O'Donnell, the republican candidate for Senate in Delaware, in the above analogy the peanut butter sandwich is masturbation; the steak, the tacos, the pork chops, hell, even the chili dogs are sex with a real woman. This is why you're "in the picture" so to speak.
(Special shout out for this piece--and video--both quite amusing).
Peace,
emaycee
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Be Still My Beating Heart...Well, Almost
Kind of an interesting week in the Free Press....
Shock of all shocks, Stephen Henderson actually defends Obamanomics, and calls out the republicans for having no ideas and no strategy other than bitching for turning the economy around. And the Free Press editorial board follows it up later in the week with another piece calling out the republicans for having no credible alternative, other than tax cuts (for which there is no empirical evidence for strenghtening the economy). You might wonder why the Free Press has suddenly had a change of heart from their usual Kumbaya mantra, but methinks as the election gets closer and closer, we might see a lot more of this type of narrative: the base just may come home, if nothing else, out of abject fear.
Along those same lines, Brian Dickerson finally puts his Princeton degree to good use while pointing out how worried CEOS are about new regulations that will require them to disclose the ratio between their compensation and that of their employees. Dickerson rightly points out that their fears are not that their employees won't fully understand, but will understand all too well how much they're getting fucked by their not so competent leadership. Pinch me, I must be dreaming....
Even old Nolan gets one right in discussing the great state of Michigan's problem with high school dropout rates. And actually proposes ideas that aren't your usual republican LSD trip taker on steroids rant. What the hell...give him a week, and he'll be back to his usual self, but I'll take the occasional surprise.
But then there's this and you just have to say what the fuck? Ostensibly, the piece is the weekly business column "At Issue" which (sometimes) discusses various business and consumer issues and gives some sort of analysis featuring arguments from both sides. Apparently this week, that was more than Margaret Collins limited abilities could handle, as she attempted to discuss the upcoming expiration of the Bush tax cuts. In reality, the piece was nothing more than a financial advice column for the wealthiest of Americans (the 315,000 who make $1 million or more who will be affected by Obama's plan to let the cuts expire for those making more than $250k) on how to avoid paying such taxes. In typical business world tone deafness to those of us not fortunate enough to have the ability of carnival booth workers talent for swindling, she poses, as an example, that their increase in taxes will be the equivalent of a BMW Z4. A fucking Beemer! Now that's the way to gain empathy for those wealthy folks--use the price of a car that is more than most people make in a year as an example! And trouble is, there are people stupid enough to fall for this bullshit. Not me--and for those complaing about how much this expiration is going to hurt those poor folks, well, hell, I'll gladly trade salaries for a year with any person making such and happily pay the price of a beemer more in taxes....
In the immortal words of the Wicked Witch as she melted, "What a world, what a world...."
Peace,
emaycee
The War on the Poor and the Middle Class
Forget about all those on the right who piss and moan about a possible class war--it's already here and we in the middle class and our brothers and sisters who make up the poor are losing. Badly.
There really isn't much to this piece by Kevin Hassett of the American Enterprise Institute concerning the "overpaid" middle class workers that I can refute better than Meteor Blades already has. He doesn't propose cutting his pay, he doesn't propose cutting CEO pay, he fails to mention how many have already taken pay cuts or a loss in hours worked (same thing). I'm certainly not an expert in economics, but deflation and people spending even less money seems like a no-brainer. I have no idea if this line of thought--that more people can be employed if we peons would only take pay cuts from our "fat paychecks"--can gain any traction, but considering that fully one-third of Americans are stupid enough to vote for republicans despite it not being (and never will be) in their best economic or moral interest, is enough to scare me. That, and thanks to Citizen's United, an organization like the Chamber of Commerce (which, as impossible as it may seem, has even less concern for the working men and women of America than republicans) is able to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to spread such bullshit.
One odd point that I thought Blades missed: the American Enterprise Institute (which would scream "socialism" if Democrats farted) is really pushing forth a rock solid socialist principle, don't you think? Spread the wealth, so to speak? I guess socialism is okay for the poor and the middle class, as long as the wealthy get theirs.
Oh, one other thing--I'm not quite as polite as Meteor Blades. My first thought--and strongest thought--to Mr. Hassett's contention that unemployment is my fault thanks to my fat paycheck was fuck you, next idiot please!
Peace,
emaycee
There really isn't much to this piece by Kevin Hassett of the American Enterprise Institute concerning the "overpaid" middle class workers that I can refute better than Meteor Blades already has. He doesn't propose cutting his pay, he doesn't propose cutting CEO pay, he fails to mention how many have already taken pay cuts or a loss in hours worked (same thing). I'm certainly not an expert in economics, but deflation and people spending even less money seems like a no-brainer. I have no idea if this line of thought--that more people can be employed if we peons would only take pay cuts from our "fat paychecks"--can gain any traction, but considering that fully one-third of Americans are stupid enough to vote for republicans despite it not being (and never will be) in their best economic or moral interest, is enough to scare me. That, and thanks to Citizen's United, an organization like the Chamber of Commerce (which, as impossible as it may seem, has even less concern for the working men and women of America than republicans) is able to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to spread such bullshit.
One odd point that I thought Blades missed: the American Enterprise Institute (which would scream "socialism" if Democrats farted) is really pushing forth a rock solid socialist principle, don't you think? Spread the wealth, so to speak? I guess socialism is okay for the poor and the middle class, as long as the wealthy get theirs.
Oh, one other thing--I'm not quite as polite as Meteor Blades. My first thought--and strongest thought--to Mr. Hassett's contention that unemployment is my fault thanks to my fat paycheck was fuck you, next idiot please!
Peace,
emaycee
Monday, September 6, 2010
Power to the People, Right on!
It's Labor Day--my personal thanks to all Unions for all they have done for us, as summed up well by Laura Clawson. The AFL-CIO is running some excellent holiday spots. Laurence Lewis sums up well the differences between the best of the Democratic Party and the usual corporate fellating that is the republican party. Michael Moore penned a "fucking" hilarious letter to Rahm Emmanuel (Prick with a capital "P") concerning his "Fuck the UAW" comment. Even President Obama weighed in, surmising that he, too, would join a union (though it would be nice if he'd actually throw some of his weight toward supporting them, e.g., the EFCA).
As for myself, I'd like to take a moment of today to thank all of those laborers who have labored for me over the past 28 years, none of whom have had the privilege of joining a union, but who have, despite piss poor leadership, lousy pay, and bullshit benefits, managed to maintain their dignity, their commitment to doing an excellent job, and are, as ever, the true straws that stir the drink. The people who run the companies I work/worked for should hit their knees every night and thank God for these people: they're the reason the companies were or are in business, they're the reason the stores work. God knows if we had to depend on whatever bozo was going to lead us to the promised land we'd have starved in the desert long ago. As the late, great John Lennon once opined, "Power to the people, right on!"
Thank you to all those who have done their best for me despite the circumstances....
Peace,
emaycee
A Glimmer of Hope
I came across this piece quite by accident. I have no idea who John Mangalonzo is (other than a reporter for a small Iowa newspaper), but he has written one of the best pieces I have read this year. It concerns the accidental drowning of an illegal immigrant, a man with a family who was here in America to try and bring a better life for his family. The article doesn't dwell on on his immigration status--no, it focuses on what it should: his humanity, what it was that brought him here, and what it is that makes America so great. Trust me, it is the kind of piece that gives me great comfort and hope that Journalism can and will be one of the beacons for all of us to a better life.
(Unfortunately, the comments section is muy depressing--republicans spreading their lies and hatred in their continuing quest to bankrupt America both morally and financially.)
In short, all I would like to say is this: well done, young man, very well done!
Peace,
emaycee
Saturday, September 4, 2010
Just a song before I go
The Free Press has jumped on its high horse over a scam by some Dems to run false tea party candidates in order to take away votes from republicans in closely contested elections. Wonk has even suggested that--gasp!--we should "throw the book at" them.
Let me preface the rest of this post by stating that these are not the type of tactics (though I thoroughly appreciate where such tactics came from--utter frustration with a political system and media that do not have ordinary Americans best interests at heart) I support. And I certainly hope it turns out to be only a couple of low level renegades--I would be sorely disappointed if the leaders of the Democratic Party in Michigan resorted to such republican tactics.
That being said...
...methinks I might swallow the Free Press' indignation a bit easier if they had been just as indignant over republican voter suppression in the ACORN "scandal." I'm not even sure they bothered to report on it. Maybe, too, I could buy their anger if they had the prescience to publish pieces such as this or this--you know, pieces that actually look out for the working men and women that populate Michigan; you know, pieces that aren't about their usual Kumbaya bullshit that will get nothing for those same working men and women here in the great state of Michigan.
Of late, it's dawned on me that there may be a reason more and more newspapers are paying lip service to republicans and tea party supporters: more subscriptions. Think about it: the tea party tacks old, conservatives tack old--who's more likely to eschew newfangled contraptions like the web? With younger voters tacking to the left, with very few Progressives and Liberals who buy the "liberal media" bullshit (after ten years of living here, the only Progressive issues the Free Press stands with Liberals on are the death penalty, abortion, and, as far as civil benefits and anti-discrimation go, gay rights), who's most likely to abandon the corporately influenced newspaper industry? It's all about the Benjamins, folks.
Just a thought.
Peace,
emaycee
Yeah sureee...
Shouldn't these two "op-eds"--one by a paid shill for the insurance industry, the other by an attorney with "clients" in the firearm industry (and I honestly give kudos to the Free Press for noting such) --really be published for what they are: paid advertisements?
Seriously, how stupid do you have to be to believe the insurance industry in the state of Michigan has your best interests at heart? Don't you think--if they truly did--they wouldn't be so quick to reduce the amount you can receive when some drunk numb nuts knocks you out of work for weeks, cripples you and takes you out of work forever, or at worst, kills you and ends your family's support? The only reason the insurance industry wants to give people more choice is to make more money by taking more of yours. How fucking stupid do these people think we are? How fucking stupid do you have to be to believe their bullshit? Bet plenty of republicans did, though.
As for the corporate lawyer for the firearm industry, it reads like what it is: a corporate talking points memo. What bravado by the Free Press to allow a corporate hack to spew the industry selling points.
William Lloyd Garrison and John Peter Zenger must be rolling over in their graves: a profession--Journalism--that was supposed to bring out the best in us has become the best that corporate influence and money can buy.
Peace,
emaycee
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Area (Park) 51
Leaving aside the constitutionality of the Park 51 Islamic Center (so convenient for conservatives to scream about the constitution until it serves their purposes to ignore it), the one argument conservatives make that just kills me is the one that goes, more or less, that we'll open an Islamic Center two blocks from Ground Zero when Arab nations allow construction of Christian churches in said nations. What the fuck? Aren't conservatives so fond of touting the superiority of America, the superiority of Christianity, the superiority of our ideals--and now we want to be like them by refusing to allow the construction of a religious building that offends some people? Really? We want to sink to their level of disrespect for other religions?
Conservative idiocy would be funny if it wasn't so utterly pathetic (and demeaning to everything America stands for).
Peace,
emaycee
Gonna go round in circles...
Yeah, sureee--we're going to lose, but at least we're going to lose on our terms. A world of hurt? Maybe in the short term, but not for long. Nope, I think old Nolan is terrified that Dems are setting themselves up for pretty well for 2012 when the climate for Dems will be better. After two years of seeing that the republicans have no ideas, and don't have their best interests in common, voters just may recall that Virg Bernero and his running mate Brenda Lawrence did indeed run for Main Street and the republicans ran for Wall Street.
And at least be honest--most (smart) Americans do hate business these days, and rightfully so. Bernero and Lawrence are not running on a "Hate Business" platform: they're running on a let's level the playing field and give the working men and women of the great state of Michigan a fair chance. Methinks come 2012 (and 2014) voters may just come to realize the wisdom of that platform.
Remember: republican = liar.
Peace,
emaycee
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Jobs, Justice, and Peace
They marched--men and women, black, white, and brown, young and old, for jobs, justice, and peace. And in their midst was...li'l ol' me, carrying my sign ("Bring the Troops Home Now!" with a b/side of "Money For Our City, Not For War!"), and sporting one big ass grin. Fifty-one years on this planet, and today was the first time I ever joined a rally for a cause I believed in. Indeed, as the saying goes, you are never too old.
'Twas very nice to be among a group of like-minded souls, and even better, souls who sought the betterment of our fellow poor and middle-class Americans. Railing against Wall Street, railing against corporations, railing against continued tax cuts for the wealthy--you have got to love unions and African-American churches. As the poet queen (Ms. Patti Smith) said, "People have the power."
Nice speech from UAW President Bob King on the need to continue marching and fighting. Virg Bernero put in an appearance and continued his Main Street vs. Wall Street theme. Debbie Stabenow put in a few good words for the President (he owes her big time). Marcy Kaptur (with whom I was not familiar), an Ohio U. S. Rep., gave perhaps the best progressive speech of the bunch. And, of course, the Rev. Jackson gave his usual stirring speech (plus we all got to recite "I am...somebody!").
A wonderful experience, but...
Turnout was moderate at best (a few thousand)--yes, it was a beautiful day here in Detroit, yes it was in downtown Detroit, yes, it was a Saturday, but you'd hope this close to such an important election people would turn out for the cause. Also, when Sen. Stabenow attempted to give President Obama his props, the response was...underwhelming. One has to wonder if his administration has any clue--Democrats aren't Republicans: we don't reward disappointing Presidents (see also, George W. winning in 2004). The enthusiasm gap may be a real problem--never having attended a Republican rally (and never will) I have no idea what they are like, but the mood started great and eventually became subdued. Don't know if it was disappointment in Democrats or hopelesness in the face of corporate power and a corporate media who kisses republican party ass on a daily basis, but the disappointment was real. Finally, the talking points on Wall Street were dead on, but other than Bob King and Sen. Stabenow, very little was done to tie these people to their biggest supporters--the republican party. We really need to remind people that the republican party has never, and never will, stand up for the working people, unionized or not. It is a party for corporations and the wealthy, the poor and the middle class be damned.
One other thing--if you're ever organizing a march with speeches afterward, keep the speech segment afterward BRIEF. There's a reason most school courses last an hour--that's about the limit for people's attention span. As the speeches dragged on today it was painfully obvious that people were turning their attention elsewhere (like on going home).
Still: raise your fists, brothers and sisters--NO JOBS, NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE!
Amen.
Peace,
emaycee
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
