BP - Keystone to America: Bend Over and Take It

BP - Time For a New WPA?

BP - America's Real Welfare Queens...

BP - Is There an Antibiotic Nightmare Coming to America?

BP - It's Time to Kill Some Companies

Frozen Out

Trey Smith

Joe White was this close to making it.

A 50-year-old California man described by relatives as a “loving father and a doting grandfather,” White had been living on the streets of Hayward for years. He wanted to work and was able to find odd jobs here and there, but it was never much or consistent enough to afford a place to live. Hayward has no emergency shelter with beds for single men, so White slept outside.

But things were looking up. Last Saturday, White was second on a long list to get permanent supportive housing in Hayward. He had been waiting in line for months and it seemed as though he might finally catch a break.

White died on Sunday.

Temperatures in the Bay Area plummeted to near-freezing on December 10, an uncommon occurrence in a region generally known for its lack of inclement weather. White’s body was found in the old Hayward City Hall courtyard. He’d been beaten up and robbed by multiple men, who took the new winter coat White’s sister had given him on Friday. He was wearing just a hoodie and shorts. His cause of death is still being determined, but police speculated that his death was weather-related.

White is now the seventh homeless person in the Bay Area to die in the cold since November 28. The others were Daniel Brillhart, 52; Enrique Rubio, 56; Andrew Greenleaf, 48; Daniel Moore, 53; and two men in the East Bay and Peninsula whose names have not been released.
~ from 7 Homeless People Freeze to Death in Wealthiest Area of the Country by Scott Keyes ~

Seven doesn't sound like that large of a number. For those who live in colder climes, the figure probably is much higher. But that's not the point.

We live in a nation in which corporate profits are soaring to record heights and those who are reaping these rewards concurrently are pushing to lower their responsibility to the community -- via taxes -- by even more than they already are. The deaths of these 7 individuals represent blood on the hands of the elite, but they don't give a damn.

Their sole focus is on the welfare of themselves and their kind. They don't care about the rest of us. Any way one looks at it, that is sad. Tragically sad.

BP - Death with Dignity vs. Death for Profit?

BP - Is the Budget Deal Really an Austerity Budget?

MR - Teen Gets Away With Murder Because He is Rich

So Sorry...But Not THAT Sorry

Trey Smith

I've been catching up on my reading and I came across a November op/ed in the Wall Street Journal, Confessions of a Quantitative Easer, in which a former member of the Fed admits that quantitative easing is what some of us always thought it was: a humungous backdoor bailout of some of the wealthiest banks in the world! As is my wont, that's not what caught my eye.

Before returning to the Fed to lead the program, the author writes,

I had left the Fed out of frustration, having witnessed the institution deferring more and more to Wall Street. Independence is at the heart of any central bank's credibility, and I had come to believe that the Fed's independence was eroding.

Yes, he was soo frustrated with Wall Street's power that, when he left the Fed the first time, where did he go? To Wall Street, of course! He then returned to the Fed, before going back to Wall Street again. The proverbial revolving door!

It is hard to believe that he is troubled by the relationship between the Fed and Wall Street because he bounces back and forth between the two of them. Seems to me that his "apology" is lacking sincerity.

TYT - New Corporate Powers In Secret Trade Deal

MR - Corporatist Third Way Dems Exposed

The Bottom Line Stands Up and Roars

Trey Smith

The world's leading technology companies have united to demand sweeping changes to US surveillance laws, urging an international ban on bulk collection of data to help preserve the public's “trust in the internet”.

In their most concerted response yet to disclosures by the National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Yahoo, LinkedIn, Twitter and AOL will publish an open letter to Barack Obama and Congress on Monday, throwing their weight behind radical reforms already proposed by Washington politicians.

“The balance in many countries has tipped too far in favour of the state and away from the rights of the individual rights that are enshrined in our constitution,” urges the letter signed by the eight US-based internet giants. “This undermines the freedoms we all cherish. It’s time for change.”

Several of the companies claim the revelations have shaken public faith in the internet and blamed spy agencies for the resulting threat to their business interests. “People won’t use technology they don’t trust,” said Brad Smith, Microsoft's general counsel. “Governments have put this trust at risk, and governments need to help restore it.”
~ from NSA Surveillance: Tech Companies Demand Sweeping Changes to US Laws by Dan Roberts and Jemima Kiss ~

It seems rather ironic that corporations who regularly spy and collect hordes of data from their often unsuspecting users are demanding that the federal government not spy and collect hordes of data so much from the unsuspecting masses. There is an obvious reason why these tech giants have committed to this drastic action: money. If people don't trust the internet, they might not rely on it so much and this development could put a serious dent in the bottom line of these companies.

There is no way to gauge how serious these outfits are. Only a very naive person would not understand that, at the very least, this could be nothing more than a savvy pr move. Were it not for Edward Snowden, most of the revelations related to this open letter would have remained hidden from public view. The abuses would have been the same, but it's hard to imagine ANY of these corporations going to bat for the rights of citizens out of the apparent blue. My guess is that, as long as the bottom line was not impacted, these giants wouldn't give a wit about possible governmental abuses of power.

That said, beggars can't be choosers. If this open letter helps to create the political will to put some serious constraints on the NSA, then I welcome it. Just don't expect me to sing praises for the altruistic actions of Microsoft or Google.

DN - As Workers Strike, Fast-food CEOs Fatten Pockets With Tax Loopholes, Social Assistance for Employees

This Really Isn't "News"

Trey Smith

Conservative groups across the US are planning a coordinated assault against public sector rights and services in the key areas of education, healthcare, income tax, workers' compensation and the environment, documents obtained by the Guardian reveal.

The strategy for the state-level organisations, which describe themselves as "free-market think tanks", includes proposals from six different states for cuts in public sector pensions, campaigns to reduce the wages of government workers and eliminate income taxes, school voucher schemes to counter public education, opposition to Medicaid, and a campaign against regional efforts to combat greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change.

The policy goals are contained in a set of funding proposals obtained by the Guardian. The proposals were coordinated by the State Policy Network, an alliance of groups that act as incubators of conservative strategy at state level.

The documents contain 40 funding proposals from 34 states, providing a blueprint for the conservative agenda in 2014.
~ from State Conservative Groups Plan US-Wide Assault on Education, Health and Tax by Ed Pilkington and Suzanne Goldenberg ~

A lot of liberal and alternative media pundits are acting like this leaked information is big, B-I-G news, but is it really? Which of these policy initiatives is new? Which one hasn't been part of the conservative agenda in year's past?

Let's get real here, folks. This agenda doesn't look much different from the one pursued 10 or 20 years ago. Yes, some of the specific targets (issues) change with the generations, but the overall aim is the same. The elite want to eliminate the social safety net as much as possible and shift public monies into their own pockets. They also want tight controls placed on the unwashed masses, while, at the same time, they want to be freed from almost any degree of constraint.

I suppose the difference between now and twenty years ago is that this agenda is out in the open for all to see. In the olden days, the elite pursued such policy initiatives behind the scenes and the general public was none the wiser. These days, however, it's getting harder to keep one's activities under the radar...even for the elite. Someone always is ready to spill the beans.

Unfortunately, just because we know the parameters of their current blueprint, this doesn't mean we have much chance of stopping them. They hold most of the cards and they know it. In some ways, they probably don't care that we know what they are up to because we pose so little of a threat.

BP - What the Media Isn't Telling You About Detroit's Bankruptcy

How "Thinness" Leads to Obesity

Trey Smith

It has been noted by many that the US has a weight problem. Simply put, a significant number of Americans are fat! This unhealthy situation knows no bounds. It affects rich and poor, male and female, young and old. While obesity crosses many categorical demarcations, it remains true that it touches the poor more than any other group.

On the surface, it sounds like a contradiction in terms. Obesity -- which often erroneously is equated with little more than overeating -- would seem to be the kind of issue at the opposite end of the spectrum for those who struggle to find enough to eat. When we think of the malnourished in the developing world, the pictures we see are of individuals who look like matchsticks! In the US, however, the malnourished often are grossly overweight.

How can this be?

It ends up working out this way in America because of the simple fact that good food is far more expensive than worthless crap. If you are financially poor -- I write from experience -- purchasing organic produce on a regular basis is out of the question. In fact, buying fresh produce of any kind -- including the majority which has been bombarded with all sorts of noxious pesticides -- is vastly more expensive than buying starchy and salt- and/or sugar-laden processed food devoid of much nutritional value.

To make matters worse, while a record number of Americans have signed up for Food Stamps, the program itself has been cut significantly -- you might say said program has been thinned. And so, with less food assistance, even conscientious consumers like Della and I (as of Jan. 1, our monthly Food Stamp allotment will drop to $158/month -- less than $40 per week for 2 adults) are being forced to purchase less nutritious foodstuffs than we would like.

It really comes down to pushing back against hunger. If we were to continue to purchase as much produce as before, we would end up missing a lot of meals each month. The rate things are going, I may turn into the vegetarian who eats few fresh vegetables!

As Sticky As Flypaper

Trey Smith

Google may have been, until now, the Obama of hip internet monopolies. No matter how many nations the President bombs, people still put Obama peace-sign stickers on their cars. No matter how many radical rightwing initiatives Google funds, people still think it’s a “progressive corporation” — How could it not be? It’s making progress!

Google is funding Grover Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform, the Federalist Society, the American Conservative Union, and the political arm of the Heritage Foundation.

And there’s more really bad news: Google is funding ALEC, the powerful, secretive, and destructive lobbying force from which many companies concerned with their public images are fleeing.
~ from I Googled “Evil” And It Took Me to Google by David Swanson ~

It's interesting how certain ideas stick in people's minds, facts be damned. Here's another current one for you: President Obama is a closet socialist working fervently to do in the country.

It may sound good to some folks, but there is no documentation to back it up! (Heck, most of the minions who repeat this refrain over and over again could not define the word, socialism, if their life depended upon it.)

A truly socialist president would advance policies to shrink the growing divide between poor and rich. Under Obama, the chasm continues to grow by leaps and bounds.

A truly socialist president would champion universal health care. Under Obama, the public option -- a weak facsimile of universal health care -- was taken off the table BEFORE the national debate even got underway.

A truly socialist president would expand the Food Stamp program to insure that everyone has enough to eat. Under Obama, the program has been cut, even though a record number of people are signed up under the program.

A truly socialist president would do everything in his/her power to protect Social Security. Under Obama, the president has shown time and again that he is chomping at the bit to hand over the program to the private sector.

A truly socialist president would favor the institution of progressive taxation. Under Obama, the most recent proposal is to cut -- yet again -- the top rates, so that the marginal rates for the rich go down even further.

You see, on the issue of economics -- socialism is an ideology based on economics -- Obama has proven to be anything but a socialist and yet the idea that he is one persists unabated.

BP - What Would Jesus Do with the Banksters?

TRNN - US Student Homelessness Up 10% Since Last Year