George Orwell for GOP Chair

George Bush once commented that his base was the "... the haves and the have mores." Since that time little has changed within the GOP. Long the party of big money, the banks and the wealthy, the Republicans are working overtime to kill financial reform.

Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY), has been leading the charge and walking the tightrope. Aware of public anger over the bank bailouts and Wall Street excesses, McConnell is attempting to protect his constituents - the banks -while feigning populist indignation at the same institutions. Claiming to be intent on changing the status quo while working to insure it is no doubt a difficult balancing act. Luckily for McConnell he is not bound by any notions of truth. Claiming that the very legislation that attempts to prevent further bailouts will cause an endless chain of bailouts is the essence of doublespeak. George Orwell would be proud.

All 41 Republican senators have signed a letter indicating they will oppose financial reform. In addition to the blatant lie that McConnell is propagating, the talking points of free markets and getting government out of lives, the Republican establishment is trying to ignore the fact that they were for the bailouts.

This approach to financial reform, oppose the legislation on political grounds but use political buzzwords to manipulate the populace, is becoming the standard GOP approach to all legislation. No longer does the Republican party even attempt to put forth a coherent counter approach. Instead, their approach has become one centered on manipulating the emotions of the voters by the repetition of the same phrases, no matter their veracity, to the point of absurdity. It seems they are aware that they cannot prevail if they honestly reveal their agenda so they are attempting to shape the debate through neurolinguistic programming.

War is Peace. Hate is Love. The GOP is for the little guy.

Goldman Sachs: The Old Fashioned Way

Goldman Sachs, the Wall Street firm often derided as Masters of the Universe for their seeming ability to make money no matter what the economic climate, have been indicted for the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for fraud.

The details of the case are complex but essentially boil down to Goldman encouraging investors to buy collateral debt obligations that they themselves were betting against. It also seems that they aided and abetted the run up of these financial instruments even as they were creating a climate for their ultimate collapse. Involved, but not charged, John Paulson, an investor who profited from the scheme, appears to have directed Goldman in this effort.

Goldman Sachs is already proclaiming its innocence. Some opinions suggest that the case may be so convoluted that it may be difficult to prosecute before a jury. Others suggest that it is just the tip of the iceberg.

Important in this discussion is how they were able to even conceive of such a scheme. In therapy, medical practice, social services, etc. professionals are taught to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. In the case of bankers, apparently the rules are to obfuscate everything and rely on the investors not asking questions.

This is the free market in action. Take the suckers for all they have. Goldman Sachs has not even attempted to defend its actions as ethical or even above board. When your defense is that the case will be hard to prove in court, there seems to be an admission of improper behavior.

As I write this, Goldman just announced record profits for the first quarter. Goldman Sachs: making money the old fashioned way - stealing it.

Less Equals More

In a recent email exchange the person I was conversing with began to express a fear of government takeover of health care. Spouting the same disinformation be promulgated by the insurance industry he continually made the point that he didn't want the government making health care decisions. He seemed befuddled at my suggestion that he must not mind corporations running his life.

In health care, and for that matter, all matters where people state that they want the government to stay out of things, they are advocating that corporations be given free rein instead. The government is really the only check on large US and even larger transnational corporations. Corporations, guided only by an allegiance to profits and the bottom line, are at best neutral while at their worst malevolent entities intent on increasing revenues at any cost. Government can run as a non-profit and have employment as a purpose. Corporations view workers only as resources to be used and used up.

There is a dynamic tension that must necessarily exist between government and corporations. Unless governments can control the necessarily amoral actions of corporations the masses of people will be exploited as a matter of course. Corporations gaining control and directing the government is nothing but fascist corporatism. This is the direction the health insurance cartel of United Healthcare, Cigna, Aetna, Wellpoint and Blue Cross are attempting to take us.

Do not think this stops at health care. Corporatism is a growing threat to our society and planet as large transnationals manipulate the governments of the world in the interests of profits. Just as surely as the United Fruit Company overthrew governments in Latin America, those in the corporate world continue to exert their influence.

After being bailed out by the government of "We the People," Wall Street awarded itself bonuses with our dollars. Somehow it seems, Hank Paulson and Tim Geitner looked out for their cronies rather than the people. Blackwater, now re-branded Xe, and Halliburton continue to work as contractors for the government despite being waist deep in corruption and malfeasance.

The rallying cry for the gangster bankers - the banksters- and the health insurance industry is that regulation is bad. The free market will take care of everything they assure us. Less regulation equals more money - for them.

Less does equal more. Less government means more corporate control. In a government of "We the People," we probably get what we deserve. In a corporate world, we are all just fodder for the cannons aimed by the invisible hand of the market.

The Ghost of Tom Joad

Once again the workers get the shaft. Wall Street gets $700 billion, no strings attached. The government has essentially been privatized under the Bush Administration to line the pockets of Bush's self confessed "base," the haves and the have mores. The former head of the NASDAQ, Bernard Madoff, has been running a giant Ponzi scheme. Before he confessed to his sons what he had done he made sure to pay out $200-300 million in bonuses and gifts to those close to him.

Now comes the automobile industry bailout. Opinions about whether the bailout is a good idea aside, (although it does seem a little like investing in typewriters at the dawn of computers) there is an underlying effort to protect the wealthy while screwing the workers. Mostly Republican senators from anti-union southern states (where not coincidentally, major foreign auto plants are headquartered, due to taxpayer subsidies) have been arguing that the major problem of the auto industry is that the workers represented by the United Auto Workers (UAW) are adequately compensated.

Seeing an excuse to engage in union busting, these politicians are betraying their constituents and their duty to the nation.

There may be good reasons to oppose the auto bailout, but it is not because the workers are too well paid. It seems that we have reached a point in this country where most people are just grist for the mill. The workers represented by the UAW engaged in good faith negotiations to get the compensation they now have. On several occasions they have made concessions to the auto companies and given back agreed upon benefits in order to help their corporate bosses.

Why is it that those with the least must take all the brunt of the economic collapse? Workers take pay cuts and private equity firms get a cash bailout. According to recent stats, ten percent of the nation is behind on their mortgage payments, yet the banks are getting the money while the people are getting the streets. No accountability for the rich, but the poor must demonstrate that they "earn" what they get.

Ever had your credit card rate raised even though you make all your payments on time?
Why is it that banks can unilaterally alter the terms of a contract? Again, their investments must be protected, but the general public cannot even trust a contract with a corporation that is sufficiently large.

One of the factors that continues to hamper the revival of the economy is that banks are not lending. They've received their bailout money, but there is no money being loaned for homes, for business, for AUTO's. The rich man who owns the bank has been bailed out by us all. Now we must once again prove worthy to subsist.

Has any one considered that the problem is capitalism?