Plutocratic States of America

After an unseemly series of maneuvers by Chief Justice Roberts expanded the case far beyond the issues presented, a five to four majority of Republican appointees held that unlimited cash “Donated” to elect political candidates is somehow "speech " protected from regulation by the First Amendment.

Stating openly in his dissent that "the Court changed the case so it could change the law," Justice Stevens warned: "A democracy cannot function effectively when voters believe laws are being bought and sold."

The post-Citizens United conduits for such barter, the Super PACs, funnel millions from the ultra-wealthy to support their human puppets -- a counterweight, one supposes, to the risky effects of letting ordinary people vote.

The ads spawned by this torrent of money now flood our airwaves: a prominent Democratic consultant estimates that his party's nominee must raise at least $1.5 billion to compete with the tidal wave unleashed by the Supreme Court. This spiraling financial arms race drives candidates away from voters in order to grovel before demanding would-be patrons in big-dollar "money primaries." And there is much groveling to be done. The 2012 campaign produced over $1 billion in soft money. 2016 will see a drastic increase. And not by the average voter…

In fact only 156 families have put $176 million on the electoral table.

As anyone with half a brain -- surely Chief Justice Roberts -- could foresee, this constitutionally coddled and pampered class is overwhelmingly white and overwhelmingly right leaning.

With honorable exceptions, such people are characterized by vaulting self-esteem, and tend to perceive the national interest by looking in the mirror. And while support from rich donors does not, in itself, ensure victory, (Newt Gingritch) at the least it badly skews the discussion of policy and issues within the campaign as a whole. It hardly matters if these donors' desires preexist, or match with, the candidates' current positions -- though often the symmetry is so striking as to suggest an answer. This unwholesome symbiosis between plutocrats and their pets is epitomized by two of the most well fed, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio.

Take Cruz. As of July, pro-Cruz Super PACs had raised $38 million. $15 million came from just two people; Dan and Farris Wilkes, Texans who made billions through fracking. No surprise that they oppose regulation of pretty much anything which relates to oil and gas that might affect their bottom line.

Stranger still is their leadership of a tiny and socially conservative cult which holds that every word of the Bible as originally written is literally true. In a nifty double pander to his patrons, Cruz calls fracking a "providential blessing." And Cruz' program for the rest of us is manna for any fundamentalist fracker: barring the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases; adamant denial of climate science; disdain for reproductive rights and -- in direct response to the Court's approval of gay marriage -- subjecting justices to electoral review.

Then there is the combined $21 million from Robert Mercer, a hedge fund kingpin whose enterprise is under IRS investigation, and Toby Neugebauer, a Texas financier who fled the US for Puerto Rico after it erased the capital gains tax. A true American patriot…..

Cruz tax program? Abolish the IRS, enact a flat tax, and roll back the capital gains rate. Whatever his proposals might do to the country, no doubt President Cruz would strive to bring balm to this afflicted duo, liberating Mercer from the IRS while facilitating Neugebauer's repatriation.

Even so, for the experience and zest he brings to the role of rich man's avatar, Marco Rubio stands out. Here one starts with Norman Braman, who has pledged $10 million to help bring us President Rubio. Since Rubio entered Florida's legislature, Braman has funded his campaigns and subsidized his personal finances, employing Rubio and his wife and underwriting Rubio's stint as a college instructor. As a legislator, Rubio steered $85 million to Braman's favorite causes. And as a candidate for president, Rubio echoes Braman's adamant support for Benjamin Netanyahu, no matter what the issue. I am sure that Rubio’s adoption of Braman’s wants as his own, has NOTHING to do with that patronage…..

But even more adamant is the billionaire Rubio is courting most assiduously -- casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, by many multiples the biggest donor of soft money in 2012. Though Adelson has other requirements -- notably a bill to ban Internet gambling now sponsored by Rubio -- it is Israel which best illuminates Rubio's political permeability.

For Adelson is committed to investing a staggering amount in the candidate who best demonstrates absolute fealty to his hardline views. And they are not merely extreme -- they run counter to the most basic tenets of American policy with respect to Israel. An unbroken line of presidents -- all staunchly committed to Israel's security -- have supported the establishment of a demilitarized Palestinian state on the West Bank, home to several million Palestinians. This is no small matter. A half century of Israeli occupation has fed a festering anger which, now as before, threatens to explode in a cascade of violence which could destabilize an already dangerous region. American and Israeli national security experts believe that indefinite occupation will end in tragedy for all concerned: the collapse of the Palestinian Authority; a third intifada; the bloody intervention of more Israeli troops; and a radicalized populace bereft of hope and dotted with extremists.

But this is precisely what Adelson wants America to support: an Israeli appropriation of the West Bank and the ensuing subjugation of its people. As for the nuclear deal with Iran, Adelson would have the next president rip it up. His alternative? A pre-emptive American nuclear strike on the Iranian people. Seems legit….

This would be so much park-bench babbling but for Adelson's resolve to spend tens of millions to elect his chosen candidate. And so Republican aspirants flock to Las Vegas in the hope that winning the "Adelson primary" will make them our next president. But Rubio goes the extra thousand miles. As New York magazine quoted an Adelson intimate, every two weeks "Rubio calls and says 'Hey, did you see this speech? What do you think I should do about this issue?' It's impressive. Rubio is persistent." And now Rubio has backed away from the two-state solution, and pledged to hamstring the multinational nuclear pact with Iran.

Rubio's panders abound. But what marks this callow candidate -- and the shame ofCitizens United -- is his willingness to change his views on vital foreign policy issues to those of an ignorant and imperious donor.

Too many Republicans prefer bigots

Trump, and the other Republican candidates are playing the scapegoat game once again, this time with Muslims.

During the 2004 Bush campaign, gays and intellectuals were scapegoated, Gay marriage and abortion were held up as serious threats to the American way of life, and unless you voted for Bush, the terrorists gays and abortionists would win.

This is the same bullshit, just with more targeted racism.

Trump is not just capturing the discontent of Americans who are sick of D.C. He's stirring the hatred that lies just beneath the surface of so many of our communities. The kind of hatred that many people want to pretend does not exist. The kind of irrational hatred that inspired Dylann Roof in Charleston, South Carolina; Chris Harper-Mercer in Roseburg, Oregon; and Robert Dear in Colorado Springs, Colorado.

In the past several months, Trump has called Mexican immigrants rapists and suggested building a wall akin to the Great Wall of China to keep them out of the United States.

In mid-November, he pronounced as fact completely made up statistics suggesting that most white people are killed by black people.

When a black protester was assaulted when disrupting one of his political rallies, he stated on national TV that "maybe he should have been roughed up."

Last month, he suggested a mandatory Muslim registry.

This week, he called for a "total and complete" ban on all Muslims entering the United States.

Words matter. Proposals matter. This man is ahead in every national poll. People are flocking to attend his events. People that cheer and applaud his racism enthusiastically!

If this is not proof positive that Republicans are frightened, ignorant bigots that need to be led like sheep, I do not know if there is proof enough to convince you.

Fat cats pay $45000 for a single Thanksgiving meal

The vast majority of working Americans haven’t seen a real raise in 35 years. 

Meanwhile, every year, their health care, education, insurance and household costs rise. Their employers eliminate pensions. And their kids struggle with rising college or technical school tuition and debt. 

Workers worry whether they will ever be able to pay the bills.

By contrast, on the other side of the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade, the richest 1 percent are supersizing their feasts. For example, three families will spend $45,000 – each – for Marie Antoinette-style meals, gold flakes and all, at the Old Homestead Steakhouse in New York City. That’s up by $10,000 from the restaurant’s Thanksgiving fare for eight last year. It’s more, for one meal, than the average American worker earns in a year.

The Marie Antoinette $45,000 Thanksgiving includes two turkeys. Because when would one, 20-pound free-range, organically raised bird at $75 a pound ever be enough?

The 1 percent can spend $45,000 for a Thanksgiving supper because they’re gobbling up virtually all of the income from workers’ productivity increases. And now they’ve launched a new assault on workers. It’s a lawsuit called Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (CTA). The 1 percent hopes it will prevent public service workers like teachers from joining together to collectively bargain for better wages and working conditions.

The Marie Antoinette $45,000 Thanksgiving includes gravy made with Pappy Van Winkle bourbon, which goes for $4,900 a bottle. Because when would $9 worth of cooking sherry ever be good enough?

If the $45,000-Thanksgiving-dinner crew wins the case, they’ll go after private-sector labor organizations next. They do not intend to stop until there’s nothing left for the other 99%.

The Friedrichs case is about power. 

Individual workers don’t bargain for raises with gigantic multinational corporations and government agencies. 

They beg.

But when workers band together and seek raises as a group, they gain for themselves the power necessary to negotiate. A fact that is intolerable to 1 percenters. And that’s why they’re backing the Friedrichs case – to prevent workers from ever gaining that negotiating power.

Defending their right to collectively bargain are public service workers ­– the likes of firemen, teachers, social workers and public health nurses. The labor organizations these workers belong to try to ensure that they receive living wages and decent retirement benefits.

But just as importantly, public service workers also use their collective voice to negotiate in the public interest, including improving response times for paramedics and lowering social worker caseloads to allow adequate time to investigate child abuse allegations. 

Public school teachers, who spend an average of $500 a year out of their own pockets for classroom supplies, routinely bargain to secure the smaller class sizes that parents want, to protect the recess breaks that elementary students need and to preserve arts and music education.

Sigh... 88 Dems bow to pressure from uninformed voters.

Most dealerships are authorized to sell cars and make loans to finance the purchase. They send their customers' financial information to a bank, which then sends the dealer an appropriate interest rate for a borrower with that particular credit profile. But banks also permit dealers to "mark up" the interest rate on the loan to a higher level, and allow the dealership to pocket some of the additional charge.

That, of course, creates incentives for the dealer to charge people higher interest rates. But data dating back to the 1990's have shown that people of color are more likely to have their interest rates marked up than white borrowers.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau issued regulatory guidance in 2013 instructing companies on how to cope with this phenomenon.

Since issuing the guidance, the CFPB has taken action against Honda and Ally Bank for overcharging borrowers of color, forcing them to return more than $100 million to their customers. This was apparently too much for banks and auto dealers to handle. They lobbied for a bill that would nullify the CFPB's regulatory move.

None of the opposition was enough to counter two interest groups that wield tremendous power on Capitol Hill. Not a single Republicans voted against the bill to curb the CFPB's enforcement of anti-discrimination law this week, while 88 Democrats voted in favor. The legislation cleared by a vote of 332 to 96.

The 88 House Democrats who voted to enable racial discrimination in the automobile market:

Pete Aguilar (Calif.)
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Fla.)
Brad Ashford (Neb.)
Joyce Beatty (Ohio)
Amerish Babulal "Ami" Bera (Calif.)
Don Beyer (Va.)
Sanford Dixon Bishop Jr. (Ga.)
Brendan Boyle (Pa.)
Robert Brady (Pa.)
Julia Brownley (Calif.)
Cheryl "Cheri" Bustos (Ill.)
Matt Cartwright (Pa.)
James "Jim" Clyburn (S.C.)
Gerald "Gerry" Connolly (Va.)
Jim Cooper (Tenn.)
James "Jim" Costa (Calif.)
Joseph "Joe" Courtney (Conn.)
Joseph Crowley (N.Y.)
Henry Cuellar (Texas)
John K. Delaney (Md.)
Suzan DelBene (Wash.)
Debbie Dingell (Mich.)
Mike Doyle (Pa.)
Tammy Duckworth (Ill.)
Elizabeth Esty (Conn.)
Bill Foster (Ill.)
Tulsi Gabbard (Hawaii)
Ruben Gallego (Ariz.)
Gwen Graham (Fla.)
Alan Grayson (Fla.)
Eugene "Gene" Green (Texas)
Janice Hahn (Calif.)
Alcee L. Hastings (Fla.)
Dennis "Denny" Heck (Wash.)
Brian Higgins (N.Y.)
Rubén Hinojosa (Texas)
Jared Huffman (Calif.)
Steve Israel (N.Y.)
Marcy Kaptur (Ohio)
William "Bill" Keating (Mass.)
Dan Kildee (Mich.)
Derek Kilmer (Wash.)
Ron Kind (Wis.)
Ann Kirkpatrick (Ariz.)
Ann Kuster (N.H.)
Rick Larsen (Wash.)
Brenda Lawrence (Mich.)
Ted Lieu (Calif.)
Dan Lipinski (Ill.)
Dave Loebsack (Iowa)
Michelle Lujan Grisham (N.M.)
Ben Ray Lujan (N.M.)
Jim McDermott (Wash.)
Grace Meng (N.Y.)
Patrick Murphy (Fla.)
Rick Nolan (Minn.)
Donald Norcross (N.J.)
Beto O'Rourke (Texas)
Bill Pascrell (N.J.)
Ed Perlmutter (Colo.)
Scott Peters (Calif.)
Collin Peterson (Minn.)
Mike Quigley (Ind.)
Kathleen Rice (N.Y.)
Raul Ruiz (Calif.)
Tim Ryan (Ohio)
Loretta Sanchez (Calif.)
Adam Schiff (Calif.)
Kurt Schrader (Ore.)
David Scott (Ga.)
Terri Sewell (Ala.)
Brad Sherman (Calif.)
Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.)
Albio Sires (N.J.)
Louise Slaughter (N.Y.)
Adam Smith (Wash.)
Jackie Speier (Calif.)
Eric Swalwell (Calif.)
Mike Thompson (Calif.)
Dina Titus (Nev.)
Paul Tonko (N.Y.)
Norma Torres (Calif.)
Nikki Tsongas (Mass.)
Juan Vargas (Calif.)
Marc Veasey (Texas)
Filemon Vela (Texas)
Tim Walz (Neb.)
Peter Welch (Vt.)

A brilliant article!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-nelson/dr-ben-carson-the-most-da_b_8573398.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

Conservatives are a danger to themselves and others.

Conservatives, even in the 1950s and 1960s, were creating a cult-like political system that prized orthodoxy over critical thought, alternative evidence, or empirical reality. This is the shadow under which the politics of disorientation operates for movement conservatives. On this point, historian Robert Toplin explains at the History News Network how:

Individuals who seek a broader understanding of the present political standoff in Washington may find Hofstadter’s thoughts on these matters poignant.

Richard Hofstadter recognized that evangelical leaders were playing a significant role in right-wing movements of his time, but he noticed that a “fundamentalist” style of mind was not confined to matters of religious doctrine. It affected opinions about secular affairs, especially political battles. 

Hofstadter associated that mentality with a “Manichean and apocalyptic” mode of thought. He noticed that right-wing spokesmen applied the methods and messages of evangelical revivalists to U.S. politics. Agitated partisans on the right talked about epic clashes between good and evil, and they recommended extraordinary measures to resist liberalism. 

The American way of life was at stake, they argued. Compromise was unsatisfactory; the situation required militancy. Nothing but complete victory would do..... 

Sound familiar?

Movement conservatism is compelling for so many people because of its visceral emotional appeal, and how the mindsets of conservative authoritarians are oriented toward accepting a binary, good or evil, fear-centered, and dominance-oriented view of the world.
Moreover, movement conservatism is obsessed with protecting “real America” and "real Americans".

This functions both as salvation and as something at risk by “liberals,” “progressives,” people of color, immigrants, gays, or whatever other group is viewed as a threat to the status quo of the “good old days.” Alas, this “real America” never truly existed.

Nevertheless, this illusory world must be protected at all costs because it is central to the “politics of disorientation,” a highly theatrical and Spectacular driven political belief system that today’s conservatism uses to make sense of the world.

The culture of illusion and distraction, wherein entertainment is a stand-in for full and authentic human experiences, enables the Reality TV-esque popularity of demagogues like Donald Trump, and the litany of ridiculous policy positions — again divorced from empirical fact or reality — offered by the leading Republican candidates. Here, Fox News, a “news” operation that has made right-wing talking points interchangeable with “facts,” represents the culture of illusion in full operation. That Fox News is America’s highest rated “news station” and actually has the most ignorant and uninformed viewership of any major news media outlet, signals to how entertainment is confused with substance in the culture of illusion and distraction. The masses are asses in such a system, not because such behavior is “natural,” but because such behavior is normalized and encouraged.

The right-wing media is one of the most effective propaganda operations in modern history!

Lies and Deception: The Right-wing media, the elites in the Republican Party, and its various interest groups, are engaged in a systematic campaign of deception toward the American people. This is philosopher Leo Strauss’s theories on truth and leadership in action.

As explained by political writer Jim Lobe:

…Not only did Strauss have few qualms about using deception in politics, he saw it as a necessity. While professing deep respect for American democracy, Strauss believed that societies should be hierarchical – divided between an elite who should lead, and the masses who should follow. But unlike fellow elitists like Plato, he was less concerned with the moral character of these leaders. According to Shadia Drury, who teaches politics at the University of Calgary, Strauss believed that “those who are fit to rule are those who realize there is no morality and that there is only one natural right – the right of the superior to rule over the inferior.”

This dichotomy requires “perpetual deception” between the rulers and the ruled, according to Drury; while Robert Locke, another Strauss analyst says,”The people are told what they need to know and no more.” While the elite few are capable of absorbing the absence of any moral truth, Strauss thought, the masses could not cope. If exposed to the absence of absolute truth, they would quickly fall into nihilism or anarchy, according to Drury, author of ‘Leo Strauss and the American Right'

Movement conservatives, and Republican voters, en masse, are utterly confused about the nature of reality, and respond with rage and anger when confronted by facts — a version of the Dunning-Krueger effect, in which where people are ignorant but do not have the expertise or awareness even to know just how ignorant they are — because they have been systematically misled.

Current conservative propaganda pushes an hallucinatory ideology. This is a dangerous system of belief wherein people are unencumbered by reality and embrace distorted views of the world and the people around them, often driven by stereotypes or other types of hatred, which then works to legitimize destructive behavior.

Hallucinatory ideology helps to create the recalcitrance and hostility to the very idea of political compromise and the open authoritarianism that form the brand name of conservatism and the Republican Party in the Age of Obama. 
Thus we find ourselves. And the question-- one that has lingered over American politics since the election of a Black and Democratic president drove the right wing et all into mouth-frothing derangement still remains: 

Will normal politics on display in last week’s Democratic debate be able to defeat the willful ignorance and insanity of the Republican Party in November of 2016?

Who are these asshats really working for?

Yesterday the Senate-- and then the House-- voted to pass a continuing resolution (CR) to keep the government open at least until December 11. Every Democrat in the Senate and every Democrat in the House voted yes, of course. And in the Senate, where it passed 78-20, all but 20 extreme right and intellectually challenged Republicans voted in favor, despite Ted Cruz's lament about shutting the whole thing down. These were the 20 who voted to shut the government down:

• Roy Blunt (R-MO)
• John Boozman (R-AR)
• Richard Burr (R-MC)
• Dan Coats (R-IN)
• Tom Cotton (R-AR)
• Mike Crapo (R-ID)
• Ted Cruz (R-TX)
• Dean Heller (R-NV)
• James Inhofe (R-OK)
• James Lankford (R-OK)
• Mike Lee (R-UT)
• Jerry Moran (R-KS)
• Rand Paul (R-KY)
• James Risch (R-ID)
• Ben Sasse (R-NE)
• Tim Scott (R-SC)
• Jefferson Beauregard Sessions (KKK-AL)
• Richard Shelby (R-AL)
• Pat Toomey (R-PA)
• David Vitter (R-LA)

As Alan Grayson pointed out earlier this week, the last time the Republicans, the party of “Fiscal Responsibility”, forced the government to stop doing business, "Standard & Poor’s estimated that the 16-day federal shutdown in 2013 cost us $24 billion, and reduced fourth quarter 2013 Gross National Product growth by about 0.6%."

This time most Senate Republicans were feeling more like responsible adults. Alas, not so in the House, where the rot has spread to the majority of the GOP. The CR passed 277-151 because Boehner made a deal with Pelosi and she had every single Democrat, all 186 of them, on board. Only 91 Republicans voted yes; 151 Republicans voted to shut down the government, and not just the Terminally stupid ones like Steve King, Louie Gohmert, Daniel Webster, Jim Jordan, Jody Hice, Ted Yoho, Tim Huelskamp and Glenn Grothman, but also conservatives who try usually around election time to pass themselves off as  vaguely in touch with reality