Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘2008’

One more bank down. Washington Mutual fell today and was bought out by JP Morgan Chase. This means, in effect, that the debts and bad loans of a speculative investment firm have been merged into a commercial bank. This cannot be good. When we look back at one of the causes of the great depression, the investment firms and the commercial banks were allowed to merge. When you combine a high risk investment firm with a commercial bank it is inevitable for there to be problems without any government oversight. The first thing FDR did to get us out of a depression was to separate the two types of banks from each other and pass legislation stating that they were not allowed to merge anymore. Then he insured the commercial banks and told the investment banks that they were going to be on their own.  The Glass Stegall Act was created to oversee the investment firms and make sure that they were not gambling and taking impossible risks.

In 1999 under President Clinton the Glass Stegall Act was repealed.  The advice to remove this Act came from Barack Obama’s campaign advisor and then Secretary of the Treasury Robert Rubin.  I bring up this point to remind Democrats that they are not free from fault in this crisis and that it was under a democratic
president where the problem got out of hand.

Now we are seeing these investment firms falling and being bought out by commercial banks. It is only a matter of time before the bad loans catch up to them and they fall to. When Bank of America and JP Morgan Chase come crashing down, it will be Main street that will be in trouble. The government buy out of these bad debts will just put the burden on the tax payer. Should this bail-out occur there needs to be more oversight, complete transparency, equity for the government, and penalties for the banks that participate.

I recommend everyone to check Ron Paul and Ralph Nader on what they advise should be done about this crisis. Here are some videos that are worth watching.

Ron Paul:

Ralph Nader:

With these great opinions on what could be done to save our economy, how come Ralph Nader isn’t going to debate. Nader is on 45 States ballots. He’s a write in for all the other states but one, Oklahoma where you can’t write someone in. He is polling 9% in most polls.

How about Bob Barr a libertarian, America’s oldest third party. Those that are worried about Nader “taking away votes” should consider demanding that Bob Barr be included in the debates.  He is also on 45 State ballots and is polling well without any media coverage.

Here is what you can do to get these guys on the debates:

– AT&T (Main corporate sponsor of the first debate) 210-821-4105
Jim Lehrer (Moderator for First Debate) 703-998-2138
Commission on Presidential Debates 202-872-1020

– Call Barack Obama at 866-675-2008.
Hit 6 to speak with a campaign volunteer.

– Call John McCain at (703) 418-2008.
Hit 2 or 3 to speak with a campaign volunteer,
6 to leave a message in the general campaign voice mailbox.

– Email the executive director of the Commission on Presidential Debates.
E-mail Janet Brown jb@debates.org,


Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Okay, time for action. The first Presidential debate is Friday. And we’re getting stonewalled. They won’t let Ralph Nader, Bob Barr, Mckinney, or Baldwin into the Presidential debates. So, here’s what we’re going to do. It’s a two step process.

Step one — call Barack Obama. Tell Obama he should demand that Ralph Nader (If you are for Bob Barr then you could replace Nader’s name with Barr’s in every instance of the script.) be included in the debates. And step two — e-mail the Commission on Presidential Debates. And let them know you are onto their game.

Here are the details.

Step one:

Call Barack Obama at 866-675-2008.
Hit 6 to speak with a campaign volunteer.
Once connected, politely deliver the following message:

Hi, my name is …

I was wondering if Senator Obama, being a believer in equal opportunity and equal rights, could insist that Ralph Nader and other ballot qualified third party candidates be included in the upcoming Presidential debates?

After all, Nader is on 45 state ballots.

And he’s polling well nationwide. And he could help Senator Obama challenge the corporate Republicans.

True, Ralph would critique Senator Obama for his corporate ties also. But isn’t that what democracy is about? Could you please leave this message for the campaign manager? Thank you.

Step two:

E-mail Janet Brown, the executive director of the Commission on Presidential Debates.

Here’s a sample e-mail:

Dear Janet Brown:

Greetings. You must be busy. Preparing for the first Presidential debate this Friday. So, I won’t take much of your time. Just wanted to let you know that the American people were not born yesterday. We know the deal. Take that little private corporation that you run. Controlled by the two corporate parties. And funded by big business. For the purpose of excluding independent minded candidates. Friday, two Wall Street candidates are scheduled to be in the ring. Barack Obama and John McCain. The one candidate who represents the American people, Main Street, if you will, will be on the outside looking in. So, here’s a simple request.
Drop your exclusionary restrictions. And let Ralph Nader into the debates. It will be good for your conscience. Good for the American people. (I believe it was The League of Women Voters that called your corporatized debates “campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity, and honest answers to tough questions.”) And good for democracy. Let the American people have a real debate for once. Main Street vs. Wall Street.

Thank you.

Signed

your name.

Read Full Post »

Please think wiser about the effects of a third party. In regards to the 2000 election, don’t just add 2 to 48 to beat 49; it doesn’t work that way. Suggesting that a third party is a “spoiler” is just plain political bigotry. We all have the right to run for president so under the same logic either we are all spoilers or none of us are.

Speaking with Marx in mind, the progression of government under capitalism is purely economical. The democrat and the republican parties are corporate parties. Since the corporation was given “personhood” in 1886, (Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad) it achieved the same constitution rights that you and I share. This has corrupted our government beyond any measure, criminal wars, torture, economic depression, the list goes on and on.

To break away from corporate and political slavery, we will need to think and vote different this year. He’s not the president we deserve but he’s the president we need, vote Nader.

votenader.org

Read Full Post »

Addressing two major problems when electing the Independent Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader.

First, Nader will need major media attention to reach a large enough audience to even possibly become electable and second, the problem that occurs when the electability of the more likely candidate is reduced by the independent vote thus causing the less favorable candidate to win. (In this case I assume the scenario would be the democrat losing votes to the independent causing the republican to win.)

There is a trick to getting Nader access to a major audience. He would need to do one of two things, either get authorization from the private company that controls the debates which happens to be owned by the democrat and republican parties or he can appeal to another corporation to sponsor a debate, one that can offer an audience that can’t be turned down, as to insure the acceptance of the major parties. Nader has accomplished the latter, he has managed to convince Google to fight the aforementioned corporation for its monopoly over the debates. Now Google has agreed to hold an open debate live on YouTube that will allow multiple parties to participate, as long as the party has at least 10% in the national poll.  (Which is 5% less than what the Dem & Rep owned debates accept, even thought getting it doesn’t necessary insure acceptance) Nader, by the way, has around 6%. That being said, I do believe that there is a big problem with Nader not having enough media coverage, you can see him expressing it when he says buzz-word-phrases that attract media attention but he’s been able to sway Google to help him with this obstacle.

Concerning the second probelm, a two party system which forces us into voting for a party in fear that the other party would be elected is in itself problematic to the concept of democracy. (Which we hold to be conducted by a series of free elections) Furthermore, in denying the possibility of a third party we are condemning ourselves to the polarizing and monopolizing effects of a two party system. I think that in exposing this flaw common sense logic tells us that a two party system is counter intuitive to a democracy.

Read Full Post »

This is in response to the youtube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE06O7lZuPo
Ralph Nader Interview by CSPAN

I recommend everyone to listen to what Ralph Nader has to say. His plans are more effective and progressive than any other candidate. When you look at the options available for such problems as the war in Iraq, Health Care, and the Israel/Palestine conflict, Ralph Nader has superior ideas. His plans begin with subjecting the corporations to the rule of law, demanding that they raise their standards, and removing their constitutional personhood, thus returning the power back to the American people.

On the war in Iraq, do you think that Iraq would be able to use its authority and establish an economy that could support its people if it didn’t have access to the oil in their country? Why are we occupying a territory and forcing its people to give us access to their natural resources? We should take the resources away from these corporations (Exxon, Shell, etc. Who by law have no allegiance to our country our any country) and place them back in the hands of the Iraqi people. Why do you think that there is so much violence in Iraq and furthermore why do you think Al Qaeda’s presence in Iraq grows stronger with each new day, simply because we are stealing from these people. Watch this video and hear what Nader has to say about Iraq; he can have us out in 6 months.

On health care, why are we not arguing for a single payer system? Why after all these years are we now pushing for a universal health care system? We are starting to move to a universal health care system because the corporations are finding it more expensive to manufacture their products here in the US than in other countries due to the high price of health care. So now we have the possibility of getting health care because the corporations see it profitable to do so. So here we are arguing over a broken health care system that is built to make money and not to help the people and the idea of a single payer system is completely off the table. Listen to Nader, he is calling for a single payer system and he has a plan to pay for it.

Concerning the energy crisis and the high price of oil, which we would normally see these as two problems, the ladder can be seen as a solution to the former. The rest of the western world is using this time, where oil is the highest price it has ever been, to invest the surplus of money that is accruing into new energies. Why are we not doing that? As Nader says, we’d have a lot of solar energy if Exxon owned the sun. When you compare the governments of other western countries to our own, we find that they have more social intervention into the market. When you look at the housing crisis and the bailing out of these big corporations (i.e. Fannie Mac and so on) you see that we are naturally moving to a more socialized state, like Germany’s government for instance.

Barack Obama has, like most politicians, told us one thing and did another. Just look at the FISA bill. As a democratic candidate, Obama is the best choice and when you compare him to the republican candidate, McCain, he would definitely make the better president. But why should we settle for the best of the worst? Why should we settle for another corporate candidate, especially when we don’t have to. Let’s get organized. Let’s elect someone for real change, who is not apart of this two party system that has been destroying our democracy.

http://www.votenader.org

read more | digg story

Read Full Post »