Obama takes Arizona in 2012. Myth or potential reality?

A recent Rocky Mountain poll says that as of today, it would happen.  President Obama leads Republican Mitt Romney by 45 percent to 40 percent.  Herman Cain and rick Perry both come in at 38 percent.  The way things are going in the GOP right now, and if the President continues his forceful support of his jobs bill, this could be a nationwide trend in the near future.  Although the Occupy Phoenix turnout was only around 1,000, for the first time progressives have made themselves heard in Arizona.

Did you know that Arizona’s legislature was considered the most conservative in the nation last year?  Also the most farcical considering its political blunderings.  But it looks like states east and north are putting Arizona to shame in 2011 with their conservative fanaticism.  I am talking about Alabama and South Dakota.  Arizona got its first place in 2010 with the rash of stupid gun laws and the bigoted anti-immigration bill SB1070, authored by State Sen. Russell Pearce.

Due to the 2010 election, state legislatures across the country had more Republicans than anytime since 1928.  This esteemed body of racists produced a total of 1,592 bills connected to immigration.  The granddaddy, of course, was passed in xenophobic Arizona.  Other states like unenlightened Tennessee now prevents public school teachers from helping students understand theories such as evolution and global warming.

The conservatives have obviously had the momentum, but this radicalism, along with corporate greed and an inept Congress, has now awakened the progressives from their long sleep.  The Occupy movement is the best example, and hopefully this will translates into votes in 2012.  Michael Moore said Mr. Obama’s only hope for re-election was the Occupy Movement.  I don’t agree, but Moore also said he must come out immediately in a more forceful way for the left and I agree with this 100 percent.

Another very interesting point in the poll is that the President picked up 50 percent of Arizona’s Independent voters against Romney, Cain and Terry, with their showing of 29 percent, 33 percent and 26 percent, respectively.  If Independents in the most conservative state in the country have decided that Obama is the best choice in 2012, still over one year from the election, what can democrats expect from their stronghold states and those that are left-leaning?  It depends entirely on just how hard we work for the votes.

Think your personal data is safe? Think again

I spent 35 years in the junk mail industry selling your names and personal data, making a lot of money doing it.  That’s the reason companies are so anxious for you to reply to their offers, asking you to “tell them all about yourself.”  All about yourself garners over $4 billion annually for junk mailers and data brokers who hawk your private information like any other commodity.  Years ago when I started in the business, security was at the bottom of the priority list.  Profit was number one.

This has changed in the last few years with the number of personal data breaches soaring, and identity theft becoming the top consumer complaint according to the Federal Trade Commission.  The top five states in 2010 were Florida, Arizona, California, Georgia and Texas.  South Dakota was last.  You can see the full FTC report here.  The largest age group hit was 20 to 29, followed by 30 to 39, then 40 to 49.  Those age 60 plus surprisingly accounted for only 13 percent.

And then there was the massive hack into RSA SecurID tags in March of this year.  RSA provides additional security to 40 million customers to prevent unauthorized access to their data systems.  RSA’s SecurID tags are a two-factor authentication solution that provides additional security to its clients.  This includes, along with the normal username and password, a key fob or token in randomized code that must also be entered.

The hackers could now possess the keys to circumvent companies’ database protection.

RSA described the attack as an “advanced persistent threat” (APT), an approach that involves “…patient, skilled, well-funded attackers…”  It was carried out in three stages.  First, “phishing” emails are sent to employees of the target company.  In RSA’s case, one opened the message and then opened an attached Excel file.  Bingo, malware installed through the backdoor. 

Second, the hacker, in control of the employee’s computer, steals his or her passwords and uses them to enter other systems where sensitive data is housed.  Three, extracting files from RSA to a hosting provider’s hacked machine, the data is then downloaded to the hacker. 

The security industry believes there have been other victims, companies not willing to talk openly like RSA.  Those affected by the RSA breach include giants like Amazon, Google, Facebook, Yahoo and Microsoft.  Other large corporations were Charles Schwab, Freddie Mac, Wells Fargo, Intel and IBM.  Government agencies named were the General Services Administration and the IRS.

Security analyst Brian Krebs said: “The sheer number of corporations mentioned in the list proves that no one is safe from attack.”  He added: “That’s why these attacks are called ‘advanced persistent threats.’  They often carry on for years without anyone knowing.  But RSA says they feel no damage has been done to the best of their knowledge, and some of its client companies may have fended off the attacks with no damage done.  You can see a list of all the companies involved here.

There is a treasure trove of personal data in this list which could yield the bad guys just about any information they wanted on most individuals in the U.S.  And this is only the beginning.  The key fobs or tokens were on the Internet underground within hours, and many of us won’t know for months, perhaps even years, if our private information is going to be stolen.

Read more here and here.

If the 1% buy elections, the 99% must cancel that with their votes

The Center for Media and Democracy’sPR Watch says, “…the top one percent are playing an increasingly outsized role in American elections.”  My simple answer to that is to offset this influence with the 99 percent that can out contribute and vote out the congressional culprits that are taking it under the table. 

Yes, that’s exactly what it is when you buy votes, no matter how the contribution was made.  We’re all sick and tired of the stock answer from aides—almost never from the elected official—that the donation of money to his or her campaign has nothing to do with the Senator’s or Representative’s votes.  BS!

This becomes even more bizarre when you consider many of these politicians and their aides, when leaving office, slip right into high-paying lobbyist positions in Washington, as the following video illustrates.

This increased influence was made possible by the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision, and is one of the primary factors fueling the Occupy movement nationwide.  PR Watch accuses a CEO of the Variety Wholesalers dimestore discount chain headquartered in North Carolina of buying that state.  “The Republican agenda in North Carolina is really Art Pope's agenda,” says Marc Farinella, a Democratic political consultant.

Thanks to the Citizens United decision, Super PACs can now raise unlimited funds from corporations, unions and individuals, using this huge storehouse of cash against federal candidates.  PR Watch says this decision proves that “money is speech” and that in 2012 money will overwhelmingly come from the 1 percent.  Unless…the 99 percent kicked in say a $5 donation, $1 for low income households, for their progressive candidate of choice.  Than go out and vote.

This has become necessary because in 90 percent of political races, the one who raises the most money wins.  That’s why the folks like those in the Occupy movement, plus all good progressives out there, must take a direct approach to the 2012 elections and support the left with both money and votes.  And if you need good reason to get on the progressive band wagon, let me tell you more about that 1 percent.

The figure includes 1.4 million households that earn nearly 17 percent of U.S. income and pay approximately 37 percent of its income tax.  Their collective adjusted gross income is $1.3 trillion and the average income is $960,000.  This is the group whose incomes have soared while the middle-class deteriorates.  And the higher up in the income categories you look, the higher the gains.  It is one thing if at least we are all moving in a positive direction, but this is clearly class favoritism.

It is time to re-think the philosophy of share-the-wealth, or those without will find another way to take it back.

On the good ship Emma Maersk/Wal-Mart deadheading to China

It’s another one of those misinformed emails forwarded around the world designed to inflame the population over an issue that really isn’t an issue at all.  The subject is the Danish built ship, the Emma Maersk, whose home port is Taarbaek, Denmark, and which is lauded as the largest container ship ever built.  The non-issue is that Wal-Mart fills this behemoth with goods in China that are eventually delivered in the U.S., and the ship deadheads back to China empty.

The inference of the email is that all we do is import from China and do no exporting at all.  This is not true.  Although there was a trade deficit with China in 2010 of $273 billion, we did export $92 billion in U.S. goods to China in that year, which was a 32.2 percent increase over the prior year.  The complaint of the email should have been that the U.S., both government and private business, aren’t doing enough to balance this deficit.  Nobody cares if the Emma Maersk deadheads back to its origination; that loss is borne by the shipping company.

The email I received said the message was the “ship” and was in no way meant to be a political statement.  The sender begged for recipients not to reply about this being “political.”  Then, after several beautiful color pictures with specifications on this monstrosity, the email ends with an “Editorial Comment” that drips with the political message we were promised in the beginning there wouldn’t be.  As usual, we are urged to forward the email, which I never do.

There is a tag line: BE AMERICAN ~ BUY AMERICAN.  I not only agree with this slogan; my wife and I also make a concerted effort to buy local from businesses in our area.  But I don’t feel un-American when I do buy foreign goods, like the Honda Odyssey we just purchased.  It was just what we wanted and had the best reputation of all the mini-vans on the market.  And it was probably built in this country using American laborers, and at least some parts manufactured in the U.S.

Now, more about that trade deficit of $273 billion.  There is one good reason, although it should not be a crutch not to insist on more exports to China.  The American public wants inexpensive merchandise, cheap if you will.  That’s why the most popular and profitable retail outlets are stores like Costco, Target, and, yes, Wal-Mart.  China can produce these products at a cost considerably less than U.S. business, and whatever you think about the overseas labor situation, there is an enormous market in the U.S. for cheap goods.

The editorial comment also blames the jobs crisis on “empty containers shipped back to China.”  This is absurd.  The current jobless situation was caused by the lack of regulation of the financial community by Geo. W. Bush’s administration, which laid the groundwork for the financial meltdown, and the decimation of the housing market.  You can also blame big business for its practice of outsourcing jobs overseas, which also took flight under GWB.  Not empty Wal-Mart containers headed for China.

The Internet created an uncalled-for monster when it developed email that allows misinformation like this to circulate freely.  Our forefathers might just groan a little in considering something like this 1^st Amendment worthy.

Why can’t Congress just get along?

It’s not my headline.  I borrowed it from Ed Hornick of CNN, and I hope he doesn’t mind.  I tried…but there is no better way to say it.  It’s a question almost everyone is asking themselves, even the President of the United States, but no one has come up with an answer.  Mr. Hornick has written an excellent article on the issue using Mr. Obama’s American Jobs Act as the nucleus for discussion.  It isn’t a pretty picture.  The author calls the underhanded moves by the Republicans just more “political theatre.

I have done several articles on this dysfunctional body of bunglers you can see by searching “Congress” above.  The most recent illustrates the amount of confidence the public has in that branch of government.  “The American public has basically dismissed the U.S. Congress according to a new Washington Post/ABC News poll,” posted on Oct. 13, reveals that only 14 percent of the public support this Congress, lower than just before the 1994, 2006 and 2010 elections, when the majority party was on the verge of losing power in the House.

 

In a vote last Tuesday that was apparently meaningless except to prove that the GOP and a couple of Democrats still won’t pass any bill presented by the President.  Now the Dems can use that against Republicans in 2012, but not without the latter claiming the Dems did it just for partisan spite.  Pathetic, says John Avlon, an Independent and CNN political contributor.  Avlon cites other divided governments that have worked together, which continues to give credence to the concept that the GOP just wants to get rid of Mr. Obama.

 

The jobs bill, opposed by the Republicans in its entirety, due primarily to the 5.6 percent millionaire tax, could pass in parts due to partisan agreement.  Does that mean the President will take everything he can get, then, when the obstructionist-right pooh-poohs the tax raise, the Dems tell the American public in 2012 the GOP doesn’t love you like we do?  There has to be a better way to convince the masses that the party of big business just doesn’t give a damn about them.

 

Avlon says the Republicans’ record of being the “party of no” has moved from just being a slogan to reality.  They are voting against legislation simply because it came from the President.  Political science professor, Gary Jacobson, at the University of California, San Diego, thinks the GOP ploy is “pretty transparent.”  Why would the Republicans want to decrease unemployment before the 2012 election?  Duh.  This places everything mouthed by Speaker Boehner, Sen. McConnell and their henchmen in the category of pure crap.

 

Especially McConnell’s continuous bellowing about Obama’s American Jobs Act being just a re-run of the 2009 Recovery Act, which he claims didn’t work.  Not so, according to the Congressional Budget Office, which claims it created or supported millions of jobs, keeping the unemployment rate from rising another 2 points.  The Recovery Act was supporting up to 3.6 million jobs in 2010, 2.9 million in 2011.  Moody’s Analytics says the American Jobs Act will add 2 points to GDP growth, add 1.9 million jobs, and cut unemployment 1 percentage point.

So why can’t Congress get along?  Maybe it should take its lead from the animal world where opposites do attract…like the following slideshow suggests:

More bizarre Arizona politics

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer for President…well, not exactly

The right leaning Arizona Republic newspaper commented how Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer had become quite popular on the political speaker circuit with attendees paying $150 to hear her, another $250 to get their picture taken with her.  OK.  In Arizona, at least, this woman has trouble putting two sentences together that make sense, so she must have one hell of a teleprompter on the road.  The paper says she is joined by other “GOP heavy hitters Sarah Palin, Condoleezza Rice and Michele Bachmann.”  Yeah, sure.

Actually, the newspaper is touting Brewer as a “vice-presidential hopeful;” the president thing was my idea.  Sorta like parody in the extreme.  Apparently some bloggers desperate for attention are throwing this idea around, and that should certainly draw the attention of progressives who would love to see her on the ticket with Rick Perry.  They could probably outdo the comedy team of Dean Martin and Jerry Lewis.  Possibly even Laurel and Hardy.

James King, writing for the Phoenix New Times says it is coffee spitting hilarity, if you read the Republic headline early in the morning with your first cup.  King did a poll at the end of his article asking, “Could Jan Brewer really become Vice President Jan Brewer?”  The voting answers were: “Yes,” “No” and “Kill me now.”  Yes and No pulled 7.2 percent and 26.3 percent, respectively.  Kill me now pulled a walloping 66.5 percent.  It really says something when you’d rather join the deceased than live with Jan Brewer in Washington.

During these jaunts around the country Brewer is also promoting her new book, which raises the question, who is paying travel expenses?  It seems that her “reputation” is enough for the groups where she is speaking to pick up the tab.  Although it isn’t on her schedule as far as I know, I’ll bet the Comedy Club in Los Angeles would love to have her act.  Sarah Palin did the foreword to Brewer’s book, which leads me to the following scenario.

There they are, Thelma and Louise (Brewer and Palin) on the South Rim of the Grand Canyon about a half mile from the bluff in their convertible Edsel.  Behind them is a group of discontents that have read both Palin’s and Brewer’s books, chasing the pair.  The Thelma and Louise wannabes, look at each other, make their decision, and with books held high, drive right off the cliff.  And suddenly, all is well in Alaska, Arizona and the rest of the country.

But the coverage of Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer would not be complete without talking about her brain dead period on TV of 13 seconds where she looks as if she doesn’t even know where or who she is.  She does recover artfully after the embarrassing lapse of a double-digit IQ with, “We have did what was right for Arizona.”  You can see the video below.

Occupy Movement is about the rights of all Americans

It is the right to have an equal share of the American pie and enjoy the benefits of a lifestyle that is affordable because we earned it and continue to work for it.  When this right is threatened by big business and the wealthy, whose greed have so far denied a sharing of the wealth, people rise up in revolution.  And that is what the Occupy Movement is all about.  There is no need to dissect this struggle by the mainstream media for a central meaning.  

The Huff Post exclaims that a “confused” media is calling for the protesters to narrow everything down to “one specific demand.”  It’s the “rights” stupid.  That covers just about every faction of Occupy from an end to corporate greed to the needs of gays and lesbians.  But the HP goes on to appease the mainstream media with a listing of why the demonstrators are criticizing the system.  

Herbert Hoover

The GOP wants fewer restrictions on big corporations, yet wants to repeal Roe v. Wade that would restrict a woman’s reproductive rights.  We witnessed the insistence by a group of racial bigots for President Obama to produce his long-form birth certificate, but wouldn’t do the same of a Republican like Rick Perry.  We saw the banks get bailed out with our tax dollars, then reward their CEOs with multimillion dollar bonuses.  We observe where the police are more likely to arrest Occupy protesters than a Baptist Church group that pickets soldiers funerals.

And finally, we live in a nation where our government makes more opportunities available to big business than to the individual American. 

HP makes two points that demonstrate both the strength of the Occupy Movement and its substance.  First, the demonstrators make no demands of the institutions in control because they are rallying to diminish and modify the power held by those institutions.  Second, even though all the protests revolve around rights, there are still a number of complaints of everyday citizens that make up the whole.

Here's a video of Keith Olbermann expressing the distress of the occupy movement:

In another Huff Post article, they cite the fact that Occupy protesters are hitting the mark with millions in this country who are upset over such a “One-sided economic recovery.”  It sounds to me like they are echoing Howard Beale’s famous line from the 1976 movie Network: “I’m mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore.”  As Rev. Al Sharpton said of the movement earlier, it’s all about economic inequity.

It was Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, who, trying to avert the disaster of another Republican, Herbert Hoover, used millions of borrowed dollars to bail out the banking system.  Hoover’s administration’s policies led to another financial calamity that had to be rescued by Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt.  But when Bernanke failed to attach any restrictions to those loans, the banks simply sat on the money and the economy continued to spiral down.   Yes, that’s what the Occupy Movement is angry about.

I urge you to read the above two Huff Post articles, as well as two of my previous posts here and here.