Progressives make significant strides in recent elections

It would appear that voters are finally making their voices heard, letting elected officials know they are fed up with conservative extreme politics.  You had to wonder just how long thinking Americans would allow this Bush/Cheney/Rove insanity to go on.  But apparently it is emerging at just the right time for the left, but must be nurtured even more to keep the momentum going. Justine Sarver, executive director of the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, says “…the other side has gone too far.”

One of the most blatant examples is the recall election of Arizona State Sen. Russell Pearce which resulted in his defeat by a Republican moderate.  Pearce was even the Senate President.  There is now consideration to recall Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio, even the forged governor, Jan Brewer.  And in Michigan, state Rep. Paul Scott (R) lost his seat due to opposition to teacher tenure and education funding.  He was also chairman of the House Education Committee.

Also in Michigan, Traverse City residents voted to keep on the books a non-discrimination law prohibiting discrimination for sexual orientation.  Openly gay and lesbian candidates across the country, themselves, achieved success by electing candidates in Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Virginia and New Jersey.  A total of 53 of 75 candidates endorsed by the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund won.

But the biggest loss by conservatives was in Ohio where Gov. John Kasich (R) took a big hit.  It was a bi-partisan effort, including Independents, totaling 60 percent of Ohio voters that defeated the issue to maintain the Governor’s restricted union collective bargaining rights of 360,000 public employees.  Even Kasich, in his first term, said it was time to pause, adding, “You don’t ignore the public.” 

In Mississippi a stupid “personhood” amendment was rejected that declared a fertilized egg a legal person and would have made it illegal for women in the state to use some birth control along with other restrictions.  It almost sounds as if the Catholic Church has infiltrated Mississippi government.  And Maine reinstated the right to register to vote on Election Day rather than a legislative requirement by the Republican governor for two days prior to the election.

But returning to Arizona where the politics have been so bizarre since sham governor Jan Brewer took office, there is energized hope that saner heads and enlivened progressives could prevail in 2012.  I use this state as an example, and as a prototype for the worst state government in the U.S., primarily because I live here.  Also, from my observation, it actually is the worst governed state in the country. 

There is a legislature controlled by Republicans that, with the help of an incompetent pretend governor, does as it pleases, regardless of how it affects the state.  Arizona’s Democratic Party contends that the recent recall of State Sen. Russell Pearce, author of the anti-immigration bill SB1070 and the state’s official bigot, is evidence of a shift from extremist conservative politics in the state.  President Obama has even said Arizona will play a “critical role” in 2012 where his grassroots group Organizing for America has been active.  And they are also focusing on the Hispanic vote by hiring Mexican-Americans to work the Latino community.

The Behavior Research Center said, "The impression of Arizona as a majority conservative state is more a reflection of gerrymandering and the historically superior strength of conservative forces in getting their voters to the polls."  And if you have been following the recent redistricting dispute where mock Gov. Jan Brewer removed the Commission’s Independent member because the new map results favored Democrats, you can understand the gerrymandering charge.

So my point is, if it is possible for progressives to bring around the state of Arizona, at least partially, it is possible for progressives to win across the U.S.  The country will be eyeing the typically important states where election decisions are traditionally made in most elections.  But I bet a lot of people, including myself, will turn their attention to Arizona to see if it continues to qualify as the most politically laughable state in the nation.

Barack Obama at the crossroads

Some are predicting gloom and doom for the President, yet others say he has a good chance in locking up the 270 electoral votes needed to win.  He had 365 in 2010 with nine considered toss up, five leaning Obama, and thirteen solid Obama; but 2012 is likely to be very close.  The site above provides some interesting insights into his win in 2012, and a clear roadmap to what he’s up against next year. 

As an example, solid states like Michigan may prove impossible to reclaim with an unemployment rate there of 11.1 percent.  Nevada, with one of the highest foreclosure rates in the country could now be leaning right.  John Avlon on CNN News tested the theory of top political experts that says “…you can gauge a president's chances of re-election by looking at just a couple of key indicators -- job approval, unemployment and growth in gross domestic product.”  He concludes there is no reason for overconfidence for Mr. Obama.



His approval rating is 45 percent compared to Nixon, Reagan and Bill Clinton who had 49 percent at the same point in their administrations.  The closest unemployment rate to the current 9 percent was with Ronald Reagan at 8.5 percent.  And with this considered, Obama actually stands tall with the 45 percent, along with a personal approval rating of 70 percent.  What the former presidents didn’t have to contend with is today’s home foreclosure market.

One of the President’s biggest problems now is the ongoing European crisis, escalating up and down on almost a daily basis.  Greece gets repaired then Italy starts going down the tube.  Conversely, the two things that Obama has to shout about are the killing of Osama bin Laden, and the death of the dictator Muammar Gaddafi.  But Avlon notes that other figures are against him with American conservatives measured at 40 percent and liberals only 20 percent.

Back to the Electoral College, Chris Cillizza, writing for The Washington Post says Mr. Obama “…still retains several plausible pathways to the 270 electoral votes he needs.”  Cillizza even thinks he can lose important states like Florida, Ohio, Virginia and North Carolina and still win.  Further, the President’s 2010 election win with 365 electoral votes was the largest since Clinton’s 379 in 1996.  And Obama won three states in 2010 that no Democratic president has carried for over 20 years: Indiana, North Carolina and Virginia.

Carrying this further in a USA Today/Gallup Poll, it determined the 12 swing states most likely to decide the outcome of the 2012 election based on their voting histories.  They are: Michigan, Florida, North Carolina and Virginia in the South; Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico in the Mountain West; Iowa, Ohio and Wisconsin in the Midwest; and New Hampshire and Pennsylvania in the Northeast.  I plan to analyze all these states in the future as well as others for characteristics that could be considered positive for Obama.

Indiana, which Obama carried in 2008 now seems to be lost to the GOP.  But Jim Messina, his campaign manager, says that Arizona could be a possibility in 2012.  The recall of Arizona State Sen. Senator Russell Pearce, a Republican, and replaced by a moderate, gives this call credence.  Then you have to consider a sleeping Hispanic population in this state coming alive in 2012.  

On the other hand twice as many Republicans voice an “extremely enthusiastic” attitude for voting next year than Democrats.  This is an inherent gene for the left and if someone doesn’t improve this kind of DNA before next November there will be problems.

Of course it all comes down to who is the GOP candidate that will run against the President, and every expert I have heard from says that is definitely important.  Even with a bunch of Keystone Kops leading into the Republican Primary, there is still a dedicated group of voters on the right that would follow any one of them off the ends of the earth.  However, it looks like it is going to be Mitt Romney and the fact that he is a moderate could be a real challenge to Obama.

Beat the bankers at their own game with the Ultimate Bank Secrecy Account



Grant Hall



I want to tell you about a fascinating man I have known for over six years who has probably forgotten more about privacy than most privacy advocates know.  His name is Grant Hall and he has just published his latest book on the subject: Privacy Crisis Banking; Bank Secrecy Plan & Resource Guide to Protect Identity, Money, and Property.  If you are looking for the ultimate in privacy protection, Grant will show you how it’s done in the volume’s 175 pages. 

If you want to secure your money and property without giving up your Social Security number or other personal information, there is a way.  Grant will also show you how to do your banking, cash checks, even open up a safe deposit box while remaining essentially anonymous.  And his system puts you in a position where your identity cannot be stolen in the future.  There are certain financial institutions that provide this secrecy, which also includes your business, and they can be found in the book.

According to the author, Privacy Crisis Banking “teaches self-reliance and keeps ‘owners’ in control of money, property and businesses.”  With an economy that still hasn’t recovered and a banking system that has historically taken advantage of its customers, plus there have been numerous breaches of security, this gives the free thinking person a way to put their mind at rest over their assets.

Getting inside the book, Grant launches the first chapter with an account of a barter company, Liberty Services that was shut down probably because it emphasized in its offering the devaluation of the dollar and the benefits of barter, when what it offered was a voluntary means of exchange by individuals and businesses.  Proof that your resources are not safe, even when there is no cash involved.

We are told of the massive trolling of our personal data by government and business computers to learn every aspect of our daily activities and lifestyle.  The question of who we are, revealed by IDs like our Social Security numbers, driver licenses and more.  There are personal stories of actual experiences of those seeking this complete secrecy, including some who have used Grant’s system with success.  And each chapter ends with a “Summary” and “Notes.”

If you are worried about what is happening to your private information, particularly in your banking habits, you must read Privacy Crisis Banking.  I guarantee you two things; you will not walk away from its pages without a new appreciation for the value of your personal data, and you will have developed a new candid suspicion of those in whose hands it resides.

Buy from Amazon.com, Barnes & Noble online or your local bookstore.  

Democratic Boston Mayor Thomas Menino wants tougher gun laws

According to Brady Campaign Acting President Dennis Henigan, “The recent multiple shooting in Carson City, Nevada occurred despite the presence of an armed citizen. So did the mass shooting in Tucson.”  In other words this whole concealed-carry concept by the NRA and its boneheaded members is just hogwash.

Along with the other half of the founding Mayors Against Illegal Guns, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Menino is heading to the U.S. Congress to try and convince a bunch of unreasonable conservative gun bubbas—and even some Democrats—In both houses that the loose gun situation is out of control.  Menino and Bloomberg formed this coalition in 2006 and it has now grown to over 500 mayors in 40 states. 

Glock 19

They are asking for an overhaul of the background-check system for gun purchases which allowed such massacres as the one at Virginia Tech which killed 32 people, injuring 17 others, and the most recent in Tucson, Arizona killing 6 and injuring 13, including U.S. Representative Gabby Giffords from Arizona.  They both, known to be mentally ill, easily obtained a Glock 19 to do their dirty work, which emphasizes the need for more regulation.

Mayors Against Illegal Guns is supported by the Campaign to Fix Gun Checks, a non-profit organization to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people.  The group says, “It’s time for common sense reforms to Fix Gun Checks and stem the tide of gun murders that leaves 34 Americans dead every day.”  With Arizona gun laws the loosest in the U.S., it is a wonder there haven’t been more incidents in that powder keg state.

And now a bill approved by The Republican-led House Judiciary Committee in October is expected to go before the full House and be passed as early as today.  Senator Frank R. Lautenberg of New Jersey and Representative Carolyn McCarthy of New York are asking President Obama to veto the bill if it comes to his desk.  The bill would make it easier for people to carry concealed handguns across state lines, observing the laws of their ownership state. 

This would immediately unleash a bunch of gun carrying fanatics from the state of Arizona across the country supported by laws that allow them to do just about anything they chose with their firearms.  People in that state can carry a concealed weapon without having a permit or any education in the handling of a gun.  It’s like buying bread at the local supermarket, only a loaf of bread won’t kill you.  It is lunacy at its highest level.



Mind you, these laws that allow guns on the street in anyone’s hands exist “…despite such evidence as the recent study by a Stanford economist demonstrating that right-to-carry laws do not decrease the overall level of crime and perhaps even increase it.”  You might remember that when Jared Loughner started shooting in Tucson, two gun-carrying cowboys came to the rescue and almost shot each other.

This fact is also supported by findings from the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence which counters the National Rifle Assn. desire to allow gun owners to carry their guns anywhere they want to.  According to the Brady group, “The more lax the gun laws, the more likely that dangerous people will acquire handguns, as a recent report by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence profiling 13 murderers who held concealed-carry permits makes clear.”

The Brady Campaign is also fighting the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011, H.R. 822, sponsored by Congressmen Cliff Stearns (R-FL) and Heath Schuler (D-NC).  They also have a report out featuring the profiles of some of the worst concealed-carry killers including Jared Loughner, “…Paul Michael Merhige, who is charged with killing four family members on Thanksgiving in 2009, and Marqus Hill, who had had his license revoked but got it back and is charged with shooting a man 13 times, killing him.”

The Brady campaign also listed three primary reasons this bill would be dangerous for all.

1.    The legislation would override current state laws.

2.    It would force states to allow untrained visitors with guns like those from Arizona.

3.    New widely varying standards would apply in states with stricter rules.



Vigilante justice we don't need



According to Brady Campaign Acting President Dennis Henigan, “The recent multiple shooting in Carson City, Nevada occurred despite the presence of an armed citizen. So did the mass shooting in Tucson.”  In other words this whole concealed-carry concept by the NRA and its boneheaded members is just hogwash.

The wealthy get wealthier and the poor get poorer

We’ve hit a record in this country cultivating an environment where the poor can proliferate.  In the latest report from the U.S. Census, 1 in 15 people have joined the “poorest poor,” which means their income is less than $5,570, $11,157 for a family of four.  Also revealed is the fact that “…more Hispanics, elderly and working-age poor have fallen into poverty.” 

The 2010 population was 308,745,538 with 46.2 million individuals, or 15 percent, in poverty.  We’re supposed to be the greatest nation in the world but with 6.7 percent of its citizens the poorest poor?  Something’s not right.  However, the U.S. looks good compared with most of the world, until you consider that the majority of these are third-world countries.

 

Robert Moffitt, a professor of economics at Johns Hopkins University said, "There now really is no unaffected group, except maybe the very top income earners."  And since we just can’t seem to shake these recession blues, this trend is likely to stay with us for a while.  Inner-city Black ghettos are turning into Hispanic barrios.  And a sun-belt that has recently experienced prosperity is now seeing poverty emerge.  Around 20.5 million Americans comprise the poorest poor, which is almost 50 percent of those at the poverty level.

There were 40 states plus the District of Columbia that saw the poorest poor rise since 2007.  Not one of the states saw a decrease.  D.C. experienced the highest rate at 10.7 percent, and then Mississippi and New Mexico.  Nevada, surprisingly, had the biggest increase from 4.6 percent to 7 percent.  And an industrial Midwest today continues in the doldrums of extreme poverty.  There shouldn’t be a doubt in anyone’s mind that a huge economic inequity exists.

By ethnicity, the latest Census figures provide a breakdown of those earning less than $15,000 annually.  Whites represent 9.9%, Blacks 21.3%, Asians 11.4%, American Indians 15.9% and Hispanics 14.1%.  This income group represents 6.2 percent of U.S. families. 

When you look at the education attained by Americans age 25 plus, some of these figures aren’t hard to understand.  15.2 percent of the public did not finish high school.  29.2 percent did finish high school but only 17.5 percent went on to get a bachelor’s degree.  Considering the advances in technology, and the fact that many U.S. companies have outsourced the middle to lower level jobs overseas, these are most likely the new entries into the poorest poor population.

It is hard to comprehend how a great country like we live in could have allowed things to get so bad.  With 15 percent of our population in poverty and 6.7 percent representing the poorest of the poor individuals making $5,570 or less, the conditions are ripe for revolution.  The Occupy Movement has made its move and is all about the financial inequities of the American system.  If Occupy can be translated into votes, 2012 may be the start of something new and different in respect to the sharing of the wealth.

DING DONG! The bigot is gone

Racist JT Ready with Russell Pearce

AZ State Sen. Russell Pearce, of course. Beaten out of his office by another Mormon Republican from Mesa, AZ, who said he was going to bring class to the position.  The inference obviously that Pearce had none, which is well known outside the Arizona Tea Party and the ranks of double-digit IQs that support Pearce.  Jerry Lewis, a complete newcomer, received 53.4 percent of the vote to Pearce’s 45.4.  It seems to me eight percentage points represent a mandate the bigotry of the Russell Pearce legacy.

To boot, the man was the Arizona State Senate President, and perhaps one of the most influential politicians in the state’s history.  He also introduced the anti-immigration Bill SB1070, which had its most strict features on illegal aliens struck down by a federal court.  Pearce is also the first officeholder in Arizona to be recalled. 

According to Bloomberg’s BusinessWeek, Earl de Berge of the Phoenix-based Behavior Research Center, a nonpartisan polling company, said “There is a deep dissatisfaction in Arizona for what is viewed as politics in the extreme.”  As a resident of Arizona, I cannot agree with this statement.  From the Governor throughout the Republican side of the State Legislature, there is nothing but extremism apparent.  Just look at the state’s gun laws.  And these people did not get into office without an extremist public electing them.

Rep. Raul Grijalva, a Democrat from Arizona, said, "With Sen. Russell Pearce's defeat in this recall election, everyone who practices the politics of fear and division was put on notice.”  Whether these lawmakers are bright enough to realize this is another thing entirely.  One thing is certain, Arizona pseudo-Gov. Jan Pearce will never get it.  She has vigilantly, virtually all by herself, put the redistricting of the state on hold by removing the Commission’s chairman Colleen Coyle Mathis.

But before leaving the demise of Arizona’s favorite racist despot, it is appropriate to show some last minute dirty tactics of Pearce supporters.  The candidate’s Tea Party supporters launched a deceptive robocall to Hispanic voters to draw them away from opponent Jerry Lewis.  A man with a Spanish accent says:

“Voters beware. If you plan to vote this Tuesday, you should know that both candidates for State Senator, Russell Pearce and Jerry Lewis, are Republicans. The only other candidate, Olivia Cortez was forced to withdraw last month. You can protest this one-sided election by writing in your own candidate.”

And the Tea Party’s Ron Ludders, who commissioned the message, says “This is an educational situation, totally,” adding, “There’s nothing sinister about this.”  Without a doubt, this is the epitome of “Give me a break!”

So at the end of the day we can gloat over one down, one to go.  Next, impeach Arizona’s bogus Gov. Jan Brewer.  Could the country’s meanest Sheriff Joe Arpaio be next?

Ditching your big bank is the way to go

Not just because 650,000 consumers have switched to credit unions since September 29, but because the American public is tired of being manhandled by these behemoths of greed.  The latest stupid move by not-to-bright Bank of America was the instigator of this latest rush away from institutions like them, Wells Fargo, Chase and Citibank.  B of A wanted to charge its customers $5 per month to access their own money by using their debit card.  Other banks thought of it, even tested, but decided no.

Even more have deserted the big guys and moved to smaller banks where service is much better, and they are not so greedy.  The bank dumping movement began officially on November 5, prompting another 40,000 to join credit unions.  This, combined with the larger figure is more than credit unions add in a whole year, expressing the ire of consumers in the U.S.  We switched to a smaller bank a couple of years ago, but they have eventually been acquired by BMO Financial Group of Canada.  We’ll see?

Derivatives time bomb

Occupy Wall Street formed “Dump Your Bank Day” which started on November 8.  The Occupy Movement has been very vocal over the big bank menace citing the consolidations going on for 20 years resulting in a concentration of four large banks.  They are JP Morgan, Citibank, Bank of America and Wells Fargo, and they add up to 40 percent of the total assets of the commercial banking system.  On the other hand there is risk involved in their trading of derivatives.  JP Morgan Chase and Citibank combined hold 54 percent of derivatives contracts.

Investopedia defines derivatives as: “A security whose price is dependent upon or derived from one or more underlying assets. The derivative itself is merely a contract between two or more parties. Its value is determined by fluctuations in the underlying asset. The most common underlying assets include stocks, bonds, commodities, currencies, interest rates and market indexes. Most derivatives are characterized by high leverage.” 

The key here is the term “high leverage.”  Companies in that category are considered to be at some financial risk, in some cases bankruptcy.  So on top of everything else, the extra fees and charges by big banks, they could also tank if the derivatives market goes bad.  Both the above banks think their risks are manageable but Davis Paul, Pres. Of Fiscal Strategies Group, isn’t so sure.  He cites “…the corruption of the culture of commercial lending as banks embrace the trading culture that is central to the derivatives world.”



According to Marcy Gordon writing for the Associated Press, “Federal regulators bowed to pressure from big banks seeking a quick exit from the financial bailout program and did not uniformly apply the government's own conditions set for repaying the taxpayer funds.”  Get this; the banks wanted this quick exit so they could avoid any limits on executive’s compensation.  Taxpayers pay for the bailout and these greedy bastards go home with our money.  No wonder Americans are deserting the big banks in droves.

In all fairness to the system, the taxpayer will recoup the $245 billion invested in banks and will make an additional $20 billion in profits.  But it’s just the arrogance of this industry that has galled the American public as they continue to dump the culprits.