|
FOCUS | Poetic Justice: Romney to Finish Election at 47 Percent |
|
|
Wednesday, 21 November 2012 13:40 |
|
Sargent writes: "When all the votes are counted, could Mitt Romney really end up achieving perfect poetic justice by finishing with 47 percent of the national vote? Yup."
Mitt Romney addresses supporters during a campaign rally, 04/24/12. (photo: Getty Images)

Poetic Justice: Romney to Finish Election at 47 Percent
By Greg Sargent, The Washington Post
21 November 12
hen all the votes are counted, could Mitt Romney really end up achieving perfect poetic justice by finishing with 47 percent of the national vote? Yup. Dave Wasserman of the nonpartisan Cook Political Report says new votes in from Maryland put Romney at 47.56 percent. He predicts with certainty that with all of New York and California counted, Romney will end up below 47.5 percent of the vote.
Rounded, of course, that would put the final tally at 51-47. Anticipating this moment, Markos Moulitsas has inaugurated the 'Romney 47 percent watch.
At risk of piling on, a 47 percent finish would represent a perfect conclusion to the Romney political saga. If Romney ran a campaign of unprecedented dishonesty and lack of transparency, virtually all of it was geared towards misleading people about the true nature of his - and his party's - actual beliefs and governing agenda. This was the case on multiple fronts, from Romney's dissembling about the size of the tax cut he'd give to the rich, to his evasions about the overhaul he and Paul Ryan planned for the safety net, to the obscuring of the massive upward redistribution of wealth represented by the Ryan agenda - the GOP's central governing blueprint for nation's fiscal and economic future.
It was fitting that Romney himself unmasked his own apparent beliefs and the broader ideological implications of the larger GOP agenda and the ideas driving it - in private remarks to those who would likely benefit from his policies most. As Jonathan Chait put it at the time:
This is not a random gaffe, a joke gone bad, or even a terrible brain freeze. It is Romney exposed for espousing a worldview that is at the heart of his party's mania. The idea he summed up at that fund-raiser was a combination of right-wing fever dreams ...the Ayn Randism, the fact-free class warfare, the frantic rage at a changing America. The Republican Party is going down because its candidate was seen advocating exactly the beliefs that make the party so dangerous and repellant.
Romney's widely criticized post-election remarks - in which he claimed Obama won by giving core Dem constituencies gifts - were essentially a reprise of the 47 percent remarks. Romney reiterated in overly blunt terms what many Republicans and conservatives have been saying for years - and got disemboweled by his own party after detailing these views out loud, a fitting coda to his candidacy.
And consider the numbers themselves. The Romney victory was always based on the hope that a whiter-than-2008 electorate would ensure that Obama's victory was a demographic fluke. Yet Obama's constituencies - many of whom make up Romney's fabled 47 percent - turned out to add up to the majority, confirming that these ongoing changes are real and inexorable, a sign of what America is really becoming. If Romney's described electorate - the job creators and the makers of America who were supposed to be enraged at all the moochers and the takers - ends up totalling 47 percent, we will have come full circle.

|
|
Bernie Sanders | Stand With Working Families |
|
|
Wednesday, 21 November 2012 09:14 |
|
Sanders writes: "Most important, in the coming weeks and months, the Democrats must demand that deficit reduction is done in a way that is fair - and not on the backs of the elderly, the children, the sick and the poor."
Senator Bernie Sanders. (photo: Getty Images)

Stand With Working Families
By Bernie Sanders, Open Mike Blog
21 November 12
he Democrats won a major victory on Election Day.
Despite dozens of billionaires spending huge amounts of money to defeat President Barack Obama, he won a crushing victory in the Electoral College and received 3 million more votes than former Gov. Mitt Romney did nationally. Democrats won 25 of 33 seats contested in the Senate and, to everyone's surprise, expanded their majority there by two. They also gained seats in the House.
Now, with this victory behind them, the president and congressional Democrats must make it very clear that they will stand with the middle class and working families of our country. These are the people who, because of the Wall Street-caused recession, have seen a significant decline in their family income. These are the people who worry about whether they can afford health care and whether their kids will be able to attend college. The Democrats in the House and Senate must stand with these people - not the millionaires and billionaires who are doing just fine.
Most important, in the coming weeks and months, the Democrats must demand that deficit reduction is done in a way that is fair - and not on the backs of the elderly, the children, the sick and the poor. At a time when real unemployment remains close to 15 percent, we must also focus on creating the millions of jobs that our people need.
In America today, we have the most unequal distribution of wealth and income of any major country on Earth. Incredibly, the top 1 percent owns 42 percent of the nation's wealth while the bottom 60 percent owns just 2.3 percent. In the last study done on income distribution, we learned that 93 percent of all new income generated between 2009 and 2010 went to the top 1 percent while the bottom 99 percent split the remaining 7 percent. This extraordinary unfairness is not only morally reprehensible, it is bad economics. It will be very difficult to create the jobs that our people need when so many Americans have little or no money to spend.
Congress must pass legislation to create a major jobs program to put millions of people back to work rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure. Throughout our country, we need a massive effort to improve our roads, bridges, water and wastewater systems, airports, rail, broadband and cellphone service. Rebuilding our infrastructure makes us more productive and internationally competitive - and creates millions of new jobs.
In terms of deficit reduction, let us not forget that in 2001, when Bill Clinton left office, this country had a $236 billion surplus. As a result of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that were unpaid for, huge tax breaks for the rich, a Medicare prescription drug program put on the credit card and a significant decline in federal revenues because of the recession, we now have a $1 trillion deficit and a $16 trillion national debt.
Congress must address the deficit situation and the fiscal cliff, but we must do it in a way that is fair. At a time when the wealthiest people in this country are doing extremely well and their effective tax rates are low (think Romney), the people on top must pay their fair share of taxes to help us deal with the deficit. We must also end the outrageous loopholes that allow one out of four large profitable corporations to pay nothing in federal corporate income taxes. Further, it is absurd that current tax policy allows the wealthy and large corporations to avoid paying over $100 billion a year in federal taxes because they stash their money in tax havens in the Cayman Islands and elsewhere.
We must also take a hard look at wasteful spending in the Defense Department, where we now spend almost as much money as the rest of the world combined. Significant savings can be found at other federal agencies, too.
What we must not do, however, is move toward a balanced budget on the backs of the elderly, the children, the sick and the poor. Sadly, that is the approach that virtually all Republicans and some Democrats are advocating. As the founder of the Defending Social Security Caucus, I look forward to working with other members of Congress, the AFL-CIO, senior and disability groups and the vast majority of people in our country who want to prevent cuts in Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, education and other programs vitally important to the working families of America.
In my view, if the Republicans continue to play an obstructionist role, the president should get out of the Oval Office and travel the country. If he does that, I believe that he will find that there is no state in the country, including those that are very red, where people believe that it makes sense to continue giving huge tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires while cutting Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. I have a strong feeling that when large numbers of constituents all across this country start calling and emailing their senators and members of Congress about this issue, the American people will win this fight.
The good news is that we are already beginning to see some Republicans make thoughtful comments showing they understand that elections have consequences. Bill Kristol, the conservative commentator and Weekly Standard editor, said Sunday that the Republican Party should accept new ideas, including the much criticized suggestion by Democrats that taxes be allowed to go up on the wealthy. "It won't kill the country if we raise taxes a little bit on millionaires," he said on "Fox News Sunday." "It really won't, I don't think. I don't really understand why Republicans don't take Obama's offer."
Kristol is right. At a time when the gap between the very rich and everybody else is growing wider, common sense and justice require the people who are doing extremely well financially to help us in a significant way to reduce deficits.

|
|
|
Make Thanksgiving an Opportunity to Support Walmart Workers |
|
|
Wednesday, 21 November 2012 09:06 |
|
GOOD reports: "So this Black Friday, pledge to not shop at Walmart and instead find an action or event near you to show your support for striking Walmart store and warehouse workers! "
Son of a Walmart worker walks the picket line (photo: Making Change)

Make Thanksgiving an Opportunity to Support Walmart Workers
By GOOD Magazine
21 November 12
almart has many distinctions. It is the largest corporation in the world-in 2010, Walmart brought in $408 billion. It is the largest retailer in the world. It is the largest retailer of food in the world. It's also one of the worst employers and corporate citizens in the world-not only to its direct store employees, but also to the subcontracted warehouse workers that ensure that Walmart's goods make it to the stores on time.
The average hourly wage of a Walmart store employee is $8.81. Walmart store employees usually aren't able to work full-time and can't afford the premiums for the health insurance offered by the company. So Walmart actually tells its employees how to apply for Medicaid and publicly funded health insurance for their kids. While you enjoy your Thanksgiving meal with family, Walmart employees will be at their store preparing to open at 8 p.m. that night.
For Walmart warehouse workers in Southern California and outside Chicago, low pay is also a major problem. Often, the warehouse workers are paid by "production"-meaning, for each truck that they unload, they are paid a set rate. One worker told the Food Chain Workers Alliance that he was paid $62 to unload a truck-that took him a day and a half, so the $62 did not even cover minimum wage per hour. Injuries and illnesses are also common, as they are for Walmart store employees.
Walmart store workers and warehouse workers have been organizing to demand respect on the job and improved wages and working conditions, and they have won some improvements. But many of these workers have also been retaliated against for organizing. They have had their hours cut, schedules changed, and some workers have even been fired. Walmart has even attempted to silence them by filing charges against the union UFCW that is supporting the workers. But they're not giving up-these workers are going out on strike.
So this Black Friday, pledge to not shop at Walmart and instead find an action or event near you to show your support for striking Walmart store and warehouse workers!
This Thanksgiving, you can show your thanks to the millions of workers in the U.S. and around the world by celebrating International Food Workers Week with us.
GOOD is urging the community to resist the urge to volunteer around the holidays-the time of year when food banks and soup kitchens have more helping hands than they need. Join in volunteering smarter and commit to serving on a day when the need is far greater.

|
|
FOCUS | SEC Rocked by Lurid Sex-and-Corruption Lawsuit |
|
|
Tuesday, 20 November 2012 13:15 |
|
Taibbi writes: "Move over, adulterous generals. It might be time to make way for a new sexual rats'nest - at America's top financial police agency, the SEC."
Matt Taibbi. (photo: Rolling Stone)

SEC Rocked by Lurid Sex-and-Corruption Lawsuit
By Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone
20 November 12
ove over, adulterous generals. It might be time to make way for a new sexual rats'nest – at America's top financial police agency, the SEC.
In a salacious 77-page complaint that reads like Penthouse Forum meets The Insider meets the Keystone Kops, one David Weber, the former chief investigator for the SEC Inspector General's office, accuses the SEC of retaliating against Weber for coming forward as a whistleblower. According to this lawsuit, Weber was made a target of intramural intrigues at the agency (which has a history of such retaliation) after he came forward with concerns that his bosses may have been spending more time copulating than they were investigating the SEC.
Weber vs. the SEC: The Full Complaint
Weber claims that in recent years, while the SEC Inspector General's office has been attempting to investigate the agency's seemingly-negligent responses in such matters as the Bernie Madoff case and the less-well-known (but nearly as disturbing) Stanford Financial Ponzi scandal, two of the IG office's senior officials – former Inspector General David Kotz and his successor, Noelle Maloney – were sleeping together.
Weber also claims that Kotz was also having an affair with a lawyer representing a key group of Stanford victims, a Dr. Gaytri Kachroo. Where the story gets really strange is where Weber claims that Maloney last year refused to meet with Kachroo as part of the Stanford investigation. By then, Kotz had stepped down as SEC IG and Maloney had replaced him as Acting IG. The complaint describes Weber confronting Maloney over the issue, asking why she wouldn't meet with the lawyer representing a key group of Stanford victims.
Maloney asked Weber to close the door to her office. Maloney told Weber that she would deny the following conversation if Weber were to repeat it.
Maloney then said that, "David [Kotz] was fucking that lady . . ." Maloney stated that Kachroo had received special treatment. Maloney even questioned whether the OIG would have ever opened an investigation into the SEC's oversight over the Court-Appointed Receivership in SEC v. Stanford.
The Weber lawsuit is the latest chapter in an ongoing drama that began when Kotz stepped down last January amid not-world-shaking ethics questions (including, of all things, receiving Philadelphia Eagles tickets from a financial adviser). Subsequently, however, an investigation by the U.S. Postal Service Inspector General David Williams concluded more seriously that Kotz violated rules by overseeing investigations involving people with whom he had "personal relationships."
Weber's complaints, made early last year, were apparently the impetus for that Williams investigation. If what happened to Weber subsequently was retaliation, it didn't take long. Weber was placed on leave in May after being accused of being a "personal threat" who wanted to bring a gun into the office. The "gun" incident was highly publicized, and Weber was ridiculed in the media (sample from the Atlantic Wire: "Do You Really Need a Gun to Police the SEC?").
Weber was fired on October 31st. Apparently he has decided not to take the firing quietly. "When David Weber began to uncover the depth of dysfunction at the SEC, they fired him," his attorney Cary Hansel said. "He has no intention of being silenced by threats and false allegations."
The filing of this lawsuit now by Weber officially begins the raging clusterfuck portion of the story, as he and his lawyers are releasing lurid details not only about Kotz and Maloney, but about a host of other SEC and SEC IG officials. It's very strong stuff: the only things missing from this lawsuit are tales of SEC officials running white-slavery rings and snorting brown-brown off the corpses of strippers with West African rebels.
There are, for instance, allegations that officials handed out SEC contracts to buddies at influential Beltway consulting firms, claims that sexual harassment cases were covered up and accusations that the SEC failed to properly screen contractors who were given full access to SEC databases (it cites an example of one contractor who was on early parole from a 10-year narcotics bid in Virginia). The suit also alleges that the SEC security chief, William Fagan, "watched the video feed from security cameras outside of the [Inspector General's] suite, in order to determine the identities of . . . potential whistleblowers."
Perhaps most crazily, however, the suit alleges major security violations. In one section, Weber claims that SEC investigators took sensitive, highly-protected system data from financial exchanges like the NYSE – systems so carefully protected that they have to be "air gapped," i.e. not connected to the internet – and loaded them on unencrypted laptops before flying to Vegas to attend a "Black Hat" convention for security specialists and hackers. From the suit:
Many government and law enforcement officials who attend the "Black Hat" conference register under aliases, keeping their identities and employers secret. However, the SEC staff who attended, with unencrypted laptops containing sensitive exchange information, registered under their own names and identified their employer. Walking around this convention with a name tag and, regardless of name tag, registered as an SEC IT information security examiner, is the equivalent of wearing a giant target on one's back.
Reassuring!
It's hard to say how all of this will shake out. Certainly, from a P.R. standpoint, it'll be ugly for the SEC. One other storyline to follow: If the Weber retaliation claims are true, they fall within an ongoing and increasingly disturbing pattern of federal whistleblowers who have come forward and experienced reprisals themselves instead of having their claims investigated properly.
Another story to follow is the possibility that the SEC Inspector General's office in recent years was weakened or compromised by these sexual scandals in any way. If all this kink was common knowledge within the agency, it is not hard to imagine that OIG investigations into things like the Madoff mess might have had their momentum slowed by internal politics.
Anyway, crazy stuff, more to come down the line. SEC spokesman John Nester by the way had no comment on the story today, except to say: "We look forward to filing our response with the court."

|
|