RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
Neoliberalism's Deadly Experiment Print
Sunday, 23 October 2016 08:09

Rector writes: "Corporate media coverage has ignored the relationship between the water crisis in Flint and ongoing mass water shutoffs in Detroit. More broadly, it has obscured the role of neoliberal restructuring in undermining one of the nation's largest water systems, and in leaving over one hundred thousand people without running water in a state surrounded by the Great Lakes."

The Detroit Water March on July 18, 2014. (photo: National Nurses United)
The Detroit Water March on July 18, 2014. (photo: National Nurses United)


Neoliberalism's Deadly Experiment

By Josiah Rector, Jacobin

23 October 16

 

In Michigan, privatization and free-market governance has left 100,000 people without water.

ver the past year, media reports and op-eds have examined the lead poisoning disaster in Flint, Michigan, from a variety of angles. Some focus on Michigan’s emergency manager laws, which the Republican-dominated legislature has used to suspend democracy in majority-African-American cities, including Flint, Detroit, Pontiac, Highland Park, and Benton Harbor.

Others focus on the larger issue of lead pipes and decaying infrastructure, or the criminal negligence of Governor Rick Snyder and his administration. Still others note that the long history of housing discrimination in Flint, and the racist application of emergency manager laws, help explain why the majority of the poisoning victims are African American (although they include many working-class whites).

Corporate media coverage, however, has ignored the relationship between the water crisis in Flint and ongoing mass water shutoffs in Detroit. More broadly, it has obscured the role of neoliberal restructuring in undermining one of the nation’s largest water systems, and in leaving over one hundred thousand people without running water in a state surrounded by the Great Lakes.

Since 2000, state-appointed emergency managers in Detroit, Highland Park, Flint, and Pontiac have outsourced key functions of their water departments to private companies, while ramping up water shutoffs on low-income households. Since 2013, when Republican governor Rick Snyder placed Detroit under an emergency manager, the Detroit Water and Sewage Department (DWSD) has shut off water for over one hundred thousand residents, provoking condemnation from the United Nations Human Rights Council.

Public health experts have also said that the mass shutoffs will increase infectious disease and infant mortality in Detroit. Meanwhile, even after its lead-contaminated water became a national scandal, Flint has continued to shut off water for residents unable or unwilling to pay for poisoned water.

Whether from shutoffs, contamination, or both, so many poor and working-class urban residents in Michigan lack water to properly bathe, clean, or flush their toilets. Why are so many people unable to use tap water in a state bordering the Great Lakes, the largest group of freshwater lakes on earth?

Michigan’s water crisis is rooted in the hollowing out of the public sector over the past three decades, which emergency manager laws have accelerated.

Between 1977 and 2010, DWSD was under an EPA consent decree for Clean Water Act violations. Judge John Feikens, an arrogant racist and longtime opponent of school desegregation, recommended Victor Mercado to head DWSD in 2002. Mercado was a former vice president of Thames North America (an offshoot of Thames Water, privatized by Margaret Thatcher in 1989) and United Water (a subsidiary of the French multinational Suez).

In 2003, United Water took over Atlanta’s water system, with disastrous results. In Detroit, Mercado cut DWSD’s maintenance and repair staff by 13 percent, and accelerated the outsourcing of unionized jobs to private contractors. This process continued under Mercado’s successors, culminating in 2012 when DWSD signed a contract with EMA, Inc. that included plans to lay off 81 percent of DWSD’s staff, leading to a strike by AFSCME Local 207.

While Mercado laid off unionized workers and illegally rigged bids with private contractors, water rates in Detroit more than doubled. At the same time, as a result of welfare reform, the number of recipients of cash assistance in Wayne County fell from 198,000 in 1995–96 to 32,613 in 2003, and to 15,238 by 2013.

As part of welfare reform, Republican governor John Engler eliminated the Vendor Pay program in 2002, which had assisted welfare recipients with water and other utility bills. Overnight, tens of thousands of low-income people enrolled in the Vendor Pay program, many of them disabled and elderly, were at risk for water shutoffs.

This problem was most severe in Highland Park, the birthplace of Ford’s Model T. After Highland Park’s tax base collapsed in the 1990s, following the relocation of Chrysler’s headquarters to suburban Auburn Hills, Governor Engler appointed corporate accountant Ramona Pearson as emergency manager in 2001. To fill gaping budget holes, Pearson closed schools, libraries, and community centers, while jacking up Highland Park’s water rates to three times the national average, even though over half the residents lived below the federal poverty line. (These events are described in the Liz’s Miller’s excellent 2007 documentary The Water Front).

While downsizing the Highland Park Water Plant to four employees, Pearson began negotiations to sell the plant to the Rothchild Wright Group in 2004. Pearson only dropped these proposals under pressure from daily protests organized by the Michigan Welfare Rights Organization and Highland Park Human Rights Coalition, led by veteran activists like Maureen Taylor and the late General Baker.

The water crisis in Michigan is also intertwined with the subprime mortgage meltdown, which is closely related to financial deregulation. In 2005–7, Detroit had the highest rate of subprime mortgage foreclosures in the United States. While increasingly deregulated banks were aggressively marketing adjustable-rate subprime mortgages to working-class African Americans in Detroit, they were also selling risky financial instruments to the city government. The Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 allowed the swaps market to metastasize from $180 billion in 1998 to $6 trillion in 2004 to $57 trillion by the summer of 2008.

In 2005, during this “wild west” period for predatory lenders, Detroit entered into a $1.4 billion dollar deal with UBS AG and Merrill Lynch Capital Services (later acquired by Bank of America). The deal included two layers of speculative financial instruments, one of which was an “interest rate swap” to fund DWSD. The swap deal constituted a bet that interest rates would rise. After interest rates plummeted as a result of the 2008 crash, DWSD was forced to pay $537 million in swap termination payments to banks.

In order to pay the termination fees, DWSD increased water rates, and took out $489 million in further bond debt in 2012. That year, Bloomberg reported that “debt service has climbed to more than 40 percent of revenue” at DWSD. As a result, nearly half of Detroiters’ water payments were going to pay debt service to banks, inflated by the banks’ predatory swap deal. In April 2013, ongoing DWSD rate increases provided a public rationale for Flint’s emergency manager, Ed Kurtz, to switch from DWSD to the Flint River, although the actual reasons remain murky.

Emergency manager legislation has only exacerbated these problems. In 2012, 52 percent of Michigan voters and 82 percent of Detroit voters struck down Public Act 4. This legislation, signed by Governor Snyder in 2011, expanded the authority of emergency managers to unilaterally break public-sector union contracts, and even lock elected officials out of city hall and council chambers and freeze email accounts. Empowered by the new law, Detroit Public Schools emergency manager Robert Bobb laid off all of the district’s unionized teachers in 2011, and proposed to increase class sizes to sixty.

Immediately after voters rejected Public Act 4, Snyder signed a replacement bill, Public Act 436, which included a provision that it could not be overturned by popular referendum. During the same session, Snyder signed Michigan’s first right-to-work law. The primary purpose of Michigan’s emergency manager legislation (drafted with help from the Mackinac Center, a think tank funded by Dick Devos, the Walton Family, the Koch brothers, and other right-wing billionaires) is to break public-sector unions.

In March 2013, Governor Snyder appointed Kevyn Orr as emergency manager for Detroit. Orr, a bankruptcy lawyer from Jones Day (the largest corporate law firm in the United State), placed bids to privatize DWSD, the Detroit Public Lighting Department, and waste collection at the Detroit Public Works Department, while leasing Belle Isle (the largest city-owned island park in the United States) to the state of Michigan for thirty years. Also in 2013, a consortium of local foundations released the Detroit Future City plan, which proposes to “replace, repurpose, decommission” or “reduce and maintain” water and other basic services in nearly half the city of Detroit. The plan also concentrates resources in a gentrifying “digital/creative” zone centered on downtown and the Cass Corridor (recently rebranded as “Midtown Detroit” by developers).

The same year, Mackinac Center board member Rodney Lockwood released a futuristic novel and promotional web site, called Belle Isle: Detroit’s Game Changer, which promoted the idea of turning Belle Isle into an offshore tax haven for thirty-five thousand citizens (membership fee: $300,000), where the official currency would be the Rand, in honor of Ayn Rand. The novel describes a mid-twenty-first-century Detroit with a population of forty-five thousand, where neighborhoods have been cleared of people and replaced with “green zones” where wealthy entrepreneurs operate urban farms.

This scheme closely resembles the Hantz Farms project, led by developer John Hantz (another Ayn Rand devotee with an estimated net worth of $100 million). As geographer Sara Safransky has noted, under this plan Hantz “could potentially own one-fourteenth of Detroit.”

While developers eyed an increasingly indebted Detroit for land grabs and privatization opportunities, Emergency Manager Orr supported the intensification of DWSD’s program of residential water shutoffs. In a city where nearly 40 percent of the residents fall below the federal poverty line, increasing water rates are a formula for default.

The Michigan Welfare Rights Organization and the People’s Water Board (founded in 2007) had long advocated a water affordability plan, which would cap water bills at 2 percent of household income for residents with incomes below 50 percent of the federal poverty line, and 2.5 percent for those at 50-100 percent. The Detroit city council approved a water affordability plan in 2006, but the city never implemented it.

In February 2014, the DWSD customer service department announced that “DWSD is preparing to ramp-up shutoffs. Any account sixty days past due will be subject to shutoff.” According to the Detroit News, roughly half of the city’s water accounts fell into this category as of March 2014.

As a result of this ruthless policy, shutoffs rapidly escalated, as the following table (based on DWSD statistics available here, here, and here) illustrates. Economist Roger Colton, who helped design the Water Affordability Plan passed by the Detroit City Council in 2006, told me in an interview that a “safe” estimate for the number of Detroit residents facing water shutoffs since 2013 was one hundred thousand. Moreover, the shutoffs spiked dramatically under the rule of Emergency Manager Orr, from March 2013 through December 2014.

While this humanitarian crisis unfolded, Orr began seeking bids from private water companies, including American Water, Veolia, and United Water, to take over DWSD. By April 2014, the city had received thirty different proposals. Orr asked companies to come up with binding bids by June. The announcement came during a breakdown in negotiations with suburban municipalities about regionalizing DWSD under a new Great Lakes Water Authority (GLWA).

The GLWA board would be governed by six members, with two appointed by the mayor of Detroit, one appointed by the governor, and one each appointed by Wayne, Macomb, and Oakland counties. In June 2015, the City of Detroit leased DWSD to the GLWA for forty years, in return for $26.2 million per year for use of city assets. For the first time in 180 years, Detroit would lose control of its water system.

GLWA’s Memorandum of Understanding, adopted later that year, listed Veolia, the world’s largest private water company, as a contractor hired to “undertake an assessment of the systems and make recommendations to assist the parties in operating models, capital requirements and saving opportunities.” Veolia was also hired by Flint’s emergency manager in 2015, and deemed the city’s water “safe” despite rapidly rising lead levels.

Beginning in May and June 2014, Detroit activists began a campaign of civil disobedience against the mass shutoffs. In June, protesters began to physically blockade the Homrich dispatch facility at 4660 Grand Boulevard, to prevent trucks from leaving to perform shutoffs. Between July 10 and July 25, police arrested twenty-nine protesters attempting to blockade Homrich trucks, many of them chanting “We Shall Not Be Moved.” On July 18, over one thousand protesters marched in downtown Detroit to protest the shutoffs, in an action called by National Nurses United. Many of the protesters targeted Wall Street banks, both because of their role in the city’s foreclosure crisis and in the predatory swap deal.

Between October 18 and 20, in response to letters from the People’s Water Board, UN Special Rapporteurs Leilani Farha and Catarina de Albuquerque visited Detroit. In a press conference, Leilani Farha, the special rapporteur on the human right to water, called Detroit’s water crisis a “man-made perfect storm” caused by poverty, unaffordable water rates, and DWSD’s draconian shutoff policy. The shutoffs, the UN experts told the press, violated international human rights laws to which “the United States is bound,” both concerning the “right to water” and the “right to nondiscrimination,” because of their disproportionate effect on African-Americans.

However, Mayor Mike Duggan disregarded the United Nations, and has proven equally supportive of mass water shutoffs and the Detroit Future City urban triage plan. The shutoffs have continued, and the GLWA has failed to devote even the paltry $4.5 million it pledged in 2014 to water assistance programs.

The difference in shutoff policies toward low-income households and local corporate interests also provides a revealing window into the GLWA’s priorities. In 2015, while the city officially shut off water service for 23,300 homes, it only shut off 680 businesses, despite the fact that businesses owed $41 million in water bills, compared with $26 million for private homes. Delinquent businesses that have not been shut off (despite enormous water bills) included the Detroit Red Wings stadium and the Palmer Park Golf Course.

During the same period, the Flint water crisis became a national scandal. Few commentators, however, have examined the links between the water crises in Detroit and Flint. As noted previously, the DWSD rate increases provided a public rationale for Flint’s emergency manager, Ed Kurtz, to switch Flint from DWSD to the Flint River in April 2013. His successor, Darnell Early, oversaw the completion of this process.

Disregarding the EPA’s lead and copper rule, Governor Snyder’s appointees at the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) exempted the Flint water treatment plant from corrosion control. Instead, MDEQ only promised to test Flint water during two six-month trial periods, and institute corrosion control if lead and copper levels exceeded EPA standards. Because the Flint River water was high in corrosive chlorides, the new water supply caused lead and copper to leach from water pipes into the city’s drinking water for over two years.

When technicians discovered elevated lead and copper levels, Governor Snyder’s MDEQ tampered with the test results to conceal the problem. An epidemiological study in 2014–15, led by Dr Mona Hanna-Attisha of Michigan Children’s Hospital, found that the incidence of elevated blood lead levels in Flint children more than doubled after the switch.

Such problems were not isolated to Flint, however. The following year, school officials in Detroit discovered elevated levels of lead and copper in nineteen out of sixty-two schools tested. During the same period, Darnell Early, the emergency manager in Flint during the water crisis, became the emergency manager of the Detroit Public Schools. After the Flint lead poisoning scandal attracted national attention, Early stepped down from his position at DPS.

Following the resignation, Governor Snyder praised Early, saying that he “restructured a heavily bureaucratic central office” and “set in place operating and cost-containment measures” at DPS. However, the lead testing results suggested that such “restructuring” and “cost containment” was as dangerous for children in Detroit as in Flint.

At one Detroit school, Ronald Brown Academy, tests showed lead levels of 1,500 parts per billion, and tests at eight schools found copper levels at 1,300 parts per billion. Similar complaints about black mold, rats, roaches, and leaking roofs contributed to a “sick-out” by teachers that closed eighty-five of one hundred DPS schools in the winter of 2015–16.

After seven years under emergency management, Detroit schools are more hazardous than ever. The water test results, in particular, suggest that a Flint-like poisoning crisis could easily occur in Detroit.

The interconnected water crises in Detroit and Flint demonstrate the massive human costs of destroying the public sector, which antidemocratic emergency manager laws have accelerated. The combination of risky financial deals and privatization is also increasing water rates and shutoffs in other cities. Although population decline and aging infrastructure partially explain water rate increases, neoliberal restructuring is at the heart of the problem. The decimation of the welfare state, which led to the removal of Michigan’s vendor pay program, have also made poor and working-class residents (disproportionately African Americans) more vulnerable to shutoffs.

Addressing this crisis will require a moratorium on residential water shutoffs, and implementing ambitious water affordability programs. The People’s Water Board and other organizations have pushed to get ten water affordability bills before the Michigan house. The People’s Water Board also deserves support.

More generally, we need to fight the multinational corporate drive to commodify and maximize profits from water and other survival necessities. As Martin Luther King Jr pointed out in his speech “Where Do We Go From Here?” in August 1967, almost exactly half a century ago:

Why are there forty million poor people in America?” When you ask that question, you begin to question the capitalistic economy . . . “Who owns the oil?” You begin to ask the question, “Who owns the iron ore?” You begin to ask the question, “Why is it that people have to pay water bills in a world that is two-thirds water?”

In the context of global climate change, and claims that privatization is a solution to growing water scarcity, we need to ask those questions more than ever.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
NFL Shows It Doesn't Really Care About Domestic Violence Print
Sunday, 23 October 2016 08:08

Macur writes: "In the case of Giants kicker Josh Brown, the league has shown that it could not care less about women and really, really doesn't want to call out its players for doing bad things to them."

Giants kicker Josh Brown was charged in 2015 with assaulting his wife. The N.F.L. suspended him for one game, but has now reopened its investigation. (photo: Elsa/Getty Image)
Giants kicker Josh Brown was charged in 2015 with assaulting his wife. The N.F.L. suspended him for one game, but has now reopened its investigation. (photo: Elsa/Getty Image)


NFL Shows It Doesn't Really Care About Domestic Violence

By Juliet Macur, The New York Times

23 October 16

 

elevision ratings for the N.F.L. are down 11 percent this season, and league officials have been grasping for possible explanations.

To some extent, they blame the presidential election. Some fans have tuned out football, they theorize, to tune in to a political race in which sexual assault and the treatment of women have been front and center, thanks to Donald J. Trump, the Republican nominee who has bragged about groping and kissing women without their consent.

Those issues are important to some people, like — and this is just a guess here — women. And anyone else with even a sliver of decency.

READ MORE


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Landmark Settlement Reins in Rogue Federal Wildlife Killing Program Print
Sunday, 23 October 2016 08:06

Excerpt: "'Our settlement ends killing on six million acres of our public lands in Nevada unless and until a modern environmental assessment occurs and ensures that Wildlife Services will update its analysis of the impacts of its killing activities across the country,' said Sarah McMillan, senior attorney for WildEarth Guardians."

More than 380 gray wolves were killed by Wildlife Services in 2015, pleasing Western ranchers while angering conservationists. (photo: Barrett Hedges/National Geographic Image Collection/Alamy)
More than 380 gray wolves were killed by Wildlife Services in 2015, pleasing Western ranchers while angering conservationists. (photo: Barrett Hedges/National Geographic Image Collection/Alamy)


Landmark Settlement Reins in Rogue Federal Wildlife Killing Program

By WildEarth Guardians Press Release

23 October 16

 

Killing Stops on Over Six Million Acres of Our Public Lands

federal court approved a groundbreaking settlement agreement between WildEarth Guardians and the federal wildlife killing program, Wildlife Services, late last week. The settlement comes over a year after the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed that WildEarth Guardians’ interests are injured by the program’s activities and the organization may challenge them in court. Under the settlement, Wildlife Services will conduct new environmental analyses in Nevada and across the nation, cease reliance on an old, largely debunked analysis and end killing activities on certain public lands.

“This agreement means Wildlife Services can no longer rely on disproven ‘science’ to justify its cruel and ecologically unsound killing practices,” said Bethany Cotton, wildlife program director for WildEarth Guardians. “We call on the program to use this opportunity to accept the clear science demonstrating that lethal control of native wildlife is ineffective and often counterproductive, and to adopt a coexistence mandate.”

In August 2015, the Ninth Circuit held the program’s reliance on a twenty year old analysis, which itself relies on outdated and largely disproven decades old science, was not immune from environmental review. The settlement requires the program to no longer rely on the outdated 22-year-old Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS). The program will conduct a new environmental analysis of its activities in Nevada, and will update all analyses nationwide that rely on the 1994 PEIS. The program will also cease all killing activities in designated Wilderness and Wilderness Study Areas in Nevada — over six million acres of public lands — at least until the new analysis is complete.

“Our settlement ends killing on six million acres of our public lands in Nevada unless and until a modern environmental assessment occurs and ensures that Wildlife Services will update its analysis of the impacts of its killing activities across the country,” said Sarah McMillan, senior attorney for WildEarth Guardians. “The public has a right to be informed of and weigh in on the use of taxpayer dollars to kill native wildlife, and the program has a responsibility to ensure ethical and scientific standards are met by federal employees.”

Wildlife Services killed over 1.6 million native animals in 2015 alone. The program, under the auspices of the Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), uses a variety of cruel and inhumane tactics to kill wildlife including trapping, aerial gunning and poisoning. Many of these methods cannot discriminate amongst species; meaning non-target animals are at serious risk. Both non-target wildlife species, including threatened and endangered animals, and domestic companion animals have fallen victim to Wildlife Services’ devices.

WildEarth Guardians and other conservation organizations are challenging the program’s failure to adhere to modern science and humane practices for the treatment of wildlife. In December 2015, a federal court faulted the program for failing to adequately analyze the impacts of its wolf killing activities in Washington state. Numerous additional cases are currently pending challenging the program’s wildlife killing activities across the West.

Background:

In 2012, WildEarth Guardians challenged Wildlife Services’ refusal to analyze the impacts of its wildlife killing activities in Nevada as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The program instead insisted that its 1994 PEIS was a sufficient analysis of its current activities, even though the PEIS relies on outdated and largely disproven ‘science’ from the 1970s and 1980s, with some cited studies dating back to the 1930s. NEPA review is designed to ensure all environmental impacts are analyzed and that the public has an opportunity to comment on, and therefore influence, activities conducted using public funds. The law is designed to take into account current conditions and the best available science, which is impossible when the government relies on severely outdated analysis and science.

In addition to Wildlife Services’ refusal to conduct an analysis taking into account current science, the program also argued its wildlife killing activities were immune from oversight because the State of Nevada might conduct similar activities if Wildlife Services were prohibited from doing so. In March 2013, the Federal District Court for the District of Nevada granted Wildlife Services’ motion to dismiss in part. Guardians appealed that decision to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. In August 2015, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals resoundingly rejected this argument, finding that WildEarth Guardians’ interests are injured by the program’s activities and that regardless of whether the State of Nevada could engage in similar activities, Wildlife Services is accountable for its own actions. The Ninth Circuit sent the case back to the Nevada district court, at which point WildEarth Guardians and Wildlife Services entered settlement negotiations resulting in this agreement.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Michael Moore: It's Not Just Trump on the Ballot. Racism and Misogyny Are Also on the Ballot This Year. Print
Saturday, 22 October 2016 13:30

Newman writes: "Earlier this week, veteran documentarian Michael Moore delivered his own October Surprise. The Oscar-winning filmmaker and legendary muckraker suddenly announced the release of a previously unannounced project: Michael Moore in TrumpLand, a new film culled from two one-man shows the director performed earlier this month in the predominantly Republican town of Wilmington, Ohio."

Filmmaker Michael Moore near a closed factory in Flint, Michigan, where his father worked. (photo: Fabrizio Costantini/NYT)
Filmmaker Michael Moore near a closed factory in Flint, Michigan, where his father worked. (photo: Fabrizio Costantini/NYT)


Michael Moore: It's Not Just Trump on the Ballot. Racism and Misogyny Are Also on the Ballot This Year.

By Jason Newman, Rolling Stone

22 October 16

 

'TrumpLand' director on why society should treat the GOP candidate like a pedophile and how "white privilege is on the ballot"

arlier this week, veteran documentarian Michael Moore delivered his own October Surprise. The Oscar-winning filmmaker and legendary muckraker suddenly announced the release of a previously unannounced project: Michael Moore in TrumpLand, a new film culled from two one-man shows the director performed earlier this month in the predominantly Republican town of Wilmington, Ohio. Shot, edited and released in less than two weeks, the movie largely avoids haranguing the Republican presidential nominee, with Moore devoting most of the film to Clinton's virtues alongside polemics about the decline of the "angry white male" and need for increased gun control regulations. (The film is currently playing in New York and Los Angeles and is available on iTunes.)

Despite polls predicting Clinton to win the presidency by a large margin, Moore is far from confident. "I live beyond the wall where the White Walkers are," he tells Rolling Stone. "I could just tell on the streets that there's no enthusiasm [for her] whatsoever." In his first interview since the release of TrumpLand, Moore explains why he doesn't trust any polls, why society should treat Trump like a pedophile and how this election is nothing short of a referendum on white privilege itself.

You released this film without any warning or announcement. How did the element of surprise play into your reasons for making the film?

It's better that I'm quiet when I'm working because there are many forces who are standing by to try and thwart my every move. [Laughs] I also just think it's better to work that way. I don't subscribe much to the machine even though I work within this industry. I don't set my clock by Access Hollywood. It seems better to just focus on my work and do the best job I can.

The other part of it is that I wasn't really going to do anything until after the Democratic convention and throughout August. As Hillary came off a great convention and Trump was imploding with one insane thing after another, I noticed supporters of Hillary Clinton doing an end-zone dance on the 50-yard line. We were two to three months away from the election and everyone's thinking, "We're safe now. It's over." Trump's done himself in and Hillary is doing great at the debates and everyone relaxes and starts to feel relief. I started to feel like those people were contributing to Trump's potential election. And this wasn't the time to relax. This was the time to double and triple up in terms of what needed to be done. I didn't see that happening.

You talk in the film about how the sentiment is more about voting against Trump than for Clinton. Is that why much of the movie focuses on your support for her versus dislike of Trump?

Yeah, a lot of it became a negative: "I need to stop Trump." That's a dangerous way to have your candidate win, when you're not asking people to vote for her because of her. They're expecting her to win because of people's fear of him. And one thing that I think we've learned in this post-9/11 world is that politicians manipulating the public with fear is never a good thing. Even if it's being done on our side, I don't think it's a good thing. 

Maybe people will come into the film expecting two hours of me trashing Trump. But ask yourself as a movie lover: Do you really want to hear Michael Moore rehash everything you already know about Trump? And there's nothing I could add to the cacophony that would make it any worse than attacking the parents of a soldier who died in Iraq.

Some of the early reviews, though, lament that that isn't the film you made. The reason so many people are interested in this election is the curiosity factor and Trump's unpredictable nature.

Absolutely. It's the reason these ratings have been so high with the debates; take Trump out of it and there would never be these ratings. They're not tuning in because of Hillary; they're tuning in to the shitshow. He has controlled this thing from beginning to end. That's why I took the more difficult path here. The easy path for Michael Moore would have been to do just more of the shitshow. The harder path was to not put a single picture of Donald Trump on the stage and spend virtually no time talking about him. I spend a lot of time talking about men who support Trump, but it's about Hillary – and the decision to make it about Hillary means I took a risk that there would be no interest in it. Hillary is not the shitshow that people want to watch. She's not the trainwreck that you can't take your eyes off of.

Did that play into titling the film Michael Moore in TrumpLand versus, say, Michael Moore Loves Hillary?

Yeah. But I did think about calling it My Forbidden Love for Hillary. If I was the average filmgoer, I would go, "That's interesting. That's something I don't know what the hell's going to happen in the next hour and a half. That's the kind of movie I want to go to. I don't want to go to the next fracking movie. I get it; I don't like it. Why would I spend another 90 minutes being told fracking is bad for us?"  

You recorded the show two weeks ago before a series of women alleged Trump sexually assaulted them. Do you feel more confident about Hillary's chances now than you did then?

No. I'm more concerned. I think this is all about voter turnout and the more people feel relaxed and not as worried or not believing how important their vote is, because it looks like he's done. "He's cooked. Put a fork in him." That's going to decrease the number of people coming out to vote for her. There could be a rude wake-up call.

I saw what happened in the [Michigan Democratic] primary in March, where Hillary was ahead in every national poll by eight to 20 points ahead of Bernie [Sanders] in Michigan. How did she go from that to losing 12 hours later? I do not believe the polls. I don't think anyone should believe them. If you want to believe anything, because it's fairly close, it means it could go either way, even as of today. And I know people go, "How can that be? How can it be that close, considering there's a Putin-loving, female genitalia-grabbing sociopath on the ballot. How can it be even remotely close?" And I saw a poll last week where 17 percent of Hispanics said they were voting for Trump. And you go, [makes exasperated noise].

What did you think of the third debate?

He put out a not-so-subtle message to his rabid followers that they should consider inciting violence if he's not elected. And for years, they passed these incitement to riot laws mainly against blacks and unions. He was trying to incite a potential riot and I'm not opposed to the FBI stopping by Trump Tower to ask him a few questions, just to see where he's going with this. We live in a country that has 330 million guns in their homes. Now 50 percent of those guns are owned by just three percent of the population. But that's still nine million people that own 165 million guns.

The headline on every site the next day was Trump's "I will keep you in suspense" line when discussing a concession if he loses.

Yeah, it was the typical language of a bully. I'm going to keep you in a state of constant terror between now and November 8th. And you won't know exactly what I'm planning to do with my millions of rabid supporters. And remember, even if he loses, he will get 40 million votes.

Michael Moore claims that Donald Trump never wanted to be president. Watch here.

If Clinton does win, what do you think Trump's next move is either politically or otherwise after November 8th?

I don't know and I don't want to give him any advice. I hope he goes down. I want a 50-state sweep. I want both houses of Congress back in Democratic control and I want all the "nasty" women and men to show up November 8th. Now you see what he's done by his behavior. It's no longer just Donald J. Trump on the ballot. Misogyny is on the ballot. Racism is on the ballot. White privilege and elitism are on the ballot. It's not just about defeating Trump. First of all, be for Hillary. But secondly, we need to defeat not just Trump, but whatever it is he springs from; the dying dinosaurs that exist in this country who miss the old way where the white man was going to run the show. Last month, we just got the second year in a row where the majority of kindergarteners in school in this country were not white.  So welcome to the new America.

It's a much broader referendum than just choosing a candidate.

Absolutely. I'm counting on my fellow Americans, the same ones who elected Barack Hussein Obama – twice – to come out and make a grand statement. This is way beyond what the nuance is of how you feel about Hillary. How much you like her, don't like her, don't trust her. Just stop it. You have two siblings; one is a little better than the other.

Regardless of the outcome, do you think Trump has set a new template for a certain type of politician or is he the anomaly candidate?

No. He's the end. He's the past. The past is going to come to an end. His days are over.

But his base is still tens of millions of people.

First of all, we don't even know if there's going to be a Republican party. Something good may come out of this. Obviously we need more than two parties to represent the broad spectrum of political thought in this country. Two parties can't do that. The Canadians know they need five, with just 34 million people. So we have to start to construct a better system that's more representative of the people and you will get more people involved in voting.

But it's not that he came in and destroyed the Republican party. He's the natural extension of everything that they have believed in for the last 30 years. And it's like the gene pool has got more and more depleted and you end up in a science fiction show like the one we're in with this creature. It's like somebody went to Dr. Frankenstein last year and said, "I need a candidate who is the embodiment of every awful male trait, every awful white man trait and every awful rich guy trait and roll that all into one candidate. In a way, it's a gift. It does become a referendum. He literally is a representative for each of these things that we've been seeing a gradual end to. The times have changed. The days of these dinosaurs are over. It's got to be hard on them. Nobody likes to give up power. We've been in charge for about 10,000 years, so it's a long run. We had a great streak.

One review of the film said you wanted to "convert the Trumpian masses" but it also showed your "religious conversion" to supporting Hillary. Is that accurate?

No. No. First of all, I make it very clear: I wrote a chapter in my very first book 20 years ago [1996's Downsize This!] called "My Forbidden Love for Hillary." There's nothing to come around on. I was for Hillary before Hillary was for Hillary. I didn't go to convert Trump people. I did not want the racists or the crazies in there or we would have never gotten the show done. But we went to union halls and guys that I grew up with – people who normally vote Democrat who are thinking of voting for Trump. That is a huge chunk of the population, especially where I'm from. So I wasn't there so much to convert them away. I don't think a lot of them necessarily decided for sure that they were going to vote for him. But I want them to think about the damage they could do by being a legal terrorist on November 8th.

What do you mean by "legal terrorist"? Is that a catch-all for any Trump voter or are you referring to anyone in particular?

Any. Legally, you have a right to vote on November 8th. You can go in there and even though you're not necessarily in favor of Trump and you don't like him that much and you know he's a little crazy, you also know he's going to blow up the system. The system that took your job and house away from you. You get to get back at the system now and blow it up and this is the only day you can do it legally. He's told everybody that's what he's going to do. He's the outsider who is going to ride into town and blow up the old way.  So you, as a voter, get to participate in the detonation. He's going to get a lot of votes from people who actually just want to sit back and watch the thing blow up.

You were adamant in your support for Bernie Sanders in the primaries. What's your message for former Sander supporters who are now deciding between Clinton and a third party candidate?

Come on. Come on. Let's... [long pause] We're not being asked to vote for Margaret Thatcher or Sandra Day O'Connor or Clarence Thomas. We're being asked to vote for Hillary Clinton and that's a good thing. Really. She's not any of those people. Do we have our problems? Yes. Do we have our disagreements with her? Yes. She is not exciting the base to get out and vote for her. So we, the Bernie revolution, have to help save her from herself. We know how to do this.

It's really what's best for the country at this point. We lost. We made a good run at it. We don't like Debbie Wasserman Schultz and how they tried to spike the election. But we won 22 states. That's almost half the states voted for a socialist. That is a historic moment and as more young people come of age, every poll shows that young adults 18 to 35 support socialism over capitalism. And it will only get better and they will remember us as the ones who almost made it happen. We almost got to see the billionaire versus the socialist in this campaign.

What has been your personal experience with Trump? Have you ever crossed paths with him?

I was in a green room with him in 1998 when Roseanne Barr had a talk show [and had us as guests]. He came in and saw that I was on the show with him and freaked out. He went to the producers and said, "I can't go out there. He's just going to attack me." And the producer came over to me and said, "He's very nervous. Would you mind talking to him?" I went over, introduced myself and shook his hand; it was all clammy and wet. He goes, [imitates Trump] "There's no reason to go out there and mix it up." I said, "Look, Mr. Trump. I've only been here in New York a few years. I don't know you that well. I see your name on buildings. You're worried you're going to get the General Motors treatment here from me? I'm here to talk to Roseanne about my show The Awful Truth." I had to calm him down. "Don't worry. It's going to be OK. We're going to go out and have fun." And we went out on the couch and we had fun and nothing happened.

This may be your toughest question: Can you say something nice about Trump?

[Laughs] Oh, my God. Um. I think I would thank him for restoring the ice rink in Central Park. It was a wonderful gesture on his part and he paid for it [himself]. I have a belief that people are good at their core and sometimes they forget their core. Sometimes it gets covered up. They lose their way. I've lived in New York for many years and I've seen what he's done. I remembered being at a Planned Parenthood fundraiser that he supported or was co-host. He invited the Clintons to his wedding and not the Bushes.

But he's not well. I would not want to pick on him anymore. We need to stop him. You can't have a sociopath in the White House and some will disagree with me and say, "No, Mike, you're wrong. He is a psychopath." I'm not educated enough to know the difference. But he's not a well person and he needs help. And once you realize that he has a mental illness, at that point, if you're a human being with a soul and a conscience, you want him to get help.

At the same time, you have to protect the population from him like you do with a pedophile. A pedophile doesn't need to be in prison; they're sick. They have to be separated from us so they don't hurt children. But you have to treat it that way.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: War or Peace? Print
Saturday, 22 October 2016 11:32

Kucinich writes: "The most consequential statement by Secretary Clinton in last night's debate was her pronouncement that a no-fly zone over Syria could 'save lives and hasten the end of the conflict,' that a no-fly zone would provide 'safe zones on the ground' was in 'the best interests of the people on the ground in Syria' and would 'help us with our fight against ISIS.'"

Dennis Kucinich. (photo: Facebook)
Dennis Kucinich. (photo: Facebook)


War or Peace?

By Dennis Kucinich, World Beyond War

22 October 16

 

he most consequential statement by Secretary Clinton in last night’s debate was her pronouncement that a no-fly zone over Syria could “save lives and hasten the end of the conflict,” that a no-fly zone would provide “safe zones on the ground” was in “the best interests of the people on the ground in Syria” and would “help us with our fight against ISIS.”

It would do none of the above. A US attempt to impose a no-fly zone in Syria would, as Secretary Clinton once cautioned a Goldman Sachs audience, “kill a lot of Syrians,” and, according to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Dunford, lead to a war with Russia. If the US has not been invited into a country to establish a “no-fly zone” such an action is, in fact, an invasion, an act of war.

It is abundantly clear from our dark alliance with Saudi Arabia and our conduct in support of jihadists in Syria that our current leaders have learned nothing from Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya as we prepare to plunge head-long into the abyss of a world war.

Our international relations are built upon lies to promote regime changes, the fantasy of a unipolar world ruled by America, and a blank check for the national security state.

As others prepare for war, we must prepare for peace. We must answer the mindless call to arms with a thoughtful, soulful call to resist the coming build up for war. A new, resolute peace movement must arise, become visible and challenge those who would make war inevitable.

We must not wait until the Inauguration to begin to build a new peace movement in America.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 1851 1852 1853 1854 1855 1856 1857 1858 1859 1860 Next > End >>

Page 1857 of 3432

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN