Month: May 2008

Lessons From The AAM Strike

American Axle workers began to return to work earlier this week, after the end of a three-month walkout in Michigan and New York. The struggle—one of the longest walkouts in the auto industry in decades—ended in a bitter defeat for the workers.

More than half of the returning 3,650 workers, including 1,100 in Detroit, will lose their jobs. The remaining will see their wages cut from $28 an hour to $18.50 and in some locations as low as $10.

In a conference call to Wall Street investors Wednesday corporate CEO Richard Dauch said the new deal would reduce all-in labor costs by 50 percent—saving the company $300 million. “I am pleased to report,” he boasted, “we have achieved all of these goals.”

That the hated contract was ratified by a 78 percent margin was testimony to the lack of confidence in the United Auto Workers union to obtain anything better if workers remained on strike. Even before the walkout began, the UAW signaled its willingness to impose substantial wage cuts. Then the union left workers isolated on the picket lines for 87 days and paid meager strike benefits of $200 a week. In the end, the UAW brought back the concessions agreement and told workers, “Take it or leave it.”

Acting on the belief that there was no alternative, workers voted for the deal with most opting to take the buyout now or in the near future. Many, no doubt, will join the migration of ex-auto workers out of Michigan, where 143,000 auto jobs—or 45 percent of the total—have been wiped out since 1999.

The UAW betrayal at American Axle—like at Delphi and the Big Three concessions before it—will be used to set a new benchmark for the permanent lowering of wages. Hit by high gas prices, the credit crunch and slumping sales, General Motors and Ford have already announced sharp reductions in the production of light trucks and SUVs.

This is only a prelude to a new round of mass layoffs, bankruptcies and concession demands in the auto industry, the airlines and the rest of the US economy. The corporate executives and investors will not be satisfied until the auto industry is a low-wage sector in which workers have no benefits or job security.

The needs of the working class—for decent paying jobs, health care, education, housing and a world free from war—must take precedence over the selfish and destruction drive for individual profit. The guiding principle must be the fight for social equality, the elimination of poverty, and the raising of the living standards of the world’s people through the conscious and rational use of mankind’s productive resources.

The existing Unions are impotent!  They do not serve the workers as they were suppose to.  I say it is time for a change.  The workers need strong representation and leadership.  Not only do they need it, but they must step up and demand it!

A Few Societal Thoughts

Just a bit of the info that is sadly missing in the news. Average Americans have known for years that the economy, their economy has been in the toilet, while the media tells them how well the economy is doing; but that is for those with 7 figure incomes.

The income divide between white and black families has grown again and for the last 30 yrs it has continue to widen. The equality that has been promised for a 100 yrs has never quite made it to the mainstream.

Let us look at crime–the number of policemen killed in the line of duty has gone up and those killed with a firearm are as follows:

NY–22
Fla–18
CA–12
LA–8

The deaths are up by 31% and deaths by firearm is up 37%. Something to think about.

Maybe it is just a coincidence, but the top 3 states are lead by Repubs–just saying, not accusing.  So please do not get your panties in a wad!

political Quote Of The Week

Since the birth place of democracy was Greece, I thought I would quote one of the founding fathers of democracy.

Democracy is when the indigent, and not the men of property, are the rulers.
Aristotle

If true, then like socialism, it has never been tried.

Liberal vs Conservative

Are a liberal or a conservative? How about Republican or Democrat? Does it matter? Actually, it does not! With the approaching primaries and then the election, I have been thinking about this very subject for awhile. There seems to be very little that separates the two parties, other than minor emotional bullsh*t.

Really? Why? Look at the candidates in the upcoming election. The major candidates are corporate liberals. Rudy or Hilary, not much difference between the two. One is “liberal” repub and the other is a “conservative” dem. Ask why corporate owned media is pushing ex-candidate Romney and Clinton. Why does the media want a cat fight between Obama and Clinton?

Actually, the whole system is lead and controlled by corporate liberals. And they have been in control since 1933. Their control is extended by such organizations as the Council on Foreign Affairs.

Why do I say this? Well, they both approve of moderate trade unions, integration of minorities, moderate welfare, heavy involvement in the economy, foreign aid. Again there is minor differences on how they think these policies should be used.

Corporate liberals control both the Republican and Democratic parties. Only once did it deviate from this formula; that was in 1964 when the Repub nominee was Goldwater over the corportate choice of Rockefeller. And then they lost control of the dems in 1972 when McGovern was picked over Humphrey or Muskie.

The upper class right wing and the corporate liberals have basically the same direction for policy. The differences center on whose approach is best for the maximization of profits and necessary conditions for the continuation of the upper class rule.

Now there is the upper class left wing–they function as the innovators and the guardians of class rule. Their innovations are basically on how to stabilize capitalism and the define the acceptable limits of the left’s boundary. They also spend a major amount of time and resources opposing any third party that would jeopardize the control of the corporate liberals. Especially any third party that will not defend a big business controlled foreign policy.

If there is any doubt about this, then I suggest looking at the candidates that are running now. Any of the major candidates have a platform that does not favor the upper class. Remember, I said major. That would be Clinton, Giuliani, Obama, McCain, Romney, Edwards can be eliminated somewhat, he is a bit of an anomely. There will be NO difference in whoever you elect, there will be only minor differences in their approach.

This whole two party thing is just f*cking silly! The whole partisan, us against them, thing is just as damn silly. No matter where you put you vote; you will be voting for the same people, the corporate liberals.

Put a little thought into your vote. Stop listening to the bovine fecal matter that impresses you. Learn where to put your vote, so that the American people, your children and grandchildren, will have a descent life.  The standing two party system has actually help few and given the American the crisis they are now facing.

McCain’s “League Of Democracies”

Gaining ground this political season is a proposed League of Democracies designed to strengthen support for the next president’s overseas agenda and ensure a global leadership role for the United States.

John McCain, the virtually certain Republican presidential nominee, has endorsed the concept of a new global compact of more than 100 democratic countries to advance shared views and has discussed the idea with French and British leaders.

Barack Obama, who has a lead in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, has not taken a stand. But Anthony Lake, one of Obama’s policy advisers, has spoken in favor of the idea.

Analysts at think tanks in Washington and elsewhere envision a league focused on maintaining peace and limiting U.S. military intervention, such as the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

But missing so far are specific, proposed steps to turn the idea into reality, such as where to have a headquarters, who would finance the league and how its membership would be decided.

Thinking……thinking….is this not what the UN is for?  Why waste time and resources starting something that is already up and functioning?  If this is part of McCain’s foreign policy then we are in as much trouble as with Bush.

Is It Really Time For A Change?

Yes, is the short answer to the question. But unfortunately, Americans will most likely get reform, not change. There will be NO change, regardless who wins the election in November.

Just about to the person the Big 3, candidates, are promising some form or degree of change in Washington. But the question that Americans should be asking is, which, if any, will truly bring the change they are promising? A national “hero”? A woman? Or how about the African-American? Now ask, where will the change begin? From an unsuccessful, impotent Congress? Just where would this promised change come from?

Change? As I have already said, more like some form or another of reforms, not change. These candidates want to reform Washington so that the “business as usual” will become a thing of the past. Thinking…….but does that not mean using the powers that be? if so, then why would there be any change or reform? It would mean that someone, somewhere would lose their power and that will not be happening.

Reform is more preferable in this 2 party system. Why, you ask? Reforms can be short lived, they are easily overturned at a later date and they give the illusion that change has occurred, but with limited success.

For reforms to be achievable, then there needs to be a national crisis to discredit a sitting administration. We have that–the economy. The Repubs have nothing on the economy, their proposals are nothing but a continuation of the situation that has put the economy in crisis. So they keep the dialog on national security, because their economic policies are as thin as Waffle House bacon.

The Repubs have stuck to the same lame policies they had a 100 years ago–words change, but the ideology remains the same. Defend the weak central government, deny there is a class conflict, and that business is the answer to ALL problems. On the other hand the Dems have stuck to their same lame talking points–equality of taxation, class struggles, and more control of business. And for the same 100 years of their counterparts.

Reformers do not want change, only some adjustments to what is. Reformers appeal to the sensibilities of the people to make them feel the heavy weight of the situation and to prod them into a false since of responsibility by voting. Once they are successful and the people have “spoken”, then all reverts back to the status quo.

November will usher in a historical race and the American people will participate in making that history. But unfortunately their participation will not bring the change that they say they seek. About the only thing they have to look forward to is some minor reforms to give an illusion of change.

People! People! Politics is about marketing, not about what is best for the country and its people. The word CHANGE is just part of the marketing scheme offered to the voter. Please do NOT hold your breath waiting for the promised change…..I promise you will turn blue and die before the change occurs.

State Workers Protest Wage Cuts

State workers in Illinois sent a message to Governor Rod Blagojevich Thursday.

AFSCME union workers are outraged the governor plans to cut their wages to help balance the state budget. They protested today in Marion, Anna, and 36 other sites around the state.

The union has been trying to get a contract for the past six months.
Larry Flynn has worked for the state for 23 years. He said he’s getting frustrated with the drawn out labor talks.

“Your insurance is going to go up. You don’t know if your pension benefits are going to be there. I don’t know what’s going to come out” said Larry Flynn who works at the Vienna Correctional Center.

An AFSCME local Cary Quick says, “We’re so far behind because of the dragging of the feet of the state of illinois that we’re not even done with all our language. To top it all off, we’ve got an economic proposal that’s near impossible for us to work with.”

Illinois state workers picketed 38 state buildings, two of them in Southern Illinios. Choate Mental Health in Anna and the DHS office in Marion.

Union leaders say Thursday’s pickets did not affect services. Contracts for state workers expire at the end of June

Once again it will fall on the workers to pay for a mismanaged government.  All workers should protest this turn of events with letters, calls and such to the governor of Illinois.  Support you fellow workers, for the next round of this fight may be your job!

New FLDS UpDate

The Texas Supreme Court affirmed yesterday that state officials should not have seized scores of children from the ranch compound of a polygamist sect, agreeing with an appellate court that the group’s beliefs were not, by themselves, proof of abuse.

The decision, issued yesterday afternoon in Austin, did not immediately bring the release of the more than 460 children of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints compound near Eldorado, Tex. But it did seem to make that outcome very likely. Child-protection authorities said yesterday evening that they would comply if the trial court judge ordered the children returned.

Because the case involves state law, not federal statutes, legal experts said the Texas Supreme Court was as high as an appeal could go. That court agreed with a decision last week by the state Court of Appeals for the Third District, which rejected arguments at the heart of the state’s case.

“On the record before us, removal of the children was not warranted,” the nine-judge Supreme Court ruled. The court found that the protective services department had removed all the children after an April 3 raid, disregarding less-drastic options. “The Family Code gives . . . broad authority to protect children short of separating them from their parents and placing them in foster care.”

As I have said in the past, I am not a follower of the FLDS, but I also see this as a civil rights situation and IMO the Texas Supreme Court has made a good decision.

We Have Ways Of Making You Patriotic

For months I had been bitching that MSNBC was misleading the public in several ways.  Theyt nwere on board with Romeny and Huckabee and then with Clinton and now this story has come out about the reporting to assist in patriotic fervor.

CNN correspondent Jessica Yellin said Thursday she was referring to her time spent at MSNBC when she said she felt pressure not to report stories critical of the Bush administration during the time leading up to the Iraq war.

Yellin’s initial comments, made during a discussion with Anderson Cooper on CNN Wednesday, shifted attention to the news media’s performance following release of a critical assessment of the Bush administration by former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan. He wrote that Bush’s strategy for selling the war was less than candid and honest.

During her CNN appearance, Yellin said the press corps was under enormous pressure from corporate executives to make sure the war was presented “in a way that was consistent with the patriotic fever in the nation and the president’s high approval ratings.”

The higher Bush’s approval ratings, the more pressure she felt from news executives to put on positive stories about the president, she said. Pushed by Cooper to explain, Yellin said her bosses would turn down critical stories about the administration and try to put on positive pieces.

She said she didn’t mean to leave the impression that corporate leadership edited her work; she was referring to senior producers who “wanted their coverage to reflect the mood of the country.” She didn’t identify any of the producers or give a specific example about how things were changed because of this.

MSNBC spokesman Jeremy Gaines said Yellin was a “freelance overnight news reader at MSNBC for one year who was not renewed.” But he didn’t dispute Yellin’s claim that she did some Washington and Pentagon reports while there.

Back in the 1920’s Italian political theorist, Gramsci predicted that the mass media would become the leader in the formation of political thought of the people.  He was so accurate.

Is Bush Irrevelant?

I have found myself slightly agreeing with conserv. Pat Buchanan in the past several months.  I found this article written by him recently and wanted to share it with my readers.

After losing both houses of Congress in the 1994 election, Bill Clinton expostulated: The president of the United States is not irrelevant!

On learning his trusted aide from Texas Scott McClellan has denounced as an “unnecessary war” the same Iraq war McClellan defended from the White House podium, George Bush must feel as Clinton did.

The synchronized savagery of the attacks on McClellan as turncoat suggests he drew blood. For what he has done is offer confirmation to the president’s war critics, from within the White House inner circle, that Bush’s motive in going to war was not a clear and present danger of attack by Iraq with weapons of mass destruction, but to advance a Bush crusade to impose democracy on the Middle East.

Neoconservative ideology, not U.S. national interests, McClellan is saying, motivated Bush to launch one of the longest and most divisive wars in U.S. history.

When loyalists defect and seek to profit from that defection, it is usually a sign of a failing presidency. And, indeed, events suggest that history is passing Bush by.

Despite the administration’s designation of Hamas and Hezbollah as terrorist organizations, and of Syria and Iran as state sponsors of terror with whom we do not negotiate, America’s clients are ignoring America.

Israel has ignored Bush’s demand that it stop building and expanding settlements on a West Bank that is to be the heartland of a Palestinian state. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has been secretly negotiating with Syria for the return of the Golan Heights in exchange for peace.

When America refused to play honest broker between Jerusalem and Damascus, Turkey, at Israel’s request, stepped into the role.

The pro-American Lebanese government of Prime Minister Siniora has negotiated a truce and power-sharing arrangement with Hezbollah, giving that militant Shiite movement and party veto power in the Beirut government. Egypt is negotiating with Hamas for a truce in the Israeli-Gaza war and to effect the exchange of a captured Israeli solider held by Hamas for Hamas fighters held in Israel.

The Iranian Revolutionary Guard, designated a terrorist organization by the Senate, helped to arrange the ceasefire between government forces and the Mahdi Army in Basra and Sadr City. While the United States has used the roughest of language to denounce Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president has been received as an honored guest by the Iraqi government we support and by the Ayatollah Sistani, who has yet to meet a high-ranking American.

When Bush went to the Middle East to celebrate the 60th anniversary of Israel as the Zionist he has become, he was criticized by a Palestinian leader who survives on U.S. aid. When he went to Riyadh to plead for an increase in the flow of oil, he got a token concession from the king.

In Pakistan, the new government has been negotiating a truce with the radicalized frontier provinces, which would leave the Taliban with a privileged sanctuary from which to prepare their annual offensives to overthrow the government in Kabul and expel the Americans, as their fathers expelled the Russians.

As Russia and China move closer together to oppose U.S. missile defenses and the U.S. presence, military and economic, in the Caucasus and Central Asia, Latin America seems to be going its own leftward way. The halcyon days of the Alliance for Progress are long gone.

The world seems to be waiting for Bush to depart and for the next American president. For the foreign policy differences between John McCain and Barack Obama are as real and stark as they have been since the Reagan-Carter election of 1980, or the Nixon-McGovern election of 1972.

Looking back on the years since 9/11, it is hard to give the Bush foreign policy passing grades. We pushed NATO eastward and alienated Russia. We have 140,000 Army and Marine Corps troops tied down in Iraq in a war now in its sixth year, from which our NATO allies have all extricated themselves. We have another war going in Afghanistan, where the situation is as grave as it has been since we went in.

The Bush democracy crusade was put on the shelf after producing election triumphs for Hamas, Hezbollah and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. And the Bush Doctrine of preventive war, after Iraq, appears to be headed there, as well.

America remains the first economic and military power on earth. But after seven years of Bush, we no longer inspire the awe or hopes we once did. We are no longer the world hegemonic power of the neocons’ depiction. And the reason is that Bush embraced their utopian ideology of democratic empire and listened to their siren’s call to be the Churchill of his age.

Of Bush, it may be said he was a far better politician and candidate than his father, but as a statesman and world leader, he could not carry the old man’s loafers.