One Year And Counting

One year ago Lehmann Bros. died of skid marks, Goldman-Sachs was gasping for life and then the economic crisis was for real.  All of Wall Street went to Washington, to their paid agents in Congress for help and they got it and to the tune of $700 billion and with a far reaching tentacles that will run into the trillions when all is counted.

In an article by Barry Grey, he observed:

In what was meant to give the appearance of a stern rebuke, Obama declared, “I want everybody here to hear my words. We will not go back to the days of reckless behavior and unchecked excess at the heart of this crisis, where too many were motivated only by the appetite for quick kills and bloated bonuses. Those on Wall Street cannot resume taking risks without regard for consequences, and expect that next time, American taxpayers will be there to break their fall.”

He went further, implicating the American people in an economic catastrophe for which they bear no responsibility and whose victims they are. “The crisis was not just the result of decisions made by the mightiest of financial firms,” he declared. “It was also the result of decisions made by ordinary Americans to open credit cards and take on mortgages.”

He returned to this theme to proclaim that the crisis was a “failure of responsibility that led homebuyers and derivative traders alike to take reckless risks they couldn’t afford. It was a collective failure of responsibility in Washington, on Wall Street and across America…”

Obama linked his demand for “collective responsibility” with a pledge to impose austerity measures on the American people. He promised his well-healed audience that he would put the country “on a secure fiscal footing” by “cutting programs that don’t work.” He reiterated that his plan to slash health care for the working class, in the name of “reform,” would “not add a dime to the deficit.”

Obama characterized his regulatory proposals as “the most ambitious overhaul of the financial system since the Great Depression.” This is a fraud. He is proposing nothing approaching the structural reforms enacted under Franklin D. Roosevelt. On the contrary, he is opposing the restoration of any of the key elements of New Deal banking reforms that have been dismantled over the past three decades. This includes the Glass-Steagall ban on investment banking by commercial banks.

Instead, he is proposing a hodge-podge of minor measures which will do nothing to rein in the speculative activities of the banks and hedge funds. His Consumer Financial Protection Agency would merely establish a new agency to oversee consumer credit without giving it any powers beyond those presently spread out among a number of different regulators. In any event, this proposal is a dead letter because it is fiercely opposed by the banks.

Any regulatory “reform” that might emerge from Congress will be drafted by Wall Street lobbyists working behind the scenes with politicians bought and paid for with campaign contributions and other bribes. The Center for Responsive Politics recently reported that the financial industry, along with the insurance and real estate sectors, has already given more than $50 million in campaign contributions so far this year. The financial industry has spent more than $222 million lobbying Washington, where it deploys more than 2,300 lobbyists.

Sorry Progressives, but this is total crap!  Obama said NOTHING that would be good for the people living and dying on Main Street.  After one year of straightening out the crisis….and NOTHING has changed…..all involved are still too big to fail, they are still taking all that risk, they still receive massive bonuses, taxpayers still on the hook and finally there appears to be very little regulation that will be enacted, just minor tweaking to allow all this process to continue.

Obama is playing a dangerous game with the financial health of the country.

But….What Did The Prez Really Say?

Note:  This post was originally put on Progressive Independence (to visit go to blogroll).

I realized that after I posted on the speech the Prez recently made that I did not give enough details on what he is proposing.  I will try and rectify that oversight now.

The Prez gave his talk and most people, with the exception of conservs, really thought it was a good speech, but is he really caving to the base on this?  IMO, he is caving period.

These are the main points of the speech and I would like to thank the McClatchy Newspapers for this list:

•CURRENT COVERAGE: Those who’re now getting employer-provided coverage or are insured through Medicare, Medicaid or the Veterans Administration wouldn’t be required to change their plans or their physicians.

•COST: About $900 billion over 10 years.

•HOW IT WOULD BE PAID FOR: By finding “savings within the existing health care system,” mostly by trimming waste and rooting out fraud. Also, insurers would be charged a fee for their most expensive policies.

•HEALTH INSURANCE EXCHANGES: Consumers and small businesses without coverage could comparison shop at these marketplaces among private and perhaps also public plans. The competition is supposed to help reduce prices. The exchanges would take effect in four years.

PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS: Insurers wouldn’t be permitted to deny coverage because of pre-existing medical conditions. Nor could they cancel or dilute coverage when people get very sick.

AFFORDABILITY: No limits on how much coverage a consumer could get in a year or a lifetime — but limits on out-of-pocket health care expenses. Tax credits would be available for those needing aid.

PREVENTIVE MEDICINE: Insurers must cover, at no extra charge, regular preventive care and check-ups, such as mammograms, colonoscopies and routine check-ups.

•PUBLIC OPTION: People without coverage would be able to choose a nonprofit government-run insurance plan that would have the same rules and protections that private insurers do. A government option plan might be available only if private insurers fail to meet coverage benchmarks in designated markets. Alternatively, a nonprofit co-op might administer a competitive insurance plan.

CATASTROPHIC INSURANCE: Low-cost coverage would be available in the years before the exchanges are created to protect against financial ruin in case of a serious illness.

INDIVIDUAL INSURANCE MANDATES: Everyone would have to have basic insurance. Most businesses would be required to offer insurance or “chip in” to help cover workers. Only hardship cases and some small businesses would be exempt.

MEDICAL MALPRACTICE LAWSUITS: The administration will seek experimental “demonstration projects” in different states aimed at helping to revamp the tort system.

There you have the meat of the proposal and what part of it looks like he is caving to the Left?  Single payer is gone and almost forgotten…..public option will be a mere reflection of what it was suppose to do…..Medicare will take the brunt of any cuts and savings to pay for the above system…..and then there is the tidbit to try and pull in Repubs….tort reform, one of the GOP’s most  favorite reform that and those damn silly HSAs…..health savings accounts.

With all that said Obama is showing the sickness that has plagued liberals for decades….that the political choice is the lesser of two evils….instead of real reform Obama is pushing some middle of the road crap that will be turned over as soon as a new pres walks into the White House.  Instead of taking a bit out of the problem, he is just gumming at it.

The Dems seem to be living with the idea of a bi-partisan solution….this past summer…the summer of hate…has proven that to be a no deal.  Liberals are caught up in this pie in the sky attitude that “good people” will inject good character into the debate…..and the idiots have been proven wrong time and time again and yet they persist in the naivete. Liberals are full of good intentions but do not seem to have the guts to make them happen.

The proposal that the president is offering will probably pass because it is basically still protecting the people that are the problem….but my biggest question is will the Progressives fall for the pale imitation of the public option?

Afghanistan: What Have We Accomplished?

An Inkwell Institute paper

Subject:  Foreign Policy

Just recently Sen. McCain has called for more troops for deployment to Afghanistan–of all the people in the Congress, I do not understand McCain position.  Did he not learn anything from his deployment to Vietnam?  Does he not recall that an increase in troop strength came with an increase of American lives?  Has he not seen the polls that show a gradual but steady decline in the people who support the war in Afghanistan?

Eight years and counting and what has the US really accomplished in Afghanistan?  A question that needs to be asked and answered if the US is to succeed.  But first, What is the US mission in Afghanistan?

Before we go there we must understand the history of Afghanistan.  Thanks to afghancitizen.blogspot.com for the history lesson.

The land that is now Afghanistan has a long history of domination by foreign conquerors and strife among internally warring factions. At the gateway between Asia and Europe, this land was conquered by Darius I of Babylonia circa 500 B.C., and Alexander the Great of Macedonia in 329 B.C., among others. Mahmud of Ghazni, an 11th century conqueror who created an empire from Iran to India, is considered the greatest of Afghanistan’s conquerors.
Genghis Khan took over the territory in the 13th century, but it wasn’t until the 1700s that the area was united as a single country. By 1870, after the area had been invaded by various Arab conquerors, Islam had taken root. During the 19th century, Britain, looking to protect its Indian empire from Russia, attempted to annex Afghanistan, resulting in a series of British-Afghan Wars (1838-42, 1878-80, 1919-21).

And then Hell came to the country.

1978
Khan is killed in a communist coup. Nur Mohammad Taraki, one of the founding members of the Afghan Communist Party, takes control of the country as president, and Babrak Karmal is named deputy prime minister. They proclaim independence from Soviet influence, and declare their policies to be based on Islamic principles, Afghan nationalism and socioeconomic justice. Taraki signs a friendship treaty with the Soviet Union. But a rivalry between Taraki and Hafizullah Amin, another influential communist leader, leads to fighting between the two sides.
At the same time, conservative Islamic and ethnic leaders who objected to social changes introduced by Khan begin an armed revolt in the countryside. In June, the guerrilla movement Mujahadeen is created to battle the Soviet-backed government.
1979
American Ambassador Adolph Dubs is killed. The United States cuts off assistance to Afghanistan. A power struggle between Taraki and Deputy Prime Minister Hafizullah Amin begins. Taraki is killed on Sept. 14 in a confrontation with Amin supporters.
The USSR invades Afghanistan on Dec. 24 to bolster the faltering communist regime. On Dec. 27, Amin and many of his followers are executed. Deputy Prime Minister Babrak Karmal becomes prime minister. Widespread opposition to Karmal and the Soviets spawns violent public demonstrations.By early 1980, the Mujahadeen rebels have united against Soviet invaders and the USSR-backed Afghan Army.

1989
The U.S., Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the Soviet Union sign peace accords in Geneva guaranteeing Afghan independence and the withdrawal of 100,000 Soviet troops. Following Soviet withdrawal, the Mujahadeen continue their resistance against the Soviet-backed regime of communist president Dr. Mohammad Najibullah, who had been elected president of the puppet Soviet state in 1986. Afghan guerrillas name Sibhatullah Mojadidi as head of their exiled government.

Then after the withdrawal of the Soviets, the Taleban took control and began enforcing rigid fundamentalism on the population.  9/11 happened and after a short while the US and its allies invaded and removed the Taleban from power and began a search for the now infamous Osama.  He escaped capture and is still at large.

The US original task was to eliminate al Qaeda and in particular Osama, that has bee a bust…..the US slowed them down but they are just across the border gaining strength and allies as I write.  That task was a bust and now it has been retasked to providing security to the population from the terrorism of the Taleban and its allies.  That task is not going so well for there is daily suicide attacks killing Afghans and others.

The US task whatever it is deemed to be is NOT working well at all.  Why do we say such?  Easy answer…..recently elections have been deemed fraudulent…..the killing drones are killing as many civilians as bad guys……the drug trade still flows openly….Taleban is still a viable force….al Qaeda is still a viable force…..and finally as best we can tell Osama and his cronies are still breathing.

Once you take history and the tasks into consideration…then NOTHING is working well….and it seems to be all a waste of money and manpower and lives.