It's About Coalitions, Not Purity, Part Forty-Five

"The Chickens Come Home To Roost-George W. Bush's Second Term," Part 2

George W. Bush chose 3 nominees for the United State Supreme Court, although one of those, Harriet Miers, withdrew. Both John Roberts and Samuel Alito were confirmed, with opposition, by the U.S. Senate.*

In the late summer of 2005, a major hurricane, named Katrina, struck the U.S. Gulf coast. President Bush and his administration were slow to respond to what became a major crisis, as state and local governments struggled to accommodate those displaced by the violent storm, as well as to clean up the immense destruction caused by Katrina. Photos and videos of people begging for help from rooftops in flooded areas struck a raw nerve with many Americans, as they turned on the president and the conservative philosophy of people needing to do more to help themselves. The reports about the clean up and the overall catastrophe went on for months.

George W. Bush also tried to reform the immigration system, including what was termed, "a path to citizenship," but hard line conservatives opposed the measure, and it did not pass, in two separate attempts.

The war in Iraq continued, with the president sending more troops, a part of a "surge." When the surge helped to cut some of the violence in Iraq, President Bush and the Iraqi Prime Minister, Nouri Al Maliki, made an agreement with the goal of the withdrawal of U.S. forces by the end of 2011. During President Bush's entire second term, the debate over the use of torture to obtain information from prisoners came under intense fire at home and abroad. Further, responsibility for the faulty information used to get the U.S. into Iraq in the first place was front and foremost in the minds of many. The drumbeat had ceased to be the one leading to war, but rather one wanting answers and accountability for the previous drumbeat TO war.

Oil and gasoline prices surged ahead to new records, with the president and Republicans saying it was "just the free market at work." More and more another statistic began to be heard in economic reports... FORECLOSURES, as the numbers for such continued to escalate. The banking system began to show signs of strain (I'll cover the financial crisis in the next segment) and the president and congressional Democrats (Democrats controlled Congress after the 2006 election) worked together to get a tax rebate totaling about 150 billion dollars. As speculation in the oil and gas markets drove prices ever higher, I recall one analyst saying how a significant part of the tax rebate would go into the pockets of big time speculators. Ahh, c'mon, now. You don't think those greedy, no good bastards would do that, do you? After all, the Bush administration said it was "free markets." I guess pickpockets could claim the same thing... free markets.

Another sign of the free markets was showing..... tremendous stress on the Republican coalition.

Next.... The Chickens Come Home To Roost, But It's Too Hot In The Hen House ... The Financial Meltdown

* Justice Sandra Day O'Connor retired and then Chief Justice William Rehnquist died; thus the two Supreme Court vacancies. 

WORD HISTORY:
Term-This word, distantly related to "through," goes back to the Indo European root "terh," which had the idea of, "pass through, pass beyond," which then produced the extended "termen," which had the notion, "limit, boundary." This gave Latin "terminus," which meant, "boundary or limit:  geographically, time wise, contract wise;" thus also, "a word or expression." This gave Latin-based Old French "terme," and this was borrowed into English, circa 1200, initially with the ending "e."

It's About Coalitions Not Purity, Part Thirty-Three

"Clinton Leaves In More Controversy, Bush Takes Office"

Bill Clinton's controversial time in office closed with ... ah ... controversy. On his last day, Clinton, as most presidents do, made some pardons and sentence commutations, many of them involving a certain amount of controversy, but his pardon of Marc Rich drew a resoundingly negative response, even among many Democrats. Rich, who had been born in Belgium, but whose family fled to the United States to escape Hitler, was an American citizen who later became involved in the oil markets, including with Iran, even during the American hostage crisis and in spite of sanctions against Iran put in place by President Carter.* Rich's extensive overseas business dealings had him out of the United States for considerable periods of time. By the 1980s, Rich had been indicted by the U.S. government on criminal charges of tax evasion and illegal dealings with Iran. Rich was in Europe and remained there, thus becoming a wanted man. Later, the U.S. government changed its policy on tax evasion, choosing to pursue such matters in civil suits, rather than as criminal cases. Clinton said the criminal charge should be dropped in favor of the updated civil suit tax evasion procedure,** favoring a position argued by Rich's attorney, one "Scooter" Libby, a Republican, later heavily involved with Dick Cheney. One of the problems was, Rich's wife had made donations to Democrats, making the matter smell like a political deal, but the real problem was Rich's dealings with Iran during the hostage crisis.

Also as Clinton left office, the economy sagged, as high gasoline prices and the bursting of the so called "dot.com bubble" took a toll. The mid to late 1990s had seen a growth in the Internet and in companies doing business on the Web. The lure of the new technology brought stock buyers to these companies in large numbers, but the failure of some businesses to reap fast rewards eventually brought the stock prices tumbling and an uncertainty to the economy. Enter George W. Bush....

As Bush took office, the party division in Congress further highlighted the national split, just as the presidential vote had. Republicans retained control of the House by a narrow margin and the Senate was 50-50, but with Republicans in control by virtue of Vice President Cheney, as the vice president has a Senate vote in case of a tie. The new president proposed to use part of the then record budget surplus for tax cuts to help boost the economy.*** Many Democrats argued the proposed tax cuts would disproportionately favor the wealthy, and the battle was on.

Next... "Tax Cuts and 9/11"

* Rich's idea was, maintain good business relations with as many international leaders of oil nations as possible, including, or "perhaps especially," those out of favor in western countries. With oil scarcities, use the connections to buy oil at relatively cheap prices and then sell it to those willing to pay premium price, thus making millions.

** The pardon did not exempt Rich from civil suits and it levied a multi million dollar fine on him.

*** The budget surpluses looked larger than they actually were, because of Social Security being included in the overall federal budget numbers. Understand, that also means the budget deficits of previous years were really worse than most Americans realized, because of the inclusion of Social Security. What do I mean? Well, during that general era, Social Security was taking in more money than it paid out annually, thus, when added to the overall federal budget, it made surpluses look larger in the late 1990s, just as it had made federal deficits look smaller prior to that time.
   
WORD HISTORY:
Spear-This word traces back to Indo European "sper/spar," which had the notion of "pole." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "speri," which meant "spear." This gave Old English "spere," which meant "spear, lance," and this then became "spear." The verb form developed from the noun. Other Germanic languages have: standard German and Low German Saxon "Speer," Dutch "speer," West Frisian "spear." The North Germanic languages use a different word for this meaning.   

It's About Coalitions Not Purity, Part Thirty-Two

"The Contentious Election of 2000," Part Two
"It All Comes Down To A Few Hundred Votes In Florida"

The 2000 election came at a time when the country was enjoying "relative peace and prosperity," as well as budget surpluses.* The surge in Web-based businesses, and the explosion in stock prices for such businesses, masked the trend of a general decline in what I'll call "working class jobs," as both technology and a shift in jobs to foreign countries was accelerating, making it difficult for wage increases for many workers. On top of that, the increase in health insurance costs for those who had it, previously, but not always, picked up by employers, began to be shifted to employees, as employers deducted a percentage of insurance costs from their workers' paychecks, and often, co-pays for certain procedures or prescriptions increased for those covered. This process too seemed to be accelerating. Further still, the price of oil and gasoline, which had fallen tremendously in the late 1990s,** began to escalate at a rapid pace, and gasoline prices surged toward or above $2.00 a gallon for a time, adding psychological pain to the pain in the pocketbook for many Americans. All of these things, as well as perhaps a "weariness" with the Clinton scandals and political battles, must have had an effect on the electorate and tilted the electoral vote ever so slightly towards Republican Bush.

The 2000 election showed that while most Americans were fairly satisfied with the times, and Bill Clinton's popularity increased, Clinton had failed to build a large lasting coalition among voters, although, as I noted in the previous segment, Al Gore did win the popular vote over George W. Bush (see further below). Bush and his campaign emphasized Clinton's scandals, saying Clinton had embarrassed the country and undermined the presidency. Gore tried as much as possible to play down the topic of Clinton's sex scandals, even to the point of sparingly utilizing the politically adept Clinton in his campaign. The use of American troops in military actions, especially in eastern Africa, was also a target of the Republican campaign, as Bush noted that the United States should not be involved in such operations. Bush chose long time Washington insider Dick Cheney to be his running mate, and Gore chose Senator Joe Lieberman, also a veteran of Washington politics. Cheney, who had served as Secretary of Defense under George Bush (Senior), added military and foreign policy experience, experience which George W. Bush lacked.

The election showed Al Gore receiving nearly 48.4% of the popular vote to George W. Bush's nearly 47.9%, but Green Party candidate Ralph Nader garnered more than 2.7%. The Gore-Lieberman ticket led the Bush-Cheney ticket by about a half million votes. In the Electoral College, however, Bush won 271 votes to Gore's 266.*** A number of states were very close, barely tilting one way or the other, but none was as close as Florida, where the entire presidency hung in the balance. On election night and in the wee hours of the next day, news agencies first declared Gore the winner in Florida, but then changed it to Bush, before backing away from declaring any winner there. To make matters worse, Gore called Bush to concede Florida and the presidency, only to withdraw the concession as Bush's lead in Florida continued to narrow. Florida had 25 electoral votes, far above what was needed for Gore to be the next president, and just barely enough to give Bush the presidency. In what became a saga lasting for weeks, Bush had a narrow lead of about 1700 votes in Florida's unofficial returns, out of about 6 million votes. After a mandatory recount, done by feeding ballots back through machines, and after the counting of outstanding ballots from military personnel stationed in foreign countries, Bush held a lead of less than 1000 votes. It would get closer. Ralph Nader received more than 97,000 votes in Florida.

The issues involved after this point are many and would require at least another article or two to explain, but with such a close vote count, EVERY discrepancy took on major meanings,**** so this is VERY basic here. Gore legally asked for ballots to be hand counted in certain counties, but Florida law allowed only one week from election day for counties to submit revised totals from recounts. Gore received a favorable decision from the Florida Supreme Court, which extended that deadline for about two weeks. All recounts were not complete by that date and Florida declared Bush the victor by 537 votes. Gore protested, as tens of thousands of ballots had been rejected by the ballot counting machines, and the Florida Supreme Court ordered those ballots to be hand counted, a process that gave Americans some new terminology in the expression "hanging chad;" that is, ballots where the dot to be punched out indicating a vote for a particular person or issue remained connected to the ballot in some fashion; "hanging" from the ballot. News reports showed people involved in the count holding up ballots to try to determine the intent of the voter. It was a mess! Eventually the U. S. Supreme Court stopped all recounts by a 5-4 vote, which awarded Florida to George W. Bush, as Florida then used previously certified results as the final official tally. George W. Bush took the oath of office in January 2001.

* I failed to note this in an earlier segment, but the budget surpluses looked larger than they actually were, because of Social Security being included in the overall federal budget numbers. Understand, that also means the budget deficits of previous years were really worse than most Americans realized, because of the inclusion of Social Security. What do I mean? Well, during that general era, Social Security was taking in more money than it paid out annually, thus, when added to the overall federal budget, it made surpluses look larger in the late 1990s, just as it had made federal deficits look smaller prior to that time.

** If my memory is right, and please note this caution, I seem to remember paying as little as about eighty-five cents a gallon for gasoline in maybe about 1998. 

*** One elector from Washington D.C. abstained in protest over the lack of representation in Congress for the District of Columbia, but had been a Gore voter, abstaining only when this one vote did not make a difference. The Electoral College provides for each state to receive one electoral vote for each congressional district within its boundaries, as well as one vote each for the two U.S. senators. So if state "XYZ" has eight congressional districts, it has ten electoral votes (8 +2). The smallest number of electoral votes a state can have is three. The District of Columbia, which has no voting member of the House of Representatives and no senators, was given three electoral votes. There are 538 electoral votes available nationwide; 435 congressional districts, and 100 senators, plus the three votes for the District of Columbia. A candidate needs at least 270 electoral votes to win the presidency, so George W. Bush was just over the line.

**** Just a few of the many issues involved were: first, a confusing ballot design in one heavily Democratic county had resulted in Reform Party candidate Pat Buchanan receiving what was seen as an unusually large number of votes in that county, 3400, far more than he received in any other Florida county, and "over votes;" that is, where more than one candidate was selected for president. Buchanan received less than a half million votes nationwide, which represented less than a half a percent of the overall vote. Second, a controversial removal of voters from the rolls in Florida by Republican elected officials were found to be incorrect; that is, a number of voter names were removed from the rolls for being "felons," but they were not, and some such voters were never informed of their removal until they tried to vote on election day. Third, Republican Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, the state's chief election officer, was heavily involved in the Bush campaign.   

WORD HISTORY:
Stab-The origin of this word is uncertain to some, but I'm not one of them. It is really a variant form of "stub" used in part of Scotland as "stob," and borrowed into English usage in the 1300s. Up until then, English used forms of "stick" and "sting" to indicate the action of "stab." It goes back to Indo European "steupb," which had the notion of "hit, beat, knock, push." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "stubjaz," which had the same meanings, but also developed meanings for things from the result of being "hit or pushed." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "stybb," meaning a "tree stump;" that is, the remnant of a tree after been hit or knocked by humans, wind, lightning. This later became "stubb(e)," before the modern version. The verb developed from the noun, with the idea of making something "stubby" or leaving a "stub" after pulling, cutting, or hitting (plants, hair/whiskers, ticket), and of course, the OUCH part of hitting your toe or finger against something. So "stab" follows the same course, with the notion of "cutting, pushing a sharp object into something." The noun form of course comes from the idea of the result of  "being pierced by a sharp object."

It's About Coalitions Not Purity, Part Ten

First published September 2012 
See NOTE at bottom of article for update


The Reagan Coalition and the Rise of the American Political Right, Part Two

You can't really understand the election of Ronald Reagan, unless you understand the presidency of Jimmy Carter. Jimmy Carter and the nation faced a serious problem over a continuing energy problem, or perhaps it would be better to say, over a lack of energy. Oil and gasoline prices soared, dragging the price of everything else along. The long time Democratic coalition continued its disintegration, and overseas, a fundamentalist Muslim revolution in Iran brought down the American supported government of the Shah of Iran, only to be replaced by a fanatical fundamentalist Muslim cleric, the Ayatollah Khomeini. Iranian students and revolutionaries took over the American embassy in November 1979, along with more than fifty Americans who were held hostage. The crisis had grave consequences, which are still with us today.* As the crisis went on, it was eventually covered by the news media as, "Day 79 of the Iran Hostage Crisis," .... "Day 101 of the Iran Hostage Crisis," .... Day 250 of the Iran Hostage Crisis..." and so on and so on. Americans were angry and frustrated, as no one really knew what to do. After the first couple of months of the crisis, it was revealed that Canada had hidden several American diplomats in their embassy in Iran, eventually granting special "Canadian passports" to the Americans and then flying them out of Iran to safety. All over the United States the announcement was greeted by standing ovations for the Canadians and Canadian flags were displayed and the Canadian national anthem played on radio stations and at sporting events, it was a little victory in a dismal situation, as the actual hostages remained in Iran.

In the midst of all that was going on, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. This prompted President Carter to have the American team boycott the 1980 Olympic Games, which were held in Moscow. It was a decision that brought mixed reviews, as many critics, fairly or unfairly, believed the Olympics should have been free of international politics.** 

President Carter also negotiated a treaty with Panama to turn control of the Panama Canal over to Panama on December 31, 1999, while maintaining the neutrality of the canal, so it could be used by all nations, and giving the U.S. the right to enforce that neutrality. Conservatives exploded, accusing Carter of giving away control of a necessary American shipping passageway to a dictator (which was true, as the ruler of Panama had taken power in an overthrow of the government several years before). The Senate ratified the treaty anyway, but conservatives fumed for years over the loss of what was "like sovereign American territory," as I believe some of them put it, and perhaps even Ronald Reagan said it, I just forget, as he opposed ratification of the treaty.

With inflation a constant problem, and gasoline prices at record highs (the Middle East/Iran situation),*** the economy stumbled along in a period of what was termed "stagflation;" that is, stagnant economic growth, but persistently high inflation which was threatening to climb to double digits. President Carter wore a sweater, told Americans to adjust their thermostats to help control energy costs, and a 55 mph highway speed limit had already gone into effect under President Nixon in 1974. At first, many Americans saw the need for such measures, but Americans were not used to such things, and many people began to resent the conservation measures. In an effort to get control of rising prices and restore economic growth, President Carter, a moderate, appointed Paul Volcker as Federal Reserve Chairman. Volcker began to raise interest rates, but with rate increases came a downturn in economic growth, which brought Carter trouble from labor unions and businesses. The 1980 election season was then underway. 

* The U.S. imposed economic sanctions against Iran back then, which were later intensified over other matters, and these sanctions continue to the present, President Obama having turned the screws even more tightly. The American public was so outraged over the hostage taking (countries had long agreed to the non arrest of foreign diplomatic personnel and to help protect such personnel from harm), that politicians were careful not to be seen as in any way associating with Iran, thus keeping any diplomatic ties from being reestablished, and preventing talks aimed at averting other crises. With no presence in Iran, when the anti-government protests developed there a year or two ago, the U.S. was pretty much out in the cold. Now, the other side of this is certainly true; that is, while Khomeini died in 1989, the religious fundamentalist governmental system he established is still in place, and this government not only allowed American embassy personnel to be held captive, but actively supported it. The problem is, no one, Republican or Democrat, really knows what to do about the situation, in spite of hot-air rhetoric to the contrary. The Middle East has been a powder keg for decades, seemingly waiting for the lit match. The world dependence on oil from the Middle East has given countries there a daunting trump card, as anything that threatens the world oil supply sends oil/gasoline prices skyrocketing, threatening economic turmoil everywhere. 

** In retaliation, the Soviets boycotted the 1984 Olympics in Los Angeles.   

*** For much of the 1970s gasoline prices were high compared to previous decades, and this was in large part due to the Middle East being so unstable, including war between Israel and Arab nations, and revolution in Iran.

NOTE: The situation with Iran goes far beyond the revolution there and the taking of American hostages in late 1979, but the tensions between many nations, including the U.S., and Iran do trace back to the Iranian Revolution. In more recent times, Iran began research and development in the nuclear field. This brought more sanctions from the U.S. and others. In 2015, the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Russia, and several other countries reached an agreement with Iran over nuclear research and sanctions against Iran. 

WORD HISTORY:
Shot-This word, closely related to "shoot," goes back to Indo European "skeud," with the notion of "to project, to throw, to move quickly." This gave its Old Germanic offspring a noun "skot(an)," "something thrown or discharged, the result of shooting." This then gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "sceot," with the same meaning, but also "a payment, a contribution" presumably from the notion of "handing over; that is, projecting the payment to another." It had this same ("payment") or similar ("tax") meaning in the other Germanic languages too, but this meaning has died out, except in the expression "scot free;" literally, "payment free," and the original hard "c" or "k" sound is still present, while in "shot" the sound softened. Common in various forms in the other Germanic languages: German has "Schoss," which means "lap (of a person);" that is, "a projection from a sitting person," and also "a young sprout from a plant, for which English uses the related "shoot;" further, German has "Schuss," meaning "shot." Low German Saxon has "Schott" (shot) and "Schoot" (lap of a person). Saterland Frisian has "Schoat" (shot) and "Schoot" (lap); Dutch has "schot" (shot) and "schoot" (lap of a person). Danish has "skud" (shot) and skød (lap); Icelandic has "skot" (shot); Norwegian has "skudd" (shot); Swedish has "skott" (shot). Notice that the North Germanic languages, Danish, Icelandic, Norwegian and Swedish have all retained the "k" sound.

The World In Protest, Revolution or Civil War? Part 2

This article was first published in late 2011.

From North Africa stretching into the Middle East, protest movements have developed to change the societies in the various nations in these regions. Many of the countries have been ruled by autocratic dynasties or dictators, and much of the wealth has been concentrated in the upper strata of those societies. The protest movements seem not only to want to change the governing style of their nations, but to also make their nations fairer in terms of income distribution. Underlying everything is the desire to have more control of how they are governed. "Freedom" in and of itself does NOT guarantee success, and we will have to see how events develop in these countries over time. Remember, being able to vote in free elections is great, but it does not mean a substantial part of the voting public won't vote for religious radicals, or some other dictator to replace the one they have just ousted. Freedom also does not guarantee economic success. The United States and some other parts of the world are still mired in an economic mess created by too little government regulation, not too much. The prevailing economic/political philosophy of the last thirty some years has been "get government out of the way; government isn't the solution to the problem, government IS the problem; turn people loose to do whatever they want." You are, and have been, witnessing the result of that philosophy.

Part of this "less government" philosophy has been about less power in the federal government, with the desire to see power shifted to the individual states. The overall discussion is worthy, but let's not forget, the Civil War was fought over states' rights, more specifically in those times, a desire to permit slavery to continue. You know, slavery...the owning of one human being by another. Is this God's will? Is this Christian? Is this Judeo-Christian? Is this religious? One of the major points of my series, "The German Question," was, "You can't have a true nation without a strong national government." Again, how strong that government should be is a valid question, but some of the notions proposed by people like nutty Ron Paul is to essentially dismantle the federal government. On the other hand, I also tried to show in that series how a super strong national government (the Nazi era) can be disastrous.

America is moving more and more toward a society totally dominated by the wealthy, a plutocracy. They aren't elected, but they have such huge sums of money, they can convince Eskimos to by ice cream cones. As president, Obama has done little to really take them on. The little he did, or tried to do, brought an immense backlash from the wealthy reactionaries of this country, and their minions in the GOP. If you're going to get lambasted, you may as well go for the whole hog, and not just the curly little tail. He chose not to do that. Instead, he let a discredited (momentarily) group get back up off the floor, and he's been paying the price, and so has the country, ever since.

Make no mistake about it, the wealthy interests run the country. Look at profits. Many companies are doing better than EVER! And we just dodged a depression, and we have yet to really climb out of a damaging recession. Why? Look at prices. For a country with 9% unemployment,* prices are way above what is healthy for the country, but they are sure healthy for rich company owners and investors. They are doing just fine. The price of most things are really controlled by the wealthy. They buy stock and DEMAND that those companies they've invested in make more money, so they'll make more money. They buy futures in things like oil and gasoline, driving up prices, making money there, and forcing prices on EVERYTHING, products and services, higher. They sell products overseas, EVEN OIL AND GASOLINE,** to make big bucks, but prices here rise further due to what they can then claim are "tight markets." The oil companies tell us all the time how they employ people, but they don't say that its the high prices that are strangling many Americans who are paying for this. They put money into some pockets with one hand, and take money out of those same pockets with the other hand. Don't be fooled by all of the nonsense talk and ad campaigns (well, I just said "nonsense talk"). Food prices have always had price swings, but now, with money managing companies and hedge funds, 24/7 monitoring of prices minute by minute, the wealthy can cause prices on certain items to soar almost instantaneously. Once they make a bundle, they get out, and move on to the next victim, like the scavengers many of them are. And they are feeding off of YOU!***

If you consider yourself a Republican, you'd better head to the nearest mirror, look into that mirror, and ask yourself some VERY serious questions. Taking your party back from some of these bizarre nutcases will help the country, trust me.

* I know unemployment just fell to 8.6%, but unless things really pick up, and I seriously doubt that will happen quickly, the rate will go back up, probably to about 8.8%. Of course that's just my guess, but we'll see.

** If you are aware of the big argument over the proposed oil pipeline from Canada through much of the central U.S., no matter what your basic beliefs on the issue, this oil is destined for sale in China, not in the U.S. Of course, the big boys are saying (with some truth) it will help employ some Americans.

*** Weather can certainly affect food prices. This year, some parts of the country had too much rain, while other parts had some of the worst drought conditions on record. Okay, we get it, but with the scenario I described above, prices soar on many items, way above what once happened, and the on top of that, some companies then sell "supposedly scare products" overseas!!! Why? Mo' money, mo' money, mo' money!

WORD HISTORY:
Ride-This word "seems" to go back to a possible Indo European "reidh," which meant "to ride, to travel," but please note, besides Germanic, there are connections to Celtic (also with connotations of travel/transport), another branch of Indo European, but that is it, and that is a bit odd for such an important word. Celtic and Germanic had lots of contact in ancient times, and one could have borrowed a form of the word from a non-Indo European source, with the other then borrowing it from them. Of course, both could have borrowed it separately from the same source. What ever the case, Old Germanic had "ridan(an)," with the meaning "to move forward, to travel." This gave Anglo-Saxon (Old English) "ridan," meaning "to ride," and this later became "riden," before the modern spelling. Forms are common in the other Germanic languages, except modern Frisian, although Old Frisian had "rida," which has now died out. German has "reiten," Low German Saxon has "rieden," other Low German dialects have "riede," Dutch has "rijden" Icelandic has "ríða," Swedish has "rida," Danish has "ride," and Norwegian has "ri."

The Greed "Gushes" Forth

The greed mongers and egomaniacs are at it again. Oil and gasoline prices have been escalating as they did a few years ago (prices for many things will follow, as virtually EVERYTHING we do is related to oil/gasoline prices). Folks, there is no shortage of oil.* We all know about the unrest in several oil producing countries, and that has become the excuse for the mad rush to make "mo' money, mo' money, mo' money!" (Don't forget the schemes they came up with to get "mo' money" in the mortgage game. Probably many of the same people, and certainly people of the same mindset.) Any drop in output from Libya has already been made good, according to cooler heads. No folks, this isn't even about what the free marketers like to call "supply and demand;" nope, it's purely about GREED and about the attempts by some egomaniacs to soothe their troubled minds (VERY TROUBLED, in my opinion, with no way to EVER soothe them-see the Word History below, specifically the modern German word for "greed").

They have been unleashed by the free marketers, and if the situation continues, America will continue its decline from the top perch to where the bird doo doo falls. Make no mistake about it folks, the possibility of American decline will never stop these egomaniacs, in case you think that might happen. No, that would assume some sort of rational behavior, and this ego maniacal behavior is not rational; it exploits. If the United States were on its last leg and was about to topple because of these bastards, they would not stop. That's part of the reason for the "anti-government" campaign we've had for more than thirty years. Without government at some level willing to put a stop to their nonsense, they can do anything they want, without fear of repercussions; and so they have, and so they continue. Unions are one of the last organized forms of resistance to the overall rightward shift in the country. The assault on unions will further weaken opposition to them.

Meanwhile, I sit and watch the country decline, as the money transfers from our pocketbooks into their bank accounts. If you're young, you're probably going to have a hell of a time in your life. If you're older, your kids and grandkids are likely going to struggle in this country, where the top income people have taken over. We've lost our balance.


* For those at the other extreme, gasoline is unlikely to be 99 cents a gallon, unless we kick the oil habit; thus not only bringing prices down (true "supply and demand"), but also ending our involvement in wars (and the tremendous cost in lives and national treasure in those wars) over oil. Do any of you truly believe Americans would have given a good damn about Iraq's invasion of Kuwait more than twenty years ago, if Kuwait didn't have lots of oil? We essentially had little choice; we're stuck. That involvement then led to heavier involvement in 2003, clear up until the present. We're stuck too, if turmoil hits others countries, even if we don't get much, if any, oil from those countries, since the countries who do use that oil will then turn to our suppliers; thus driving up prices. That is, like it or not, supply and demand.


WORD HISTORY:
Greedy/Greed-This goes back to a form of Indo European "gher" (or perhaps "gher-d"), which meant "to want, to long for, to like." This gave Old Germanic the offshoot "graedigaz," which seems to have had the more specific notion of "liking or wanting/desiring food, to be hungry" (hunger implying "craving/desire for food"). This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "graedig/gredig," with the idea of "big appetite," and also "desirous/covetous," and eventually "greedy." The spelling later changed to "gredi/gredy," before the modern spelling was adopted. It wasn't until the 1500s that English use of "greed" developed from "greedy." The other Germanic languages with forms of "greedy" are: Dutch has "gretig," Danish and Norwegian have "grådige," Swedish has "girig," Icelandic has "gráðugur." German once had "gratag" for "greedy," and obviously related to our word. Modern German has "Habsucht," from "hab"=have + "sucht"="obsession" (so: "an obsession to have, to possess") and also "Habgier" ("insatiable desire to have") and Dutch, besides "gretig," already mentioned above, has the closely related "hebzucht." Note: "German "Sucht" (and Dutch "zucht") is/are related to English "sick," although its more easily seen in it main form "siech(en)," which means "to be very sick, wasting away." Hm, so in German and Dutch these particular words have greed being connected to sickness. I LIKE IT! Nothing like some truth.

Gas Cramps

I hope you will take a moment to click on the link below and to check out the article. Americans are easily distracted, and the economy, health care reform , the Winter Olympics, and a fresh pot of coffee can divert attention from other important issues. Trust me, oil and gas prices are VERY important, and the price of both played an important role in bringing the economy to its knees; something glossed over because of the magnitude of the housing mess the "wealthy interests" got us into, although not without a lot of help from others. (A Word History is below the link)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/raymond-j-learsy/80-barrel-oil-the-billion_b_471008.html

WORD HISTORY:
Duke-This word goes back to Indo European "deuk," which meant "to lead" (in a very broad sense, as for instance, it is also the source of our word "tug," a small boat that pulls; that is, "leads" a larger boat or ship). This gave Latin "dux," which initially meant "military commander," but later also meant the more specific "military leader of a province," and in some cases just "a type of prince or noble who leads a province." (Mussolini took the name "Duce," or "leader," which is a modern Italian form of the word, and combined the meanings of "military leader and governmental leader.") The Latin gave Old French "duc," and this, in turn, gave English "duke" in the 1100s, but at that time it was only used as a title for foreign leaders who already carried that title, and it was not until the 1300s that English began using "duke" as a title for a particular English nobleman.

Will We Let Them Destroy Us?

The serious economic crisis that we have been experiencing didn't just decide to pay us a visit for the hell of it. It happened because of unchecked greed. The philosophy that the best regulation is no regulation came back to bite us on our behinds, and the bite was so severe, we still can't sit comfortably. Government, at whatever level, can't stop human beings from our various desires, but it can put a clamp on how those desires manifest themselves. Libertarians will say that this is stifling freedom, and the wealthy beneficiaries of the "no regulation" philosophy love that kind of talk. The neighborhood burglar would love the repeal of breaking and entering laws, too; after all, those laws are stifling his desires. Of course, there IS a difference. There isn't much of a constituency for burglars, but the wealthy investors of the country have lots of money to toss around to convince the public that if there are laws to control "the sit on their ass class," that this is not in the interest of the average American. I'd say that to a great extent, they have succeeded, even though this nonsense is NOT in the interest of non-rich Americans. Remember folks, the upper level income groups are able to hire the absolute best public relations people in the world. We are bombarded on a daily basis with all sorts of advertisements telling us how one product is better than another. These people know how to make a case, no doubt about it. They are good at what they do, but that doesn't mean they should be left to run over and flatten many other Americans.

The "sit on their ass class" also has the resources to hire the best financial and legal minds in the world to help them with their "desires." With a certain segment, those desires are insatiable. With those less aggressive, they can't let the others get ahead of them, or they will lose status, and thus the merry-go-round continues, but the rest of us are paying the fare. Even if during these last three decades of massive deregulation, the government hadn't been so lax about regulation, it could never have kept up with these folks, as they have people working the system for them 24/7. Government is overwhelmed and so is the public. And don't get the idea that government at some level could pay some of these financial experts lots of money to join in an investigation of the financial system. There would be ads run telling us how our tax money is being spent and wasted on such things, and my guess is, many Americans would agree. As I've said here numerous times, this isn't actually a conspiracy, it is self-interest, and the wealthy KNOW what is in THEIR own interest. Many in the public don't understand, nor do many people want to take the time to understand, the complex nature of the financial system that the "sit on their ass class" has fashioned. The less we know, the better for them. That's why we need strong government regulation and regulators who have the desire to regulate. It may not be perfect, but we've got to get a handle on this situation. Even after this terrible crisis, the rich are still running the country and the "too big to fail" businesses are even bigger.

At a time when the economy is struggling to make a comeback, "the sit on their ass class" has gotten oil and gasoline prices way above what they were just a year ago. They are pushing gas prices toward $3.00 a gallon, and trust me, if we don't do something to stop these greedy bastards, $4.00 and $5.00 a gallon is not far off. That siphons money from the rest of the economy right into the pockets of...I'll give you one guess. These same folks, and people like them, didn't put petroleum products on futures markets because they thought it would help YOU or the country or the world, they did it, just as they did with complicated mortgage investments, to help themselves. With few people to speak up for the rest of the population, they have made a bundle. Many of these same people didn't push for "free trade" because it would help American workers, rather I'd say, just the opposite, they wanted to circumvent American labor. Now, I'm not saying making money is bad, but they have just ramrodded us and stuffed their pockets and bank accounts, using their gains to make more money, while average Americans have been falling behind, some way behind, even after working harder than ever (less pay and benefits for more work).

During the late 1960s and then the 1970s, Americans came to realize that government couldn't do everything that we had come to expect of it. Now Americans must recognize that free markets have the same problem, or will we let them destroy us?

WORD HISTORY:
Simmer-A pretty common word in today's English, but not much is known about it. Prior to the mid-1600s, it was "simperen," or "simber(en);" I found both. Where it came from is unknown, but some speculate that the original word was imitative of the sound of bubbling liquid. By the 1700s, the word also began to be applied to human emotions "being agitated." About a hundred years later, this meaning brought about the opposite meaning of "simmer down;" that is, "get emotions, usually anger, under control." Now this is just MY question: Could it be related to "simper?"

Will The Dems Finally Act?

Regular readers know that I've been preaching here for quite some time about how the country has been taken over by the wealthy business interests in the country. There are many important issues in this country, war and peace certainly being one, but in my opinion, in the end, what will destroy the country is how we deal with the economy and the standard of living for all Americans, not just the rich. The philosophy that spawned the take over by the "interests" was put in place just shy of thirty years ago. In the early Reagan years, many Americans could not have foreseen how the mighty would truly become THE mighty in the country within just a couple of decades. We have two major political parties to help balance things out in how the country operates. During much of the last thirty years many Democrats in Congress supported a lot of conservative policies. I said "many Democrats," but certainly not all. Some of those Dems were so conservative, that they switched parties and became Republicans. Additionally, during his two terms, President Clinton, a Democrat, also signed into law a number of policies that were heavily supported by conservatives in the country, including the repeal of some significant regulation of the banking industry, proposed mainly by then Senator Phil Gramm, Republican of Texas.* So, I'm not just picking on Republicans, but it was their favored philosophy that prevailed for almost thirty years, and it was that philosophy that helped put the country into the predicament it is now in economically.** In essence, however, WE are to blame.

We watched oil and gasoline prices spiral to heights never believed possible. We watched as higher energy prices drove the price of just about everything higher. We watched as the price of many other food products soared, because of "supposed scarcity." We watched the country's wealth dissipate in trade imbalances that boggled the mind. We watched as middle class Americans saw their collective incomes shrink. We watched as Wall Streeters and other wealthy Americans "cleaned up" on high prices for everything, transferring money from OUR pockets into THEIR bank accounts. We watched as Wall Streeters and other wealthy Americans used that money to drive prices even higher, thus perpetuating the transfer of wealth from low and middle income Americans to the very wealthy. We watched as these same greed mongers helped (unwittingly, I'm NOT saying this was a conspiracy) foreign nations, some of them openly hostile to America, reap the benefits of higher oil prices, "fueled," if you'll pardon the expression, by the obsessive greed of our own greediest people. We watched as home prices surged to absurd levels, driven higher by mortgages granted to anyone who had a heartbeat, and maybe even to some who didn't. We watched as people who hated the idea of government, be put in charge of the government! Then these same imbeciles charged that the government doesn't work right! If you ever wanted to know what the Wild West was like, this stuff was pretty much comparable; that is, no law and order, except for the wealthy, who were a law unto themselves.

Now we've had a new President since late January. We've had Democrats in control of the House of Representatives. We've had Democrats in charge of the U.S. Senate. So what's been done to change all of the absolute nonsense that had been going on? Ah...NOTHING! Well, I guess there is going to be a policy to cut back on Wall Street bonuses announced some time today, supposedly for one year, but that is insufficient for the magnitude of the problem. The whole system was taken over by wealthy interests. Corporate board members have been as cozy as cucumbers on a vine with CEOs and other corporate officers. These folks approved all of these bonuses and exorbitant salaries. The average shareholder is just like dust on the floor.

We have the greedy back to driving oil and gas higher. Let me tell you, how much do you want to bet that many a Wall Street business is behind that? They'll destroy the country, because they are so obsessed by greed and ego trips that they don't even see how they hurt the country by taking money from the pockets of average Americans AND helping transfer more of our wealth overseas to oil producing countries. I know many people don't agree with me on this at this time, but you watch, if nothing is done, many Americans will be screaming for Uncle Sam to nationalize the oil industry in this country, just to get a handle on the abuses that have gone on. Survival will outweigh all this "socialist" malarkey shouted by some people who don't even see their own self interest. And they are urged on by people who fully understand their own self interest. Can you guess who they are? All of the negative ads appearing on your television screen didn't get there by magic. They were funded by someone. Any attempts to change the system that now favors the "big boys," will face well funded opposition, and you can put that in a Wall Street bank account. (A "Word History" is below the notes)

* Gramm was one of those former Democrats who changed parties.

** Very concisely, but not all inclusive, that philosophy entailed big tax cuts for the very wealthiest Americans, free trade policies with countries whose workers earned only a fraction of what American workers made, thus putting our own workers at a serious disadvantage, and the idea of "the best regulation is no regulation." That last notion was in place as the conditions mounted that would cause the economy to melt before the very eyes of those who opposed regulation so much, like Christopher Cox, George W. Bush's head of the Security & Exchange Commission, better known by its initials, SEC, but he was not alone!

WORD HISTORY:
Now-This very common word goes back to Indo European "nu," and meant "at the present time." This gave many of the Indo European dialects (later separate languages) a form of the word, as Sanskrit, an ancient relative of English, had "nu," and Latin had "nunc," and Greek had/has "nun/nyn/nu" (I found three different versions). The Germanic languages also kept a form of the word, and this gave Old English "nu." The other Germanic languages also still have forms: German has "nun," Dutch has "nu/nou," Norwegian has "na," Danish has "nu/na," and Swedish has "nu."

Siphoning Money From Our Gas Tanks

The country remains in what is now being called, "The Great Recession." The price of many things have fallen, largely in an orderly manner; that is, we've not had a panic driven deflation that has sent the economy spiraling into the abyss. Of course, those stalwarts of the "investment industry," better known to me as "the sit on their ass class," have chosen to continue to extract more money from the American economy through higher oil and gasoline prices.

Every dollar siphoned from our pockets into their bank accounts means less for the rest of us to spend on things that might actually help bring the economy back. I've heard it said several times on CNBC* in the past, that for every penny gasoline goes up on an annual basis, it costs American consumers one billion dollars.** I've not heard anyone challenge that info, so I'll take it that it is pretty accurate. The best thing Americans can get out of the greedy bastards is that "it is cheaper than last year." I've been saying for a long, long time here that these greedy egomaniacs will destroy the country, and much of the wreckage is already lying around us. The "investor class" has already helped bring the country to its knees. Do they stop? Hell no! Mo' money! Mo' money! Mo' money!

Now that NASA has bombed the moon to see if there is water there, what we really need for the space agency to do is, find out if there is money either on the moon or on some other planet. If so, they'll be able to sell tickets to our greediest citizens to go there, because there isn't enough money for them on THIS planet! (A "Word History" is below the notes)

* CNBC is a cable business channel owned by NBC Universal.
** Remember, this is on an annual basis.

WORD HISTORY:
Siphon-This word, originally just a noun, traces back to Greek "siphon," which meant "tube or pipe." Greek is an Indo European language related to English, but further down the "family tree," although many words, or root words in English, and indeed in many of the Indo European languages, have come from Greek, albeit at times via Latin, or a Latin based language. From what I can find, linguists haven't been able to trace "siphon" back to some Indo European, or other, base, up to this point in time. Latin picked up the word from Greek as "sipho," as the singular form, with a long "i" sound and a long "o" sound. Latin is another Indo European language, likewise related to English further down the "family tree." French, a Latin based language, continued with "siphon," and English seemingly acquired the word from French at some point, perhaps in the 1500s or most definitely by the 1600s. During the mid 1800s, a verb form seems to have emerged from the noun, with the meaning "drawing in or expelling liquid through a tube" (often used in reference to some sea creatures with such tubes), but apparently it wasn't until World War Two that the idea of "diverting a liquid (gasoline) from one container (gas tank) to another container (a gas can) by way of a tube," developed.

Greed Has No Conscience

The greedy bastards are right back at it, folks! Oil and gasoline are soaring, just as if we've learned nothing about the economic mess we plunged into. The self-centered, egomaniacs will do anything and everything to get that money, even though they already have plenty. Then, I'm sure, they'll turn around and whine about their taxes going up 3% and perhaps having to live by some rules and regulations of the "free markets," which is a term they choose to use so they can gouge us at every turn; all the while cutting workers pay and/or benefits. The income gap in America didn't get to be the way it is because things are fair to middle and lower income Americans. If the Obama Administration allows this crap to start all over, then they'll go the way of Bush and his minions. And they deserve it! They need to take a stand now, before this all heads off any chance for an economic recovery.

I'm not saying that 99 cent a gallon gasoline should prevail, but what these people already did to us should serve as a reminder as to what they will do again, if left unchecked. If all the millions and millions of dollars in bonuses made you angry, then you need to focus on what's happening NOW! Don't let the economic downturn, or Pakistan, or health care, or any other issues distract you from the doings of these ever greedy bastards!*** Write a letter or send an email to your congressional representative and your senators, as well as to the White House.

In the past year, we've heard consideration of nationalizing banks, insurance companies and auto companies (taxpayers already own like 75-80% of insurance company, AIG, and varying percentages of some banks, with auto companies to follow, but these are "probably" temporary measures, and should be such). What really needs to be nationalized are ENERGY products!!! We've still got all of these vital products in the hands of the greedy, and the greedy have no conscience. They'll further ruin the country for their own interests.

*** I'm NOT saying that these issues and others aren't important, they most certainly are important.

Word History:
Big-While this is an extremely common word today, it only seems to have come into English usage during the 1300s, and this was in the dialects of northern England where there was much influence from Old Norse, a North Germanic language, leading many linguists to believe it was brought to England by the Danes, and some linguists feel there is a connection to the Norwegian dialect word "bugge," meaning "great or important man;" however, the other Germanic languages do not have any known forms of the word. Gradually the word moved south across England. No other reliable information is available on the origins of "big." Initially, the word meant "powerful, strong." The notion of being "strong" or "powerful" progressed to the meaning of "large" by the latter part of the 1300s. Just a little note, "bigwig" came from the notion of the large wigs worn by important men in England.

Older Folks Hurt By The Economy

Wanted to post this link to an article about how many elderly people are being hurt by economic conditions. For years, Americans dreamed of the days when they could retire, and for years retirees could enjoy their "golden years." Now the situation has changed for many, and it bodes ill for those approaching retirement age.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25804814/

The Ill Winds Of Hurricane Dolly & Speculators

I've never been through a hurricane, at least not the weather type, anyway. As "Hurricane Dolly" approaches American shores, some may say, "well, its only a minimal hurricane." Hey, hurricanes are dangerous storms, no matter the category. I think at times how bad a storm is here in Cleveland when the winds gust at 50 or 60 miles an hour. Even a "minimal" hurricane has winds of 74 miles an hour, and those are SUSTAINED winds, not gusts. In fact, gusts may clock in 80 to 100 miles an hour. The high surf, for those near the shore, can be deadly, and certainly destructive to property. The heavy rain can cause terrible flooding, even far inland. So don't write off category one hurricanes like they're a spring shower. I hope all those in the path of "Hurricane Dolly" will be safe, including those on the Mexican side of the border.

As the reports of this growing storm were released, the price of oil and gasoline headed higher. Why? The more honest among the oil/gas speculators came right and said how they figured the storm would hit the oil and gasoline region in southern Texas, and that they hoped this would turn oil and gasoline prices around from their fall of the last few days. Only a bunch of greedy, no good bastards would wish such a thing on their fellow human beings just for money. To be perfectly honest, I wish we could round up these good for nothings and tie them down on the shores of southern Texas and let them see what a hurricane REALLY means. I make NO apologies for my feelings! How disappointed they were when they found out that the storm was expected to miss the oil and gas areas, and so prices came back down. What a shame!

Are They Drilling Enough For Oil Now?

Here's a link to an article about charges traded back and forth between President Bush and Congress, more specifically Democrats in Congress, about drilling for more oil. I can't say that I know enough about the specifics to offer an informed opinion. I do know there have been "charges" (not saying whether they are true or false, or mixed) leveled by some that the oil companies have not been wearing themselves out trying to find oil in American territory, but rather that they have taken large sums of their huge profits and paid them out to investors, many of these investors being some of the richest people on Mother Earth. In an attempt to be fair here, some of the folks questioning the policies of the oil companies are not exactly left wing fanatics, but are some of the folks I've seen on CNBC, a cable business channel. When oil prices were like $75 or $80 a barrel, what now seems like bargain prices, some of the CNBC folks were asking like, "Where are all the oil rigs. The oil execs said that a lot of oil wasn't worth trying to get, because prices were too low (obviously in past years). They can't say that now."

I do like the idea proposed by Democrats (according to this article) about passing legislation requiring the oil companies to drill for oil on lands to which they already have lease agreements. Big oil needs to put up or shut up. Americans are not unreasonable, in my opinion. If we see the need to extend leases to new areas, we'll do it, I'm sure, especially if we have the proper information about the process and any environmental dangers to the areas involved.

ttp://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25653628/

Quit Whining and Go To Debtors' Prison

Ever the one with a stern thought for the day, former Senator Phil Gramm, THE economic advisor to John McCain's campaign, this week gave us all a good thrashing. When asked about the poor economy, he said it was all in our heads that the economy is not doing well. So I take it then, that the problems with the economy are just an illusion. Now, within the circle of people in which Phil Gramm travels, I'd say he's probably correct, as the rich are doing just fine, "Thank You!" So remember, by the end of this year, millions of Americans will have lost their homes in just the past three years, with 2.5 million just THIS year. That's no illusion, Mr. Gramm! Millions more will have lost health insurance during the Bush years. That's no illusion, Mr. Gramm! Millions more will have gone into bankruptcy. That's no illusion, Mr. Gramm! As to you and your friends, the income gap has widened to a point not seen since just before the Great Depression; thus giving America a "reverse Robin Hood;" take from the poor and middle income people and give to the rich! No wonder old Phil thinks things are so dandy! Hmm, I wonder if Phil is invested in oil and gas? Those folks are every bit as cheerful as Phil.

Further, Phil didn't want to just leave us with his thoughts on the economy, but also on Americans in general. He said we're just a bunch of whiners. Give me Phil's money, and I guarantee that you won't hear a peep outta me. I won't even write another blog. (Hey, what's that applause for???)

So folks, take old Phil's advice, and when you go to file bankruptcy, do it with a smile! When you get kicked out of your home, no whining, now! When you put twenty bucks of gas into your vehicle, don't whine when the needle barely moves. You'll make Phil Gramm just one big happy man. Another thing that would definitely bring a smile to his face would be for the country to bring back "debtors' prison." What a fun guy!

Check this:
http://pontificating-randy.blogspot.com/2008/07/june-foreclosure-stats.html

A Few Things On Oil And Speculators

A number of weeks ago, the president visited Saudi Arabia. Upon his departure for the Saudi Kingdom, he told us that he was going to ask the Saudis to increase oil production because of the high oil prices. Essentially, the Saudis turned him down in a very public way. The interesting thing is, after more than seven years in office, this administration and this president haven't learned that these things aren't handled in public until the deal has already been done behind the scenes. The rebuff to Bush by the Saudis didn't hurt him the American public opinion polls, but that seems to be the likely result that he can't go much lower, as his poll numbers are and have been "cold enough" to make ice cubes; that is, they are well below the freezing temperature of 32. I would have to believe that it has hurt him and American foreign policy, as foreign governments take note of these kinds of things.

The Saudis have insisted that the supply of oil on the market is adequate and that speculators have been driving up the price, not the more common excuse... ah... I mean reason of supply and demand. Last week on CNBC (a cable business channel), there was an analyst on about the whole oil situation. I just forget the company he represents, but his basic comments were that oil prices are NOT being determined by supply and demand, and that there are full oil tankers "clogging" (his word) the waterways around the Middle East, because there are NO buyers for that oil. Now, maybe the guy is nuts, but I didn't hear anyone call his hand on that statement. As much as I hate to say it, this seems to jive with what the Saudis have been saying. The Saudis have been under tremendous pressure from a great number of countries, not just the United States, feeling the severe pinch of high oil and gasoline prices (if reports are to be believed, and common sense tells us that there must be a great deal of truth to the reports). Now, this past weekend, there was a big powwow in Saudi Arabia, but the result was much the same; that is, the Saudis blame the tremendous increase in oil prices (about double what they were last year) on speculators, and they promised to increase production by a scant 200,000 barrels a day, "IF" their customers ask for it.

To me, one of the major problems has been that the Bush Administration, the defenders of the wealthy and business interests, has refused to admit the speculators are part of the problem. This bunch NEVER met a millionaire, or better yet, a billionaire they didn't like; oh hell, I mean LOVE!!! Even some Republicans in Congress are screaming for the administration to get its head out of the sand and to take action to limit the damage being done by these greedy bastards, part of the "sit on their ass class." If I had my way, they'd all have to work for $8.00 an hour, with no medical insurance, and limited benefits. They be out digging ditches, paving roads, working in factories (what we have left, anyway!), running cash registers, stocking shelves, delivering furniture, waiting on tables, manning security desks, tending to sick patients, oh well, you get the point. Once they get a taste of what they've done to so many others, and what it means to REALLY have to work to earn other people BIG BUCKS, do you think it MIGHT sink in? Don't answer too quickly....

Oil Speculation

Here is the link to a good article about what might or might not happen in the halls of Congress about the rising price of oil. To be quite honest, since taking control of Congress in the '06 elections, Democrats have been timid to act, in my opinion. They grumble, but that's been pretty much it. Republican members of Congress, terrified about their current prospects for coming election, might well join Democrats in actually DOING SOMETHING! I think the American people are FAR ahead of their leaders on these things, and in the actions we would support. We aren't stupid! Don't forget, if wealthy interests can drive up the cost of oil, then they also benefit on their gasoline futures' contracts, as gasoline is then bound to go up, since oil is the main ingredient in gasoline. If there were a "bread" futures market, if you can get the price of flour way up, bread has to increase too. (By the way, the price of wheat is WAY up, and thus so is the price of flour. See how it works?)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25253877/

Alls Not "Well" With Oil

The U.S. Government, headed by George Bush, who just a couple of months ago said he didn't know that gasoline prices might go to $4.00 a gallon, has finally started to get its head of out the sand and DO something. The cooperation of the British is a good sign.

http://www.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idUSSP23289620080530

Food Banks In Trouble

I saw this story and thought it is well worth posting, as it again shows how the country is sliding downward under the relentless assault by the monied interests. Many of the main victims are folks who in the past commonly described themselves as "middle class." From what I understand, a million more Americans are expected to lose their homes to foreclosure this year alone, and that estimate may prove to be too low. Add in the number of folks who have already been added to the foreclosure tally from the last few years, and the total is staggering!!! Here is the link:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24832584/

First Impressions Of CNBC Show

For those who watched the CNBC special about oil and gasoline, I've got to say that my first impression was that it was very balanced, maybe even tilted more to the "un-rich" point of view (If I'm right on this, then it tells me that even those with a pro-business bias are now getting terrified about what these bastards are doing to us!). I recorded the show on my DVR, so I'll have to watch it again and refine my thoughts on the show. Of course, Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson gave the Bush Administration's usual pro-business, pro-wealthy, free market point of view. He left out "Hurray for the free markets and the hell with the rest of you!"