There's been a big media splash about a meeting at the White House between leaders of freethought groups such as American Atheists and Obama administration officials. President Obama didn't show. The meeting is a small positive step for an administration that discriminates against freethinkers in a variety of ways, including expanding Hate Based Initiatives which divert federal funding from inclusive nonprofits to religious ones.

It may be a very small step, but that didn't keep the religious nuts from throwing fits. An example is provided by Bill Donohue, the wingnut who runs the "Catholic League" a tiny heterosexist, misogynist, racist, and Roman Catholic supremacist hate group. (Raw Story 2/26/10)

"People of faith, especially Christians, have good reason to wonder exactly where their interests lie with the Obama administration," Donohue said in a statement. "Now we have the definitive answer. In an unprecedented move, leaders of a presidential administration are hosting some of the biggest anti-religious zealots in the nation."

If you aren't giggling about Donohue accusing other people of being "zealots," you probably don't know much about him.

As comical as Donohue can be, there is a sinister side to this religious extremist. He has attacked a group representing survivors of the rampant molestation of Roman Catholic children by their priests on numerous occasions. Here's a particularly vile example in one of Donohue's press releases of demonizing the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests (SNAP).

Any minor who has been sexually molested deserves our compassion. But what SNAP is doing, aided and abetted by angry Catholics and ex-Catholics, deserves not our understanding, but contempt. This is a group which has a deep ideological and financial investment in painting the Catholic Church as a villain.

“SNAP’s ideological bias stems from the fact that it positively refuses to recognize the incredible progress that has been made—exactly five priests out of more than 40,000 had accusations made against them for abusing a minor in 2007—yet for SNAP it’s never enough. Financially, it derives much of its funding from the steeple-chasing lawyers who have fleeced the ‘deep pocket’ Catholic Church. It’s time we dismissed these professional victims’ advocates for what they are—activists whose goal is to discredit the Church.

This is sick, sick, sick.

Given the enormous amount of child molestation that still goes on in the Roman Catholic priesthood, the claim that only five priests have had accusations made against them in public during 2007 is truly frightening. It strongly suggests that the RCC clergy is still pressuring victims and their parents to keep quiet.

Learn More About SNAP!

 

The economy is horrible. Most people are suffering, but Warren Buffett is benefiting from the situation. (New York Times 2/28/10)

This time he described how he had used the last 18 months to scoop up a string of assets — a buying spree that culminated at the end of last year with the agreement to buy the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway, his biggest bet yet.

Mr. Buffett wrote that his company, Berkshire Hathaway, had net income of $8.1 billion last year, or about $5,200 a share, 61 percent higher than in 2008. The company also reported a 19.8 percent rise in book value.

Goody, goody for him.

I'm reading Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States, and it is reminding me about something I learned before. Prior to New Deal reforms that buffered economic downturns, depressions were quite common in this country. During those depressions, it was common for the super rich to buy assets at discounted prices, consolidating their wealth and power.

As usual, the NY Times article repeats the obsequious tone of so much of the corporate media towards these vultures who make money off of the misery of others. If you read the corporate media, you get the distinct impression that we are all expected to worship the very excrement of Buffet and his ilk.

We need to make the rich pay their fair share in taxes so we can help the miserable. Besides, with less money available for wild financial speculation, we would have a more stable and secure economy.

 

Congress has passed legislation extending the Unpatriotic Act, without even any modifications to protect peoples' privacy. The official name of this legislation which attacks American values is the "Patriot Act," and so many, even on the left, have gone along with this.

In two previous postings, I have referred to the Club for Growth (of Income Inequality). The official name lacks the part in parentheses. The organization has no real interest in spurring overall economic growth. If they did, they would oppose tax cuts for the rich which repress economic growth instead of making them mandatory for any politician they support. The Club for Growth (of Income Inequality) is made up of extremely wealthy Republicans, many of them in Manhattan. They spend large amounts of money running primary challenges against conservative, but not batshit crazy, Republicans in order to save much larger amounts of taxes.

This is part of a larger project by the far right to deceive the American public about the nature of their goals and practices. Here are some examples of deceptive organizational organizational names and what the organizations actually do.

"Family Research Council"
Promotes and disseminates propaganda promoting bigotry, discrimination, and violence against women, non Christians, and queers. Promotes religious extremism.

"National Right to Work Committee"
Opposes the rights of employees to form and maintain unions. Opposes legislation which protects employees who want to join unions from intimidation, harassment, and firing by union busting employers. Demonizes unions and union members with bizarre propaganda.

"National Right to Life"
Promotes bigotry, discrimination, and violence against women. Opposes life saving condom distribution and AIDS education programs. Promotes religious extremism. Demonizes abortion providers to such an extreme extent that it results in terrorist threats and attacks.

"Keep America Safe"
Works to frighten Americans so much that they will go along with policies that endanger our national security and economic well being in order to further enrich the super rich.

"Accuracy in Media"
Works to maintain and enforce the far right slant of corporate media propaganda and to censor information which would lead people to question far right ideology.

"Reason Magazine"
Uses bizarre and illogical rationalizations to promote wealthy and corporate interests at the expense of the middle class and the poor.

"Center for Individual Rights"
Promotes discrimination on the basis of race and sex.

"Concerned Women for America"
A militant, fundamentalist hate group largely controlled by men.

I'm sure you could list more organizations if you put your mind to it, but I've made my point. The far right knows it can not win political debates honestly and transparently, so they deceive and manipulate the public as much as possible in order to try to win in the political arena.

If you notice a similarity between the US right's practices and the fictional totalitarian socialist regime in 1984, you are quite correct. The author, George Orwell as a democratic socialist who saw the dangers in terms of what was around at that time, the late 1940s. He didn't foresee that the US right would adopt many of the practices of deception that are commonly described as "Orwellian" as an homage to his book, largely because the well funded rightist reaction of the late 20th Century was only in its infancy.

Major corporate media outlets happily go along with the deceptive naming of far right organizations because it advances the agendas of wealthy owners and advertisers. In today's USA, we are propagandized at as relentlessly as citizens of the old Soviet Empire. The main difference is that the field of propaganda has advanced since then, making it more effective.

 

In a meeting with people wearing shabby sheik clothes and looking very serious and virtuous.

GLH: I'm Godless Liberal Homo...and I am...addicted to laughing at...Sarah Palin.

Rest of People in Room: Hi Godless Liberal Homo!

Anyway, here's another Sarah Palin parody video made possible by the addictive software at xtranormal.com.



 

Jonathan Tasini is running a primary challenge against Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, a far right Republican pretending to be a Democrat here in New York. He has a lot to say. Every time you promote his videos, as is the case with Dennis Kucinich's videos, you are promoting important ideas and values.



Learn More About the Tasini Campaign!

 

Photo: Jef Nickerson

There have been some disappointing economic numbers from the past three months, numbers which have surprised many economists. Some outside the field of economics are arguing that the recovery is weakening or isn't happening at all.

I don't find the recent numbers surprising, and I don't think for a minute that the economy is going into another free fall like it was doing through in 2008 and the early part of 2009. There's a central fact that so many people aren't even considering.

This has been a really bad winter.

Economic numbers are seasonably adjusted, but we have experienced unseasonably bad weather for the past three months. December was unusually cold by a considerable margin in most of the country. January and February were a bit below average in terms of temperature, but both months have been extremely wet. In most of the country, this has meant an enormous amount of snow. In Southern California, an important part of the national economy, it has meant bucketfuls of rain.

The consequences of this shitty weather are predictable. People are going out less. That means they are spending less money. It also means that people are spending less time out house hunting. The former is a huge deal in an economy largely based on consumer spending. The latter also is especially significant since finding a house takes a lot of time and effort, and delays in house hunting will slow down a major sector of our economy.

I should note to younger readers that middle aged and old people are much likelier to stay in during bad weather. So, if this analysis seams weird to you, remember that your body functions more efficiently than those of older folks.

Disappointing economic numbers from this period should be watched, but they shouldn't set off any alarms. Demand delayed by bad weather will show up once the weather gets less execrable. Obviously, if there was shockingly bad weather for a year, it could have longer range effects on our economy, but a bad winter doesn't rate as a cause for panic.

 

Photo: nerdcoregirl

Being a gay man, I can't really say for sure, but I can point to a comment that I learned a lot from. It was from a post on Stuff Queer People Need to Know about Lady Gaga coming out as bi.

Other bi girl dilemmas I have personally encountered in my bisexual life:

1) Getting fired for coming out bi at work.

2) Hearing about bi girlfriends needing to run from their boyfriends or husbands, who were so intimidated by their girlfriends’bi-ness, they threatened to break their teeth.

3) Being called a “traitor” or “full of diseases” right to my face by lesbian women.

4) Having sleezy straight boys hit on me for three-ways–because that’s why I exist, to make sure they get their three-way.

5) Being told I don’t exist or that I’m “politically irrelevant” by the gay community.

6) Being harassed when I show up with a bi t-shirt or bi button by gays and lesbians at a queer pride rally or parade, even though I’ve gone there to support all LGBTQ.

7) Being told that I “have a sickness” by straight people who see my bi t-shirt or bi button on the way to the gay parade/rally/event.

8) Being told that I am just a “part-timer” by lesbian, gay, or queer-identified people, even though I am bisexual 24/7, no matter who I am dating.

9) Being told by right-wing religious people that I am an even bigger threat to society because I “choose” my sexuality.

10) Having people like Tila Tequila, Rikki and Vikki Ikki, Megan Fox, and Lady Gaga represent bisexuality to the public, with no counter-representation from regular bisexuals who just try to make it in this world.

Now that new credit card regulations from Congress and the Federal Reserve are in effect, the banksters have come up with lots of new ways to rip us off and are expanding on old ways to rip us off. Before I go on, I want to remind people of one central fact.

"Credit Card Companies" = Banks

The banksters reserve many of their most reprehensible practices for their credit card customers. These practices are so larcenous that the banksters have invented the fiction of "credit card companies" in order to make it seem like somebody other than the banksters are responsible for that crap.

---

American Express: Now, if you are late with a payment, you have to pay a $29 fee to get access to the rewards payments you made on purchases. (CNN Money 2/22/10)

Bank of America: Intimidated customers trying to turn off the overdraft functions of their credit cards at bank locations. . (MSNBC article updated 2/23/10)


JPMorgan Chase: has raised it's fee for transferring credit card balances from 3% to 5%. (CNN Money 2/22/10)

JPMorgan Chase: Sent out threatening letters to customers trying to frighten them into opting into expensive overdraft protection. (MSNBC article updated 2/23/10)


Inactivity Fees: Some banksters are charging up to $36 per year for not using your charge card. (MSNBC 2/23/10)

Rising Interest Rates: Average interest rates increased by over 1% in the last six months. (MSNBC 2/23/10)

---

How Much Power Do the Banksters Have Over You?
According to a column in the Chicago Sun Times suggests that getting rid of a credit card account may not be as damaging to your credit score as you think.

Your concern is understandable, since it seems the credit card companies have all the power these days, in spite of the benefits of the new Card Act, which took effect Monday. If you make the decision to close your credit card account, assuming your credit is in good standing, it might have a small impact on your credit score. But that might not be enough of an impact to cause you to hang on to the card and pay an annual fee.

There could be two consequences of closing an account. Part of your credit score is based on your length of credit. So if you've had that card for many years, closing it could ding your score about 20 to 30 points, depending on whether you have other long-held cards. Even so, your score is likely to rebound within months.

One way to protect yourself, if you are the one closing the card (instead of the issuer), is to send a registered letter to the issuer when closing the account. Then keep a copy of that letter so that if your credit score declines, you have proof you were the one who closed the account.

Read the Full Article for Details.

---

Where Is the Money Going?
From AFP 2/23/10:

Bonuses paid to Wall Street securities industry employees in New York rose 17 percent to 20.3 billion dollars in 2009, state officials said Tuesday.

New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli said total compensation at the largest securities firms grew even faster and industry profits could hit a record amount after unprecedented losses in 2008.

Banks are a big part of the "Wall Street securities industry."

---

What Is the Real Value of the Banksters?
A while back, Craig Murray posted a brilliant indictment of this parasitical class. One paragraph reminds us, in particular, just how little banksters contribute to the real economy.

I am typing this on a keyboard which was not made by a banker. It rests on a desk which was not built by a banker. I am sitting on a chair which was not made by a banker, which rests on floor tiles not made by bankers, resting on a concrete and steel reinforced floor not built by bankers in a house of similar construction. I have to hand a sausage sandwich - the pigs were not reared by bankers and the wheat was not grown by bankers, and a cup of coffee - the beans were not grown by bankers, the milk was not from banker raised cattle, the water was not purified by a banker, the sugar cane was not cut by a banker. The clay was not dug by a banker nor the kiln fired by a banker. None of it was brought to this spot and assembled or constructed by a banker.

The entire commentary is well worth reading. Money is a symbolic representation of goods and services. That's it. Yet, we have allowed the banksters to mystify money and their relation to it to the point that many of us don't realize just how inept and easily replaced these people are. We are bombarded with messages from media where the banksters advertise and make loans telling us we have no choice to go along with what the banksters want no matter how insane or destructive.

We all need to take a step back and think critically.

---

Any Alternatives?
The disgusting and irresponsible behavior of the banking industry is starting to get people to think about alternatives. One alternative that is getting a fresh look is North Dakota's socialist bank. More conventional alternatives like credit unions are getting more and more attractive.

---

Think You're Pissed Off at the Banksters?
This guy bulldozed his house rather than letting them take it via foreclosure.


Photo: wot_nxt

 

I tend to be one of those people who picks the best of products from a variety of tech companies based on my own needs. My Cell Phone is from Palm. I love my Mac Mini, but avoid Mac peripherals like okra. The best word processor is still WordPerfect, but Open Office is definitely better than Word and is more than good enough for home use. Firefox is by far the best browser for 99% of websites, but I use Chrome for Yahoo's fancy email version because Chrome is much faster with JavaScript than any other browser, which is Chrome's only redeeming value.

I figured I should disclose that I'm not a fanboy. I'm a picky bastard.

Anyway, Steve Jobs has teased the world with his release of the IPad to high praise and enormous ridicule. I find this interesting, because the IPad that he showed off was very much an unfinished product. Microsoft is notorious for releasing beta software as a finished product, while Google will call finished and stable products "beta" for years. Jobs is definitely emulating Microsoft on this one.

The video I've seen on the Apple website shows that the IPad has a lot of potential due to its portability and style. But, it needs major improvements.

Things it needs:

1) 3-4 USB ports. My Mac Mini has USB ports so I can use a real keyboard and mouse and other devices. There's no excuse for the IPad not having them. Touch screen keyboards are crap. They should let people use real keyboards (and not shoddy Apple keyboards either) for longer amounts of typing. Since IPads don't have cameras and would be too big and awkward for taking lots of photos, there should be an easy way for people to sync their cameras via USB.

2) A Camera: I suspect the AT&T's crappy network is keeping Apple from implementing a camera which would logically allow video conferencing. F That.

3) Choice of Carriers: AT&T is already swamped with people using IPhones. Sprint is better and cheaper than AT&T. People should be able to use whatever carrier they want.

4) A Phone: What's the point of getting a big IPhone that doesn't even have a phone?

5) Alternatives to Apple's Apps Store: Apple arbitrarily excludes apps for dumb reasons. The apps API should be open so people can buy any kind of app they want for the IPad from anybody they want, including ones with sexual content. If IPads become market leaders, the Justice Department will be legally obligated to intervene against this monopolistic, Microsoft style tactic.

6) Multitasking: Until Apple implements that, you're better off buying a Palm Pre, which also has a phone. At least you can use a retracted ball point pen as a stylus for that device.

7) Lack of Disk Space: The IPad really needs at least 200 GB of disk space to be worth buying. Otherwise, I would have to constantly do complicated syncs with my Mac, switching which media I want on the IPad. I like the simple syncs I do with my IPod Classic, and I would expect to be able to do them on an IPad just as simply.

8) A DVD Player: Face it, the single most popular reason people will buy IPads will be to watch porn. Locking people out of their DVD porn collections is biting the hands (usually right hands) that will be feeding Apple. There's no reason why people should be prevented from seeing their other DVDs on IPads either.

A Thing It Might Need:

1) A Stylus: I tried the IPod touch when I finally got around to buying an IPod, and the touchscreen interface was execrable, especially for someone who has big hands. Fortunately, I tried the IPod Classic, and the wheel interface works wonderfully from the get go. (The Classic also has much more disk space, which should be the biggest criterion for buying an IPod anyway.) Basically, IPhones and IPod touches are for women and men with teeny, tiny fingers. Fingers are terrible devices for using touch screens in general, even small fingers. The styluses, which even Palm is phasing out, are much easier, faster, and more precise devices for using touch screens than the human anatomy. Perhaps the larger screen of the IPad will help make the execrable IPhone user interface more usable, but I'm skeptical.

What's the Rush?

Why did Jobs feel the need to rush something to the market which wasn't even close to ready?

This should be the focus of a lot of speculation among Mac addicts. I wonder why it isn't?

 

Photo: Talk Radio News*

Now that extreme right presidential candidate Ron Paul is won the straw poll at the fascist CPAC convention, it's time for people to consider who is really is and what he really stands for. His cultish supporters have engaged in a campaign of disinformation on liberal and progressive websites for some time now. Back in 2007, I investigated Paul's actual views and agenda and reported the results. This information looks to be even more relevant now than it was then.

Ron Paul has a swarm of zealots on the Internet, spewing pro-Paul propaganda in all sorts of liberal and progressive forums. The Paul worshipers will accurately point out his opposition to the Iraq War and the Unpatriotic Act, but they conveniently omit the vast majority of Paul's views, which are hateful and wacky right-wing. The deception is starting to offend a lot of liberals, and I'm one of them. After all, if Paul could get a 75% rating in 2005 from the “Family Research Council,” a Christian Right hate-group, that should give you some idea of where Paul really stands.

Here are some other ratings of interest:

* Secular Coalition for America: 20% (2004)

* Americans for the Arts Action Fund: 0% (2000, 01, 02, 03, 04)

* Leadership Conference on Civil Rights: 38% (2005)

* Human Rights Campaign: 25% (2003-04), 0% in previous years

* John Birch Society: 100% (2004-2006 in quarterly ratings, except for 88% in Spring 04)

* National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws: 14% (2004), 30% (2005)

* Campaign for America's Future: 0% (2005-06, energy issues)

* Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America: F (2006)


Bigotry Against Atheists

It should be noted that each of the following three positions contradict Paul's claims that he is a libertarian and that he supports individual freedom.

Opposes Restoring the Pledge of Allegience to the Version Without “Under God”
http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2002/pr062702.htm

Co-Sponsored Constitutional Amendment Pushing Coerced Prayer in the Public Schools
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:HJ00078:@@@L&summ2=m&


Voted to Allow Bigoted Alabama Judge to Post “Ten Commandments” in Courtroom
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues/votes/?votenum=257&chamber=H&congress=1091

Homophobia

Here are a couple of examples of Ron Paul's views, aside from his opposition to ENDA.

Opposes Hate Crimes Laws
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst050707.htm

Supports “Don't Ask, Don't Tell”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ron_Paul

Voted for Amendment Attempting to Block DC Government from Allowing Same-sex Partners to Adopt
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues/votes/?votenum=346&chamber=H&congress=1061

Other Right-Wing Extremism,
from his congressional web site:

Opposing Federal Funding for Stem Cell Research:
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2005/cr052405.htm

Anti-UN:
http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2006/pr061506.htm

Pro-Tax Cuts, Nearly All of Which Go to the Rich:
http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2006/pr042606.htm

Favors Cutting Gas Taxes:
http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2005/pr090705.htm

Against Corporate Accountability:
http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2005/pr041405.htm

http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2004/pr091604.htm

Glorifying Ronald Reagan:
http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2004/pr061004.htm

Supporting Corporate Efforts to Ship US Jobs to China
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2005/cr072605.htm

Attacking Gun Control and DC Self Rule
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2004/cr100404.htm

Anti-Union
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst98/tst072798.htm

I should also note that I just checked, and it definitely turns out that Paul has been lying when he says he's a libertarian. He is anti choice. No genuine libertarian would support government involvement in the most personal decision possible.

Ron Paul is correct about the Iraq War. His concerns for civil liberties would be more reassuring if he wasn't determined to limit civil liberties to wealthy, heterosexual, white, Christian men. Otherwise, he is a hateful rightist monster scarcely different than David Duke.

* Note on the Photo: I saw Ron Paul and his cultish followers on Wall St. last year. He looked incredibly lost, confused, and feeble. I couldn't get a clear cell phone pic of him because I kept getting blocked by Paulintologists. This picture shows him less out of it than the day I saw him on Wall St., but the photo I'm running from Talk Radio News was taken in January of 2008. He may have declined mentally since then.

 

Photo: WDPG_Share

New York Democrats have every reason to be frustrated with Sen. Kirstin Gillibrand's refusal to take on the Wall St. banksters and brokesters who are destroying New York and destroying America.

One of the reasons why she is doing this is that she is part of the exact same Republican political machine as former Sen. Al D'Amato and Joe Bruno. The latter is a convicted felon and the former GOP Majority Leader back when they had a majority in the state Senate.

The other reason for Gillibrand's pandering to Wall St. sleaze is that she gets a lot of money in campaign contributions from those sleazebags. Her Democratic primary opponent, Jonathan Tasini, has called for her to return that money. (Note: I'm not sure why a rightist Republican like Gillibrand is allowed by the state party to get away with pretending she's a Democrat.) Here's the text of Tasini's press release:

Today, my opponent, Kirsten Gillibrand, did what New Yorkers find increasingly troubling: she claimed she stands for one thing, while her actions contradict her public relations talking points. On WNYC’s The Brian Lehrer Show, referring to yesterday’s Supreme Court decision that allows unlimited corporate spending on elections, my opponent said, “I think it’s terrible.”

I agree—the Supreme Court decision hands over to corporations control over our democracy. It reinforces the notion in the voters’ minds that our system is dysfunctional and is not helping average people.

But, by her actions, not words, my opponent stands side-by-side with the conservative Supreme Court majority (as she did when she supported the National Rifle Association-backed overturning of the D.C. ban on handguns) by continuing to pocket huge amounts of corporate-influenced cash, particularly from the elite bankers and financial mainpluators who engineered the collapse of our economy, robbing Americans of their jobs, savings and retirement.

Yesterday, at a rally in front of Goldman Sachs, I called on my opponent to stop taking the massive amounts of money she is receiving from Wall Street and the very corporate interests that are blocking real change and to give back every dollar she has taken from the Wall Street bankers who destroyed our economy. That money is legalized corruption and is hurting every New Yorker and the American people. (The specific demand can be seen on this video at the 4:40 mark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9y8I9qFsRU)

I renew that call today. A majority of New Yorkers, and a majority of Democrats, do not support the election of the appointed Senator because they believe that she has no core principles. By rejecting Wall Street money—and, thereby, showing that she, in fact, does not support corporate control over our elections—my opponent will actually show voters that her words are not merely talking points to win over voters simply to get elected.

Democrats can respond to the Supreme Court in a forceful manner—and stand with the people. The Democratic Party can declare that it will cease accepting corporate cash today, immediately, as a signal to the American people that our party stands with the people, not with the corporate interests who have done great harm to the economy and the lives of millions of Americans.

It's no secret that Gillibrand is an NRA loving, bloodthirsty gun extremist. However, more people need to realize she is completely beholden to the banksters.