The 'two-party system' is a Stockholm Syndrome

The so-called two party system is so corrupt that even the body charged with regulating the minimal campaign finance rules has given up hope of forcing the two parties and their candidates of respecting the law. 


It still mystifies me why this system, which is a myth perpetuated by the corporate media and academics, has such a hold on the voters it works so hard to stick it to.

 

Low wages costs everyone money

A recent study by the University of California-Berkeley has two interesting revelations.

-3/4 of all people receiving public assistance belong to a working family

-And that public assistance to these working families costs taxpayers $153 billion a year

That means when employers pay terrible wages to their workers that they cannot live on, we the taxpayers make up the difference.

And this did not merely happen out of nowhere.

Democrats have spent the last 25 years selling out to corporate interests. Republicans, for their part, represented those interests long before that.

With both  major parties owned by the One Percent, it's inevitable that people who worked for a living would get screwed.

Now you know why I'm a Green. Big Money has two parties representing it. Don't working people deserve at least one?

Governor One Percent gets most of his money from the One Percent

"When I give food to the poor, I'm called a saint. When I ask why they are poor, I'm called a communist." -Archbishop Dom Helder Camara.

WNYC reports that Governor One Percent Andrew Cuomo gets most of his campaign "donations" from... surprise surprise... the One Percent. 60% of his campaign funds come from "donations" of $10,000 or more.

Meanwhile, the mainstream media keeps reporting the line that Cuomo would be hurt by a potential challenge from his left. Few of these journalists* have bothered to notice that there is an actual candidate to Cuomo's left: Green Party standard bearer Howie Hawkins. It'd be nice if state political reporters would inform themselves so they could stop misinforming the public.

(*-The article linked to in the first sentence is a rare exception, notable in that it came not from the usual Albany press insiders but from the paper in Hawkins' hometown)

The Working Families Party, which is not really a party but a faction of the Democrats, continues the charade that it might not give Cuomo its ballot line. No one seriously believes that they would do such a thing, and risk the loss of their lucrative patronage factory. This charade is designed to dupe the media into portraying it as a party that has any relevance to anything, so they don't notice that they add absolutely nothing to the political system. Naturally, the Albany press corps eagerly carries their water.

How corporate interests have taken over our politics

The Nation has a very good piece on how special interests dominate Washington (as well as the states) and undermine our democracy. This is not new - liberal hate figure and progressive hero Ralph Nader has been warning about this for years. But the extent to which our political process has been corroded keeps edging closer and closer to 100%, particularly since the fraudulent Citizens United ruling was decreed. The increasing replacement of serious journalism with transcription, talking point-saturated commentary and horse race analysis only makes things worse.

The piece also points out that the much vaunted 'tension' between Democrats and Republicans, liberals and tea partiers is mostly a sideshow, a narcissism of small differences. Both major parties are thoroughly corrupted by corporate cash. Neither wants any sort of fundamental change that would redefine their primary role back to representing real human beings. Their main argument is whether we should be speeding down a hill toward a cliff at 80 mph or 65 mph.

What are the solutions? There are no easy answers. But two that come to mind immediately are:

-Help support and build grass roots parties who are accountable to human beings. The Green Party is my choice. If you're of a different mind set, I believe the Libertarian Party also refuses legalized bribes ("donations") from corporations.

-Join the movement to amend the Constitution to repeal Citizens United and affirm that money is not speech (it is, in fact, property): We the people, not we the corporations.

Wal-Mart: America's biggest welfare queen

I was reading an article on how giant retailers stiff their workers and it pointed out how they're also stiffing American taxpayers.


It cited a study by the US Committee on Education at the Workforce [which] determined that a typical Walmart store *costs* taxpayers over $1.7 million per year, or about $5,815 per employee.

The analysis is probably overly generous to retailers, seeming to assume the average employee is actually assigned to work for 40 hours.

When they receive huge corporate welfare benefits *and* pay employees so little that they have to seek food stamps, Medicaid and other social services, Wal-Mart is leeching off the taxpayer at both ends.

I was wrong: people really are content with our political system

Looks like it's time for a mea culpa.

It seems Americans are overwhelmingly content with how our political system is functioning.

I believe there were only four candidates who were on the ballot in enough states to form an electoral college majority. Democrat Obama, Republican Romney, Green Jill Stein and Libertarian Gary Johnson.

If you wanted a candidate who represented real human beings (presuming you didn't consider corporations to be such), if you wanted someone who opposed militarism and if you wanted someone who opposed corporate control of government, there were only two choices: Stein and Johnson. They were very different candidates but they were the only candidates who were pushing those fundamental conditions needed to make America into a true republican democracy.

I thought the time was right for a decent smaller party showing. People were very lukewarm about Obama and Romney. The last few years saw some very significant grassroots movements in the Tea Party (which we forget really was grassroots originally before it was hijacked by the far right money machine), by Occupy movement and the Ron Paul insurgency inside the Republican Party. This was anti-establishment discontent we hadn't seen since the days of the Vietnam aggression. Johnson and Stein were two very active, substantive candidates. They were aggressive in their use of social media (whose influence on politics is vastly overstated but in the face of a media blacklist, it was the best they could do). Each represented a significant demographic: true small government advocates dissatisfied with Republican hypocrisy on the issue and progressives disillusioned with Obama's complete abandonment of their agenda. I knew the media blacklist would be a significant barrier but I still Johnson and Stein had a reasonable shot to get 5 or 6 percent of the vote between them.

They actually combined to get 1.3 percent of the vote; all smaller candidates only combined for 2 percent. Now, 1.3 and 2 percents were orders of magnitude greater than the amount of media coverage they received, but it was still only 2 percent who voted for real change of some sort or other to our political system. 

Thus 98 percent of voters voted to fundamentally preserve the status quo.

Americans complain about divided government but elected another divided government.

Congress has an approval rating of 21 percent but 90-something percent of incumbents were re-elected, as is usually the case.

People complain about both Democrats and Republicans but over 99 percent of members of Congress will be of those two parties.

Everything bad piece of public policy Americans complain about was enacted by Republicans, Democrats or, more often, both. Every 'onerous tax,' every 'job killing regulation,' every billion wasted on corporate welfare, every war of aggression that you complain about was enacted by one or both of the parties supported by 98 percent of the voters.

From this, I can draw one of two conclusions. Either Americans are actually fairly satisfied with the functioning of our political system or they are unhappy but aren't really interested in doing anything about it. Either way, the incessant whining is not compatible with either of these two options. If you're happy, why are you whining? If you're unhappy, then go beyond whining and try to do something about it.

I was wrong. I believed people when they said they wanted certain things or held certain values. But I guess was wrong to assume they'd vote for those things or values. And of course, some truly did. But from what I can tell, most didn't. Most voted against a candidate, not for one. That's their prerogative. And I'd be wrong to say I don't understand the reasoning. But I simply fail to see how change will every happen if only 2 percent of the people are willing to make it happen. 

Or maybe they really don't want it to happen. Maybe they are not interested in any sort of real change on the federal level. So be it. I accept that's democracy. Just quit whining when you get what you choose.

Now people need to take the next step and quit whining about what they don't want or are not willing to change.

Clinton-worship sad indictment of modern Democrats

It’s sad, yet telling statement about the modern Democratic Party that the most popular politician among its faithful remains Bill Clinton, the guy who jettisoned what remained of the party’s progressive roots and sold it out to the highest corporate bidders.

He babbled on about ‘patience’ but it’s a lot easier to make argument when you make hundreds of thousands of dollars a pop for a single speaking gig.

And while partisans may have selective memories, it’s worth remembering that the reckless deregulation that facilitated the 2008 economic crash was signed not by an evil Republican but by a Democratic president... one William Jefferson Clinton.

Vote for humans

Eight of the top nine “contributors” to Mitt Romney’s campaign are financial institutions - including some who contributed to the economic meltdown like Wells Fargo and Bank of America. 

Most of the big “contributors” to President Obama’s campaign are big tech and telecommunications conglomerates and law firms - like net neutrality opponents Time Warner and Comcast. 

The poll questions that are now a substitute for political journalism shouldn’t ask which candidate you’re going to vote for. They should ask which set of corporate interests you are going to waste your vote on. 

Unless your answer is that you aren’t going to waste your vote and will instead cast your ballot for a smaller party candidate who represents actual human beings... such as Green Party nominee Dr. Jill Stein or the Libertarian Gary Johnson.

Legislators vs people in the real world

The Post-Star has editorialized against New York legislators seeking a pay raise. (I won't link to it due to their pay wall).

NYS lawmakers are paid a bare minimum of $79,500 for their part-time jobs; committee chairmen and those in leadership positions earn quite a bit more. Incidentally, 'part-time' is the description they themselves use so as to weasel out of transparency laws that might reveal their corruption and conflicts of interest.

In addition, they are given a $171 per diem for every day the legislature’s in session. 

The legislature opposes a raise in the minimum wage. Gov. Cuomo pretends to be in favor of the minimum wage but won't push for it, for fearer of alienating his corporate backers.

A minimum wage earner would have to work SIXTY hours a week every week for THREE AND A HALF YEARS to earn what the poorest of these bozos in Albany get for five months of *part-time* 'work.'

This calculation does not count their per diem. In order to earn $171, a minimum wage worker would have to clock in 23.5 hours.

Pay no attention to the main behind the curtain

New York public radio reports that hours after speaking out in favor of campaign finance reform, NY Gov. Cuomo attended a $20,000 a plate fundraiser. It's well-known that he is joined at the hip with the big business lobbying group The Committee to Save New York. This might why Cuomo is doing a lot of talking on campaign finance reform, but zero acting... sorta like his fellow Wizard of Oz Pres. Obama and Citizens United. The pair is counting on liberals paying more attention to their words than their actions, which is usually a good bet.

Why America needs multipartyism

The Liberal Ironist had an essay on the origins of partisanship in Washington. Like most analyses, it seems to be based on the erroneous premise that there was little or no partisanship in Washington prior to the 1990s. Anyone actually familiar with American history knows there have been several times when the country and the Congress have been far more bitterly divided than it is now: the late 18th/early 19th century, the Civil War and Reconstruction, the Vietnam years.

The current hyperpartisanship is really the result of the convergence of the two major political parties on economic issues. Since Reagan's reign, BOTH major parties have veered sharply to the right on economic issues. And while liberals comfort themselves by blaming Republicans, even Democratic presidents have pushed the conservative economic orthodoxy of deficit reduction, tax cuts, heavy cuts to social services and the fraud mislabeled “free trade.”

Because the two parties have so heavily converged on economic issues, the only real difference remaining between them is on social issues. Since this is really only a small handful of issues – primarily whether gays, women and Hispanics deserve to be treated as human beings or deserve to be treated by 14th century standards – the two parties play these up to the hilt. 

It's called the psychosis of small differences. They already agree on so much, they can't compromise on the few things they disagree with or else they will be completely identical. The illusion of choice in our corporatacracy depends upon these few differences being hyped up as much as possible so as to rally the bases.

You now have a Democratic president who’s campaigning on his health insurance scheme... a scheme originally conceived and implemented by his Republican opponent... who’s now attacking what he created. 

I can’t think of anything that demonstrates the convergence (as well as the cowardice, corruption and intellectual bankruptcy) of the two corporate parties more perfectly. The Democrats have become Republicans. And the Republicans have become Medievalists. What's a rational voter to do? Follow Albert Einstein's advice and avoid the insanity of "doing the same thing over and over but expecting  different results."

Vote for smaller party and independent candidates, like Dr. Jill Stein. At the bare minimum, inform yourself about candidates from outside the two corporate parties. This will take some work, since the corporate media tends to blacklist them, but it's worth the effort.

The US is probably the only democracy in the world with so few (two) parties represented in their national legislature – even in democratic paragons like Russia and Zimbabwe have at least three. This won’t solve all the problems. But clearly, fresh ideas and approaches are needed and the Republicans and Democrats are not interested.

Governor One Percent pretends to denounce his puppetmasters

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo is jumping on the fake populist bandwagon by pretending to rail against so-called Super PACs -- even as the largest and most secretive one in the state, the ironically-named Committee to Save New York, is spending huge sums of money on his behalf. That Super PAC was given an 'F' by Common Cause New York for its complete lack of transparency; by contrast, none of the public sector unions so demonized by Cuomo received anything close such a failing grade. Governor One Percent is obviously counting on liberals to pay more attention to pious words than actual deeds, which is usually a good bet. A bill before the state legislature would implement a degree of public financing of political campaigns. We'll see if the governor, so beholden to corporate campaign bribes (I mean, "donations"), will throw his considerable influence behind public financing or if his words on this are as hollow as his promises on mandate relief.

95% of US taxpayer money to rebuild Iraq disappears into black hole

Just to give you an idea of the gargantuan level of corruption and unaccountability in the purported effort to reconstruct Iraq after the US aggression.

  

According to Yes! magazine...

Amount of oil and gas money designated by the US for rebuilding Iraq after the 2003 invasion: $9.2 billion

Amount the US Department of Defense was unable to properly account for: $8.7 billion

Occupy Wall St. validates Ralph Nader

No man is a prophet in his own land.

Dear Occupy Wall St. Sympathizers,
Occupy's message is virtually identical to that which many (most?) of you have spent the last dozen years smearing Ralph Nader and his supporters for while you've voted for militaristic, anti-civil liberties, corporatist Democrats. Glad you've finally come around. I just hope you don't develop amnesia between now and November.

The lobbyists of Gov. One Percent

The New York Public Interest Research Group (via the Albany Times-Union) has revealed the 100 top spending special interest groups in New York. Who was the most free spending group? The health care workers union? The evil teachers union? Supporters of civil rights for gays? Opponents thereof? Nope. #1 slot goes to the misnamed Committee to Save New York. This is an organizing comprising the top "donors" to the campaign of Gov. Andrew Cuomo and is dedicated to lobbying on behalf of the agenda of the One Percent.

Occupy vs the Tea Party

"When I give food to the poor, I'm called a saint. When I ask why they are poor, I'm called a communist." -Archbishop Dom Helder Camara.

The American political system pretty much boils down to the craven and corrupted Democratic Party, the venal and corrupted Republican Party and smaller parties who are mostly well-intentioned but don’t show the tiniest desire to become remotely electable (bearing in mind there are thousands of public offices below the presidency). What a depressing state of affairs. No wonder there’s so much frustration and anger that’s been expressed via the non-partisan Occupy movement and the formerly non-partisan Tea Party.

The Tea Party has been taken over by the Republican Party (the Dems would love to co-opt Occupy but they haven't succeeded yet), but there are still strains within it that remain independent and certainly the anger that originally animated it was organic; most of them are part of The 99 Percent too. The left likes to look down their noses at the Tea Party as comprising The Other, ignorant, racist rubes, but this ignores what the two movements share.

Both the Tea Party and Occupy reflect the anger of ordinary people against a corrupt system that serves the elites and not the people... or rather, at the expense of the people. The main difference lies in the response. The objective of the Tea Party is to starve government of money, since cash is what feeds the beast of corruption. Occupy's is to re-direct that money so it's used in a more humane manner. Both want to blow it up. One wants to replace it with something better; the other believes that something better is not possible so replace it with nothing.

Both really diagnosis the same problem, but offer different prescriptions.

Occupy is not about more handouts, but fewer

"If money is constitutionally protected 'speech,' then so are tents." -seen on Twitter


NPR's All Things Considered did a piece on Wall St. profits. It noted that Wall St. has made more money during under 3 years of the Obama administration than it did during all 8 years of the Bush administration. A Washington Post reporter pointed out that these profits were the direct result of government policies -- across two administrations -- in response to the financial crisis.

THIS is what Occupy is all about. It's not hostility toward people for having money or at corporations for existing. It's an anger at public policy that represents taking money from working people to hand out to corporations making record profits. It's an anger at the most grotesque form of of wealth redistribution.

Occupy is based not on a demand for more handouts, but for fewer.



"When I give food to the poor, I'm called a saint. When I ask why they are poor, I'm called a communist." -Archbishop Dom Helder Camara.

One of the great propaganda coups of our time

Take $700,000,000,000 away from working Americans to bailout crooked bankers and then convince the public our fiscal woes are the fault of a teacher earning $40,000 a year. This has to be one of the great propaganda coups of our time.

Welfare queens

The New York Times did a revealing article on General Electric. On $5.1 billion ($5,100,000,000) profits it made in the US, its federal tax ball was... zero ($0).

A teacher or prison guard making $40k with good benefits enrages American society but grotesque welfare queens like this are barely a blip on our radar.

A good example of political bribes... I mean... "donations" well spent.

The Pentagon takes care of its own

NPR ran a report explain how the Department of Defense's health plan refuses to cover brain-damage therapy for soldiers and veterans.

This sort of thing nauseates me. The Pentagon spends billions shoveling corporate welfare into the troughs of 'defense' contractors like Boeing and Halliburton, but when it comes to taking care of the actual human beings seriously injured while following their orders, all the DOD gives is the middle finger.