Sunday, September 30, 2012

Another American Revolution

Senator Bernie Sanders, Independent Senator from Vermont, posted a Progressive Agenda on his post on consistent with yesterday's post, "Steal From The Rich, Give Back To The Poor," ( with the following recommedations:

"First, at a time when the effective tax rate for the rich is the lowest in decades, we must repeal the Bush tax breaks for the top 2 percent which will reduce the deficit by $1 trillion over the next 10 years.

"Second, we must recognize that Wall Street caused the economic crisis, and that it has a responsibility to reduce the deficit. Establishing a 0.03 percent Wall Street speculation fee, similar to what we had from 1914-1966, would dampen the dangerous level of speculation and gambling on Wall Street, encourage the financial sector to invest in the productive economy and reduce the deficit by $350 billion over 10 years. Importantly, this fee, like similar levies in many other countries, would not apply to ordinary investors, retirees or parents saving to send their kids to college. Rather, it would apply to Wall Street investment houses, hedge funds and speculators who sell credit default swaps, derivatives and operate other risky financial schemes that nearly brought down the entire economy.

"Third, we have got to prohibit offshore tax shelters. Each and every year, the United States loses an estimated $100 billion in tax revenues due to offshore tax abuses by the wealthy and large corporations. The situation has become so absurd that one five-story office building in the Cayman Islands is now the "home" to more than 18,000 corporations. According to a recent report by James Henry, a former chief economist at McKinsey, the wealthiest people in the world are hiding between $21 trillion to $32 trillion in offshore tax havens to avoid paying taxes. About a third of this amount, according to one estimate, is from wealthy Americans. The wealthy and large corporations should not be allowed to avoid paying taxes by setting up tax shelters in Panama, the Cayman Islands, Bermuda, the Bahamas or other tax haven countries. Cracking down on these tax evaders could reduce the deficit by about $1 trillion over the next decade.

"Fourth, at a time when we have almost tripled military spending since 1997 and spend nearly as much on the military as the rest of the world combined, we must reduce unnecessary and wasteful spending at the Pentagon. According to a number of experts, the Pentagon today cannot account for hundreds of billions of dollars in its budget. Even Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), perhaps the most conservative senator in this country, believes that we could reduce defense spending by $1 trillion over a 10-year period while ensuring that the United States continues to have the strongest and most powerful military in the world.

"Fifth, we have got to eliminate tax breaks for companies shipping American jobs overseas. Today, the United State government, despite our losing over 55,000 factories in the last 10 years, continues to reward companies that move U.S. manufacturing jobs overseas through loopholes in the tax code. Eliminating these loopholes would raise more than $582 billion in revenue over the next ten years and bring jobs back home to America.

"What else? Ending corporate welfare for big oil, gas and coal companies; requiring Medicare to negotiate with the pharmaceutical companies for lower drug prices; taxing capital gains and dividends the same as work; establishing a progressive estate tax; and eliminating waste, fraud and abuse at every agency in the federal government would reduce spending by more than $350 billion and raise a significant amount of revenue without harming the middle class.

"Taking these steps would reduce the deficit by more than $5 trillion.

"Finally, and importantly, with these kinds of savings we could invest aggressively in rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, transforming our energy system away from fossil fuels and restoring our manufacturing base. That investment could create millions of decent paying jobs, make our country more productive and help us lead the world in addressing the crisis of global warming."

Other changes needed to advance our democracy include a Fair Media Act, reinstating Glass-Seagal, Medicare for all, elimination of voter fraud and suppression, increased funding for public schools and the elimination of for-profit charter schools, and a host of others.

Barring another American Revolution, these steps, and the steps outlined in yesterday's post, haven't the chance of the proverbial snowball in hell of happening unless an avalanche of sympathetic progressive politicians are placed in Washington.  In a society with Conservatism made criminal, these and other changes in laws will foster the democracy envisioned by our Founding Fathers.

"First love is dangerous only when it is also the last."

Branislav Nusic ( Serbian novelist of Aromanian descent, playwright, satirist,
essayist and founder of modern rhetoric in Serbia. He also worked as a
journalist and a civil servant. 1864-1938)


Saturday, September 29, 2012

Steal From The Rich, Give Back To The Poor

The Romney/Ryan Budget increases taxes on the middle class as their relentless quest to eliminate the middle class has resulted in yet another proposed drop in taxes for the rich, so that a tax hike for the rest of us becomes mandatory.

As Vice President Biden said in a speech to a retirement community in Florida, "Notice they will not name a single program, not a single thing, and why?  Well, they're doing it because they have to...And here's the reason they have to: They cannot possibly, cannot possibly continue and add to the tax cuts for the super wealthy unless they eviscerate the rest of the budget.”

It's time to take the first step in criminalizing Conservatism by restoring the TRUE Progressive Tax system and moving the top rate to 72% or more as President Kennedy implemented from the Eisenhower years of 90% *(see Slate article, below), as well as imposing an ad valorum tax on the rich to restore the monies stolen from the 98% since Reagan started the process of robbing from the poor and middle class to give to the rich.

They took it and it's time to get it back - with interest - and to make sure the greediest of the rich and their Conservative leaders and propagandists can never take it again.

As even readers of Agatha Christie and P.G. Wodehouse are reminded so frequently, Great Britain's post World War II policies of true progressive taxation finally brought down the aristocracies and their vast wealth and gigantic estates to a semblance of equal footing compared to their previous power as centuries of struggle after the signing of the Magna Charta finally ripened to fruition. (Pic of Gates"s estate, etc.)

Take some time to learn about tax policy in England:

And for a technical view of the highest marginal rates:

*For economic geeks, from Slate's article, "JFK, the demand-side tax cutter":

"When Kennedy ran for president in 1960 amid a sluggish economy, he vowed to 'get the country moving again.' After his election, his advisers, led by chief economist Walter Heller, urged a classically Keynesian solution: running a deficit to stimulate growth. (The $10 billion deficit Heller recommended, bold at the time, seems laughably small by today's standards.) In Keynesian theory, a tax cut aimed at consumers would have a 'multiplier' effect, since each dollar that a taxpayer spent would go to another taxpayer, who would in effect spend it again—meaning the deficit would be short-lived.

"At first Kennedy balked at Heller's Keynesianism. He even proposed a balanced budget in his first State of the Union address. But Heller and his team won over the president. By mid-1962 Kennedy had seen the Keynesian light, and in January 1963 he declared that 'the enactment this year of tax reduction and tax reform overshadows all other domestic issues in this Congress.'

"The plan Kennedy's team drafted had many elements, including the closing of loopholes (the 'tax reform' Kennedy spoke of).Ultimately, in the form that Lyndon Johnson signed into law, it reduced tax withholding rates, initiated a new standard deduction, and boosted the top deduction for child care expenses, among other provisions. It did lower the top tax bracket significantly, although from a vastly higher starting point than anything we've seen in recent years: 91 percent on marginal income greater than $400,000. And he cut it only to 70 percent, hardly the mark of a future Club for Growth member.

"Yet the Kennedy-Johnson team saw the supply-side effects of the bill as secondary, if not incidental, to its main goal of prodding near-term growth. 'The tax cut is good for long-run growth,' said James Tobin, another economist on JFK's team, 'only in the general sense that prosperity is good for investment.' The immediate boost to the economy was the main goal. In fact, Nixon's economic adviser Herb Stein noted that the 1964 plan led to a diminished output-per-person-employed—a fact that could argue against the supply-side tenet that lower marginal rates would unleash the productivity of workers deterred from working harder because of overtaxation.

"Many liberals disliked Kennedy's plan on grounds of equity. Leon Keyserling, an economist who had served Harry Truman, lamented that the richest 12 percent of Americans would get 45 percent of the benefits. Michael Harrington, the scholar of poverty, called the plan 'reactionary Keynesianism.' The AFL-CIO came out against it.

"That Kennedy had to rebut charges of unfairness from his left flank seems to lend credence to the supply-siders' analogy with Bush. But that analogy omits the additional fact that Kennedy's toughest opposition came from business. Corporate America distrusted Kennedy, especially after he took on the steel industry in 1962 for raising prices. A June 1962 poll showed that 88 percent of businessmen viewed him as hostile to them. Motivated by a mixture of traditional balanced-budget conservatism and personal distrust, many of them voiced opposition to the cuts.

"Kennedy took pains to sell the package to the business world. Departing from the more representative rhetoric of his June 1962 Yale commencement speech, he deliberately dressed up his program in language he thought business would like when he addressed the New York Economic Club in December 1962. He noted that the then-current system 'reduces the financial incentives for personal effort, investment, and risk-taking.' As his speechwriter Ted Sorensen later explained, 'It sounded like Hoover, but it was actually Heller.' According to historian David Shreve of the Miller Center for Public Affairs—on whose excellent work I've drawn here—it is from this December 1962 speech that the supply-side appropriators of the Kennedy mystique usually cull their quotations. They skirt the ample documentary evidence showing that the pro-business rhetoric of the Economic Club speech was largely strategic."

It's time to take our hard-earned money back!

Conduct tax policy with job policy by: making sure that employers impose pay reductions, firings or layoffs, and keep overtime and bonus rules frozen; make the part time and 1029 employment rules tighter; ban foreclosures due to tax increases for those making less than $250,000 and restore the interest deduction that Reagan killed for them also; and no outsourcing of jobs while a qualified or educable American can be hired.

"Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped."

Elbert Hubbard (American writer, publisher, artist, and philosopher. founder of
the Roycroft artisan community in East Aurora, New York, an influential
exponent of the Arts and Crafts Movement, wrote Little Journeys to the
Homes of the Great and the short story A Message to Garcia. He and his
second wife, Alice Moore Hubbard, died aboard the RMS Lusitania, which was
sunk by a German submarine off the coast of Ireland on May 7, 1915. 1856 –
 1915. From Wikipedia.


Friday, September 28, 2012

Text From Mitt!

I have been stricken by the ague this morning, having neglected to take my ague shot last year, but will take a brief moment to present a break in all the serious business of criminalizing Conservatism to present some foolishness for your enjoyment:

Text From Mitt!
A Slacktory production by Nick Douglas at

Text From Mitt

An offshoot of Text To Dog, a popular Facebook page, "Text From Mitt," under the url of (not to be confused with the Facebook "Texts  From Mitt") is presented for your viewing enjoyment..and yes, it's all very confusing. but go to for the featured site, but please enjoy the other two sites also:




"Anyway, no drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we're looking for the source of our troubles, we shouldn't test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed and love of power."

Republican P. J. O'Rourke, in an inexplicable moment of truth, potentially insulting his core audience

Thursday, September 27, 2012

Go To Jail Free Card: The Management of A Conspiracy

In what appears at first glance just to be another "boring legal article," Maryam K. Ansari, Esq. reported on a decision by the Eighth Circuit Court that will spell trouble for Conservative leaders and their sheeplet followers in a story titled, "Sentencing Guidelines: Management of A Conspiracy Defined."  (A tip of the hat to Facebook patriot Jim Bryant for finding this article!)

Sheeplets, watch out!

"What constitutes “management” of a conspiracy when it comes to enhanced sentencing, under the sentencing guidelines in the Eighth Circuit?

"This week, two defendants lost their combined sentence appeal in the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals. The two were convicted of running a massive counterfeit identification scheme, where they produced 'fake IDs.'

"Their appeal focused on the enhancements to their sentence. Silvia Duhart-Orea was given a twenty-four month sentence while her co-conspirator, Allan Roustand-Rolon, was given a fifty-seven month sentence.

"Both sentences were on the low end of the sentencing guidelines for the defendants. Nevertheless, they both raised the argument that the District Court applied the enhancements erroneously.

"After an undercover sting in 2010, the defendants were found in possession of twenty print cartridges used to produce hundreds of fake IDs. The two pled guilty to conspiracy to transfer false identification documents.

"The sentencing guidelines set the range between twenty-four and thirty months for Duhart-Orea. Her sentence was enhanced for the transfer of more than one-hundred documents. She argued this enhancement based on insufficient evidence that she transferred over one hundred fake IDs.

"Unfortunately for her, Duhart-Orea testified previously that she sold at least one fake ID a day for a period of one year.

"Roustand-Rolon had a heavier sentence based on his role as manager of the operation. On appeal, he argued that the court erred as it failed to show that he had sufficient management over the co-conspirators.

"This argument didn't fly with the Eighth Circuit. The appropriate standard for the manager/supervisor enhancement was not based on the management of co-conspirators. Rather, it was based on the 'management responsibility over the property, assets, or activities of a criminal organization.'

"Both sentences were affirmed."

"Related Resources:

"Trial Documents in U.S. v. Duhart-Orea (US Government Printing Office)"

When Conservatism is criminalized, the Conservative leaders will face increased, enhanced  sentencing for the "management responsibility over the...activities of a criminal organization," and sheeplets bleating for proof of their complicity in the largest criminal conspiracy in history will be out of luck if they try to appeal their sentences, as they have left their footprints all over the Internet.

At, we have made the case that when Conservatism is finally made illegal, that Conservative follower-sheeplets might escape sentencing under a new standard, that stupidity and genetic meanness and authoritarianism were mitigating influences of their participation in the criminal conspiracy called Conservatism.  But the Eighth Circuit Court may have thrown a monkey wrench into the machinery, and as Conservative sheeplets agree that the law must be upheld, this bodes ill for the sheeplets chances for repatriation in education camps, that they will face lengthy prison sentences instead.

Alas, 98% of the sheeplets do not possess either the stamina, concentration, or the intellectual ability to read much further than the second paragraph of this posting...but for those who make it this far: before it's too late, renounce your silly adherence to the propaganda of the Conservative leadership that has held you under its sway, bring a halt to your vicious postings NOW, scrub and delete past activities on the 'net as best you can, and re-register your party preference as 'Democratic.'


"I was making pancakes the other day and a fly flew into the kitchen. And that's when I realized that a spatula is a lot like a fly swatter. And a crushed fly is a lot like a blueberry. And a roommate is a lot like a fly eater."

Dmitri Martin

Wednesday, September 26, 2012

Conservative Hatred For The American Worker

Economist Paul Krugman published an oped in the New York Times on September 20th, called "Disdain For Workers," a most illuminating piece:

"By now everyone knows how Mitt Romney, speaking to donors in Boca Raton, washed his hands of almost half the country — the 47 percent who don’t pay income taxes — declaring, “My job is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.” By now, also, many people are aware that the great bulk of the 47 percent are hardly moochers; most are working families who pay payroll taxes, and elderly or disabled Americans make up a majority of the rest.

"For the fact is that the modern Republican Party just doesn’t have much respect for people who work for other people, no matter how faithfully and well they do their jobs. All the party’s affection is reserved for “job creators,” a k a employers and investors. Leading figures in the party find it hard even to pretend to have any regard for ordinary working families — who, it goes without saying, make up the vast majority of Americans.

"Am I exaggerating? Consider the Twitter message sent out by Eric Cantor, the Republican House majority leader, on Labor Day — a holiday that specifically celebrates America’s workers. Here’s what it said, in its entirety: “Today, we celebrate those who have taken a risk, worked hard, built a business and earned their own success.” Yes, on a day set aside to honor workers, all Mr. Cantor could bring himself to do was praise their bosses.

"Lest you think that this was just a personal slip, consider Mr. Romney’s acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention. What did he have to say about American workers? Actually, nothing: the words “worker” or “workers” never passed his lips. This was in strong contrast to President Obama’s convention speech a week later, which put a lot of emphasis on workers — especially, of course, but not only, workers who benefited from the auto bailout.

"And when Mr. Romney waxed rhapsodic about the opportunities America offered to immigrants, he declared that they came in pursuit of “freedom to build a business.” What about those who came here not to found businesses, but simply to make an honest living? Not worth mentioning.

"Needless to say, the G.O.P.’s disdain for workers goes deeper than rhetoric. It’s deeply embedded in the party’s policy priorities. Mr. Romney’s remarks spoke to a widespread belief on the right that taxes on working Americans are, if anything, too low. Indeed, The Wall Street Journal famously described low-income workers whose wages fall below the income-tax threshold as “lucky duckies.”

"What really needs cutting, the right believes, are taxes on corporate profits, capital gains, dividends, and very high salaries — that is, taxes that fall on investors and executives, not ordinary workers. This despite the fact that people who derive their income from investments, not wages — people like, say, Willard Mitt Romney — already pay remarkably little in taxes."

And lest we think that this essay doesn't strike a chord with the voters, consider the article from Trustlaw by Svea Herbst-Baylis, "Corporate Corruption is big U.S. voter worry - poll."  

"BOSTON, Sept 19 (Reuters) - With less than two months to go before the U.S. presidential election, a new survey found 61 percent of Americans say a candidate's commitment to rooting out corporate wrongdoing will be key in deciding who gets their vote.

"Along with keen interest in knowing each candidate's plans to fix the struggling economy, voters want government to do more to fight corporate misconduct - which they say helped cause the financial crisis.

"'In these difficult economic times, Americans are mad as hell about corporate wrongdoing and are going to do something about it in the November elections and beyond,'" said Jordan Thomas, a partner at law firm Labaton Sucharow, which commissioned the survey and which represents corporate whistleblowers.

"A telephone poll of 1,015 people conducted from Aug. 16-19 found that 64 percent of Americans said corporate misconduct helped bring about the current economic crisis.

"And 81 percent of respondents said the government has not done enough to stop corporate wrongdoing.

"Voters have been outraged by disclosures that banks forged documents to foreclose on homeowners, financial firms packaged risky mortgages into bonds that were improperly rated triple-A, and international banks manipulated LIBOR, a key international lending rate.

"The survey's release coincides with the first anniversary of the Occupy Wall Street protest movement.

"A year after the demonstrations began, Americans remain angry about the influence of Wall Street money on politics, with 77 percent of respondents saying they believe politicians favor corporate interests over constituent interests.

"Some 63 percent of Americans believe government should make more money available to regulators and law enforcement to eliminate corporate wrongdoing.

"2011, U.S. financial regulators opened a so-called whistleblower office to encourage individuals to report wrongdoing in the workplace.

"...(The) survey found the commitment to speak up has grown - with 83 percent saying they would report wrongdoing, compared with 78 percent a year ago. (Reporting By Svea Herbst-Bayliss; Editing by Jeffrey Benkoe)"

The American people are even closer to understanding and rejecting the Conservatives' message of Feudalism For All since the era of the 45 years after the 1929 Wall Street Crash.  

The recent Wall Street debacle that almost plunged us into another Great Depression, coupled with changing demographics are are resulting in the rejection of the premise of the right of the superior wealthy white man to rule the 98%.  And with greater understanding of the Conservative criminal conspiracy by the People, we may see the unveiling  of the beginnings of criminalizing Conservatism in our lifetime.


"Here is true immorality: ignorance and stupidity; the devil is nothing but
this. His name is Legion."

Gustave Flaubert (French writer who is counted among the greatest Western
novelist, known especially for his first published novel, Madame Bovary.


Tuesday, September 25, 2012

Self-Deportation Vs. Self-Annihilation

"...the right-wing's answer to the question of how you deport 11 million unauthorized immigrants: You don't. You force them to "deport themselves." Although immigration reform advocates would prefer a solution that involves a path to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants already here, Romney and his top immigration advisers believe they can remove millions of people through heavy-handed enforcement that makes life for unauthorized immigrants intolerable. This approach is notable for its complete lack of discretion and flexibility. Unauthorized immigrant parents with citizen children who need to go to school? Americans who are married to an undocumented immigrant who needs medical treatment? "Self-deportation" hits them all with the same mailed fist."  (From a Mother Jones article last January, "'Self Deportation': It's A Real Thing, And It Isn't Pretty.")

And even John McCain urged Mr. Romney to "tone down" his rhetoric, not just because self-deportation is wrong and vicious, but because it might hurt his chances for election in November.

Mr. Romney's plan for undocumented workers is short and sweet: "Self-Deportation," a Do It Yourself method of ridding Conservatives of Democratic-leaning brown people, the worst kind of brown people in the Conservative world.


But this original and pithy turn of phrase suggests a new and economical solution for solving the plague of Conservatism: "Self-Annihilation," a concept as surely as desirable to the average Conservative as self-deportation is to the average undocumented worker, and not without precedent - witness the characters in so many of Shakespeare's plays who self-annihilated, saving their citizens from footing the bill for a costly non-self-annihilation!

Shakespeare Would Have Approved

We all remember Lady MacBeth, who cajoled her husband into murdering King Duncan, (reminiscent of Bush's lynching of Saddam Hussein), followed by the murders of his pal Banquo, MacDuff, and MacDuff's wife and children. After losing her mind, Lady M saved the state the huge amount of money it would have taken for a lifetime of treatment in a mental institution and killed herself.

Cassius, in Julius Caesar: "Guide thou the sword (then Pindarus stabs him). Caesar, thou art avenged. Even with the sword that killed thee. (Cassius expires)

In the same play, Brutus self-annihilates, then even his wife Portia saves the strain on the Roman wartime budget, as he notes, "With this she fell distract, And, her attendants absent, swallow'd fire."

Othello, recounting how he had once killed a Turk: "I took by th' throat the
circumcised dog, And smote him -- thus. (He stabs himself)

And skipping over some of the more lowly self-annihilators, Romeo, Juliet, and Ophelia, we come to the quadruple suicide of Eros, Charmian, Cleopatra, and Marc Antony - certainly not the numerical marvel of the Jonestown Kool Aid self-annihilators, but certainly more poetic, more heroic.

The Benefits To Society

Self-annihilation offers Conservative leaders, their spouses and followers a poetic and heroic solution to the ills of their country and fellow citizens.

For those of finicky temperaments, modern science offers methods much less painless than the knives and asps used by the self-annihilators in Shakespeare's plays.

No expensive legislation will be needed; as Mr. Romney favorite health plan, emergency care,  benefits the poor, emergency care can take care of the disposal problem of the self-annihilated Conservatives.

And so many more of us would pay to watch Conservatives self-annnihilate than would pay for tickets to see aliens self-deport, a properly run self-annihilation program for Conservatives would be covered just by seat reservation sales - and general admission tickets would most likely  result in a surplus for the program!


"Things that sound exaggerated are very often not exaggerated at all.  They
are only things that you haven't heard said before or thought before..."

Agatha Christie, from Passenger To Frankfurt.

Monday, September 24, 2012

The Most Accomplished Liar of Accomplished Liars!

We've seen that Conservatives have to lie because in a representational democracy voters would boot them out of office if the Party of The Rich dared to proclaim their true goal, the ultimate feudalism of America. (

We've also seen the Conservatives tip their hands more brazenly in the last few years, almost as if they know that they've got the elections sewn up. (

Besides confusing the uninformed voter, Conservative lies are spun to give the sheeplets ammo to use when evangelizing Conservatism in the public domain.  Few can dispute the truism:  Stupid people are more susceptible to lies.

But their newest candidate for the presidency, Willard Mitt Romney, has to be crowned the King of Conservative liars...check out this article on The Maddow Blog by Steve Benen:

Chronicling Mitt's Mendacity, Vol. XXX
"Mitt Romney gave a speech Beallsville, Ohio, this week, and presented an unfortunate attack against President Obama. 'How can you go out there and tell people things that just aren't true?' he asked rhetorically. He added, 'This is a time for truths.'

"In context, Romney was referring to Obama's claim that 'we're adding jobs in the coal industry.' In reality, the nation really is adding jobs in the coal industry -- Romney was looking for an example of the president saying something that 'just isn't true,' and he pointed to an Obama quote that happened to be accurate, though he told his audience the opposite.

"It's hard not to appreciate the ironic circle -- the president said something true, Romney lied when he said the accurate claim is false, and then he complained about falsehoods in the campaign.

"But here we are. If this is, as Romney claims, a 'time for truths,' I can only hope the Republican candidate will take a few moments to consider the 30th installment of my weekly series, chronicling Mitt's mendacity. (This is the biggest list I've ever done.)"

(If I may interject a thought here, in, I noted that a common rhetorical device used by Conservatives is "projection.")

Step 4. Project your own behavior onto your opponent's.
This subconscious psychological defense mechanism is a boon to the average Republican of below-average I.Q. as a *conscious* attack strategy.

Descriptions of your faults, negative actions and shameful feelings, can be inserted into your invective to describe your opponents as "fascist," "criminal," or "murderous." You can accuse Democrats of "destroying the Constitution," "killing babies," or "taking away our free speech," and your audience will never guess that you're describing yourself!

This is why you can call President Obama a racist or Nazi, why you can claim that Democrats are waging war against women, students, minorities, and the elderly. If you practice and become as proficient as Rush Limbaugh, you can call African American figures *racist* and be believed.

But to continue with Mr. Benen's 30th installment of Mr. Romney's lies:

1. At an impromptu event in South Carolina yesterday, Romney said on Medicare policy, "Our plan [has] no change for current seniors and those 55 and older."

That's plainly false. Romney's plan eliminates all new benefits for seniors under the Affordable Care Act, which necessarily means higher prescription drug costs for seniors, and more expensive preventive care.

2. At the same event, Romney argued, "Under the president's plan, [Medicare] goes bankrupt... Under the plan I propose, it is solvent."

That's the exact opposite of reality. Obama's policy strengthens Medicare's finances, and under Romney's plan, the system would be closer to insolvency faster.

3. In Chillicothe, Ohio, Romney said that under Obama, "We've got lower economic growth."

Actually, we got higher economic growth.

4. In the same speech, Romney said that under Obama, "We've got higher unemployment."

Actually, we got lower unemployment.

5. He went on to say the annual budget deficit has hit the $1 trillion mark under Obama for the "first time the history of our country."

Not true. The first time in the history of our country that the deficit hit $1 trillion was George W. Bush's last year in office, when the annual shortfall was $1.3 trillion.

28. Romney went on to say, "Seventy-five percent of small businesses in this country surveyed by the Chamber of Commerce said that Obamacare makes it less likely for them to hire people."

The "survey" is a joke. The Chamber, a pro-Republican lobbying institution heavily invested in helping Romney, put up an unscientific online survey. Treating this as a legitimate poll of businesses is fundamentally dishonest.

29. Romney also said, "I'm going to put work back into welfare."

Work hasn't been taken out of welfare.

30. Romney went on to say, "[Obama] said if you have a business, you didn't build that. Someone else did that."

That's not even close to what the president said.

31. At an event in St. Augustine, Florida, Romney said the president "won't want to remind people of Greece because that's where he's taking our country if we don't get off the road we're on."

That's painfully untrue.

32. In the same speech Romney said of the president, "He said he'd measure progress also by whether people were able to have a good job that kept them in their home and paid their mortgage. Well, 8.5 million homes foreclosed, a record level, is not success, Mr. President."

Putting aside how dishonest it is for Romney to blame the housing crash on the president, let's also not forget that Romney intends to deliberately avoid any efforts to curtail foreclosures.

33. Romney added, "I'm going to take every government program and apply this test: Is this program so critical it's worth borrowing money from China to pay for it? And if it's not, we'll get rid of it."

This continues to be misleading. The implication here is that U.S. debt is financed by the Chinese, but this isn't true -- China only holds about 8% of the nation's debt.
For the previous prevarications listed, go to: Vol. I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XI, XII,XIII, XIV, XV, XVI, XVII, XVIII, XIX, XX, XXI, XXII,XXIII, XXIV, XXV, XXVI, XXVII, XXVIII, XXIX

Lie 33, combined with the previous lies chronicled by Mr. Benen, total 533 lies!

As Fred Clark at notes:

"Click those links. Read the lists. List after list of lie after lie. Hundreds of them — 533, to be exact, although Benen does not make any claim to providing a comprehensive chronicle.

"This is unprecedented. 'We’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers,' Romney’s pollster, Neil Newhouse, said.

"This has produced what James Fallows calls the “post-truth” age — a relentlessly dishonest onslaught of brazen falsehoods with which the media and the political system are struggling to cope. What do you do when every article, every “fact-check,” every arbiter denounces a lie and corrects it, but then a politician just keeps repeating it?

"It’s remarkable to behold."

When the Conservative lies and the lying Conservative liars that tell those lies get to be accepted as political truths, it is time to analyze the major failure of our democratic system and criminalize Conservatism.

"Love me when I least deserve it, because that’s when I really need it."

Swedish Proverb


Sunday, September 23, 2012

Conservatives HATE Social Security

If the Conservatives have enough of a majority in Congress and a do-what-we-tell-you empty suit in the White House, they will kill Social Security, no matter how they claim that they are only trying to "reform" it.

Alan Grayson, Congressional candidate "with guts," (sign up for his Facebook page here --> wrote a piece recently on the Republican plan to dismantle Social Security, "They Want To Destroy Social Security (Circa 1935)."

Some excerpts:

"...all the crocodile tears that the Right Wing sheds for the supposed insolvency of Social Security are just a cover story for what they really want to do, i.e., destroy Social Security. My Tea Party opponent is a perfect example of this: he calls Social Security a 'Ponzi scheme'; he calls Social Security and Medicare 'robbery'; he calls them unconstitutional; and somehow we’re supposed to believe that he’s the one to save them.

"So it has ever been. So it will ever be.

"Germany introduced Social Security in 1889. It came to America 'only' 46 years later, in 1935. When the Social Security program was introduced here, one of its most vociferous critics was former Republican President Herbert Hoover. Having led America into the Great Depression, Hoover wanted to make sure that no one led it out. (Does that ring a bell?)

According to an Associated Press report on May 6, 1935, and a New York Times report on May 22, 1938 (sorry, no NYT link), Hoover attacked Social Security in apocalyptic terms. Regarding the security for seniors that the program would provide, Hoover said that 'we can find [the same economic stability] in our jails. The slaves had it [too].' Hoover said that programs like Social Security would put Americans in cages: 'Our people are not ready to be turned into a national zoo.'

"Hoover said that rather than indulging in programs like Social Security, Americans should 'cling to their family life, to their homes, to their individual self-respect, to their rights, to their individual liberties.' He urged that we must not shift 'from the self-made man to the government-coddled man.' 

"I know that this sounds just like Paul Ryan, but it was Herbert Hoover. Really.

"Hoover added that the way to achieve 'genuine social security' was not through government handouts, but by 'saving pennies and producing more.'

"Yes, those pennies sure add up, don’t they? Save five of them, and you’ve got a nickel. Or, in Mitt Romney’s case, a quarter.

"Hoover said that he believed in private charity, not government handouts. He predicted that government programs like Social Security would destroy private charity, 'one of the most fundamental of inspirations in the spiritual growth of the family or individual.' 

"Now you know whom Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum got their ideas from.

"With unemployment in America approaching 25%, Hoover said that social programs like Social Security simply weren’t needed to feed, house and clothe people. 'We could do that by the simple
methods of bread lines, barracks and dungarees.
' The government could do nothing to ameliorate these problems; the only answer was courage and vision in adversity.'

"This sounds like something that Mitt Romney would say, right? Either that, or something equally vacuous.

"Herbert Hoover led the Republican effort to strangle Social Security in its crib. And now, 77 years later, Republicans are trying to suffocate Social Security as it lies in bed.

"At least they’re consistent."

Note the " the simple methods of bread lines, barracks and dungarees."  For those who have been complaining that this site exaggerates the aim of the Conservatives, that they truly want a return to feudalism, that this criminal conspiracy has been in place for decades, read this line again.

We'll have a happy new life with equal rights for all... Except blacks, Asians, Hispanics, Jews, gays, women, Muslims... Everyone who's not a white man. And I mean white-white, so no Italians, no Polish... Just people from Ireland, England and Scotland. But only certain parts of Scotland and Ireland... Just full-blooded whites... No, you know what? Nobody gets any rights! Ah, America!

Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*

Saturday, September 22, 2012

The Proud And The Profane

The Houston Press Blog published a story about a new phenomenon, the Profane Left Wing Internet Trolls (For adults only!), titled The League of Extraordinary Internet Trolls, by Jef With One that is informative from the standpoint of demonstrating effective rhetorical techniques against Conservative sheeplets - and it is extraordinarily funny too.

The cast of characters trolling and attacking the Conservative blogs is:  "Duke St. Rollins," "Surly Thor," "Duchess St. Rollins," and "Chest Strongwell" - my favorite.

Due to the profane (impious, irreligious, vulgar) nature of their work, please click on their names below to read their masterpieces of invective.

The League of Extraordinary Internet Trolls

"Recently I became aware of a new kind of performance artist. At least a kind I had never heard of before. It was a group of dedicated Facebook pseudonyms that made it their goal to attack right-wing Facebook pages with angry, profanity ridden, and often hysterical comments specifically to be drawn into arguments. The results of this troll-fu would be screencapped and added to the troller's own Facebook pages as an example of guerilla creation. Think of it as street art painted on the underpasses of the information superhighway.

"They build some pretty fair followings from this as well. Thousands of fans avidly watch their interactions and will even join in on the fun in order to wage bitter Internet war in the far right corners of Facebook. It's blossomed into a kind of community where each of these artists supports and promotes the other in order to build what I can only call the League of Extraordinary Internet Trolls. Today, I introduce you to them.

Duke St. Rollins

"(Duke St. Rollins)  is the man behind the 1,000,000 Strong to Help Improve Tea Party Patriots' Spelling and Grammar group, and it was his constant attacks on pro-Tea Party pages that led to his rise in popularity. His comedic approach is known for its absolutely brutal honesty, and is beautiful in its primal viciousness. Watching St. Rollins work is like watching a nature documentary where bring down slow prey.

"The League has no leader, but if it did it would be Duke St. Rollins. He began his troll career during the 2008 elections. Originally he trolled under his own name, but soon realized that that was not the wisest course of action. Thus was born the ultra-Reaganite Duke Strollington. Strollington (Chosen because it contained the word "troll") was an undercover conservative who eventually switched sides in a betrayal that left St. Rollins with death threats and hostility. After a hiatus, the identity re-emerged as Duke St. Rollins in tribute to the famous Black Flag singer and spoken word artist Henry Rollins.

"Watching St. Rollins work is like watching a nature documentary where cheetahs bring down slow prey."

"Like the hero he emulates, Thor's drive is the lack of truth. Where legitimate, well-thought out differences of opinion are expressed he does not go, but, "It's an entirely different thing to watch someone post like Rush Limbaugh's recent claim that Obama was behind the hurricane. That shit bothers me and that's when Surly Thor flies down and drops a Mjolnir-sized serving of truth and a few insults out the door."

"Obviously Thor lacks his counterpart's Godlike abilities, but is adept at using Old English to confuse and distract lesser minds so that they have a hard time rebutting what he's saying. He draws them in slowly with Shakespearean prose until he unleashes blistering insults as parting shots. It's a devilish technique that drives opponents mad."

" The Duchess is Batgirl to St. Rollins' Batman. Being she was a big fan of his trolling, the two became friends, and he encouraged her to follow in his typesteps using the feminine of his name. "I'm not sure why he entrusted me with the brand that he had personally built such a solid reputation for, but I am grateful and I think it's worked out pretty well for us," said the Duchess via e-mail.

"With her page often under attack from what she calls "Teabilly Trolls" and Snopes-debunked anti-liberal myths, she realized that civility was just not cutting it. The Duchess uses a bitchy approach that is tempered by a touching feminine compassion for the poor and down-trodden she feels are under attack from conservatives. She's a passionate Factchecker who is always keen to destroy racist and bigoted arguments with her truth ray."

" day a friend showed him St. Rollins' group and all that changed. As a stay-at-home dad tired of watching Team Umizoom (I feel you brother. Door Mouse can suck it) he decided to get in on the fun and wade into battle.

"Unlike his colleagues, Strongwell tends to seek out the fringes of the Internet hunting for the most stupid and absurd, whereas St. Rollins regularly visits even Mitt Romney's Facebook to launch attacks. Strongwell is a keen detective that can follow the trail of lunacy through various pages, and also fights a tireless war against perverts on Add Me pages.

"'Facebook seems to be an unlimited font of quasi-literate lunatics so detached from reality they post poorly worded hate gibberish all day about how their socialist Marxist Kenyan president wants to turn their children into gay Muslims and give away their guns to the Red Chinese or some such," said Strongwell. These people are always good for a laugh.'"

These trollers may only be the beginning.  Already a new troller has popped up:


The following sample is closer to a rating of PG-13 than the typical posts of the others, and admittedly still an X rated post, but here you go...

Scrolling through the posts of the Extraordinary Trolls will help you through the weekend, give them a try.

We admit that these Extraordinary Trolls may prove too aggressive, too profane (see above) for many  of you.  But, knowing that the hate and and criminal utterances coming from the mouths of the sheeplets and their capos can't be compared to a few cuss words from the left, if you want aggressive and profane rebuttals to Conservative nonsense and illogic, these roaming, trolling authors will give you some cheerful moments this weekend - Have a happy weekend!
Joyce Jr.


The state or condition of a community consisting of a master, a mistress and two slaves, making in all, two.

Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary

Friday, September 21, 2012

Our Shrinking Constitution

In our post two days ago, "The Fall of American Democracy: Conservative Victory," commented on a " f(inding)...that the United States was in significant danger of failing to even be a democracy at all."

The report cited what Conservatives have imposed on the American people in an effort to win by criminal fraud what they can't win by facts and logical arguments.

Restrictions on voter registration
New laws making it tougher to conduct voter registration drives
Increased voter registration requirements
The purging of voter files
Disenfranchised due to felony convicti
Voter identification requirements that make it harder for minorities to vote
Decreased opportunities for early and absentee voting
How minorities face longer wait times than white voters
Stricter voter registration and identification requirements

In a complementary article by called "U.S. Constitution Losing Influence as Model for Other Nations," the article notes:

"Once the standard by which new governments modeled their own public contract with citizens, the U.S. Constitution is losing its appeals with other countries, particularly regarding human rights.

"Three decades ago, it was estimated that 160 nations had modeled their constitution after that of the United States.

Today, however, 'constitutional similarity to the United States has clearly gone into free fall,' according to a new academic study appearing in the New York University Law Review. 'Over the 1960s and 1970s, democratic constitutions as a whole became more similar to the U.S. Constitution, only to reverse course in the 1980s and 1990s.

'The turn of the twenty-first century, however, saw the beginning of a steep plunge that continues through the most recent years for which we have data, to the point that the constitutions of the world’s democracies are, on average, less similar to the U.S. Constitution now than they were at the end of World War II.'”

"The authors of the study, David S. Law and Mila Versteeg, cite several reasons for the change, including:

· The U.S. Constitution “offers relatively few enumerated rights. While the catalog of rights found in other constitutions has steadily grown, the laconic U.S. Constitution has not added any rights at all over the last century.”
· “Among the relatively few rights that the U.S. Constitution does contain are provisions that happen to be rare at a global level. One is the Establishment Clause: today, only about one-third of the world’s constitutions provide expressly for a separation of church and state.99 Another is a right that is now so rare that it has become practically sui generis—namely, the right to bear arms. The only other constitutions in the world today that still feature such a right are those of Guatemala and Mexico.”
· “The U.S. Constitution is, instead, rooted in a libertarian constitutional tradition that is inherently antithetical to the notion of positive rights.” For example, whereas more than 90% of the world’s constitutions insure women’s rights, the issue is not addressed in the U.S. Constitution. Likewise, the vast majority of constitutions insure the right to social security, health care and food, these are not considered protected rights in the United States.
· The U.S. Constitution, the oldest still in force in the world, is extremely difficult to amend (only one amendment in the last forty years) is considered obsolete for newly emerging democracies.

In a complementary article at the by Adam Liptak, "‘We the People’ Loses Appeal With People Around the World," Liptak's take:

"Sure, it is the nation’s founding document and sacred text. And it is the oldest written national constitution still in force anywhere in the world. But its influence is waning.

"In 1987, on the Constitution’s bicentennial, Time magazine calculated that 'of the 170 countries that exist today, more than 160 have written charters modeled directly or indirectly on the U.S. version.'

"A quarter-century later, the picture looks very different. 'The U.S. Constitution appears to be losing its appeal as a model for constitutional drafters elsewhere,' (according to the study)."

"The rights guaranteed by the American Constitution are parsimonious by international standards, and they are frozen in amber. As Sanford Levinson wrote in 2006 in “Our Undemocratic Constitution,” “the U.S. Constitution is the most difficult to amend of any constitution currently existing in the world today.” (Yugoslavia used to hold that title, but Yugoslavia did not work out.)

Sheeplets Out of Step

"Americans recognize rights not widely protected, including ones to a speedy and public trial, and are outliers in prohibiting government establishment of religion. But the Constitution is out of step with the rest of the world in failing to protect, at least in so many words, a right to travel, the presumption of innocence and entitlement to food, education and health care.

"It has its idiosyncrasies. Only 2 percent of the world’s constitutions protect, as the Second Amendment does, a right to bear arms. (Its brothers in arms are Guatemala and Mexico.)

"The Constitution’s waning global stature is consistent with the diminished influence of the Supreme Court, which 'is losing the central role it once had among courts in modern democracies,' Aharon Barak, then the president of the Supreme Court of Israel, wrote in The Harvard Law Review in 2002.

"Many foreign judges say they have become less likely to cite decisions of the United States Supreme Court, in part because of what they consider its parochialism.

"'America is in danger, I think, of becoming something of a legal backwater,' Justice Michael Kirby of the High Court of Australia said in a 2001 interview. He said that he looked instead to India, South Africa and New Zealand.

"Mr. Barak, for his part, identified a new constitutional superpower: 'Canadian law,' he wrote, 'serves as a source of inspiration for many countries around the world.' The new study also suggests that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, adopted in 1982, may now be more influential than its American counterpart.

"The Canadian Charter is both more expansive and less absolute. It guarantees equal rights for women and disabled people, allows affirmative action and requires that those arrested be informed of their rights. On the other hand, it balances those rights against 'such reasonable limits' as 'can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.'”

Decades ago, Conservatives conspired to call a Constitution Convention, but when polls found that a super-majority of them believed that freedom of speech and other sections in the Bill of Rights, the clamor for the convention stalled.  But after criminalizing Conservatism a new Constitution Convention must be called.  Several of the Founding Fathers noted weaknesses in the Constitution, the lifetime terms for the Supreme Court judges with no specifics for impeachment for one; clauses discouraging the ability of individuals to amass extreme amounts of wealth; elimination of the so-called "right to bear arms;" specific language mandating the separation of church and state; and a section promoting "virtue" in our government - "virtue" defined as the preference of "good" over greed, of protection of all of our citizens over laissez faire capitalism.

"Today a reader, tomorrow a leader."

Margaret Fuller.  American journalist, critic, and women's rights advocate
associated with the American transcendentalism movement and the first
full-time American female book reviewer in journalism.  Her book, Woman
In The Nineteenth Century, is considered the first major feminist work
in the United States.  (1810-1850)


Thursday, September 20, 2012

A Special Place In Hell...

A special place in hell must be reserved for Conservative leaders and their sheeplets.  In another filibuster by the record-holders of filibusterers, the Conservative mouthpieces in the Congress shot down yet another bill that would have benefited those not of the 2 percent.

"Senate Republicans shoot down jobs bills for veterans"
from the

On Wednesday in Washington D.C. Senate Republicans continued their obstruction of legislation designed to help the American economy by blocking the motion to proceed on a bill designed to help veterans obtain jobs in the public and private sector.

At a cost of $1 billion over a five year period, the Veteran’s Jobs Corps Act of 2012 would have created a job corps for veterans looking for work. According to the text of the legislation for S.3457, the program would have employed veterans as police and firefighters as well as employing veterans in “conservation, resource management, and historic preservation projects on public lands and maintenance and improvement projects for cemeteries under the jurisdiction of the National Cemetery Administration.” In addition to direct federal, state, and local public sector work, the program would have also provided grants to non-governmental groups hiring veterans for jobs covered by the program.

The unemployment rate for veterans remains significantly higher than the national unemployment rate of 8.1% in August.

Wednesday’s vote was 58 Yeas to 40 Nays in favor of S.AMDT.2789, an amendment to the veterans jobs corps bill waiving normal budgetary procedure; however such a procedural vote requires at least 60 votes to move forward towards the final vote which requires only a simple majority for passage.

The outcome of this vote was a staggering reversal of previous Republican support a week earlier when on a September 11, 2012 vote to move S.3457 forward, the Senate voted overwhelmingly in favor with a 95 Yeas to 1 Nay.

All 51 Democratic Senators and both Independent Senators voted for the bill. In addition, five Republicans broke rank with their party to support the measure: Senators Scott Brown of Massachusetts, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, both of Maine, Dean Heller of Nevada, and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.

Republican Senators James Inhofe of Oklahoma and Mark Kirk of Illinois did not vote.

According to Roll Call, Republican Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma who voted against the bill stated of the measures, “Nobody knows if it works.”
Meanwhile, Democratic Senator Bill Nelson of Florida cited the election and President Obama’s support for the bill as the reason for the GOP filibuster.

Echoing Nelson in her statement, Murray added of the Republican filibuster, “This vote is stark reminder that Senator McConnell and Senate Republicans are willing to do absolutely anything to fulfill the pledge he made nearly two years ago to defeat President Obama. It doesn’t matter who gets in their way or which Americans they have to sacrifice in that pursuit, even if it’s our nation’s veterans.”
So the Conservatives decided to ignore the needs of veterans, police, firefighters, and the dead in one fell swoop.  How many lives will be affected by the arrogance of the Conservatives who ignore the plight of the middle class and the poor in the name of "no new taxes," a solemn pledge straight from the lips of George H. W. Bush?  The number of lives the Conservatives are willing to sacrifice to shovel more money and power to the greediest of the wealthy in our society is without limit.

It only goes to prove that Conservatism must be criminalized.  Every day they are able to prey on the rest of us, every day that they stop legislation to save lives and jobs, every day that they are enabled to use their civil rights and privileges to destroy our democracy, is a blot on our history and a step closer to the feudal society they so dearly strive to achieve.


“We read to know we are not alone.”

C.S. Lewis (British novelist. 1898-1963)