What’s Going On?

I haven’t been writing about health care reform since the Martha Coakley fiasco for three reasons. Number one is that our wonderful new son is taking both real and psychic energy away that I ordinarily use to write. I have no problem with that since the tradeoff is well worth it, but it does make it harder to produce blog product. The second reason is basic demoralization and frustration. I do my worst blogging when I’m really despondent or pissed off. The third reason is that I can’t get a read on what is going on. And without a read, I don’t have anything interesting to say.

Tom Harkin says that the House and Senate reached a deal two days before Coakley lost, and Kevin Drum is right that this should give us cause for optimism about the prospects for reconciliation. Buttressing that hope, Robert Gibbs told CNN today that we’re still on the five-yard line:

“We’re one vote in the House of Representatives from making health care reform a reality,” the White House press secretary said, positing a scenario where the House passed the version of the bill already passed by the Senate which President Obama would then sign into law.

But none of that squares up with some of the messaging coming from Rahm Emanuel.

With Mr. Obama’s health care overhaul stalled on Capitol Hill, Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, said in an interview that Democrats would try to act first on job creation, reducing the deficit and imposing tighter regulation on banks before returning to the health measure, the president’s top priority from last year.

So, I don’t know what to believe.

My first instinct, based on past history, is that any delay will be fatal to the health care bill as its prospects get worse every day closer we draw to election day. Yet, history isn’t always prologue, and there is something to be said for letting passions calm for a short time. Telling people that we’re moving on without giving up allows us to finally talk about something else. If negotiations go on feverishly behind the scenes, this outward calm could facilitate better progress. Are we really one vote away in the House? Are we really putting the whole thing on the back burner? I don’t know. I am not going to tell you that I do.

TARP Creates More Risk in System

.

Watchdog: Bailouts Created More Risk in System

(ABC News) – The government’s response to the financial meltdown has made it more likely the United States will face a deeper crisis in the future, an independent watchdog at the Treasury Department warned.

The problems that led to the last crisis have not yet been addressed, and in some cases have grown worse, says Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general for the trouble asset relief program, or TARP. The quarterly report to Congress was released Sunday.

“Even if TARP saved our financial system from driving off a cliff back in 2008, absent meaningful reform, we are still driving on the same winding mountain road, but this time in a faster car,” Barofsky wrote.

Barofsky also said his office is investigating 77 cases of possible criminal and civil fraud, including crimes of tax evasion, insider trading, mortgage lending and payment collection, false statements and public corruption.

Much of Barofsky’s report focused on the government’s growing role in the housing market, which he said has increased the risk of another housing bubble.

Over the past year, the federal government has spent hundreds of billions propping up the housing market. About 90 percent of home loans are backed by government controlled entities, mainly Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Housing Administration.

The Federal Reserve is spending $1.25 trillion to hold down mortgage rates, and millions of homeowners have refinanced at lower rates.

"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."

What to Make of Those Polls

I don’t live in Nevada so I don’t know precisely why the elecorate there is so sour on Harry Reid that they say they’ll vote for virtually anyone other than him. I do know that some recent polling showed that alternative Democrats (other than Las Vegas mayor Oscar Goodman) fared no better, so it can’t be just about Harry Reid. Something about the Democratic Party is pissing Nevadans off, and I haven’t seen any polling that helps explain what that something is or how it might be addressed. This phenomenon isn’t isolated in Nevada either. Polling is bad for Democrats all over the country, even as the people consistently say that they like the Democrats better than the Republicans. Absent some precise information to explain this, I’m stuck postulating that it is a generalized anti-incumbent mood that strikes first at those with the most power.

In other words, incumbent Republicans shouldn’t get too comfortable, especially those few Republicans perceived to have some influence on national affairs.

Some Thoughts on Obama and FDR

Franklin Roosevelt was able to connect with ordinary American people during the Depression despite coming from an immensely wealthy family (and a family that had been in the White House before) because he knew that all good fortune can be taken away at a moment’s notice. He knew that because he had the rare misfortune to contract infant paralysis (polio) at the age of thirty-nine.

The Roosevelt family had a summer home on Campobello Island, off New Brunswick, Canada. On August 9, 1921, Franklin Delano Roosevelt fell into the water while sailing. Reboarding the boat he felt chilled. Awaking the next day he felt extremely tired. His usual routine was to go swimming to refresh himself. “I didn’t feel the usual reaction…,” Roosevelt wrote later. “When I reached the house, the mail was in, with several newspapers I hadn’t seen. I sat reading for a while, too tired even to dress.” The next morning, Roosevelt recalled, “my left leg lagged…Presently it refused to work, and then the other.”

By August 12, Mr. Roosevelt found it difficult to stand and even to move his legs. The pain in his legs were almost too much to endure. He further experienced partial paralysis in his back, arms, and hands.

Just like that, Roosevelt went from being a vigorous, athletic man to needing leg braces and a wheelchair. The Roosevelt family had been benevolent-minded and progressive before Franklin’s illness, but there’s no doubt that his experience colored and deepened Franklin’s affinity for the lower strata of American society. They called him a ‘traitor to his class,’ but he knew hardship and ill fate.

Barack Obama comes to the presidency from the opposite direction. Born biracial in a racist society, abandoned by his father and (for a time) by his mother, Obama knew hardship from the beginning. Polio almost sidetracked FDR’s road to the White House, but Obama had to overcome more than 400 years of history just to get the chance to run.

I don’t think we should expect the two of them to draw the same lessons or govern the same way. When Roosevelt went after southern conservative Democrats in the 1938 primaries, he lost, and he lost credibility and power. I don’t think Obama would ever attempt something like that, which is both good and bad. It’s good, because he would probably lose, too. It’s bad because despite failing, FDR’s willingness to take on the moral blemish in his own party was indicative of a fighting spirit that paid off on many other issues.

But…LOOK AT THE PICTURE!!! (Obama On The Street)

So gotterdemerung wrote a mildly snarky piece titled Caption This on Wild Wild Left featuring a pic of Barack Obama goofing with a black guy on a street somewhere in mixed-race America. A piece which received several equally mildly snarky replies.

But…LOOK AT THE PICTURE!!!

Really.

Photobucket

LOOK at it, goddammit!!!

Look at Obama’s mouth.

Look at his stance.

Look at his comfort zone.

And read on.
His mouth?

The expression on his face?

That’s a street thing. It means “Gotcha!!!” In a (relatively) non-threatening, street goof kind of way.

What does the pic really say?

It says that Obama paid some street dues at one time. In black neighborhoods. It means that he really does have roots in both the black experience and in the working class experience of America.

Was he a gangbanger? A drug dealer? A street tough guy?

No, of course not.

But…unlike any other truly powerful politician in the history of racist America…he was there.

I walked those streets with him. In NYC when he was going to Columbia. Which university, in case you do not know it, is still about a 3 minute walk from some very…interesting…neighborhoods in Harlem, even after the area has undergone massive Bloombergification. I know the feel.

A Harlem story from those days-The wonderful jazz drummer Grady Tate was leaving the Apollo Theater late one night after a 1 AM show. His car was parked behind the theater on 126th St. As he got his keys out, someone approached him from the rear and stuck a gun in his ear. The thief robbed him, took his keys, climbed into the car and proceeded to drive away. As he pulled out, he lowered the window and said “By the way…loved your latest record.” Like dat. Obama would understand. He’d get a laugh from it. Betcha.

How did Obama live during this time?

Well, he has said that he “lived like a monk.” Lots of library time, etc.

I think not.

Not entirely, anyway.

It is known Obama lived off-campus with a roommate identified as “Sadik,” who was not a Columbia student. Obama describes Sadik as “a short, well-built Pakistani” who smoked marijuana and snorted cocaine.

The AP tracked down “Sadik,” whose real name turned out to be Sahole Saddiqi. Obama first met him when the two attended Occidental and Obama was living with a group of Pakistani students.

“We were both very lost,” Siddiqi told the AP of his days in New York with Obama. “We were both alienated, although he might not put it that way. He arrived disheveled and without a place to stay.”

Now…I have lived “off campus”…way off campus and pretty damned disheveled as well…with people who smoked marijuana and snorted cocaine, and I am here to tell you that contrary to what the right might like to imply about such a lifestyle, I learned as much or more from the experience than I ever did attending classes at institutions of higher learning.

Been “lost”, also. Let’s Get Lost-the great jazz trumpet player Chet Baker’s favorite lick. Tragic hero?  You bet. Sad junkie motherfucker? Yup. That too. But…he knew something. Bet on it. Obama knows some of that “something” too. Bet on that as well.

That single fact…that Obama lived off the grid for a while…is the most encouraging thing about him as far as I am concerned.

Not his undeniable intelligence.

Not his equally undeniable eloquence.

Certainly not his success as a President, which in his first year has been semi-negligible…a B or B minus at best.

But the plain fact that he knows the truth of what is going on in the urban streets of America. He has been there, his mortal ass walking down 125th St. at 2 in the morning on a rainy Saturday night. And he is alone in the field of potential leaders as far as this knowledge is concerned.

Why is this important?

Please.

It is popular to at least partially blame 9/11 and Al-Qaeda for our current financial troubles.

Bullshit.

The underutilization of the great talents of our population is the real reason that we are scuffling now, and racism has been the number one contributor to that failing. Without a racist culture, none of what is going down would have happened. Not in exactly same manner, for sure. And not on the same level of seriousness, either. Eliminate much of the massive financial drain of our so-called justice and public assistance systems…both necessities absolutely fueled by racism at their core…and the financial drain that is crippling this country simply would not exist. Is Al-Qaeda our active enemy? Yes. Would its efforts have successfully pushed the U.S. over a financial brink? No. There would be a surplus of funds available had we properly educated and given good work to minorities in this country for the last 50+ years. What they would have added to the GNP plus what has been subtracted from it by the systems that are necessary to maintain a culture in relative safety that has about 1/3rd of its people condemned to a position of permanent underclass?  Priceless. Would the U.S. have even felt the necessity of running its economic imperialist routine on the rest of the world? The one that really fuels most of the enmity felt towards us by organizations like Al-Qeada?

C’mon…

Of course not.

And…exactly who in our current possible leadership brigade has a fucking clue as to the reality of all of this? A visceral, experiential clue?

Ms. Clinton comes closest, but she is miles away from the reality of what Obama lived.

Any Republicans?

Please.

Any other Dems?

Nope.

So…snark away, folks. Mr. Obama has taken on a massively difficult task, and the odds of his being able to get even a part of it done are equally massively against him. Given the circumstaces, his B/B minus mark ought to be graded up on a curve to an A/A minus at the very least.

Go get ’em. bro’!!!

At least you’ve taken the risk.

Good on ya.

AG

CIA’s Revenge, Hakimullah Mehsud Dead

.

Pakistan Taliban leader Hakimullah Mehsud dead – state television

Pakistan’s military trying to verify reports that Taliban leader, who had been targeted by drone attacks, has been killed.

An elder in the Mamuzai area of Orakzai tribal agency said he attended Mehsud’s funeral on Thursday, the Associated Press reported. Speaking anonymously for fear of retaliation, the elder said Mehsud died at his in-laws’ home.

A Reuters report, quoting a Pakistani intelligence official, said the Taliban leader may have been fatally wounded following a 17 January drone attack on two vehicles in North Waziristan.

Mehsud’s fate has been the subject of intense speculation since a drone attack on 13 January on a remote madrasa on the border between South and North Waziristan.

A Taliban spokesman admitted that Mehsud had been present in the building moments earlier, but insisted he left before the American missile struck.

Days later Mehsud quelled rumours of his demise by phoning several Pakistani journalists in Peshawar. But he was apparently targeted a second time in a drone strike on two vehicles in North Waziristan on 17 January.

Unconfirmed reports since then have suggested Hakimullah was seriously injured in that strike and was shifted to his former stomping ground of Orakzai tribal agency for treatment.

CIA bomber calls for attacks on U.S. in video

(MSNBC) – The US has carried out drone attacks in the tribal belt over the past month. The salvo seems to have been triggered by the 30 December suicide bombing of a CIA base in southern Afghanistan that killed seven Americans spies including the base chief.

A posthumous video released later showed the bomber, a Jordanian doctor, sitting alongside Hakimullah Mehsud, indicating that the Pakistani Taliban played a leading role in the CIA’s greatest humiliation for decades.

8th Victim at FOB Chapman, Jordanian CIA asset …

New Taliban Leader In Pakistan Hakimullah Mehsud Warns Army Stop Following US Orders

"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."

Casual Observation

During World War Two, Edward R. Murrow flew twenty-five combat missions as a broadcast journalist. His first combat mission involved 500 planes, of which 50 were lost, but the novelty of his reporting won him even more fame and respect than his rooftop reporting during the London Blitz. He had become so valuable to CBS that they didn’t want him doing any more missions. His bosses told him that he’d already experienced the terror of combat and gotten the story that he’d set out to produce. Murrow responded that he’d only experienced the terror once, but the airmen were experiencing it over and over again. The real story, he said, was in living through this recurrent dance with death. So, he did another twenty-four missions.

I mention this because I can’t imagine today’s broadcast journalists doing anything of the kind. I do not completely dismiss the courage of today’s breed of journalist. Many took risks and some even lost their lives reporting the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Journalists have been kidnapped in Afghanistan, and Daniel Pearl was beheaded in Pakistan. But I cannot picture Brian Williams or Charlie Gibson or David Gregory or George Stephanopoulos or Chris Matthews playing Russian Roulette with their lives twenty-five times.

But more than a lack of courage, I notice a lack of any sense of public service. If today’s broadcast journalist did take such risks, I sense that they’d do it strictly for ratings. Maybe part of the problem is we fight wars we don’t need to fight. If the cause is at all controversial, a reporter feels no obligation to report with the same reckless abandon as our soldiers use in fighting the enemy. In fact, they feel it’s suspect to identify with our soldiers at all. We feel it, too.

I don’t know whether it’s a deterioration of our media or, more likely, the fallout from 40 years of fighting wars that need not have been fought. The whole spectacle has really taken a toll.

America’s sorry history with Haiti – Part 1

[This excerpt crossposted from http://www.consortiumnews.com/2010/013010a.html ]

America’s Sorry History with Haiti

By Lisa Pease
January 30, 2010

With all the talk of America taking charge of Haiti for a while, it would be prudent for us to take a step back and review the history of our various interventions in Haiti, and the outcomes of those efforts.  

For there is another kind of aid that the people of Haiti need that isn’t being talked about. They need us to understand their real history, their culture and their potential.

They need us to stop patronizing them and interfering with their progress so they can realize the freedom they are still seeking two centuries after officially casting off the shackles of slavery. [For more on that era, see Consortiumnews.com’s “Haiti and America’s Historic Debt.”]
If there’s one lesson we’ve had to learn in Haiti over and over, it’s that the solutions to Haiti’s problems can never be imposed from the outside. They must be allowed to grow from within.

And we have to let those solutions flourish, instead of trying to shape them to the liking of our business class, as we have repeatedly attempted to do, with disastrous effect.

The Military Occupation

In 1915, the United States began a nearly 20-year military occupation of Haiti, ostensibly to guarantee the country’s substantial debt repayments to American and other foreign lenders. But historian Hans Schmidt, among others, questioned this motive, as he found that Haiti’s record of repayment had been “exemplary” compared with that of other Latin American countries.

The larger reason for the occupation, according to Schmidt and others, was to keep European financial interests (German and French in particular) from economically colonizing Haiti at a time when America, having recently completed the Panama Canal, was hoping to expand its own sphere of influence in the Caribbean.

And potential investors in Haiti, such as the United Fruit Company (whose name is familiar to anyone who has studied the CIA’s coup in Guatemala), weren’t going to move in unless the U.S. took over the government and brought stability.

To be fair, it’s not like America alone ruined the place. Haiti was a mess when the U.S. forces got there. Of the 11 presidents who had held office in Haiti from 1888 to 1915, only one had apparently died a natural death, and none had served their full term. Seven presidents were killed or overthrown in 1911 alone.

And from 1843 to 1915, Haiti had been through, according to Robert and Nancy Heinl in their book Written in Blood, “at least 102 civil wars, revolutions, insurrections” or as one commentator called it, a series of “bloody operettas.”

Years of various colonization attempts had divided Haiti into an economic and cultural caste system that was in part racially based. The whites and lighter-skinned people often held the money and position; the darker the skin, the lower down the economic totem pole one was likely to be.

Efforts to spread modern technology among the peasant population fell flat, and working all day for someone else’s profit wasn’t much of an incentive for people who had few needs and were accustomed to scarcity.

In addition, many Americans who came to Haiti looked down on the native people, often due to racial prejudice. The Americans typically didn’t recognize the value of the natives’ knowledge, and believed that America knew what was best for Haiti.

One notable exception was Major Smedley Butler, who noted that “The Haitian people are divided into two classes; one class wears shoes and the other does not. The class that wears shoes is about one percent. …

“Ninety-nine percent of the people of Haiti are the most kindly, generous, hospitable, pleasure-loving people I have ever known. They would not hurt anybody [unless incited by the shoe-wearers; then] they are capable of the most horrible atrocities.”

“Those that wore shoes I took as a joke,” Butler added. “Without a sense of humor, you could not live in Haiti among these people, among the shoe class.”

Ignorance and Arrogance

You’d think that if you wanted to help a people become a prospering democracy that the first thing you’d offer them would be an education. But over 10 years into the U.S. occupation, 95 percent of the Haitian population remained illiterate.

The one educational effort the U.S. put forward was the Service Technique, a training program in agricultural and industrial technology. The problem with that, as Schmidt noted, was that the elite “traditionally held that manual labor was demeaning, while the peasants were enmeshed in subsistence farming and were reluctant to risk an already tenuous existence in outlandish experiments that were fundamental to American technological progress.”

In addition, American arrogance even prevented an exchange of ideas that could have benefited American businesses. For example, the Haitians had developed a much more efficient way of farming cotton than the industrial farming methods employed by the Americans. But Americans pushed their own technology instead.

Not surprisingly, the Americans failed to win many converts.

What little profit Haiti did make, financially, was used to pay off American bankers, sometimes in advance of the payment schedule. Funding education and public projects — the very projects the loans had been provided for — were not the priorities.

Haitian laborers were paid pennies an hour to work 12-hour days. Raising wages was discouraged for fear it might cause capital to seek a more favorable climate.

In 1925 and 1926, in an attempt to make the country more attractive to farming interests such as United Fruit, the Marines took aerial photographs of the land in the hopes of creating a cadastral survey showing actual boundaries of property.

But the photographs were destroyed in a fire, and American officials for the large part refused to pressure the masses into selling their tiny, title-less but generations-held property to American businesses.

When the market crash in 1929 rippled around the world, Haiti’s productive coffee farms lost their markets, and the people returned to subsistence-level farming. Students began striking to protest the American occupation, and soon others joined in a general strike.

An early attempt at “shock and awe” failed as miserably in Haiti as it did in Iraq. The Marines dropped bombs in a harbor where a particularly aggressive group of protesting Haitians had gathered. But instead of cowing them, the demonstration seemed to instigate them further. The Marines had to fire on the group to disperse them.

Ultimately, the depression turned the tide of opinion in Haiti against its American occupiers, increasingly seen as oppressors.

By 1932, tensions had come to a head, and President Hoover began taking steps to end the occupation. President Roosevelt completed the action in 1934.

Evaluating the Effort

What did the United States leave the Haitians with in return for the occupation? The U.S. did bring them some years of relative stability, law and order. The U.S. built some hospitals and rural health clinics as well as some roads and bridges and airstrips.

But for all that, as a contemporary observer noted, “the Haitian people are, today, little better fitted for self-government than they were in 1915.”

U.S. military forces also killed thousands of Haitians in efforts to achieve security.

The aforementioned Major Butler became quite outspoken about the role he’d been forced to play. “I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912…

“Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.”

Did the U.S. learn from this failed attempt at nation building? No. The U.S. just kept intervening, with repeatedly disastrous results.

Cut to 1957. Whatever modernization was achieved from the U.S. occupation was already a distant memory. Bridges and roads had fallen into disrepair. The same drive that in 1934 took two hours to complete by 1957 took nine hours by jeep (in good weather) due to unpaved potholes and the island’s “wrinkled paper” topology.

And that was just one road.

Imagine a country without a telephone system, with failing bridges, ports with crumbling docks, patients lying ill on the floor of dirty hospitals, political institutions in shambles or even nonexistent. Imagine what you’re seeing now, post-earthquake, as the everyday state of things.

… read the rest at http://www.consortiumnews.com/2010/013010a.html.

The Duvalier part (not included here but posted at that link) is especially interesting re some overlap with people from the Kennedy assassination story. That part has many links – better if you read it there.

Part 2, about our Janus-faced dealings with Aristide, should be up tomorrow, I think.

Shameful Cowardly Hawai’ian Democrats

There’s a strange procedural gap in the rules of the Hawai’i House of Representatives. Normally, representatives have the right to demand a roll call vote after a voice vote. But, in Hawai’i, the Vice Speaker of the House was able to erroneously rule that ‘the noes have it,’ and kill off an effort to pass a civil unions bill.

No roll call was taken on the decision to postpone the vote, which shielded representatives from having their positions on the record. Instead, lawmakers shouted “aye” or “no,” and Vice Speaker of the House Michael Magaoay then ruled that the motion to delay a vote had passed.

The voice vote defers further action on the bill unless two-thirds of lawmakers vote to reconsider it; otherwise, Hawaii’s debate on the issue is over for this year.

“You can call me a coward, but we are all not cowards. We’ll make our tough decisions as we go ahead,” Democratic Speaker of the House Calvin Say said he told civil union backers. “But members were concerned, and that was my role as the speaker to make that determination and decision to do what we did today.”

Republican Gov. Linda Lingle had refused to say whether she would have vetoed a civil unions bill if lawmakers had approved it.

“Something so divisive at the beginning of session wouldn’t be a good thing, so I’m glad they made that decision,” Lingle said.

It might have been divisive, but they had the votes to pass it. The Senate had already passed the bill last week, and the House approved civil unions by a 33-18 margin in 2009. The Republican governor had made no commitment to veto. So, basically, the Democratic leadership decided not to extend rights to the LGBT community because a minority of their own members were uncomfortable or afraid. I think ‘cowardice’ is clearly the correct word to describe this.

It’s also dishonest to deliberately mischaracterize the result of a voice vote. That’s something you’d expect in Stalin’s Russia, not the United States of America.