Dear Chris Hedges

[Zalatix]

The time to fight for the true left is not during an election, least of all with an incumbent politician at stake. The time to fight for the true left is during the primary when we're picking a new Democratic politician.

When you push for a third party during an election and enough people follow you, you get a Republican, which is worse than voting Democratic. Remember 2000? If you voted for Nader in 2000, how did you like 8 years of Bush?

Now mind you, you don't have to agree with that - history has already spoken clearly and decisively on that issue. Feel free to have a hearty argument with history!

[gateley]

1. +1!!!!!!!!

[Cha]

2. Thank you, Zalatix!

[appal_jack]

3. Nonsense.

First, let's get this necessity out of the way. I am a Democrat, and plan to vote for our President's reelection very soon.

However, an election is a time when candidates solicit support from We the People by outlining their positions (or in Romney/Ryan's case, by running from their past positions and attempting to obfuscate their present ones, apparently). From what I have read of him, Hedges is doing us (and yes, also Obama) a favor by agitating for progressive causes during an election. He is saying that fundamental issues of equality and justice cannot be ignored.

Those who choose to sweep these same issues under the rug in the name of unity and poll numbers virtually insure that important issues of equality and justice will again be ignored by whatever Democrats gain or retain power after January 2013. I don't want that; do you?

I fully believe that Obama has been a good president during his first term, but some unfortunate choices kept him from being a great president: leaving the banksters untouched following the greatest financial crime in history, appointing corporate cronies like Geithner, Summers, etc., appointing drug warriors like Holder, etc., failing to prosecute B*shco's many documented crimes and continuing some of their worst civil liberties abuses, etc. etc. etc. Am I willing to give Obama and the Democrats a second chance to achieve greatness in public works, individual freedom, economic development, and all the rest? Yes, hell yes. But they will have to answer Hedges critiques as they solicit votes. This is right & proper.

-app

[banned from Kos]

4. You are finacially illiterate.

Summers and Geithner are not.

Fini.

[marmar]

8. "finacially"

Again, who's illiterate?

[banned from Kos]

11. I know - the banksters are out to "get ya"!

Really, they are stealing your money whenever you run to them for services.

Bank Griefers are total idiots.

[marmar]

12. Daily Kos is more visionary than I give them credit for.

nt

[CrispyQ]

14. ...

[appal_jack]

9. I would alert on your post as an ad-hominem attack

"You are finacially illiterate."

I would alert on your post as an ad-hominem attack, but it's so much more satisfying just to have your idiocy out here swinging in the wind for all to see.

Geithner and Summers are corporate tools. Telling the powerful what they want to hear is not literacy, but it will get you admission in some high places nonetheless.

-app

[banned from Kos]

13. Obama cracked down on the banks, you lackey.

Dodd-Frank is the strongest regulation --- ever.

I am in finance and know this shit.

[Egalitarian Thug]

15. "Dodd-Frank is the strongest regulation --- ever." ROTFLMAO!

Now I know you're just screwing around!

[girl gone mad]

23. "I am in finance and know this shit."

This sounds like something Romney would say. "I know how to screw people out of money, therefore I'm smarter than everyone else."

[tama]

63. ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1240147474

[HiPointDem]

39. Giant Banks Now 30% Bigger than When Dodd-Frank Financial “Reform” Law Was Passed

Read more at http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/04/guest-post-giant-banks-now-30-bigger-than-when-dodd-frank-financial-reform-law-was-passed.html#oj4istCq2yAjWQYd.99

[piratefish08]

43. you people stop it - this stuff is hard - YOU try it!

[raouldukelives]

69. Money is a hell of a drug. nt

[Romulox]

72. WHY are our standards so much lower than Kos????

[Egalitarian Thug]

76. Two ROTFLMAO's in one sub-thread! Thanks1

[WilliamPitt]

74. I make in my pants sometimes.

<--------

[ProSense]

10. Actually,

"leaving the banksters untouched following the greatest financial crime in history"

...the bankers were touched. That's another one of those fallacies based on people's opinions of who should have gone to jail. The fact is a number of top-level bankers/hedge fund managers did go to jail.

Three Former UBS Executives Convicted for Frauds Involving Contracts Related to the Investment of Municipal Bond Proceeds
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021250815

Gupta Insider-Trading Sentence Is Re-Set for Oct. 17
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-27/gupta-insider-trading-sentence-is-re-set-for-oct-17.html

Former BofA Exec Indicted For Fraud
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002990749

Hedge Fund Founder Raj Rajaratnam Sentenced in Manhattan Federal Court to 11 Years in Prison for Insider Trading Crimes
http://www.stopfraud.gov/news/news-10132011.html

CEO and Head Trader of Bankrupt Sentinel Management Indicted in Chicago in Alleged $500 Million Fraud Scheme Prior to Firm’s 2007 Collapse
http://www.stopfraud.gov/iso/opa/stopfraud/ILN-120601.html

Yahoo! Executive and California Hedge Fund Portfolio Manager Plead Guilty in New York for Insider Trading
http://www.stopfraud.gov/iso/opa/stopfraud/NYS-120521.html

Former Chairman of Taylor, Bean & Whitaker Sentenced to 30 Years in Prison and Ordered to Forfeit $38.5 Million
http://www.stopfraud.gov/news/news-06302011-2.html
http://www.stopfraud.gov/iso/opa/stopfraud/2012/12-crm-342.html

Former Chief Financial Officer of Taylor, Bean & Whitaker Pleads Guilty to Fraud Scheme
http://www.stopfraud.gov/iso/opa/stopfraud/2012/12-crm-342.html

[JDPriestly]

19. ProSense, that list is pitiful compared to the fraud, the lying, the cheating that was committed.

[ProSense]

20. Well,

you're welcomed to dig for more: http://www.stopfraud.gov/news-index.html

The fact is that there were prosecutions of top-level bankers.

[girl gone mad]

24. None of the guys in your list were top-level.

Here are just a few of the rampant financial crimes which have gone unprosecuted:

• Committing massive and pervasive fraud both when they initiated mortgage loans and when they foreclosed on them (and see this)
  
  
• Pledging the same mortgage multiple times to different buyers. See this, this, this, this and this.
  
  
• Cheating homeowners by gaming laws meant to protect people from unfair foreclosure
  
  
• Charging veterans unlawful mortgage fees
  
  
• Engaging in mafia-style big-rigging fraud against local governments. See this, this and this
  
  
• Cooking their books (and see this)
  
  
• Bribing and bullying ratings agencies to inflate ratings on their risky investments
  
  
• Pushing investments which they knew were terrible, and then betting against the same investments to make money for themselves. See this, this, this, this and this
  
  
• Engaging in unlawful “frontrunning” to manipulate markets. See this, this, this, this, this and this
  
  
• Laundering money for drug cartels. See this, this and this (indeed, drug dealers kept the banking system afloat during the depths of the 2008 financial crisis)
  
  Much more here: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/07/the-many-ways-banks-commit-criminal-fraud.html

[KoKo]

67. +1 Excellent list!

[ProSense]

82. BS!

The top executive for UBS, also served as a top exec for Lehman.

<...>

Russia represents an important opportunity for Lehman Brothers and the Firm plans to offer a full range of investment banking and capital markets services. In recent months Lehman Brothers has focused on building out its offering in Russia and ensuring the most talented team is in place in order to successfully deliver our global capabilities. To that end Peter Ghavami has joined Lehman Brothers as Head of Capital Markets and will partner with Nicholas Jordan, Head of Investment Banking Russia, to build out the overall platform. Mr. Ghavami joins from UBS where he was previously global Head of Commodities.

http://www.finyear.com/LEHMAN-BROTHERS-obtient-une-licence-BROKER-DISTRIBUTEUR-en-Russie_a4421.html

The list is all top-level executives. And how do you respond, by offering up "types of crimes." Those are not people. Nice try at obfuscation.

For every type of crime on your list, there is a prosecution associated here: http://www.stopfraud.gov/news-index.html

Philip R. Lochmiller Sr. Sentenced to Over 33 Years in Federal Prison for Conspiracy, Money Laundering Conspiracy, Money Laundering and Mail Fraud
http://www.stopfraud.gov/iso/opa/stopfraud/CO-120309.html

Former President of Park Avenue Bank Pleads Guilty to Fraud, Bribery and Embezzlement
http://www.stopfraud.gov/news/news-10082010.html

[girl gone mad]

113. No one on your list is a top-level executive.

Not one of them. I stand by my statement. Peter Ghavami was a managing director, not a top executive, and the investigation into his bid-rigging started when Bush was in office.

You linked to state prosecutions to try and demonstrate that the Obama administration is tough on financial crimes. Talk about obfuscation!

Everybody knows Obama is hellbent on serving the interests of Wall Street. His Justice Dept. openly brags about refusing to bring prosecutions. You are not fooling anyone who doesn't want to be fooled.

[JDPriestly]

90. Not nearly enough. Not nearly enough.

At the least they could have produced a report that was honest about how mortgage sales personnel were promised big bonuses for getting fools into these mortgages for houses that were way overpriced.

I remember the time. Everybody and his brother was trying to sell mortgages.

I remember Bush's statement in a State of the Nation speech before both houses of Congress crowing that even the poor could get mortgages. I remember Bush's deceptive talk about the "ownership society."

I do not understand why the Obama administration was so easy on Bush, his friends and the mortgage businesses. They are to blame for our bad economy. They created it.

[Zalatix]

42. First, admit you were factually wrong.

"Leaving the banksters untouched following the greatest financial crime in history" has been soundly disproven.

The banksters were not untouched. Several of them got indicted and also some got prison time. Examples cited in Prosense's post.

Admit this, then we can move on.

[tama]

64. Admitted

People in Iceland got rid of their bankster class and corrupted politicians as whole. While people in USA got Citizens United etc. etc.

[Ikonoklast]

92. Three times as many people live in Cuyahoga County, Ohio than all of Iceland.

You cannot extrapolate the micro- to the macro.

[tama]

95. Okey then, you're doomed...

Nah, seriously, scale may be a factor but hard to say what kind exactly. Latin America is pretty big, many if not most countries to there going through various stages of similar revolutions, IMF kicked out and new Constitutions. Arab spring. Hundreds of thousands now in Spain telling government to step down and demanding new constitution.

I understand that US election cycle is giving you people there now even more introverted myopia than usual, but global revolution is going on. It's not over and done tomorrow or next year, but it's going on.

[JDPriestly]

85. It is disgusting that people who ran big firms that sold investements to their clients that they

knew were losers and against which they themselves were betting are now collecting huge bonuses on Wall Street.

There was far, far, far, far more fraud than the Obama administration has prosecuted. Hunting down marijuana farmers is easier and cheaper. That's why the Obama administration has focused on marijuana rather than corporate fraud.

Corporate fraud ran rampant during the Bush administration (and the Clinton administration too) and only a tiny fraction of it has been brought to light.

[girl gone mad]

114. He wasn't factually wrong.

Prosense linked to prosecutions brought by State Attorney Generals, not by anyone in the Justice Department.

[Egalitarian Thug]

77. At 1/1000the size of The Great Robbery, looting the S&L's generated over 30,000 investigations,

put hundreds in jail, banned thousands more from ever working in the financial industry,

You just can't pretend that this administration's reaction to this historical looting is anything other than a tacit approval of the greatest crime in history.

If we had reacted to the S&L crisis similarly, Charles Keating would have been made Secretary of the Treasury, Alan Cranston would be Chairman of the Federal Reserve, and Lincoln Savings would be the largest financial institution on earth.

[ProSense]

79. First of all,

At 1/1000the size of The Great Robbery, looting the S&L's generated over 30,000 investigations, put hundreds in jail, banned thousands more from ever working in the financial industry,

You just can't pretend that this administration's reaction to this historical looting is anything other than a tacit approval of the greatest crime in history.

If we had reacted to the S&L crisis similarly, Charles Keating would have been made Secretary of the Treasury, Alan Cranston would be Chairman of the Federal Reserve, and Lincoln Savings would be the largest financial institution on earth.

...who went to jail? Name 10 top-level bankers who went to jail. You can't pretend that throwing out "30,000 investigations" mean a damn thing. You can go here and find convictions related to the current crisis: http://www.stopfraud.gov/news-index.html

Secondly, I've researched the data, including the following chart that's past around to erroneously conclude that there have been fewer convictions. It shows prosecutions, not convictions. It's also not conclusive because it doesn't state what specifically it includes and appears to be related to bank fraud. Here's the reference:

This category can refer to crimes committed both within and against banks. Defendants include bank executives who mislead regulators, mortgage brokers who falsify loan documents, and consumers who write bad checks. (Here are some recent cases of bank fraud prosecutions.)

Goldman Sachs is not a bank. Still, even if it is mostly bank fraud, it does offer more evidence of Bush's "abysmal" record, as prosecutions dropped significantly during his Presidency. The drop off is likely due to fewer financial convictions, resulting from the repeal of Glass-Steagall.

The following is from the Financial Institution Fraud and Failure Reports for each fiscal year.



http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/fiff_00-01




http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/fiff-2002

(b): Types of Subjects Convicted in FIF Cases During FY 2007*
SUBJECT TYPE NUMBER OF SUBJECTS
Legal Alien 8
Illegal Alien 20
All Other Subjects 1,038
Bank Officer 88
Bank Employee 179
International or National Union Officer 1
President 1
Business Manager 2
Office Manager 2
Financial Secretary 1
Federal Employee - GS 12 & Below 1
State - All Others 1
Local Law Enforcement Officer 1
City Councilman 1
Possible Terrorist Member or Sympathizer 1
Company or Corporation 7
Local - All Others 2
Total 1,354

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/fiff_06-07/fiff_06-07



http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/fiff_06-07/fiff_06-07

Given the charts directly above and the break out for 2007, it appears that most of the convictions were not bank executives. In fact, the majority were bank "outsiders," likely meaning more bad-check writers and document falsifiers.

Also, bank fraud is separate from corporate fraud, mortgage fraud, and securities and commodities fraud.

The following is from the Financial Crimes Report to the Public for each fiscal year:
(Note: The 2005 report does not break out securities and commodities fraud. The 2010-2011 report is the only one that breaks out financial institution fraud. All reports show corporate fraud and mortgage fraud.)

Through Fiscal Year 2005, cases pursued by the FBI resulted in 497 indictments and 317 convictions of corporate criminals. Numerous cases are pending plea agreements and trials. From July 1, 2002 through March 31, 2005, accomplishments regarding Corporate Fraud cases were as follows: $2.2 billion in Restitutions, $34.6 million in Recoveries, $79.1 million in Fines, and $27.9 million in Seizures. As Corporate Fraud statistical accomplishments were not provided before July 1, 2002, the following statistical accomplishments are reflective of this time frame through Second Quarter, Fiscal Year 2005.

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/fcs_report2005/fcs_2005#CORPORATE

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/fcs_report2005/fcs_2005#MORTGAGE

_________

During FY 2006, the FBI investigated 490 Corporate Fraud cases resulting in 171 indictments and 124 convictions of corporate criminals. Numerous cases are pending plea agreements and trials. The following notable statistical accomplishments are reflective in FY 2006 for Corporate Fraud: $1.2 billion in Restitutions, $41.5 million in Recoveries, $14.2 million in Fines, and $62.6 million in Seizures. The chart below is reflective of the number of pending cases from FY 2002 through FY 2006.

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/fcs_report2006

During FY 2006, the FBI investigated 1165 cases of Securities and Commodities fraud and recorded 302 indictments and 164 convictions. Many of these Securities Fraud cases are pending plea agreements or trials. The following notable statistical accomplishments are reflective in FY 2006 for Securities and Commodities Fraud: $1.9 billion in Restitutions, $20.6 million in Recoveries, $80.7 million in Fines, and $62.7 million in Seizures. The chart below is reflective of the number of pending cases from FY 2002 through FY 2006.

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/fcs_report2006/financial-crimes-report-to-the-public-fiscal-year-2006#Securities

Through FY 2006, 818 cases investigated by the FBI resulted in 263 indictments and 204 convictions of Mortgage Fraud criminals. The following notable statistical accomplishments are reflective in FY 2006 for Mortgage Fraud: $388.9 million in Restitutions, $1.4 million in Recoveries, and $231 million in Fines. The chart below is reflective of the number of pending cases from FY 2003 through FY 2006.

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/fcs_report2006/financial-crimes-report-to-the-public-fiscal-year-2006#Mortgage

___________

Through FY 2007, cases pursued by the FBI resulted in 183 indictments and 173 convictions of corporate criminals. Numerous cases are pending plea agreements and trials. During Fiscal Year 2007, the FBI secured $12.6 billion in restitution orders and $38.6 million in fines from corporate criminals. The chart below reflects corporate fraud pending cases from Fiscal Year 2003 through Fiscal Year 2007 as follows: Fiscal Year 2003 - 279 cases; Fiscal Year 2004 - 332; Fiscal Year 2005 - 423; Fiscal Year 2006 - 486; and Fiscal Year 2008 - 529 cases.

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/fcs_report2007/fcr_2007#corporate

As of the end of Fiscal Year 2007, the FBI was investigating 1,217 cases of securities and commodities fraud and had already recorded 320 indictments and 289 convictions. Additional notable accomplishments in Fiscal Year 2007 include: $1.7 billion in restitution orders; $24 million in recoveries; and $202.7 million in fines. The chart below reflects securities and commodities fraud pending cases from Fiscal Year 2003 through Fiscal Year 2007 as follows: Fiscal Year 2003 - 937 cases; Fiscal Year 2004 - 987cases; Fiscal Year 2005 - 1,139 cases; Fiscal Year 2006 - 1,165 cases; and Fiscal Year 2007 - 1,217 cases.

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/fcs_report2007/fcr_2007#securities

Through Fiscal Year 2007, 1,204 cases resulted in 321 indictments and 260 convictions of mortgage fraud criminals. The following notable statistical accomplishments are reflective in Fiscal Year 2007 for mortgage fraud: $595.9 million in restitutions, $21.8 million in recoveries, and $1.7 in fines. The chart below reflects mortgage fraud pending cases from Fiscal Year 2003 through Fiscal Year 2007 as follows: Fiscal Year 2003 - 436 cases; Fiscal Year 2004 - 534 cases; Fiscal Year 2005 - 721 cases; Fiscal Year 2006 - 818 cases; and Fiscal Year 2007 - 1,204 cases.

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/fcs_report2007/fcr_2007#mortgage

______________

Through FY 2008, cases pursued by the FBI resulted in 158 indictments and 132 convictions of corporate criminals. Numerous cases are pending plea agreements and trials. During FY 2008, the FBI secured $8.1 billion in restitution orders and $199 million in fines from corporate criminals. The chart below reflects corporate fraud pending cases from FY 2004 through FY 2008 as follows: FY 2004—332 cases; FY 2005—423; FY 2006—486; FY 2007—529; and FY 2008—545 cases.

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/fcs_report2008/financial-crimes-report-to-the-public#corporate

As of the end of FY 2008, the FBI was investigating 1,210 cases of securities and commodities fraud and had already recorded 357 indictments and 296 convictions. Additional notable accomplishments in FY 2008 include: $3.1 billion in restitution orders; $43.6 million in recoveries; $151.4 million in fines and $84.2 million in seizures. The chart below reflects securities and commodities fraud pending cases from FY 2004 through FY 2008 as follows: FY 2004—987cases; FY 2005—1,139 cases; FY 2006—1,165 cases; FY 2007—1,217 cases and FY 2008—1,210 cases.

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/fcs_report2008/financial-crimes-report-to-the-public#securities

Through FY 2008, 1,644 cases resulted in 560 indictments and 338 convictions of mortgage fraud criminals. The following notable statistical accomplishments are reflective in FY 2008 for mortgage fraud: $1.1 billion in restitutions, $3.3 million in recoveries, $3.1 million in fines, and 68 seizures valued at $476.7 million. The chart below reflects mortgage fraud pending cases from FY 2004 through FY 2008 as follows: FY 2004—534 cases; FY 2005—721 cases; FY 2006—818 cases; FY 2007—1,204 cases; and FY 2008—1,644 cases.

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/fcs_report2008/financial-crimes-report-to-the-public#mortgage

____________

Through FY 2009, cases pursued by the FBI resulted in 153 indictments/informations and 156 convictions of corporate criminals. Numerous cases are pending plea agreements and trials. During FY 2009, the FBI secured $6.1 billion in restitution orders and $5.4 million in fines from corporate criminals. The chart below reflects corporate fraud pending cases from FY 2005 through FY 2009 as follows: FY 2005— 423 cases; FY 2006—486 cases; FY 2007—529 cases; FY 2008—545 cases; and FY 2009—592 cases.

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/financial-crimes-report-2009/financial-crimes-report-2009

As of the end of FY 2009, the FBI was investigating 1,510 cases of securities and commodities fraud and had already recorded 412 indictments/informations and 306 convictions. Additional notable accomplishments in FY 2009 include: $8.1 billion in restitution orders; $63.4 million in recoveries; $12.8 million in fines; and $126 million in seizures. The chart below reflects securities and commodities fraud pending cases from FY 2005 through FY 2009 as follows: FY 2005—1,139 cases; FY 2006—1,165 cases; FY 2007—1,217 cases; FY 2008—1,210 cases; and FY 2009— 1,510 cases.

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/financial-crimes-report-2009/financial-crimes-report-2009#securities

Through FY 2009, 2,794 cases resulted in 822 indictments and 494 convictions of mortgage fraud criminals. The following notable statistical accomplishments are reflective in FY 2009 for mortgage fraud: $2.5 billion in restitutions, $7.5 million in recoveries, and $58.4 million in fines; 128 seizures valued at $5.06 million and 226 criminal indicted assets valued at $510.1 million. The chart below reflects mortgage fraud pending cases from FY 2005 through FY 2009 as follows: FY 2005—721 cases; FY 2006—818 cases; FY 2007—1,204 cases; FY 2008—1,644 cases; and FY 2009—2,794 cases.

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/financial-crimes-report-2009/financial-crimes-report-2009#mortgage

_____________

During FY 2011, cases pursued by the FBI resulted in 242 indictments/informations and 241 convictions of corporate criminals. Numerous cases are pending plea agreements and trials. During FY 2011, the FBI secured $2.4 billion in restitution orders and $16.1 million in fines from corporate criminals. The chart below reflects corporate fraud pending cases from FY 2007 through FY 2011.

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/financial-crimes-report-2010-2011/financial-crimes-report-2010-2011#Corporate

As of the end of FY 2011, the FBI was investigating 1,846 cases of securities and commodities fraud and had recorded 520 indictments/informations and 394 convictions against this criminal threat. Additional notable accomplishments in FY 2011 include: $8.8 billion in restitution orders; $36 million in recoveries; $113 million in fines; and $751 million in forfeitures. The chart below reflects securities and commodities fraud pending cases from FY 2007 through FY 2011.

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/financial-crimes-report-2010-2011/financial-crimes-report-2010-2011#Securities

During FY 2011, cases pursued by the FBI resulted in 521 informations and indictments, and 429 convictions of FIF criminals. The following are notable statistical accomplishments in FY 2011 for FIF: $1.38 billion in restitutions; $116.3 million in fines; and seizures valued at $15.7 million. The chart below reflects pending FIF cases from FY 2007 through FY 2011.

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/financial-crimes-report-2010-2011/financial-crimes-report-2010-2011#Financial-ins

Through FY 2011, FBI investigations resulted in 1,223 informations and indictments and 1,082 convictions of mortgage fraud criminals. The following notable statistical accomplishments are reflective in FY 2011 for mortgage fraud: $1.38 billion in restitutions; $116.3 million in fines; seizures valued at $15.7 million; and $7.33 million in forfeitures.

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/financial-crimes-report-2010-2011/financial-crimes-report-2010-2011#Mortgage

Pending cases are important because they can still result in convictions.

[Egalitarian Thug]

81. I stand corrected, I guess you can pretend. n/t

[ProSense]

83. LOL! Pwn'd! n/t

[99th_Monkey]

105. +100

I totally agree that Chris Hedges' voice is an important contribution to the public
discourse, whenever and where ever. Hell, there's only about six months in between
elections, before the next one starts up for 2 years. The US is "in the middle of an
election roughly 75% of the time".

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/how_do_you_take_your_poison_20120924/
BTW - I got hammered yesterday for posting this Chris Hedges article, and defending
him when the Hedges Haters swarmed my OP, making stupid accusations and
unfounded claims. I ended up getting one of my posts deleted by jury, when the
Hedges Hater couldn't tolerate any more reality-based information.

[Wellstone ruled]

5. Always push the

envelope during a campaign. When you win,the opposition is already on notice,and if they start the whining,you make you move and open the envelope and have at it. Campaigns are for staking out your ideas and policies,being timid will only come back to bit you in the ass. This strategy puts the pundits on their heels and they can't make there memes the story. Causing the Pundtocracy to eat itself. Obama is now using this tool,

[Wellstone ruled]

6. Always push the

envelope during a campaign. When you win,the opposition is already on notice,and if they start the whining,you make you move and open the envelope and have at it. Campaigns are for staking out your ideas and policies,being timid will only come back to bit you in the ass. This strategy puts the pundits on their heels and they can't make there memes the story. Causing the Pundtocracy to eat itself. Obama is now using this tool,looking more like Harry Truman and 1948,next will be going after Boner and the TeaBillies.

[99th_Monkey]

107. Great point! ~nt

[marmar]

7. But Chris Hedges fights for the true left all the time, not just during a primary or an election....

...... and if you read his writing, he's convinced that the country is intractably f**ked, regardless of who wins, so what's the point of "hushing up." I'd respect him less if he did.

[CrispyQ]

16. If it weren't for women's issues, I'd probably be voting with Chris.

Also, I'm in a swing state.

[dionysus]

17. unfortunately, the "true left" isn't running, we have a choice between center left and far right.

anyone who prescribes to the "let's not vote, or vote third party and let the republicans win and burn the fucking house down so we can mantain purity and usher in the leftist utopia" is a god damned naive imbecile.

[appal_jack]

21. (Unfortunately) you are absolutely correct about this, dionysus. n/t

[renie408]

27. What he said. /\

As for

[Zalatix]

31. LOL tell us how you REALLY feel.

[SidDithers]

68. Nailed it...

Sid

[cali]

47. Actually, he doesn't. He publishes the same polemic over and over

and it's invariably about slamming liberals and dems as the greatest evil. I don't see that as fighting for anything.

[joelz]

18. i found this

If you insist on participating in the cash-drenched charade of a two-party democratic election at least be clear about what you are doing. You are, by playing your assigned role as the Democratic or Republican voter in this political theater, giving legitimacy to a corporate agenda that means your own impoverishment and disempowerment. All the things that stand between us and utter destitution—Medicaid, food stamps, Pell grants, Head Start, Social Security, public education, federal grants-in-aid to America’s states and cities, the Women, Infants, and Children nutrition program (WIC), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and home-delivered meals for seniors—are about to be shredded by the corporate state. Our corporate oligarchs are harvesting the nation, grabbing as much as they can, as fast as they can, in the inevitable descent.

We will be assaulted this January when automatic spending reductions, referred to as “the fiscal cliff,” begin to dismantle and defund some of our most important government programs. Mitt Romney will not stop it. Barack Obama will not stop it.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/how_do_you_take_your_poison_20120924/

[Zalatix]

32. Are you suggesting that I should vote third party?

[aquart]

35. Oh go peddle that no difference crap elsewhere.

I damn well KNOW there's a difference.

[tama]

22. Time to fight

Chris' analysis of the failure of anti-war movement during Bush II was that the movement failed when all progressive attention was drained to the fight for Kerry election campaign. With Obama, there is no anti-war movement left worth mentioning - and according to you total silence and more war is preferable?! How did you like 8 more years of war and how many more do you want?

[redgreenandblue]

25. What did Chris Hedges say?

[tama]

29. Among many things, this:

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/how_do_you_take_your_poison_20120924/

[cali]

26. Zal, the thing is. Chris Hedges

wants everything to crash, burn and be cleansed. He believes that's the only way. I find that a pretty despicable position, but that's his.

[tama]

28. Everything?

From what I've heard he's not happy about the current system destroying the carrying capacity of our planet - which is pretty much "everything" from our narrow human point of view. And that he's not happy about corporate power and representative system - aka oligarchic kleptocracy - doing that and prefers radical revolutionary change. Cali, oligarchic kleptocracy is far from "everything". So called 1% is not everybody...

[cali]

30. by everything I mean our current system

and yes, it is from our current narrow human pov. And if the current system does go into "cardiac arrest", the people who will suffer most and most swiftly are.... c'mon guess. Yes, that's right: The poor. The elderly. The disabled.

That's hardly the 1%, tama.

[tama]

34. Sincerely

I believe you are fatally mistaken and in denial. Current system is hurting "the poor, the elderly, the disabled" more and more and more at increasing pace, current system is a suicidal evolutionary dead end and will lead to "cardiac arrest" without radical revolutionary changes.

[Zalatix]

40. Voting third party or staying home is tantamount to suicide in that situation.

Your diagnosis of the problem is perfect. Your IMPLIED solution? Not so much.

[tama]

49. What you see as implied

is just your delusion.

[Zalatix]

51. Really? Then what's your solution? What should we do this election season?

Chris Hedges says we should vote for none of the above. What's your take on that?

[tama]

53. I'm not American

so I stay out of that discussion. In general, election season seems to be good time for victorious labor fights and labor organizing, for example.

[sabrina 1]

89. We should vote for Democrats, but we should let them know NOW when they are the most

likely to listen, why we are doing so. You are saying people should be silent about issues at the only time people have a chance of influencing their Representatives. I USED to believe that, then I saw how it worked out. It gives politicians the idea that they don't have to do anything to get our votes. And while WE remain silent, Lobbyists for Big Corporations are flooding DC and they certainly are not remaining silent about what they want.

Remaining silent during election season has been one of the worst strategies from the POV of the American People ever. But it works for the Big Corporations for whom the field is clear as political operatives shut down any meaningful debate of the issues, which is what elections are supposed to be about.

If I were paying Lobbyists to get the attention of our Representatives right now, I would definitely be trying to shut the people up.

[limpyhobbler]

93. +1000

We aren't supposed to trust politicians. We are supposed to scare them.

[Zalatix]

94. Chris Hedges is suggesting we should stay home or vote third party.

[tama]

99. How else to scare them?

"Dear Democratic Party, you are guaranteed my progressive vote no matter what (or at least as long as the other party stays credible threat of greater evil), and if I'm unhappy with your policies I will write email to you expressing my disagreement."

Better ideas?

[Zalatix]

101. So you want to bring us 8 years of MITT ROMNEY in order to scare the Democratic politicians?

8 years of MITT ROMNEY... how do you figure this will do anyone any good?

[tama]

103. Scary...

but frankly, I don't give a damn about who is the current or future puppet - what deserves more attention is those who pull the strings, and finding our own strength and courage. I've been around and I've become disillusioned by personal experience by all political parties - including revolutionary socialist parties. Wish them well and solidarity with all comrades who don't side with fascists, but if you ask me, I'm anarchist and I would prefer giving boot to all politicians and political parties.

[cali]

44. Please. I am poor.

and recently disabled. When it happened a year ago, I had no health insurance. I now have Medicaid which pays for my orthopedist visits, my visits to the pain management clinic at Fletcher Allen. My visits to my primary care physician. My prescriptions.

I use food stamps.

Don't give me the parroted denial dog codswallop.

If the current system crashes and burns- which is what Hedges advocates for- people like me are fucked. If Romney is elected and Medicaid goes to block grants and suffers the drastic cuts he advocates, people like me are fucked.

I think your claims fall into the wildly ignorant category.

The current system is deeply flawed and may well be a suicidal dead end, but it allows for at least a modicum of change and isn't an abrupt plunge into chaos.

I deplore the cleansed by fire crap that you're so rah rah about.

Oh and do tell what are the radical revolutionary changes you want? Be specific.

[tama]

48. What I want?

Thanks for asking, and don't think we are blind to the facts of dependance from the system and difficulties of change and "soft landing". But Iceland had a regime change revolution and new Constitution without collapse of social security system - which staying the course would have guaranteed and what we are seeing in Greece. Cuba survived an abrupt Peak Oil equivalent without collapse of social security system. So there are real life examples of various processes of radical change without abrupt plunge, which are not likely "enough" radical, but however major steps towards better direction.

What do I want? Many things, variety instead of neoliberal monoculture. In my systemic analysis I consider the most crucial problem the money-as-we-know-it, and I have couple ideas for a much more democratic monetary system if we want to keep on using money instead going straight to gift economy and barter. I'm happy to share those and other ideas with anyone interested in creative discussions, but not eager to push them and claim they are our only chances.

[cali]

52. Who are YOU speaking for, when you use "We"? Do tell.

and thanks for the the republican "dependence" meme. I paid taxes for decades and decades.

Iceland? Really? You're comparing a homogenous nation of 320,000 to one of 320,000,000? LOL! Do you understand how, er, ridiculous that is? Even a tiny bit? And sorry, the comparison to Cuba is not much better, hon. Neither Cuba or Iceland have suffered a crash and burn event. duh. Cuba's economy, btw, is extremely troubled.

I asked how you think the current system can be taken down and replaced with far, far greater suffering than that we are currently undergoing?

Systemic analysis? You sure as shit, ain't providing that. "I have a couple of ideas for a more democratic monetary system...." doesn't even begin to reach analysis of any kind. And your "oooh, we'll just all barter", is ridiculous. Just how would you accomplish this? It is wholly unfeasible. It's unicorns and fairy dust dog shit.

[tama]

55. OK

I'm not feeling now like I want to be a punching bag for your anger, so I'll continue this discussion with you some other time if you wish and when your tone is less aggressive. And reminds me of an addict using all his strength to convince himself that healing from addiction is impossible - which rationally thinking it is not.

For what's it worth, I'll just add that IMHO politics is all about emotions, much less about intellectual theories.

[cali]

59. you start off with the "denial' insult

and you expect me not to respond? Cute. You insult me with the crap about how I'm an addict? Gad.

I've presented facts. You present absurdities about a barter system and don't answer direct questions.

I'm done because you don't have a viable idea. There isn't anything to discuss with someone who presents total fantasy.

[renie408]

65. You are very passionate about identifying problems...

but you do not seem to be long on solutions.

Do you think that the problem of the current system being broken, its hurting the poor, the elderly and the disabled and the planet's currently careening toward a suicidal evolutionary dead end will be benefited in any way by a Republican President? Personally, I think not. Therefore, I would not want to distract any votes or attention from the goal of preventing another Republican of the current GOP variety in the White House.


And more importantly, should I have used a semi-colon after 'broken'? I can never figure out whether to use a semi-colon or just another comma.

[tama]

70. Maybe so

And unlike so many here, I hold Romney and his ilk so much beneath contempt that they don't deserve my attention, not even the hate fest attention he's getting here. Hating and fearing Romney is IMHO just distraction from discussing our common problems, possible solutions and taking action.

As for solutions, I've lived in ecovillage learning self-sufficient communal way of life and that's one solutions that I know from experience that can work and does work. But I also know it's not for everyone and not the only possible solution. How could we proceed to talk about those?

[Zalatix]

73. I'm sorry, but "self-sufficient communal way of life"?

How does self-sufficient and communal NOT contradict each other?

[tama]

75. "self"

is generic pronoun that does not refer only to individuals. A community that by itself produces sufficiently and sustainably to provide itself (ie. collectively by and for all its individual members.)

[Zalatix]

33. Cali can testify to my fanatical devotion to extreme, radical change.

However what no one can do is mistake me for an imbecile who would take 10 steps BACK just to spite Obama for only taking 1 step forward. That 10 steps back, BTW, comes from voting third party or staying home on Nov 6.

[tama]

36. That has nothing to do

with the more general and crucial issue that the whole representative system of partisan politics is broken, or rather working as meant for the sole benefit of extremely short sighted greed of the "one percent".

[Zalatix]

38. So WTF do you suppose we do about it?

I already posted my version of a solution in another thread:

Fight for a true Left politician at the primaries when we're electing a new representative.

What other ideas do you have?

[tama]

45. Vote as you please

but let's not get distracted and divided by the electorial process. You don't have to believe in the system to use your vote with good conscience, tactically, what ever, just to stay captive to the system (and wishful thinking). If you are interested in activism, there's lot's of good work to be done also in various grass roots movements etc. But most importantly, as the system is built on faith in make-believe (and 24/7 propaganda to produce the faith), we can simply stop believing, reboot our belief system and see what else World is and can be.

[cali]

46. gad. talk about over simplifcation.

I understand that you're looking for simple. You've made that clear, but it's not. As for wishful thinking, YOU, dearie, are the one indulging in that.

[tama]

50. How is that?

Please specify your disagreement, over what I've said.

[cali]

54. you seem to believe that we can completely dismantle the current system

and emerge without a complete and near total catastrophe for the most vulnerable and within a short period, the middle class. And I'm talking far, far, far fucking greater than that we're currently enduring or will endure in the near future.

And I have been 10x (at least) more specific than you in this thread.

[tama]

56. I don't have all the answers

or any answers, I don't want to be a leader and tell others to follow and what to do. What suggestions I might have share in polite and friendly discussion you are not now interested in listening, and that's fine, no problem.

[cali]

60. You don't start off a friendly exchange by telling someone they're in denial. duh.

[tama]

62. Is it unfriendly?

"Mainstream" political discussion as whole is in denial and has little if any relation to real problems of real people.

[aquart]

37. Gonna be a lotta people trying to get us to give up and stay home.

My vote is a sacred obligation and nobody better mess with it.

[DerekG]

41. "Dear Martin Luther King: Be nice to LBJ! Do you want Nixon in power?"

I would imagine that principled men and women who have borne witness to the crimes of empire have little taste for your sort of pragmatism.

[xchrom]

57. +1

[Zalatix]

61. Nice quote there. Can you answer me a straight up question?

If a lot of Democrats vote for, say, Ralph Nader right now, or they just stay home, who wins the Presidential election?

Can you answer that? Or is this where you declare victory and disappear from the thread?

[DerekG]

87. Answer: Romney would win.

For what it's worth, I understand why folks would cast an Obama vote just to avert a complete Romney debacle.

Voting isn't the real issue here. Liberal complacency is.

Obama is not our friend. He is the figurehead of our crumbling empire. As such, he must be confronted. We have to call him out on his betrayals. If we don't, he will unleash austerity measures. He will expand and abuse executive powers. And I'm telling you right now, we're going to be sorry for letting him do it.

[longship]

58. Inevitable chair throwing thread.

I agree with your post. I really like Hedges. He has the correct position on war; of which he has seen a lot.

But I also see him as one of those liberals who would throw President Obama under the bus because he's not liberal enough. Well, I am as liberal as they come, but there's no way that I won't do everything I can do to see that President Obama is reelected.

Maybe Hedges is like many DUers here. They want to vote for a candidate they cannot have. Reality is different than wishes.

[Douglas Carpenter]

66. Chris Hedges sticks up for the Palestinians - Obama sure the hell doesn't. But then again

when Chris Hedges was Jerusalem Bureaus Chief for the New York Times he didn't stick up for the Palestinians. He kept his head low and just went along to keep his job just like Jimmy Carter towed the the line when he was President and only stuck up for the Palestinians when doing so could no longer ruin his career.. I guess nobody stick ups for anybody when their job is at stake - whether their job is President of the United States or Bureau Chief for the New York Times.

[Romulox]

71. Dissent is counter-revolutionary! nt

[Zalatix]

80. How did you enjoy 8 years of Bush?

[sabrina 1]

96. How did we get eight years of Bush? Why was the election allowed to be stolen? We were

told back then to 'stfu' also and let the 'country move on'. It's been going on forever, this admonition to just be quiet and vote. And the country, no not the country, the Government, both Parties, move further and further to the right.

When exactly is a good time to talk about issues? From my experience online, which I once believed would be where the people could finally be heard but which has been taken over by partisanship and turned into just another version of the MSM, there is no good time to talk about issues. THAT is what Hedges has observed also. There's always 'an election coming up'.

Give us a time and a date when it's okay to talk about issues. I was always under the impression that Election Season WAS that time.

You get what you are willing to put up with. And we sure are getting what we deserve so long as we are too scared to tell our politicians what they are doing wrong.

All I know is, we are being once again, silenced. Has anyone asked Big Corporate Lobbyists to 'wait until after the election' to tell our politicians what THEY want?

[Romulox]

97. 8 years of Bush wouldn't have been better if Chris Hedges was muzzled, so I fail to see the point.

[Zalatix]

102. 8 years of Bush absolutely, positively would NOT have happened

if people like Chris Hedges had been ignored back in the 2000 election. Not muzzled, as you said in an attempt to bait me into generating fauxrage, but ignored.

If Ralph Nader had not run, there is no way on Earth, Middle Earth, Hogwarts or fucking Narnia that Dubya would have won.

Dubya beat Gore by just 537 votes in Florida. Nader got over 97,000 votes.

You better believe those votes would have gone to Gore. Nader SCREWED Gore in Florida, the votes that went to Nader would have won Gore the election and made the recount a moot issue.

[Romulox]

110. No, I don't buy it. America's problem is categorically NOT that our media is too aggressive. nt

[Zalatix]

111. You don't have to buy it. It just is what it is. No Nader = Gore win in 2000. The math dictates that

[Comrade_McKenzie]

78. I am refraining from any criticism I have until after the election. It's the grownup thing to do. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

84. Apparently, Chris Hedges hasnt signed the Loyalty Oath.

Bravo for him.

[Bobbie Jo]

86. Apparently the Purity Oath is still in effect.

[Zalatix]

91. He has signed the "I want Romney to win" oath instead.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

98. Where, in the article, did he express that wish?

[Zalatix]

100. I will say it again in case you missed it in the OP

You vote for a third party or you sit at home, you elect a Republican.

If you disagree with that then go ahead and argue with history.

Enjoy your 8 years of Mitt Romney if you get your way.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

104. Nonsense. Again.

So, all the people who voted for Perot in '92 elected a Republican? History, huh?

[Zalatix]

106. NOT nonsense. Nader cost Gore the election. That is a fact far beyond dispute.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

108. Gore cost Gore the election. He didn't get enough people to vote for him.

If he wanted the votes of the left in Florida, he had to appeal to the leftist voters. He didn't and he didn't get enough of their votes. That's history, and it's indisputable.

Of course, in your version of history, the people who voted for Teddy Roosevelt in 1912, elected a Republican named Woodrow Wilson.

[Zalatix]

109. Nope, you're wrong again. Nader cost Gore the election.

97,000 votes went to Nader in Florida. Gore lost by less than 600. Do the math. Nader fucked things up.

If Nader had not run then Gore would have won. The math does not lie. The math cannot be handwaved away.

[librechik]

88. it is vexing--but folks like Hedges will never think an election is time to stop

speaking truth to power. I don't necessarily agree with everything he says, but I don't think the hyper extreme leftists who refuse to vote for "babykiller Obama" ( I get this stuff every day from a leftist relative on fb) will be an important factor in the election. And I don't think they really want to be. They won't vote for Romney either, (and my relative is irrationally attached to loser Ron Paul) so fuck them. Being President is hard and bloody. Always has been.

Obama is a better man than anyone in the race, even if he isn't the great emancipator/equalizer that we prayed for. He might even be a better man than Hedges, though that is hardly possible, is it? Hedges is impressive.

[Sirveri]

112. Then don't push it in swing states.

Maybe if the states that were actually secure started to see a significant shift towards a progressive 3rd party candidate it might send a message that we're done tolerating their rightward slide.

[cpwm17]

115. We need a different system

A Parliamentary system would allow voices such as Nader and Hedges to speak their minds without sabotaging candidates most similar to themselves, which are the Democrats in this case. We need these voices. They can help push political discussion to the left, and might help rather than harm the Democratic Party in a fair system.

Candidates can win with less than 50% of the vote. That's not right. That's part of the unfairness of our system which shuts out alternate voices. Right now many of us aren't really represented in Washington DC.

Nader and Hedges didn't create our system, and it seems undemocratic to really hold it against them when they push for their ideas.

Future tends seem to be in the Democratic Party's favor. It would be a good idea to see Democrats push for some changes in elections laws to prevent a repeat of 2000.