The Shift

[Daveparts still]

The Shift
By David Glenn Cox


There are things that we react to viscerally, like a fireworks display, and then other things that we react to only in reflection. We do things the way they’ve always been done, without question, until we see someone doing those things differently. Then there are grounds for introspection. As long as we all do and act the same way, what grounds for value judgement can be found?

As many of you already know, I have become a staunch critic of Barack Obama. The President ran for office as a moderately progressive Democrat but has governed as a moderately conservative Republican. Many of my fellow Democrats take offense and point to this or that while ignoring the big picture. It’s great that Obama appointed a transgender woman to the Commerce Department and that the President promises to change Don’t ask, Don’t tell, after seeking the opinion of the military, of course. So I remind my fellow Democrats that when Harry Truman desegregated the military he didn’t ask the military what they thought about the idea. He signed an executive order and said, “Deal with it! This is the way it’s going to be from now on.”

That was then and this is now. You have to be at least fifty years old to remember Jimmy Carter’s presidency. Carter was a fine man but was hardly considered a liberal at the time. Carter was a conservative Democrat and was challenged by Ted Kennedy who was the liberal. Carter appears today as a liberal only because our political spectrum has undergone a titanic shift to the right end of the spectrum. Carter hasn’t changed; it’s the ground under his feet that has changed.

Richard Nixon established the Environmental Protection Agency and was pro-choice. By today’s skewed standards one of the most vilified Republican Presidents of all time had more moderate domestic programs than Bill Clinton or Barack Obama. Nixon stepped down after authorizing a failed burglary of Democratic Party Headquarters. Obama has authorized targeted killings of suspects, expanded the war into Pakistan, expanded the defense budget and offered up as proof that he is serious about the deficit by announcing that he’s willing to carve up Social Security. So proud is the administration of that item that the President’s committee isn't going to release its recommendations until after the November elections.

Whether it’s defending the Wall Street bonuses or the Bush era Justice Department lawyers, the Obama administration is 100% consistent in its support for Wall Street and corporate America. As each issue rises to public scrutiny, Obama takes a hard line, then throws a few snowballs and goes home.

“Since health care represents one-sixth of our economy, I believe it makes more sense to build on what works and fix what doesn't, rather than try to build an entirely new system from scratch. And that is precisely what those of you in Congress have tried to do over the past several months.” Barack Obama, Sept. 2009

This is Obama double speak. He said this at the height of the debate over the public option, which was the compromise made by the Democrats made early on. Obama talks like a progressive, but what he is saying is that private insurance companies work and Medicare for everyone won’t work. He is, in essence, agreeing with the Republicans.

March 30, 2009 -- “President Barack Obama says two of America's endangered automakers have not gone far enough to restructure their companies. The President has rejected the plans General Motors and Chrysler submitted to receive government bailout money.

“The president says both companies may need to go into bankruptcy to clear away old debt and restructure quickly.”

You know who else favored the bankruptcy idea? House and Senate Republicans, that’s who! GM’s bankruptcy pushed GM’s bad debts onto the public’s books. It cost thousands of workers their rights under collectively-bargained contracts. It allowed GM and Chrysler to push their under-funded pension liabilities over to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Trust Corporation. From now on you, the taxpayers, will pay for the pensions.

As for the thousands of white-collar, middle management employees who worked without labor contracts, they got…Nothing! Their pensions weren’t guaranteed only supplied by the good graces of GM and Chrysler and because of the bankruptcy the automakers are no longer bound by any agreements they might have made in the past with employees.

To GM the bankruptcy was the greatest thing since the inflatable tire. GM and Chrysler had received $17 billion in aid from the Bush administration. When they asked for help from Obama they got permission to go bankrupt, voiding contracts with suppliers, vendors, dealers and labor agreements with thousands of workers.

Mr. Obama then called on former Deputy Labor Secretary Edward Montgomery to go to these communities with large auto factories and work with people to minimize the damage from job losses in the industry. But GM is a worldwide concern. How are other countries handling GM’s plight and the loss of jobs in their countries?

The Independent March 12, 2010 -- "The Government today announced a £270 million-loan guarantee to car giant GM to help secure its Vauxhall operations in Britain.

"Business Secretary Lord Mandelson said an outline agreement today followed detailed and 'highly complex' talks between the Government and the United States-owned carmaker.

"Union leaders representing workers at Vauxhall plants in Luton and Ellesmere Port welcomed the announcement, saying it would safeguard jobs.”

What, no pay cuts, voided union contracts or reduced pensions? No forcing of younger workers to accept lower wages?

“Lord Mandelson said: "I always said the Government would stand foursquare behind Vauxhall and with this announcement today we have kept our word. These are excellent plants employing a first rate workforce.

"We need Vauxhall to thrive as part of Britain's automotive manufacturing base and following our negotiations with GM Europe I am confident it will do so".

Were any officials dispatched to the communities to break the bad news to workers and their families?

“Tony Woodley, joint leader of Unite said: 'This announcement is great news for British industry. The loan will help save thousands of jobs in Vauxhall's operations and in the 400 companies in its supply chain.'

“Vauxhall employs 5,000 workers in the UK, including more than 2,000 at Ellesmere Port and almost 1,500 at Luton. More than 30,000 people are employed directly or indirectly via General Motors in the UK, and a further 20,000 work in Vauxhall's dealer network."

Woodley added, "Nothing could illustrate more clearly the difference between Labour's proactive approach to helping manufacturing and the short-sighted do-nothing attitude of the Tories. With Cameron and Osborne in Downing Street, these jobs would be lost."

You know, I think I understand exactly what he is saying.

If you support your manufacturing base with loans there is chance that they can pay the government back when the economy turns around. Plus it keeps people employed. If you allow the jobs to go, the government will pay out unemployment benefits and food stamps to the unemployed, which will never be recouped.

These unemployed won’t pay taxes, thereby increasing the budget deficit. They won't be able to make their house payments, adding to the mortgage crisis. They won’t have any money to spend, leading to the continued economic morass.

The approach taken by the government of the United Kingdom is a progressive Democratic solution. The approach taken by the Obama administration is the Republican approach. Obama’s policies have mirrored those Herbert Hoover and not Franklin Roosevelt. Had Barack Obama run for the Presidency against Richard Nixon in 1968 Obama would have been the Republican. Barack Obama is no more a Democrat than Dick Nixon was a liberal.

[PeaceNikki]

1. Did you write this?

Or copy & paste from someone else?

[cliffordu]

2. Good question.

[Daveparts still]

3. Yes,

I wrote it,

[glowing]

4. The Public Option was in both Hillary and Obama's plans during their primary campaign..

His was the one without a mandatory option.. Hillary was the one with the mandatory option.. BUT the Public Option was the popular issue that people liked. People would like to have a socialized health care network option because the insurance co's are vicious and cause stress when a person who is sick needs the vultures even less.

AND if you become too sick to continue working, termination of employment and subsequent benefits does nothing to ease one' mind.

AND people who have real health care needs with bills running into the millions of dollars are cut off/ capped out... denied claims from the Drs recommended course of treatment... yada yada.

I'm really pissed off at so many of the same Bush policies continuing or becoming worse. I really hate his education platform... My sister, the teacher, refused to vote at all... She saw what he said and knew it would make teaching even worse than under Bush and it would effect children for another generation.. along with her work environment. Most teachers choose their profession because they want to help educate children.. it has nothing to do with the pay or the headaches or the pain in the ass parents who never had to pass any test or any requirements when they had their children.