Third Party & Independents: Archives

Stephen, this IS timeley news, eh? Follow the money.

Thanks for the info. As if I my conspiratorial mind had not already dreamed this scam.

Rick, the first thing that popped into my head when I heard about the blackout was: “Dang, Enron is still screwing us from beyond the grave”.

I was really surprised someone else jumped on this train of thought so quickly too and put deregulation into context that’s understandable. I suspect that Bush is going to propose sweeping reforms to upgrade the infrastructure and bail-outs of a few energy companies that can’t make the expenditures. Instead of 16,000 employees getting laid off only 8,000 will lose jobs as these companies renew their struggle for profitability (those numbers are made up :p).

Anyways, I’m a bit jaded myself, but I’m trying to find out what the actual cause was, because even with deregulation, this is a huge, and it’s suspicious that terrorism was so quickly ruled out (but the cause still unknown).

My first thought was that I didn’t know Gray Davis was in New York yesterday.

My second was that Greg Palast is the mirror image of Andrew Sullivan: an American communist living in England opining about stuff he knows nothing about.

The whole energy deregulation scam is not much more than what unregulated capitalists did to the railroads in the US. And the banking system.

Please note that Richard Bennett has never had an unfounded opinion about someone’s political affiliation. When is he going to contribute something of relevance to the discussion other than to slam someone with whom he disagrees?

The reason why I have a problem with this story is that Palast is a conspiracy theorist and political hack and not a “serious” journalist. Read his other pieces, there is absolutely no balance to what he says and no real proof to boot. If he was really serious perhaps he could sue the Bush’s for billions of dollars. Hearsay just isn’t going to cut it with me. It is a wonderful “story” but, sadly, there is absolutely no way of confirming it or any of his other stories for that matter. I believe them to be pure fantasy and him to be nothing more than a muckraking scoundrel who is often featured on disinfo.com along eith the rest of the conspiracy theorists. The thing that is so blazingly clear about disinfo.com is that it is so obviously just a conspiracy site for the left. There is almost NOTHING there that focuses on the left at all. Purely partisan and right wing bashing garbage with little sprinkles of Anarcho-communism thrown in for good measure. I highly suggest it as required reading for leftists because it pushes the extreme leftists over the edge into insanity, where they belong. The funny thing is that on the day of the blackout political hack (genius) Rush Limbaugh predicted that the left would blame Bush or somehow find a connection to him during this debacle. Hillary Clinton wasted no time doing it as well. If Bush is really as evil as he is made out to be by this guy, how come noone can ever connect him to these “scandals”? I mean the conspiracy nuts have at least 50 seperate theories about this guy over at disinfo.
I should note that this guys writing showing up at a site called disinfo is so appropriate.

Great piece. I am amazed how the American citizens have continued to get fleeced as industry after industry are allowed to deregulate to benefit the citizens. Yet all I seem to hear time and again is how the promised made are utter falicies and the people get screwed while the buiness owners and executives get rich. You mentioned the California energy fiasco. I remember utter craziness while living in Georgia as they deregulated natural gas. Ameritech/SBC has consistantly raised prices while cutting staff and creating customer service crises. Now the 50 million affected by the East Coast power outage. Are there any instances where the people have benefitted from deregulating utilities? Isn’t it better to pay maybe a little more than the promised saving in return for the security of service and rates? When technology and public interest are trumped by business interests, we look like a third world country, both in the breakdown of our infrstructure and in the way we allow the rich to screw the rest of the people.

It is also important to note that this individuals language is just like Anne Coulters in his articles. I would also like to point out that he has NO integrity. I just watched him on the o’reilly factor and he made NOT ONE mention of Bush. If he would have used the same ridiculous rhetoric Bill would have torn him to pieces. Apparently Mr. Orielly has not read his “work”.

Here’s one example of Palast’s lying: he says “There were only two states, California and Texas, big enough and Republican enough to put the electricity market con into operation.”

When Californian and Texas passed electric deregulation, they both had split legislatures, with one house under Democratic control and the other under Republican control. At that time, the majority of state legislatures were under strict one-party, Republican control.

The California energy deregulation bill was written by Sen. Steve Peace, a Democrat, and passed both houses of the legislature unanimously.

Does that sound like a consequence of California being “Republican enough” to support a con job? Does California resemble a bastion of Republicanism to any sane and honest person?

If journalism had professional standards, Palast would be guilty of malpractice. But he’s not to be taken seriously, as he’s simply a cheeky ex-pat American whom the Brits treat as a trained monkey doing tricks in the parlot.

After the power came back on where I live, I watched a news report (CNN) and some fellow was explaining the North American power grid. For those of you who missed this tidbit, there are three sections comprised of the eastern section of the US and Canada, the western US and Canada and a section comprised of Texas and some border areas of that state named the Texas grid.

Texas is the only state stupid enough to complete its deregulation of the power industry and hand that public utility, on which all citizens depend, over to proven robber baron corporations like Enron. By dint of corporate power and money, so called “public” utilities in league with politicians have removed Texas from the national power grid serving the other 90% of North America. It appeared that Texas is slowly seceding from the rest of the Union. In other words, the Texas power grid is now completely in the hands of, profit at any cost, private hands. The scam wasn’t completed in California due to the diligence of Gray Davis and other civic minded leaders in preventing a complete takeover of the public utility system and Enron getting it’s hand caught in the cookie jar.

The bought and paid for Republicans have always supported deregulation and privatization of utilities (among other industries) that serve the national interest, be it transportation, telcom, banking, health care or the public power utilities upon which all Americans depend. It’s a fact that all of these industries are in poor shape because corporations bought off politicians who then deregulated these important parts of the US economy, allowing the profit to be taken out of them by lay offs, deferred maintenance, plundered pension plans and outrageous salaries with golden parachutes for the rich white guys at the top.

History tells us that after the railroads failed, the robber barons, who made their billions with public dollars, blackmailed the government into bailing them out with more tax dollars to keep the trains running. The pattern was repeated in the banking and telcom industries, and is occurring in the health care field. We should not be surprised that it is happening with the power and light utilities. After all, big corporate and private political contributors to the Republican party and from whose ranks the Bush and Cheney crowd became wealthy and powerful, paid for deregulation, why shouldn’t they profit from it as well?

Who does not have a complaint about the deregulated banking industry that provides fewer services and higher user fees? Who doesn’t bitch about phone or cable service whose power is being funneled into fewer hands at higher user cost. Who hasn’t complained about the critical condition of the airline or health care industries who have been through a couple of rounds of deregulation and privatization, yet contiue to feed at the public trough, lose billions of dollars and provide less service for the average user?

Will bought and paid for politicians and their corporate benefactors continue to divide the US, rob the public and place America and it’s public utilities in private hands? Hands that are proven to poorly manage and profiteer from the utilities that ALL Americans depend upon. Hands that are jeopardizing public utilites by sucking out their life blood and then begging the government for welfare so they can do it all over again. Hands that re more concerned with personal gain than public interest? When will Republicans get it that we are a nation of all citizens, rich and poor, white, black, brown, yellow and red and not just the wealthy who support deregulation, privatization and plunder of US resources that are owned by all Americans?

We, as Americans have to seriously ask ourselves if we like the results of deregulation and privatization of the basic services that we have come to depend on for the survival of our society. Are we content to follow like sheep and pay more for corporate profit at the expense of public service? will we continue to allow corporate raiders and profiteers to plunder our resources until we are at their mercy?

Like the frog in the simmering pot of water on the stove, if we don’t wake up, turn off the gas and take back our nation from the robber barons of the power industry, some day soon, the majority of Americans will find themselves in the dark again. By then the takeover will be complete and we’ll pay dearly for power, water, warmth, health care or some of us will have to go without.

Let them eat cake.

The evil, white guys are sticking it to the people! Raise your fist and resist! What a joke. Sounds like a diatribe on the GREAT society, as well as commentary on the greatness of a failed political system, socialism.

pete, not evil white guys, rich white guys.

Yes, it is a diatribe and the failure of socialism is only in the approved textbooks.

Yes, I have resisted, pete. I have a felony conviction for failure to report for induction in 1971. I doubt you were even born yet, It’s probably beyond your comprehension, but some people do act on their ideals. Some people have called truth to power. Some of us still do.

Can you refute any of my claims? Or do you prefer to laugh and defend the status quo? It’s obvious to anyone politically knowlegeable that our politicians are the best money can buy. It’s no secret that greedy corporations are only interested in profit at the expense of American jobs that US law allows them to ship overseas. Utility companies aren’t interested in upgrading the power grid uness the taxpayers pay for it. They would have already done it if there was a buck to made from the effort. The only way they can show a profit is to lay people off from their jobs, defer maintenance and cook the books a la Enron. Corporate bosses are not interested in making sure electricity flows, they’re interested in stock options and golden parachutes. They’re interested in profits not making sure you have electricity. When there’s no profit left in power, utility corporations will sell widgets or corporate junk bonds. Who gets to put the system back together after it fails? The government. Who foots the bill? The US taxpayer. Taxpayers did it for the banking industry after it’s deregulation. The bought and paid for politicians in the pockets of lobbyists wearing Gucci loafers did it for the airlines and are doing it for the health care industry and the power companies.

The problem is there are defenders of the status quo. The status quo of a failing power grid and failing schools. The defenders of the status quo lavish taxpayer funded corporate welfare on private businesses who failed in spite of deregulation. So they come hat in hand begging for more money from Washington.

Who are the defenders of the status quo? Republicans.

The status quo of … failing schools … Who are the defenders of the status quo? Republicans.

You’re claiming that Republicans are the defenders of the failed public school systems in America, the ones that have failed because the teachers’ union prevents incompetant teachers from being fired, identity politics groups have stuffed the curriculum too full of fluff, and because so many students come to school from single parent homes that haven’t prepared them to learn?

That’s odd, I could have sworn that Democrats and Hippie Greens were behind these things, and that Republicans wanted to privatize education just as they’ve privatized the telephone industry to the great benefit of the consumer, etc.

Tin foil hats, anyone?

Curriculum is set by local boards. Blame the elected officials. Blame the voters. If you don’t vote in school board elections you deserve the system and curriculum you pay for. Voting in local school board elections is lower by far than electoral voting.

Once again, if you’re paying for dog food you don’t get steak. If a district isn’t willing to pay teachers their market value, well… you get what you pay for.

Parents and school boards demand that todays teachers be psychologists, sociologists, referees, counselors and more. The public expects this kind of performance yet won’t tax themselves to pay for it. If you want to blame teachers or pay them less, don’t make them do what is primarily parental responsibility.

When have Republicans ever been described as Progressive? They’re self described anti-progressive. How could one better describe a belief in protecting the staus quo?

Republicans profess to be in favor of deregulating almost everything. Except sex. Tom Delay wants to deregulate poisons used for insect control, yet wants to make sure you’re only having procreative sex. After the telcom, and banking fiascos we can look forward to the public school collapse and governmental service meltdown due to privatizing and budget cutting. Republicans still want to deregulate. We’ve just seen the beginnings of it with Enron and utility supply manipulation in California.

Do we really want to live in a nation where an education, hospitable shelter, health care and meaningful work for a living wage is not afforded to all citizens?

Curriculum is set by local boards.

Not in California, where the Education Code is the thickest volume of statutes going.

Once again, if you’re paying for dog food you don’t get steak.

It’s a myth that teachers are underpaid. The average teacher in California makes in the high 40Ks, and many are over 75K. Wages are based on seniority (thanks to collective bargaining), and it’s a part time job with a pension. We’re paying for steak and getting dog food, actually.

Parents and school boards demand that todays teachers be psychologists, sociologists, referees, counselors and more.

Thank you feminists, who’ve made the single parent family the ideal.

When have Republicans ever been described as Progressive? They’re self described anti-progressive. How could one better describe a belief in protecting the staus quo?

You claim Republicans support the status quo in education, which is obvious malarkey, and then you defend that status quo. You must be a Republican, by your own logic.

Republicans profess to be in favor of deregulating almost everything. Except sex. Tom Delay wants to deregulate poisons used for insect control, yet wants to make sure you’re only having procreative sex.

I happen to know several Republican who have non-procreative sex on a regular basis; several of them have already had some today, and will have a bit more later this evening. Jerry Falwell once admitted on national TV that his wife takes birth control pills so they can have lots of non-procreative nookie, and you can’t hardly get more Republican than he.

Republicans still want to deregulate.

Deregulation or status quo, which is it? Do you just throw out insults at random, hoping one will stick?

Do we really want to live in a nation where an education, hospitable shelter, health care and meaningful work for a living wage is not afforded to all citizens?

I’d like to live in a nation where all of these things are afforded to all who’re willing to do enough work with enough value to their fellow citizens to pay for them, and I believe I do, for the most part, live in such a nation. Education is the exception because it’s only afforded to those who can afford private school tuition, so I’m in favor of vouchers.

“Meaningful work” is in the eye of the beholder, so let’s not go there; we’d have ask “meaningful to whom, the buyer or the seller?”

Richard,

I read a lot of political blogs, and it saddens me that many of the “conservative-minded” posters, like yourself, consistently seem to fall into the same nasty habits.

In responding to any ideological challenge, there appear to be several standard modes of response:

1) Search for any maleable area of the argument, or a phrase in which a word is possibly misused while the intent remains clear, and twist the snot out of it. For example, it is clear what Rick meant in using “status quo”, but instead of meeting his arguments head on, you chose instead to mangle them. I’m not sure if this is done in an attempt to give the impression of intellectual superiorty, or what the impetus is, but it is debating tactic for the weak.

2) Don’t admit anything. The statements attributed to DeLay are true. Just as it is true that Enron’s implosion cost its workers and investors billions of dollars. Why not admit that instead of ignoring it? Acknowledging true facts does not give the appearance of weakness, it makes it look as though you are actually LISTENING, instead of just spouting off.

3) Rely on the belief that showing an argument to be false on the grounds of one or a few examples is sufficient. This is not mathematics or science, where a “theory” is false on the grounds of even one example that doesn’t hold true. Good for California if their curicuulum isn’t set on the local level, and that Jerry Falwell’s wife is on the Pill. But those singular examples alone aren’t enough to refute an argument that claims the “majority” of cases run to the opposite.

4) Stereotype. Everthing and everyone can fit neatly into a catergory, like the “leftist-bin” or the “feminist-bin”. Name-calling and insults are what people resort to when they can’t respond to an argument with ideas.

That being said, I’d like to respond to a few of your claims.

Firstly, you claim that we are “paying for steak and getting dog food,” when it comes to our teachers. I’m not sure how paying a teacher $75K at the TOP of the scale and mid-40s on average is paying for steak. I have a friend who works for an insurance company in the IT department. He has been there 4 years, has a college degree, and a salary in the mid-50s. He writes code all day for internal programs. I challenge you to explain to me how, on a societal level, what he does is more valuable than the education of 20 - 30 children. How is writing code worth more than educating our future? And then there is the issue of executives and directors for publicly traded companies all over the map taking home 6 and 7 figure salaries, retention bonuses, etc. If we are willing to support insurance companies paying their programmers salaries in the mid-50s, other companies grossly over-compensating their VIPs with our purchases, and find our teachers’ salaries to be just fine, then we are indeed getting what we have paid for.

Secondly, you blame feminists for making the single-parent family the ideal. The stated purpose of feminism is the equality of the sexes, with the obvious implication that the women need to be brought up on par with the men. Feminism rejects marriage only because they do not believe it is the “ideal” that everyone should aspire to. This does not mean that by default, they believe the opposite to be “ideal”. Feminism supports any situation in which there is equality. It does not believe that women should be compelled to get married, simply because that is what expected of them. However, that does not mean that it believes women should NOT get married. Thus, blaming single-parent families on feminism is a bogus claim.

Finally, you say that you would like to live in a nation where things like education, health care, etc. are all afforded people who are “willing to do enough work with enough value”; and that you believe for the most part, you live in such a nation. The biggest problem with that view is that many many many people are willing to do work with enough value that people are willing to pay for it. People with HS degrees would be VERY willing to be computer programmers, sales managers, and accountants. I, with a colelge degree, would be VERY willing to be a cardiac surgeon, or a corporate lawyer, or an actuary … the question is not one of willingness, but one of ability. I would be able to do many of those things, if I had the education. But how do I get the education? I can only get the education if I am not already tied up getting the essentials. For example, how can I pay for an education, if I can’t pay for health care? How can I pay for an education, if I can’t pay rent? How can I pay for an education, if I can’t get credit, because I’ve been too poor my entire life to have any? The only way I can get an education is with some help from society. And since government acts in the interest of society, it should be the provider of help. Mind you, “help” is a temporary thing, but when it is used in the right way, it can pay enormous dividends.

My family’s good fortune can be traced back to one twist of fate in which my mom, eldest child in a blue-collar family, earned a full college scholarship and became the first and only member of her family to get a college degree. I am realistic enough to know that not everyone is so lucky. Since a person’s life shouldn’t come down to “luck” it needs something else if necessary: help.

Couldn’t have said it any better myself. thanks Sam.

Oh, Richard’s part time teacher comment is ludicrous. Both my parents were teachers and the ones that I know work long hours, as many other people do, for less money than other people with advanced degrees. Teachers just don’t punch in at 8 and leave at 5 like blue collar workers who in many cases bring home more pay and better benefits for less time spent working. It takes many hours of preparation for classroom instruction time. The mistaken perception of teachers not working during the summer is laughable. Many continue their education, often at their own expense during the summer. Others take part time jobs and still others stretch their nine months pay over three months of unpaid summer “vacation”.

Let’s see Mr Bennett take 9 months salary and stretch it out over 12.

Now back to the power outage controversy. Aren’t most Americans fed up with Republican led deregulation? How’s your cable service? Phone? Banking? Airline? Are you paying less and getting better service as advertised before the mergers and deregulation? Aren’t we fed up with the government sanctioned corporate monopolies that raise costs and lower services?

When are we going to stop believing that deregulation and giving away the nations resources to private control will lead to greater competition and lower costs for consumers?

I can’t say that I’m against Republican-led deregulation, because that is too exclusive. I am against many forms of deregulation, no matter who is leading the charge. This has nothing to do with any beliefs in socialism, and more to do with a belief in capitalism: companies act only in the short-term.

Because of of interest, and the time value of money, it pays to maximize profits as soon as possible. Or even sooner than possible, if you want to get into HBOC and Enron-style accounting. That said, this is why deregulation doesn’t work for many industries. Industries in which a massive amount of infrastructure is required (like schools, electrical grids, rail networks, etc.) aren’t really set up well to be private industries because of all the intensive maintenance and staffing required. These are two things which can easily be slashed to cut costs and drive up profits, which in turn makes investors happy, and executives rich. It is so easy, it’s hard to say no. If industrialism or business had professionalism standards, many executives would be guilty of malpractice. The sweetest thing, though, is that these are industries that the US NEEDS, they HAVE to be bailed out when they are screwed up. Thus, it becomes in effect income redistribution when US taxpayer dollars are used to bail out a company that has spent the previous years dishing out all of its profits to executives directors.

Basically, the mechanics of capitalism and the stock market just do NOT go well with public-sector industries. Thus, I agree that we should not be handing over more and more of them to the private-sector. That, and regulating industries should actually try regulating, and not following the “Powell Doctrine” on display at the FCC.

How’s your cable service? Phone? Banking? Airline?

Fine, how’s yours?

Comparing the salaries of teachers to programmers or others in the private sector generally ignores the value of teacher pensions, which effectively boost their pay by 50-100%.

Like I said, it’s not bad pay for a part-time job.

You are right, who benefits, follow the money..

POWER-POINT POWER OVER BROADBAND
http://ftp.fcc.gov/oet/tutorial/oet599a.ppt
http://ftp.fcc.gov/oet/tac/TAC_III_04_17_03/Power_Line_Communications.ppt

Richard, It’s not a part time job, no matter how many times you repeat it. You’re just blowing smoke.

Why don’t you just admit that you have a nasty thing for anyone who belongs to a union. That’s the biggest problems Republicans have with teachers. Teachers unions overwhelmingly support Democrats over Republicans. I think that teachers getting paid a living wage able to feed their families and maybe send their own kids to college is a good thing. Having someone who is college educated, knowledgable and is looking out for the education and upbringing of children in society is a good thing. This whole premise must stick in the craw of someone who doesn’t understand the value of a properly funded public education.

50 to 100% boost in compensation, huh? Sounds nice. Unrealistically nice. I would be more inclined to believe it if there were some supporting evidence.

Hypothetically, even if it was a 100% boost, we’re still talking about $150K at the very top of the scale for a person to educate dozens of children over the course of a year. I could think of MANY MANY worse ways to blow $150K of taxpayer money.

Part time job? Richard, where does your hate come from?

Like you, I have been unemployed. Is that what’s getting at you? Is it hate towards anyone with a job? I’ve seen your website, and I can comiserate. Being laid-off sucks. My career has yet to recover.

If this is your beef, I can understand. I never went there myself, but I can see the slipperly slope. I still don’t see how you can support Bush, but that’s another tale.

I don’t begrudge teachers their comfortable salaries, because I’m for the children, our most precious natural resource and our future, etc. What bothers me is the constant whining about how they’re underpaid when they clearly aren’t.

As to unions, they once had a place as an important counter-balance to robber barons of early industrial capitalism. In the contemporary context where the largest and most influential unions represent public employees, the unions have inordinate influence over their paymasters, or two bites at the apple if you will: they decide who gets elected by making huge campaign contributions, and then they’re rewarded with fat pay increases. The prison guards’ union in California is the classic example now that their 35% pay increase puts them in the $100,000/yr range, not bad for people with no more education than a high school diploma.

Progressives are upset when corporations buy off politicians with fat campaign contributions and then win cushy contracts, so why aren’t they upset with unions doing the same thing?

Progressives are also upset about overly-onerous criminal justice penalties, three strikes laws, and the death penalty. The major support for this garbage is the prison guards’ union.

Do the math.

Richard, but you DO begrudge them making a decent wage for their education and dedication. That’s all we’ve heard from you on this subject.

“What bothers me is the constant whining about how they’re underpaid when they clearly aren’t.”

Wages aren’t the only contract issues. The media focuses on that to get people upset.

Constant whining? You’ve been reading your own clippings, you’re always whining about the crybabies. You know this “teacher wages” thing is a loser for you to argue anymore.

Like I said, if you want good teachers you’ve got to pay to play. In your terms, if teachers are so overpaid and rich they should support Republicans and not the party of the working and middle class.

I belong to a union, AFSCME, the single largest contributor to the Democratic party. I’ve been a member for 20 years. Over that time my total wage increases have been LESS than the cost of living. Even throughout the boomtime ‘90’s. A couple of years I got zero, zip, nothing as the cost of living and inflation ate my paycheck. Recently we bargained a new five year contract and worked hard to get a 3% increase, but we gave up some huge workplace benefits. And this only after we packed council chambers and had a good old sit in. Placards and all.

You probably aren’t interested in the fact 61% of the members of my local qualify for subsidized housing.

I took a huge cut in pay when I put my tools away. It took 12 years to get back to same wages I earned as a skilled tradesman. But it was my choice and I sacrificed $$ for a bit of job security. I agree my benefit and pension is good, but you’ve got to live long enough to collect and nobody can count on the future.

There is just as much need for collective bargaining and workers unions today as there ever was, if not more. Our hyper-capitalist culture, global economics and callous greed are all contributing to a growing plutocracy, here and abroad.

I know all this sounds so corny and terribly old school and oh, so utterly “Left”, in comparison to what passes for intellectual discussion these days. But it’s a fact of my life. So let ‘er rip gang.

But it was my choice and I sacrificed $$ for a bit of job security.

So you made your bed, now you can sleep in it.

Richard, is that the best you can do? I admitted it was my choice. I’m perfectly happy I made it 20 years ago.

So what?

Hmm. I guess I’m the only one who has noticed that Texas’s deregulated and self-contained power-grid seems to be doing just fine. My lights don’t go off until I turn them off, thank you very much.

But the great thing about issues like utility deregulation is that very few people really understand them, so it gives blowhards a lot of room to bluster and wail.

Greg,

How much did the taxpayers (you) have to pony up for the generating capacity, transmssion and distribution system? I doub the utility corporations did it out of the good ness of their heart. Did they receive Federal assistance? (I’m sure) How much are maintenance and improvement costs and who pays it?

Are the hourly/salaried employess fairly compensated for their work and the CEO’s for theirs? Do the corporate heads have close government ties or come from publicly paid jobs?

Have they accurately and honestly reported their earnings and value? Texas doesn’t have the greatest reputation when it comes to corporate honesty. Or the finest reputation for open politics.

Lastly, how closely tied are the Bushies to the utility interests? I suspect there is something rotten in the state of Texas.