Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Tightening the Screws

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Daveparts still Donating Member (614 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-10 10:55 AM
Original message
Tightening the Screws
Tightening the Screws
By David Glenn Cox


The waves have become muted in an oil-soaked tide, moving in slow motion. They wash over us and leave us polluted and muted as well. The oil spill in the Gulf is a metaphor for our American society. We shake our fists and shout with fervent, moral outrage that a Phoenix police officer can ask a driver at a traffic stop, who speaks no English, for an ID, while at the same time we take little notice that the President of these here United States has claimed the unilateral power to declare American citizens enemies of the state and have them executed.

It's taking on absurdist and surrealist proportions, thick and oily, dark and filthy, choking us and killing our political environment. The President plans to appoint James Cole to be the number two man at the Justice Department. Cole was a Justice Department official for 13 years before heading into private practice. He was a member of the Clinton transition team; he then served as deputy chief of the public integrity section of the Justice Department.

Then he left government service and went into private practice where he counseled Enron and their accountants, Arthur Andersen among others. He defended McDonnell-Douglas when they were indicted for criminal export violations. He represented individuals and entities in Foreign Corrupt Practices Act matters and individuals and entities accused in money laundering investigations.

He also defended individuals and companies in the health care field in disputes concerning billing fraud and abuse and FDA regulatory issues. When you get in trouble with the government it's always best to have an insider defending you, someone who knows not only the prosecutors by their first names but their kids' first names as well.

In 2004 Cole was hired as part of a government settlement to monitor AIG’s regulatory compliance, financial reporting, whistle-blower protection and employee retention policies. His job was as a watchdog, submitting confidential reports to the Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission. In 2008 when AIG blew up and had to be bailed out to the tune of $182 billion, it was explained by the Wall Street Journal that “Cole’s assignment didn’t include probing the issues that led to the company’s near collapse, including credit-default swaps.”

A partner in a Washington corporate practice that makes its bread and butter by defending the lowest, slimiest corporate creatures ever to wash up on the beach. A man whose career is a procession of insider politics and corporate money, a man whose most recent assignment was as a watchdog and who claimed it wasn’t his department just got promoted to the number two position at the Justice Department. Yes, indeed, we’re going to change the way Washington does business.

The Federal Trade Commission yesterday unanimously approved Google’s $750 million purchase of AdMob. AdMob is a leader in advertising for handheld devices and Google is the leader in Internet advertising overall. The FTC said in a statement that the deal, “is unlikely to harm competition in the emerging market for mobile advertising networks.” Right, you create a megalith, a giant corporation with a majority share of all Internet advertising revenue and then claim it won’t affect competition? Well, if you look at from the standpoint that there won’t be any competition, I guess they’re right. Imagine what it would cost to go into direct competition with McDonalds nationwide.

The purpose of the Federal Trade Commission is consumer protection by preventing "anti-competitive" business practices. Swing and a miss, not my department, we thought the blow out protector would work. It worked forty percent of the time when we tested it.

Meanwhile, America’s largest employer, Wal-Mart, wants to take over the transportation of its suppliers' goods. The Bentonville billionaires claim that this will cut costs and help their suppliers to sell more goods by lowering costs. It is an interesting theory, much like Vito Corleone walking into a speakeasy and saying, “I’m going to make you an offer that you can’t refuse.” Wal-Mart has no intention of providing this service for free. It is a strong-arm tactic to supersede the suppliers' transportation channels with their own. It is not capitalism it is gangsterism. It is Wal-Mart using their dominant market position to strong-arm their suppliers.

“The plan allows Wal-Mart’s fleet of 6,500 trucks and 55,000 trailers to carry more per truck and improve on-time delivery rates," said Leon Nicholas, a director at consulting firm Kantar Retail. They are admitting that this plan is about helping Wal-Mart, not the suppliers or customers. There is a cancerous slime covering the surface of the free market, choking out competition like turtles, dolphins and sea birds. Where is our market blow out protector? It doesn’t work, it was approved by the agencies that claim it’s not their job and litigated by the attorneys that work both sides of the street.

It makes you wonder; it makes you look inside yourself and ask, “What the hell is going on here?" Just how many barrels of black filth can be dumped on our society before we can no longer swim or breathe? Are we to become just more floating dead refuse in a corporate Uber Alles land. They insist that the well is only, “only” leaking 5,000 barrels a day; then they explain that the four inch pipe inside the twenty-one inch pipe is collecting forty percent of the oil but are hard pressed to explain how it collected 5,000 barrels yesterday.

The US Senate just passed its version of financial reform legislation. The Capitol had been swamped with lobbyists and bankers advocating that the powers of the Federal Reserve not be curtailed. So successful was their effort that amendments calling for an audit of the Federal Reserve and ending their control over banks with $50 billion in assets were voted down by 89 Senators.

The Senate voted for a mechanism to liquidate failing institutions nice and quiet-like, instead of all those glaring headlines and claims from government watchdogs that it wasn’t their department. Kind of like Luca Brasi, two minutes with a piano wire and it's all over, nice and quiet, and the banks cast lots for the leavings and canoles.

Bloomberg- “The Fed’s authorities seemed to be under serious threat,” said David Nason, a former assistant U.S. Treasury secretary who’s now a managing director at Promontory Financial Group LLC, a Washington-based consulting firm. Instead, the Fed “appears to have regained its footing and now appears to be emerging with at least as much authority and likely more.”

Oh, they did more than regain their footing. They regained their footing on your throat. The Senate voted for a consumer protection agency to be run from inside the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve isn’t a government agency; it is no more Federal than Federal Express. It is a private corporation made up of a group of banks that have a monopoly over the money supply.

“The Fed didn’t get everything it wanted. The bill would make the New York Fed president a political appointee and put the consumer-protection agency inside the central bank without giving it a direct role in running the new bureau.”

The Fed won’t have any direct role in running the new bureau, but like lawyer Cole they’ll know what their boss wants done, and like the Wal-Mart suppliers they’ll play ball or else. It is an explosion, a blow out, a filthy spill that dwarfs corporate “free speech” contributions. It is like turning over the control of untaxed liquor to Al Capone and putting Pablo Escobar in charge of drug interdiction and BP in charge of oil drilling safety.

Friday is the traditional news dump day and yesterday it lived up to its title. Tons of toxic filth spewed out on the people, poisoning our environment, deleveraging our government to unelected monopolies that promise, cross their hearts, to work for our best interests. Yesterday the US Senate, by a vote of 59 to 39, voted to turn financial consumer protection over to a group of privately owned banks. It stinks of toxicity to high heaven and blackens more than just our beaches.

“Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.” Benito Mussolini
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-10 11:18 AM
Response to Original message
1. This article starts out as bullshit
of course cops can ask the DRIVER for id in a a traffic stop. Hello, a driver's license??? In Arizona we are opposed to stopping people ONLY to ask for an ID or to ask passengers in a car for ID.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Daveparts still Donating Member (614 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-10 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Are you more upset
about state ID laws or Presidential decrees? Why does the Coast Guard say that it is BP making the rules?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-10 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. they are both horrible
the coast guard is part of our military and should never listen to what private companies tell it to do, and we are to be presumed innocent by the police unless they see us doing something illegal so asking for ID is a horrible presomption of guilt. Both are bad, and this journalist seems to think that the law had to be changed in order for police to be able to ask a DRIVER for ID....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Daveparts still Donating Member (614 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-10 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Have You
ever crossed an international border, if so did they ask you for ID?
Were you presumed guilty of a crime? Ever been through customs?

I get your point you don't like the Arizona law my point is that there are bigger fish to fry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-10 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. yes, i have been asked for ID's at international borders
that is normal to be allowed into a country because countries have a right to know who crosses their border. Once inside the country ID checkpoints are a presumption of guilt. I live in a country that has internal ID checks (france) and I am never stopped because I am white. I can tell you that people born in France of north african ancestry, sometimes 2nd 3rd and 4th generation born in France are quite often stopped and asked for ID. This does not help them feel accepted as French people. The law in Arizona will stigmatize an entire racial group of people and make them feel less accepted as Americans. The USA is not a "show me your papers" country. It is horrible that they do it in France too. "Show me your papers" is too much like the Soviet Union for my liking. WITHING THE BORDERS of the USA everyone is free to travel without being questioned about where they are going so long as they are not doing anything illegal. Stopping people for the way they look is fascist just as much as combining corporations and government. When Mussolini ruled Italy don't you think he rounded up Jews and Gypsies too??? How did they do this??? ID checkpoints..... ID checkpoints are as unamerican as letting a private company tell our military what to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Daveparts still Donating Member (614 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-22-10 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. When you
traveled across international borders how did you get on the plane? When you cash a check do you have to show ID?

Was Jimmy Carter a racist? He detained over 100,000 Cubans when Castro emptied the prisons. Arizona has 400,000 illegals and it's wrong to ask for ID?

Who gains from the illegals? Tyson foods, Archer Daniels Midland, this is a wedge issue just like abortion and gun control and corporate America agrees with you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-23-10 04:02 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. you are missing my point
most times i have showed id to get on a plane, often times when arriving where i live in the European union there is no customs contrl, my family has come twice and not gotten any stamps in their passports. I dont cash checks i just put them in the bank but yes when i withdraw money i show an id TO A PRIVATE BANK to make sure I AM NOT STEALING BY FRAUD! Asking someone for their id because of their color is racist because you will target one racial group, most of whom are natural born american citizens, and ask them for id time and time again whereas whites like me will never get asked, so my nephew will be stopped and asked all the time because he is latino but not me. How will latino americans feel accepted as americans? you cant stop and ask for id if someone is not committing a crime in plain view or without a warrant based upon probable cause and signed by a judge. If you dont want illegals, secure the border, i have nothing wrong with having a secure border, plus why are these immigrants illegals? why not just give them all green cards like they did 120 years ago when my ancestors arrived from poland, germany, italy, austria, and lithuania????

PLUS PUERTO RICANS SPEAK SPANISH AND THEY ARE AMERICAN! my sister in law and nephew speak spanish, they are from puerto rico, they dont have to speak english and are natural born american citizens yet they will be stigmatized as potential illegal immigrants for speaking their language in their own country.

How will you like it when you are stopped and asked for your id because they think you are an illegal??? And when you dont have a birth certificate but you may have a joint on you, or you may have just had 6 beers and are walking home...and you end up in jail because they think you are an illegal ukranian immigrant....or an illegal nigerian or what not???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Daveparts still Donating Member (614 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-23-10 09:00 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. I do understand your point
The Arizona law is based on the Federal law, it is illegal to cross a border without permission. That said, Mexico is a failed state. Because of free trade and Corporate America Mexico has been destabilized. During the 70's and 80's NAFTA and factories along the border have lured rural Mexicans and central American people from their homes.

In 2001 China joined the World Trade Organization and since that time 65% of those jobs which have lured those people north have left Mexico. Mexico's population is 111 million people and an estimated 10 to 16 million have left the country that is not immigration that is an exodus.

Is that an accident? I don't think so,since the days of Ronald Reagan the Republicans suddenly took an open border road to citizenship position. Prior to that time their position had always been opposed to open immigration.

During the coal strike in Matewan when the company couldn't break the strike they hired a train load of Italian Immigrants and brought them to the mines.
The owners were unaware that Italians were sympathetic to organized labor and within a week they went out on strike with the locals. The owners then hired a train load of African Americans from Chicago and brought them to the mine.

The company made a lot of noise about paying the African Americans the same wages as the white men. It was by design racist to split the union. The situation that we have in Arizona is very similar. The Arizona law is being used by both left and right as a wedge issue i.e. Abortion, gun control

It is no accident that immigration suddenly become the issue de juere just as Congress and the Administration decide to tackle immigration reform. Like health care reform, financial reform, the GM bankruptcy what you are promised going in is not what you will get coming out. Obama's plan wants to make it easier for foreign students earning advanced degrees to be employed while in the US. While at the same time giving the illegal Mexicans hoops to jump through, fees and fines to pay and classes to take. It's Mat ewan, it is a cynical game.

Arizona is a border state they have to deal with this problem everyday of the week. An estimated 400,000 illegals live in Arizona that is one in six of the population. Border control is a legitimate function of government and when I traveled to Europe the State Department advised me to keep my passport with me at all times and that if I was in an accident or had and issue I should make it known to the police that I was an American.

If I was from Puerto Rico and stopped by police I would have a drivers license issued by Puerto Rico. Probable cause is still in effect, accident,traffic stop etc. same as if I were from Samoa or Guam. I fully understand your position but I feel that because a law might appear racist if misused you can't assume racism because of it. Because there are racist police doesn't prove that all police are racist. Asking for and ID based on probable cause isn't racism while corporate manipulation of populations and wages is racism.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Daveparts%20still/163
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 04:08 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC