The Barney Bait.

As one man succinctly put it, responding to a Bill O'Reilly tears into Barney Frank thread ("This was fucking great. To see Bill just tear apart Barney 'the shit stain' Frank, was beautiful"),

"the coachmen steered towards the cliff, jumped off, then handed Frank the reigns. Phil Gramm, Alan Greenspan, Bill Clinton, and George Bush are the primary reasons we're in this mess."

Fox, O'Reilly and the Neocons lured Barney Frank into their web by deliberately spreading lies about his contribution to the economic meltdown. Barney Frank, like any normal human being, wanted to correct Bill O'Reilly's "errors" about an event sure to go down in history as one of the worst periods our economy has faced.

Why isn't Bill O'Reilly going after the #1 culprit, Phil Gramm? Gramm pushed through historic banking deregulation bills that all but guaranteed this massive meltdown. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act eliminated the barriers - by tearing down the walls created by Glass-Steagall - between commercial banks, investment banks, insurance companies, and securities firms. This started a wave of mergers which exposed banks to all kinds of securities they were restricted from owning before this bill.

That wasn't enough for Phil Gramm. He then pushed through the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, written by financial industry lobbyists, in order to "protect financial institutions from overregulation" according to Gramm. In other words, this bill, famous for the Enron loophole, completely deregulated "credit default swaps", all $62 trillion dollars worth! The same swaps that are literally responsible for making investment and commercial banks go under.

Besides falsely extending Frank's time as Chairman over the House Finance Services Committee by one year, O'Reilly dug up a Frank quote from something he said five years ago, four years before Frank assumed his position...at a time when the GOP controlled everything from Congress, the House, the Executive Branch to the world!

Does anyone really think Frank's quote from 2003 had anything to do with this fiasco? Yes, Barney Frank may have been wrong about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and as I said in my previous post, Frank should accept some blame. However by the time Barney Frank took over as Chairman, most of the damage was done, and even though the Democrats won over the House and Senate in 2007, most of their time has been spent in Republican generated gridlock. The bottom line is Barney Frank's contribution to this crisis is negligible in comparison.

Read more...

Barney Frank Was Ambushed!

Years ago, when I used to watch Bill O'Reilly, I distinctly remember him refer to Barney Frank as perhaps the smartest man he's ever interviewed. O'Reilly said he didn't agree with Barney Frank on anything; however, looked forward to the challenge of interviewing him.

Fast forward to the latest interview. Bill O'Reilly becomes extremely angry right away, refusing to let Barney Frank talk. Why? Because O'Reilly knew if he gave Barney Frank an inch, he would take a mile. He knew that Frank wouldn't let him blame the entire financial meltdown on him and the Democratic party.

Prior to Bill O'Reilly's temper tantrum, O'Reilly lied, and said Barney Frank became Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee (HFSC) in 2006 (9/30 episode). Barney Frank started the position in January of 2007, at the same time, the Democrats won over the House and the Senate. He also quoted Frank from 2003, and tried to apply it to his current position, further blaming him for the crisis.

This goes beyond Bill O'Reilly, although I'm sure O'Reilly enjoyed every moment. Fox News, the mouthpiece for the Republicans, has pegged Barney Frank as the "whipping boy" and the scapegoat for the financial crisis that they caused. Why Barney Frank? Well, aside from being Chairman (HFSC), the position he's held for less than two years, he is gay and we know how the Conservatives love to throw gay people to the lions to either promote their agenda or cover their ass.

Bill O'Reilly was foaming at the mouth and would have loved to call Barney Frank a faggot. However, O'Reilly knew that would be stepping over the line and might ruin this excellent opportunity to blame the Democrats. So, he did the next best thing and attacked Barney Frank's manhood, by calling Frank a coward and telling him that he's not a man, that he didn't "stand up" like a man, knowing that people who were watching, either knew, or would find out, that Barney Frank is gay. All of a sudden through the power of suggestion, O'Reilly's accusations make perfect "sense" to the average ignorant person.

The Neocons understand how important it is to keep the general public in the dark. That's the only way to maintain control and spread their bullying, scapegoating propaganda, essential to maintaining their control. They take advantage of our ignorance and manipulate us through our underlying biases, realizing that repetition of the lie will transform that lie into the "truth". My father, who watches Fox News, told me they replay this interview over and over.

“See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda." -- George W. Bush.

“Propaganda proceeds by psychological manipulations, character modifications, by creation of stereotypes useful when the time comes - The two great routes that this sub-propaganda takes are the conditioned reflex and the myth” -- Jacques Ellul

Most people don't know all that much about Barney Frank. Most people don't know all that much about the financial crisis. It's easy to find a scapegoat when the public has no idea what's going on.

The Conservatives know Barney Frank is smart and they know he is not a coward. That's why they went for the jugular. Anyone who has watched Barney Frank knows he has no problem standing up for himself and for what he believes, thus the reason they used Bill O'Reilly, the biggest bully on T.V., to do their dirty work.

Is Barney Frank innocent of wrongdoing? Probably not. However, Barney Frank, who has championed the people's rights throughout most of his career, is not even close to being the cause of this mess.

Unfortunately, most people do not know the collapse of the banking industry did not start yesterday. It started thirty-years ago, when Ronald Reagan declared his extreme "free market" ideology and began the process of deregulating as much as he could, making sure his agenda would be carried out for years to come. It continued with Greenspan's wholehearted belief in an unregulated market; his belief in his hero, Ayn Rand and her philosophy of the morality of individual greed; his insistence on keeping interest rates artificially low, and inflating the housing and stock market bubbles...

Read more...

The "Self-Made" Man Fantasy.

Most of the upper and upper middle-class act as if their status in society is solely a result of their intrinsic "superiority" and strong work ethic, some actually claiming to be "self-made". But, what does "self-made" mean? Did they change their own diapers? Self-nurse? Did they support themselves right out of the womb?

I doubt it, yet who raised you, where you were born, gender, race, social status, level of familial structure, good timing, the right connections, level of affluence, your education, etc. as well as hard work, talent and the willingness to take risks, etc., all factor into how far you go in this world.

Take Bill O'Reilly who proclaimed (a few years ago) that he could make himself into the same "Bill O'Reilly" he is now even if he was born in Afghanistan brought up on a diet of insects and grass... that his male gender, white skin, private education and good fortune to be born in the world's wealthiest most powerful country had nothing to do with contributing to his success. After all, he went over to Afghanistan several times and even dodged a few bullets during his lifetime. Ipso facto, he overcame the same level of hardship as a poverty-stricken Ethiopian.

How arrogant is it to overlook the advantageous circumstances and the people who "contributed" to the person you eventually become? How can anyone claim being born in the USA is equivalent to being born into a poverty stricken family in Afghanistan, Africa, India?

So, what's the big deal if a few people claim themselves to be "self-made"? It's harmless, right? Maybe, however, "self-made" men often take on a "deserved" pretentious bravado of superiority that serves to justify their political beliefs that those who don't have as much, somehow deserve to be marginalized. Deep down, they believe that they made themselves who they are, therefore they do not owe anything to anyone, including their country.

It's OK that we have the highest child poverty rate in the developed world, (21.9% in 2006), that almost 50 million people do not have health insurance, that the gap between the rich and the poor is vast...if they did it all "alone", than others can do the same.

Pay taxes? Why? The "self-made" man could have been born in Haiti, brought up on a diet of mud cookies, mud floors, and mud huts and he would be the same man he is today, albeit his birth into an affluent (relatively speaking) family with advantages 98% of the world lack.

Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, says, "Lots of people who are smart and work hard and play by the rules don't have a fraction of what I have. I realize I don't have my wealth because I'm so brilliant."

One out of every 10,000 American families can claim an income in excess of $10.7 million. No matter how hard these wealthy families worked to earn their money, they worked no harder as than most American families. As far as risk goes, the average taxpayer is the one who absorbs their risk... AIG, Fannie Mae/Fredie Mac, etc.

Money begets money. Our justice system, laws, tax code and economy all favor the rich. The more you accrue, the easier it becomes to accrue, on an increasingly escalating scale. The Bush tax cuts gave/give those who earn over $1 million dollars annually a tax cut anywhere from 100-600 times the average American. Does anyone think the "self-made" man possess 100-600 times the superior intellect, talent or work-ethic than the average American?

Over the last quarter century, the portion of the national income accruing to the richest 1 percent of Americans has doubled. The share going to the richest one-tenth of 1 percent has tripled, and the share going to the richest one-hundredth of 1 percent has quadrupled.

Instead of coveting their gratuitous profits and refusing others the same advantageous circumstances they received/receive increasingly, the"self-made" man and those who continue to benefit from his blood-line should contribute a fraction of what's been given to them. It's their patriotic duty.

“The rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more in proportion.” -- Adam Smith (Wealth of Nations, vol. 2, ed. Campbell, Oxford U Press, 1976, p. 840.)

Read more...

Being Born Into the American Dream Increases Your Chances for Acquiring It...Duh.

One of the biggest obstacles to leveling the playing field in America is the part of the population, who as former football coach Barry Switzer says,

"are born on third base and go through life thinking they hit a triple."

Unfortunately, this similar thinking group is not only large in number, but having been "born on third base" has the power and money to make and enforce the rules.

Most who fail to recognize or are loathe to admit their enormous head-start in life more than likely did not struggle financially, are white, Republican, and more than likely find Bill O'Reilly intellectually stimulating, fair and balanced and even truthful. Shallow, status conscious, self-absorbed and elitist, these individuals will always believe people succeed based on the merits of their accomplishments rather than the social class into which they were born.

As harsh as that may sound, there must be an element of truth as it does not take a genius to comprehend that it's much easier to succeed born into a white, financially sound, "educated" "Leave it to Beaver" atmosphere rather than being born into the "poverty-stricken" projects to a crack-addicted mother, an incarcerated father, and having to worry whether a stray bullet will permanently disqualify him from attaining the "American Dream".

I don't know much about Barry Switzer, the man however Republican J.C. Watts, Switzer's former quarterback and the first black congressman elected to office in Oklahoma described Barry Switzer in the excerpt posted from his book, What Color is a Conservative? .

Nevertheless, whatever else Barry Switzer did or didn't do he certainly summed up why American society will find it hard to achieve anything but a veneer of democracy.

Read more...