AGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

I am saying that a lot these days.
And letting things go.
I am afraid the die has been cast and even if Obama had an epiphany and saw from the outside how ridiculous this Kabuki show we call our Govt has become, he could not save it.

And we are so far from him having that epiphany.

I still beleive its important to point it out though. If only for my own sanity. and laughter. The human condition and all that.

Love your thread name.

off to my second job now…and thrilled to have 2 these days….

Grayson’s bills are a waste of time. The Court has already indicated they’re unconstitutional.

If you want to limit ownership of our political system by foreign-owned corporations, you’ll need a constitutional amendment, folks.

The First Amendment shall only apply to living persons.

I was shocked that McCain’s Siamese twin, Lieberman, was nowhere to be found yesterday.

I don’t know who the hell Obama thinks he’s fooling. He nor any of the other hot air containers expressing false outrage at SCOTUS have any intention of doing anything about it. They all tend to benefit so as usual fuck everybody else.

All talk, no action. Business as usual.

A new Supreme Court would do to but that is not about to happen for another 30 or 40 years. I guess the good news is that the powers that be have at last admitted that they own us, lock stock and barrel. If we ever want Democracy in this country we are going to have to get it by taking to the streets, the ballot box has been rendered useless.

Gotta a sneaky feeling that’s gonna be the general response to his state of the union address as well. He blew a year and none of us are gonna get it back…..or he intentionally blew it, in which case we’re even more royally fucked. :-(

Good morning, pups. It’s Monday so we’re faced with [gag] The Pasty Little Putz and Prof. Krugman. The Pasty Little Putz solemnly addresses health care insurance reform. In “Too Big to Reform” he opines that if the health care legislation fails, liberals will have a long list of scapegoats. But they might want to save some blame for the welfare state their predecessors built. Me, I think I’ll save my blame for the morons who came up with the “death panel” bullshit and have lied about every important aspect of reform from jump street. Prof. Krugman, in “The Bernanke Conundrum,” says Ben Bernanke should be reappointed as Chairman of the Federal Reserve only because rejecting him could make the Fed’s policies worse. God, I hate Mondays…

Here they are.

The coffee, tea and hot chocolate are ready and the biscuits are out of the oven. We’re back to dank and rainy, with no real end in sight. I’m off to scrape the moss and mildew off my north side and then have another cup of tea. Have a great day.

The latter, I believe.

Whatcha gonna do when the Times starts charging?

The Fed policies are bloody useless and could get worse but only because that is what Goldman Sachs et al want. Bernanke, Summers, Geitner and their water boy Rahm, are “in charge” of the monetary policy and as long as they keep Oh Bummah! on the payroll he is happy to go along.

To assume that there is nobody else, other than the present “in crowd”, that could change the disastrous financial path America is on is complete and utter bull twaddle. Inquiring minds want to know if Krugman been drinking koolaid?

Apparently they are going to allow a few visits “free” and then start charging. If they keep track with cookies one could zap all NYT cookies, if they track by proxy then one could get a “false” proxy.

Either way the real question is, are the columnists going to get a peck at the cash and if not are they going to continue to have their views available on their blogs/Newsletters. and I guess the other question is, is the NYT worth paying for?

“the ballot box has been rendered useless.”

And hackable. What worries me is that with the corporate propaganda and tamperable voting machines, the sheeple will never even notice.

Sounds rather like the freak-out in deecee during the fall of ’08 when the banks had to be bailed out to “protect our economy”.

Can’t take bernanke out of the equation……the whole thing could fall apart. Wall Street would collapse. s/

I’m no economist but may be that wouldn’t be such a bad thing but that’s just a knee-jerk reaction.

Look at it this way, darlin’……SCOTUS just fixed bad practices with voting machines. The corps now have their fingers on the levers. :-(

“Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), co-crafter of landmark campaign finance legislation in his career, said he thought not much could be done to counter the Supreme Court’s decision Thursday to lift long-held restrictions on corporate donations to political candidates.”
___________________________________________________

Um, Senator the courts decision didn’t limit the Congress’ ability to tax the hell out of them thereby making it less to their advantage.

I’ll probably pony up, since it’s my old home town newspaper and is, alas, still “the newspaper of record.” The reason I have my wee bloggy thingy is from when they had their short-lived experiment with charging before. I guess it may give that a reason to continue! (I’ll be taking requests for news — how freaking weird does that sound?!)

Excuse, please. I see you already counted the corporations in your calculation.

SEC mulled ‘National Security’ for AIG details:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60N1S220100124

AIG=CIA

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/use-national-security-book-cooking-exception-not-looking-so-paranoid-after-all

Would anyone like to wager on the chance of more documents coming out with a lot more specificity about the import of a National Security interest here? We take no pride in being both paranoid and right here. It is simply the fact that no well-reasoned suspicion seems that outlandish to us anymore when it comes to predicting what crony capitalists might do/have already done.

Something else to peruse:
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/scandal-albert-edwards-alleges-central-banks-were-complicit-robbing-middle-classes

Thanks for everything, Marion.

I was surprised last week when Jonathon Turley supported the Supremes’ decision. He’s the only person on the left I’ve seen support it, and he’s always been solid on liberal issues. He seemed to regret having to support it on first amendment grounds.

Greenwald had two columns on it last week. He supports the decision too, and says we have to distinguish between outcomes and the interpretation of the constitution.

What the Supreme Court got right

Follow-up on the Citizens United case

Greenwald describes himself as “deeply ambivalent” about the decision.

He seemed to regret having to support it on first amendment grounds.

Absolutely. He looked miserable.

Good morning.

Constitution arguements? Not until my second cup.

It was free if you have a .edu email addy, wonder if they will do that again?

Well I have to defer to Turley and Greenwald. I guess Congress is going to have to deal with it somehow.

And of course Obama was a constitutional law professor, I’m sure he cares about what’s right and can be counted on to do the right thing. (joke).

I don’t understand the free speech arguement. After the corps take over the internet, where are you going to go to speak? Citizens United is the death of net neutrality, among many other things.

Marion you are a gem. Your morning NYT comments are always a treat and have obviated, for me, the reading of pasty, bobo and mojo. Thanks

see if you can dig up ART45 for the argument!

I thought about the implications for free speech after, and as a result of, that thread. I’ll probe him the next time I see him & the topic is right.

Don’t know what Marion is gonna do but I know what I’m gonna do, the same thing I do whenever a favored writer, regardless of topic, goes behind a pay wall.

I shrug my shoulders, say “oh well, life sux then you go to work” and precede to ignore them except for the occasional times when they are back out from behind the wall.

Don’ forget though, since you’re not a lawyer, you can’t talk to him about the law and first amendment as he wrote a paper on the first amendment way back when.

He’s an authority after all. /s

My little mornin bakery puts one out for free in the morning and I’m always the first one there so that works out for me!

I kept thinkin he was going to ease up on that. . .

A technique I try to use is to put my point in the form of a question. (See Prime Minister’s questions on cspan.) Not infallible, but it works a lot of the time.

Silly you. After his first narciscistic comment (I forget which came first, but it was a gangbuster) it seemed pretty clear he would keep doubling down.

Another hard headed Nam vet, pretty soon they’ll ban us all.

(except, of course, the voice of reason the Dragon!)

Never! Whose hard head would I have to knock my hard head against? *g*

Someone typed, yesterday I think, that d’oh is now in some dictionary.

See. Ya should’da been just a plain old “Cold War warrior” like me.

Of course, then ya might have had the joys of winters at northern tier SAC bases and such (4 years in Hawai’i after 15 months in small town northern MI almost re-balanced the scales)

just DOH, no ‘

all gave some, some gave all

yep.

That’s why I both laugh at and shake my head at the cry babies who go “ZOMG! Scary brown person!”

I spent too much time sitting in hardened shelters during alerts knowing that if it were the real thing, we were all likely toast, regardless of the “hardened” aspects of the “shelter”

McCain already has what he(and the Republicans)wanted from that legislation — the weakening of unions.

Apparently you haven’t read Krugman’s blogs recently to understand why he believes Bernanke is the lesser of the evils that could be installed in the Fed. Please read them and get back to us. Hint: it has nothing to do with Geithner and Summers.

Um, Senator the courts decision didn’t limit the Congress’ ability to tax the hell out of them thereby making it less to their advantage.

that’s right. Tax the hell out of them. I believe that is called one dimensional chess.

I’m the one who typed that. But, it was on hearsay. My mister heard it was added to Merriam Webster and told me. I suppose I could Google it.

Here’s a link.
http://www3.merriam-webster.com/opendictionary/newword_display_alpha.php?letter=D

You are right. I’d make the amendment more specific to permit regulation of corporations and other entities by state or federal governments.

A constitutional amendment drive to overturn Citizens United might be a good issue to unite right and left. It might also be a good issue to create a true grass roots network to demonstrate to the powers that be how distant they are from the public–or we can continue to go OMG

“Hard as it is to believe, John McCain was on a Sunday Talk Show yesterday.”

C’mon. Don’t bullshit us this early on a Monday morning…

I still have trouble swallowing some of the viewpoints in Glenn’s article. There’s a link to some questions about corporations, dealing with things like unreasonable search, the argument being if corporations have no constitutional rights, the ACLU’s offices could be searched by the FBI without just cause. It’s a troubling question, but my gut says that the PEOPLE making up the ACLU have constitutional rights, not the organization itself.

Godsakes.

What’s the difference when the Oval Office is bagman for Wall Street!
http://market-ticker.denninger.net/archives/1895-Financial-Terrorism-You-Decide.html

Your gut is telling you that Exxon and Goldman Sachs don’t have to worry about the FBI raiding their offices willy-nilly. That we’ve divided up our existence into two entities, persons and property is insane. Having another category say corporations have certain rights, but not all or to the same degree as a person, isn’t blasphemy. It actually makes a little sense. Just like today we have citizens and non citizens. Just because you aren’t a citizen doesn’t mean you lose all your rights (in theory). Maybe your gut is bothered because it thought that the point of the Constitution was to care for and protect the living, breathing people of this country.

I think what bothers my gut the most is that the SC has the gall to take up time being concerned about the lack of influence of corporations on our political landscape, but not weather you and I could be declared enemy combatants and shipped off to Bagram if someone fudged a few characters in a database. Every day we get to watch another life being destroyed and this is how our government spends its time…??? How about being thrown out of your house and losing everything you own, and dieing slowly because you don’t have insurance is restricting your right to “life, liberty, and happiness”. Now I understand how Romans felt about Nero. At least Bush played the guitar. The least they could do is pound out a decent beat with the gavel or something. Entertain us for god’s sake!

I need a break from these people ;-?

From what I’m understanding, there are two separate amendments here:

1. We want to write a constitutional amendment to clarify the 14th amendment, redefining citizenship as belonging only to living, breathing persons.

2. We want to also amend the 1st amendment, and limit the freedom of speech to individuals, the press, and maybe non-profits, and not-for-profits, and NGOs, and unions, and…

So how exactly would amendment #2 be written?

(Full disclosure: I am not a lawyer, just a semi-informed citizen for whom this SCOTUS decision has been intellectual torture. On that subject, did the Founders really desire such quandaries to occur where ordinary citizens could not unravel and weigh the logic behind their Court’s decision, and where thus reduced to “deep ambivalence” and inaction?)

Structure is, according to some people, the only content of knowledge.Knowledge comes to us only from experience. Which can be repeated and described.
A structure of governance can be seen and so also known.Let’s take a cancer cell. Scientists obtain knowledge of its structure only via eye. Thus, obtain knowledge ab it at that point in time.
If one has eyes one can see the structure of US society and system of rule And only thus can one obtain knowledge ab that or anything else.

All governmental structures rests on a set of ‘laws’; called constitution
By ‘laws’ i mean that we’ve never had “laws” [i use it now in the usual folk sense and not kingly or ceo sense]in recorded history since the ‘laws’ were written by “them” [dreadful them] and not us.

In short, we have lived in lawlesness for at least 10 k yrs.

The structural members of US governance are: WH, congress, cia, fbi, army, private army, clergy,judiciary, media, ‘educators’.
Each has a different function; however, each is an integral member of a whole structure.

A prez can be viewed as steering wheel.Plutocrats as the engine. When engine burns, a prez can steer all he wants.
Axle is like an army, etc.
I am always trying to use english which mothers speak to theri kids. That’s the only language people understand; to cavepeople and them BO’s or media language is nonsense or rather by now finaly realized that the vrabl brilliancies is indeed not sensible or understandable.

For working class people to obtain their rights they have to render cia, fbi, army, congress theirs. In any case, apodicticly [of necessary or desirable truth] a remedy for the madness must exist! tnx

Caveat,
not at all sorry for my typos. I hate meritocracy! yes, i did reread my post. I don’t how “verbal” became vrabl and “are” became an “is” etc.
One advice: don’t get mad; get it all [cia, army, etc.tnx for ur forgiveness!
btw, i did finish last in my class!