California Free Press

Pastor James Dobson Asked Evangelicals to Pray for Deluge for Obama's Speech in Denver. Got Instead Hurricane Gustav Coinciding with Republican Convention.

Evidently, God was not pleased when right wing evangelical Pastor James Dobson of Focus on the Family asked right wing evangelicals to ask Him to rain on Obama's speech at the Democratic National Convention. As it turned out, Obama had perfect weather (thank you, God) and now that the Republican convention is here the following week, God is producing a deluge on the Gulf Coast that is seriously interfering with the Republican convention (thank you, God). There is finally some justice in the universe! Evidently, God favors Obama and not the right wing nut cases like James Dobson who presume to know who and what God favors in national politics. Hey Dobson, maybe a little humility would be in order. It goes to show how much influence you have with God. The following is from AlterNet:

As reported here over the weekend, James Dobson's Focus on the Family employs Stuart Shepard to make short, "clever" religious-right videos for the evangelical powerhouse. Shepard creates these videos regularly, and most of them are entirely forgettable. Last week, however, Focus unveiled a new video, asking politically-conservative Christians to pray for rain on Aug. 28, in order to disrupt Barack Obama's speech at the Democratic National Convention. Shepard called for "abundant rain, torrential rain ... flood-advisory rain." He adds, "I'm talking about umbrella-ain't-gonna-help-you rain ... swamp-the-intersections rain." Explaining why he wants everyone to pray for rain, Shepard explains, without a hint of humor, "I'm still pro-life, and I'm still in favor of marriage being between one man and one woman. And I would like the next president who will select justices for the next Supreme Court to agree." In other words, Obama disagrees with the religious right on culture-war issues, so Focus on the Family wants God to smite Obama with rain. Got it.

Maybe these idiots should pray for a brain instead. What numbnuts! Rain in the proportion they asked God to provide would undoubtedly have wreaked havoc in the whole Denver area and caused much devastation. It is just desserts that their prayers were not only not answered but produced results just the opposite of what they prayed for. Let that be a lesson, a**holes!

Evangelicals have a problem: they want to involve themselves in politics -- for instance by praying that the Obama speech at the Democratic convention is rained out, as James Dobson of Focus On the Family called for. Some evangelicals are embarrassed by such antics. What can they do? Nothing because their theology acknowledges no central authority. Evangelicals don't "do" structure. They don't do government, or bishops or tradition. They just do "me" and "I" never we. So their individualistic and narcissistic village idiots-Dobson, Robertson, Osteen etc.-are in charge by default. The whole point of Evangelical Christianity is a consumerist-oriented, do your own thing approach to Jesus. This is a departure from historical Christianity centered on a liturgical tradition that had to do with faith lived in community and beliefs defined by tradition, not the individual pastor standing in front of the congregation holding forth according to whim. But evangelical "worship" is nothing but grandstanding. It's all about the sermon and the pastor's personality. ... Evangelicals get direct messages from God. So who needs tradition, let alone government? That is why Evangelicals are opposed to all structure. They hate government, and they hate the idea of bishops telling them what it means to be a Christian. They hate the idea of health care for all that might involve someone (other than voices in their heads) telling them what to do. And they want the "right" to own guns, raise kids on myths and own that SUV and believe that more drilling for oil will bring down the price of gas. They also want God to speak directly to them, never mind a community of faith. And God seems to tell them weird stuff. So today's crazy person is tomorrow's best selling Rick Warren or Victoria and Joel Osteen. And how can they be crazy? Look how big their churches are! They measure up to the only real Evangelical creed-the ability to make money and be successful in commercial terms. Evangelicalism is a series of personality cults masquerading as religion.

John McCain Has So May Houses He Doesn't Know What To Do!

You all have heard about the little old woman who lived in a shoe who had so many children she didn't know what to do. Well, John McCain has the opposite problem. That little old man has so many houses he doesn't know when his property taxes are due! By latest count McCain owns at least eleven, count 'em, eleven houses with his wife Cindy who has a little sibling problem. John McCain can't count all his houses; Cindy McCain can't count all her siblings.

There was an old woman
Who lived in a shoe;
She had so many children,
She didn't know what to do.
She gave them some broth,
Without any bread;
She whipped them all soundly,
And sent them to bed.

There was John McCain with his $520 Ferragamo shoes.
He had so many houses he didn't know when his property taxes were due.
His wife had so many siblings she forgot who was who.
So he fed the American people some gruel without any bread,
Whipped the whiners soundly
And sent them to bed.

Now who's the out of touch elitist? I guess the economy is going pretty good ... for the McCains. After all they spent over a quarter of a million dollars last year on household help. Jeez, if their taxes had been lower, they could have hired a few more servants. They would have been able to create more jobs as we know all rich people do if their taxes are low enough.

But then as if not being able to count all your houses isn't bad enough, Cindy McCain can't even couint all her siblings!

When Cindy McCain talks about growing up, she usually refers to herself as an "only child" -- a phrase that ignores the existence of her half sisters. "It's terribly painful," Kathleen Hensley Portalski said yesterday. "It is as if she is the 'real' daughter. I am also a real daughter." Portalski and McCain are both children of the late Jim Hensley, the Arizona businessman who founded one of the largest beer distributorships in the nation. Kathleen, 65, is the product of Hensley's first marriage in the 1930s to Mary Jeanne Parks. Hensley divorced Parks for Marguerite "Smitty" Johnson, whom he met at a West Virginia hospital in World War II and married in 1945. Cindy was born nine years later. The half sisters had little contact growing up and have not spoken since Hensley's funeral in 2000. In his will, he left just $10,000 to his older daughter; Cindy inherited her father's multimillion-dollar fortune. Portalski told our colleague Kimberly Kindy that she stood quietly by for decades while her father lavished attention on his second family. But the past few months -- with Cindy McCain's glowing childhood memories and repeated references to being her father's only child -- finally became too much. "I was his family, too," she said from her home in Phoenix. "I saw him at Christmas and I spent my birthdays with him." But there's more: Cindy McCain has another half sister. Before her marriage to Hensley, Johnson had a daughter, Dixie Burd, by a previous relationship. Burd, who is much older than Cindy, could not be reached for comment. The McCain campaign has been tight-lipped about the expanded family tree: "Mrs. McCain was raised as the only child of Jim and Marguerite Hensley, and there was no familiar relationship with any other sibling," it said in a statement. The messy saga went public after McCain talked about her childhood in an NPR interview. Portalski's son, Nicholas, contacted the network to clarify the family history and his mother's feelings about being overlooked. "I'm upset," she told NPR. "I'm angry. It makes me feel like a nonperson, kind of." Money, of course, has exacerbated the family tensions. The multimillionaire Hensley only occasionally saw his older daughter -- and was emotionally distant when he did, according to her son -- but gave Portalski and her children money and college tuition. But when he died eight years ago, Hensley bequeathed Cindy the majority share of his company. (Andrew McCain, John's son from his first marriage, is now the chief financial officer.) Portalski got no share of the business, and support to her family was abruptly cut off. "It doesn't make any kind of sense at all,'' Portalski said yesterday. "He was generous over the years when I was growing up, so it doesn't compute that he would do that; that he would leave all of us out. He paid for college for two of my kids. He gave us yearly gifts that were generous, allowed for a down payment on a home. I felt shock and disbelief. I just wish I could ask him, 'Why?' " Her son, Nicholas, asked for a copy of the will and said it had been amended so many times that it was hard to tell what the original intent or language must have been. Now, she said, all she wants is for the McCains to apologize and acknowledge her branch of the family tree. (Since you asked: Yes, they're Democrats.) "He was my father, too. I don't know why even now he cannot be a part of my life."

Memo to Cindy: Couldn't you at least give Nicholas Portalski, your nephew, a job driving a beer truck? After all that's what the family business consists of: beer distribution. You truck beer around the state of Arizona. That's how your father, Jim Hensley, made his millions.

But speaking of Jim Hensley, he was convicted in 1948 of liquor law violations.

The criminal convictions had little immediate impact on the brothers' fortunes. James Hensley profited handsomely from his association with liquor magnate Kemper Marley, a man police suspect ordered the 1976 murder of Arizona Republic reporter Don Bolles, who had written about Marley's business and political dealings. The man convicted of placing a bomb beneath Bolles' car testified that Marley also wanted former Arizona governor and then-attorney general Bruce Babbitt murdered because Babbitt had filed an antitrust lawsuit against the liquor industry in 1975. (Marley, who died in 1990, was never charged in the Bolles case. Babbitt is now U.S. Secretary of the Interior.) By 1955, James Hensley had launched a Budweiser distributorship in Phoenix, a franchise reportedly bestowed upon him by Marley, who was never indicted in the 1948 federal liquor-law-violation case -- or a subsequent one -- despite his controlling financial role in the liquor distribution businesses. James Hensley's conviction didn't deter the State of Arizona from granting him a wholesale liquor license in the mid-1950s. The Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control turned a blind eye to repeated liquor-law violations at the company. State liquor regulators did nothing when James Hensley failed to disclose his federal felony conviction on a sworn 1988 disclosure statement to the department and the City of Phoenix. Today, Phoenix-based Hensley & Company is the nation's fifth-largest beer wholesaler -- a privately held business that 80-year-old James Hensley still controls. He built the Budweiser distributorship into at least a $200 million-a-year business, with annual sales of more than 20 million cases of beer.

Not quite the American Dream story that has been portrayed for James Hensley: "returning veteran starts business, makes fortune." Yeah, by associating with the mob.

But be that as it may. Cindy's father came home from WWII and divorced his first wife, Kathleen's mother, in order to marry Cindy's mother. John McCain came home from the Vietnam war, divorced his first wife in order to marry Cindy. Is that history repeating itself or what? McCain callously left behind his first wife, Carol, after she became disfigured in an auto accident. After Carol had done all she could to get McCain released from the Hanoi Hilton, McCain ditched her when he finally came home and found that she had gained weight and walked with a limp. He ran around with other women and finally settled on the beautiful and rich Cindy. He married Cindy a month after getting a divorce from Carol.

McCain had less than a distinguished record at Annapolis graduating almost last in his class. His class rank was 894 out of 899. But then he described himself as being "dumber then Bush" a difficult feat to accomplish. Then he went on to lose five aircraft before he landed up in the Hanoi Hilton. And this is what you call a distinguished military career? The Red Baron, he ain't. But I guess graduating almost last in your class qualifies you to be President of the United States. Along with those other stellar intellects Ronald Reagan, Pappy Bush and George W Bush, McCain would be in the tradition of a long line of Numbskull Republican American Presidents.

I hope that Joe Biden will point out that almost every McCain utterance contains the words "My friends," a noun, a verb and "prisoner of war." Did McCain actually accomplish anything in Vietnam other than getting shot down and losing millions of dollars' worth of US aircraft? The answer is not much. Some war hero. And then there's the questionable "cross in the sand" story.

But you would have thought that, after he got home, McCain would have been a champion of the POW/MIA cause and a champion of all veterans returning from Iraq. Sadly this was and is not the case.

According to Mrs.Carol Hrdlicka, when POW/MIA family members confronted Sen. John McCain in the halls of Congress after the conclusion of the Committee’s Report, he shoved the wheelchair of handicapped POW mother Jane Gaylord out of his way knocking it into her niece who was behind the chair attending to her aunt and she was pushed up against a wall. Subsequently Mrs. Gaylord filed a complaint for assault against the Senator but the matter was squelched by the powers that be. As Senator McCain attempted to jump on an elevator to make a quick escape from the POW/MIA family members gathered, he shouted at Mrs. Hrdlicka, “You don’t know what I’ve been through”(indicating he was a former POW and inferring Mrs. Hrdlicka had no comparable experience or appreciation of his great suffering and sacrifice). As the door to the elevator began to close around the cowering Senator who was making good his get-a-way, Mrs. Hrdlicka raised a large photo of her POW husband Col. David Hrdlicka and thrust it at the elevator doors to show the Senator that she did indeed share in the suffering of POWs and family members and shouted that she had clear proof her husband David was still alive in captivity. Unfortunately, Mrs. Hrdlicka’s cries and pleas for help from government officials bent on closing the chapter on POWs fell on deaf ears and blackened hearts!

You know, but there is no group McCain will not pander to. He even offered up Cindy to be in the Miss Buffalo Chip contest at Sturgis which involves women performing simulated sex acts! Then there's his famous temper  even telling a fellow senator "F**k you", and the Keating Five ethics scandal.

And then there's the $520 Ferragamo shoes.

Ah yes, the economy is fundamentally sound ... for John McCain.

Speculators Drive Up Price of Oil

We have reported before about how speculators have driven up the price of oil, but now there seems to be something approaching proof that this is the case. And as in other agencies of the Bush administration, the CFTC, which is responsible for regulating commodities traders, has shown itself instead to be a tool of the industries it's supposed to regulate. All across the board, the Bushies have put incompetents in charge of government agencies (remember "Heckuva job Brownie"?), and then pointed at them when they fail and said, "See, government doesn't work."

It turns out that a Swiss company, VITOL, has taken huge positions in oil and was in fact more of a speculator holding oil contracts as a profit making investment rather than a means of lining up the actual delivery of fuel. According to a Washington Post article, "A Few Speculators Dominate Vast Market for Oil Trading," speculators hold 81% of the contracts on NYMEX, the New York Mercantile Exchange.

"It is now evident that speculators in the energy futures markets play a much larger role than previously thought, and it is now even harder to accept the agency's laughable assertion that excessive speculation has not contributed to rising energy prices," said Rep. John D. Dingell (D-Mich.). He added that it was "difficult to comprehend how the CFTC would allow a trader" to acquire such a large oil inventory "and not scrutinize this position any sooner." The CFTC, which refrains from naming specific traders in its reports, did not publicly identify Vitol. The agency's report showed only the size of the holdings of an unnamed trader. Vitol's identity as that trader was confirmed by two industry sources with direct knowledge of the matter. CFTC documents show Vitol was one of the most active traders of oil on NYMEX as prices reached record levels. By June 6, for instance, Vitol had acquired a huge holding in oil contracts, betting prices would rise. The contracts were equal to 57.7 million barrels of oil -- about three times the amount the United States consumes daily. That day, the price of oil spiked $11 to settle at $138.54. Oil prices eventually peaked at $147.27 a barrel on July 11 before falling back to settle at $114.98 yesterday. The documents do not say how much Vitol put down to acquire this position, but under NYMEX rules, the down payment could have been as little as $1 billion, with the company borrowing the rest. The biggest players on the commodity exchanges often operate as "swap dealers" who primarily invest on behalf of hedge funds, wealthy individuals and pension funds, allowing these investors to enjoy returns without having to buy an actual contract for oil or other goods. Some dealers also manage commodity trading for commercial firms. To build up the vast holdings this practice entails, some swap dealers have maneuvered behind the scenes, exploiting their political influence and gaps in oversight to gain exemptions from regulatory limits and permission to set up new, unregulated markets. Many big traders are active not only on NYMEX but also on private and overseas markets beyond the CFTC's purview. These openings have given the firms nearly unfettered access to the trading of vital goods, including oil, cotton and corn.

Now we can see how such a simple thing as electing a President Obama who would clean house of these incompetent Bush administration appointees and replace them with regulators with real teeth could lower the price of oil significantly. 

The 10 Highest Paid Executives of 2007 and the Minimum Wage

Here are the 10 highest-paid CEOs for 2007 at Standard & Poor's 500 companies based on calculations by The Associated Press. The total pay figures are rounded, and are based on the AP's compensation formula, which adds up salary, perks, bonuses, above-market interest on pay set aside for later, and company estimates for the value of stock options and stock awards on the day they were granted last year.

1. Larry Ellison, Oracle Corp., $84.6 million

2. John Thain, Merrill Lynch & Co., $83.1 million

3. Leslie Moonves, CBS Corp., $67.6 million

4. Richard Adkerson, Freeport-McMoran Copper & Gold Inc., $65.3 million

5. Bob Simpson, XTO Energy Inc., $56.6 million

6. Lloyd Blankfein, Goldman Sachs Group Inc., $53.9 million

7. Kenneth Chenault, American Express Co., $51.7 million

8. Eugene Isenberg, Nabors Industries Ltd., $44.6 million

9. John Mack, Morgan Stanley, $41.7 million

10. Glenn Murphy, Gap Inc., $39.1 million

Wait a minute. Didn't Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch hemorrhage billions of dollars in losses last year? Well, it didn't seem to affect its CEO salaries, did it?

Meanwhile, as of July 24, 2008 the minimum wage increased $.70 an hour to $6.55. This is from The Minimum Wage: A Disgrace and a Scandal by Jonathan Tasini:

But, we should keep in mind that, at the grand new sum of $6.55 an hour, the minimum wage is a disgrace and a sad commentary about the state of our social safety net, the economy and our political system. If you do the math, it's pretty stark. If you worked 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year, you would earn $13,624. Not a single day off. No sick days. No health care. No pension. ... * Adjusted for inflation, the minimum wage today is what it was in the 1950s -- more than half a century ago. * To really make ends meet at minimum wage pay, two people in a household have to work three full-time minimum wage jobs. ... My friend Joel Rogers,director of the Center on Wisconsin Strategy, made a stunning calculation not too long ago: Had wages tracked productivity as they have over the past 30 years, "median family income in the U.S. would be about $20,000 higher today than it is." Check this out: Taking into account productivity, the minimum wage should be $19.12 -- which would make it almost 50 percent above today's median wage (not to mention the pathetic $6.55). That's right. The minimum wage should be more [like] three times what it is today. At that level, you would make almost $40,000 a year. Not an outstanding amount given all the other costs and the likelihood that you would not be in a job with health care and a pension (that's another issue). But, beginning to be in the realm of respectable. ... Yesterday, I wrote about how the rich -- the top one percent -- are getting a larger share of the nation's income. Today, the minimum wage goes up to $6.55 an hour. The top one percent of the income earners burp and make far more in that brief moment than any minimum wage worker. According to Citizens for Tax Justice: In 2008 the best-off one percent will have an estimated average income of almost $1.5 million each. Just to get into this elite group requires an income greater than $462,000. If all of that came from wages, then for single people it would take an average wage of $224 an hour to make it into the top one percent, and $722 an hour to become an average member . To underscore: $6.55 per hour versus $224 per hour.

$6.55 vs $224.00 per hour indeed! That's $1048. a month vs $35,840. a month. And this doesn't even take into account the underclass, the homeless, who are probably surviving on around $500. or less a month although reliable figures for homeless incomes are hard to come by.  Now let's see. Larry Ellison of Oracle (a two time college drop-out by the way) made $42,300. per hour in 2007. John Thain of Merrill Lynch made $41,550. per hour in 2007. Leslie Moonves of CBS made $33,800. per hour in 2007, and #10, Glen Murphy of Gap made $19,500. per hour in 2007. Such disparities in citizens' incomes in a democracy are obscene! Ellison made $117.50 in a second, and in a few seconds made more than a homeless person's monthly income. In 10 seconds he made more than a minimum wage earner makes in a month.

An Nguyen Checks In From Singapore

I asked An if he would comment on Singapore's Sovereign Wealth Fund (SWF) and how it operates to help the citizens of Singapore in connection with my previous blog post, Sovereign Wealth Funds, State Capitalism and Corporate Socialism. The Singapore SWF is the world's third largest with $330 billion in assets. The interesting thing is that Singapore's SWF, the Government of Singapore Investment Corp. (GIC) along with its sister fund, Temasek, owns equity stakes in many corporate enterprises such as Singapore Airlines. However, the enterprises are not nationalized in the sense that the government owns them in their entirety. So there's the capitalistic situation of share ownership combined with the socialist characteristic of government ownership combined with private ownership. Thus the modern world has left the old dichotomy of capitalism vs socialism behind. Those nations that are still mired in the capitalism vs socialism debate are out of touch with reality. That includes the US whose approach to government finance is antiquated at best not to mention that its government and private corporations are in debt to or are partially owned by the SWFs of other nations. A prime example is Singapore's bail-out of Citibank. So far SWFs have prudently not taken majority equity stakes in major US banks and corporations, but it's only a matter of time ...

 

Here is An's report:

 

In Singapore, everytime a worker gets paid, the government automtically deducts about 5% of his salary for the Central Provident Fund (CPF). His employer is required to contribute the same amount toward his CPF account. This fund will accumulate with interest until a worker is retired. At any time, a worker is allowed to borrow from the fund from his own account to buy a house or apartment, and also can use his CPF for his monthly payment.   He can continue to use the CPF for payment as long as he still owns the house and works. If he sells the house, the government will automatically deduct the amount that he has borrowed, plus interest, and put the rest back into his CPF account. During the course of his life, he can continue to borrow from the fund in order to purchase a house.   The CPF also can be used toward hospital bills. In Singapore, there are private and public hospitals. The public ones are just as good, if not better, than the private hospitals. They are heavily subsidized by the government and the cost is affordable by everyone.   A person can take one lump sum amount from his CPF account when he retires, or take monthly payments as he wishes. When he dies, the next of kin is entitled to the balance of his CPF.   The personal income tax in Singapore is extremely low compared to the US. For a yearly income of $50,000., a person pays less than $1000. for income tax. The government is making money by wisely investing the CPF and from its SWFs.  There are very few countries in the world that don't have deficits. In fact, the Singapore SWF is making a profit every year from overseas investments. Practically any of the corporations that the government owns are making good profits, from telecommunication, airline, real-estate, to shipping, etc. ... The profit is announced at year's end, and every citizen is given a share.   One could say that, because Singapore is a small country, it should be easy to manage. But the the truth is Singapore doesn't have any natural resources; even water has to be imported from Malaysia. Its wealth is credited to its intelligent government that really looks after its citizens.   Compared to Singapore, the US has a bundle of natural resources, and yet we are the biggest debtor in the world. Our people are still struggling everyday to earn a living. We owe money to almost all of the powerful friends that we have.   Our country is where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. The capitalists are making billion of dollars in oil profits everyday at the expense of every decent hard working American.   I feel sad for our country. It's time for a big change.   Best regards, An

The Singapore CPF is a fully integrated retirement, home loan and medical insurance package, and each citizen can access his or her personalized account online. The web interface is very helpful and user friendly as opposed to US government websites. The CPF will help you start a business, make investments and provides many other useful services and benefits.

The US only knows how to go into debt, not how to make profitable investments, as witnessed by the huge budget deficits it runs and its $10 trillion national debt. Its antiquated Federal Reserve, lack of a true central bank and antipathy toward government ownership of equity assets has hamstrung it with respect to other nations. Its lack of beneficense towards its own citizens is exemplified by the 47 million people without health insurance and its large and growing homeless population. Meanwhile, Singapore, a nation of 4.5 million people, bails out Citibank, a major corporation in a nation of 300 million people!

In recent months, banks including Citigroup, Morgan Stanley and UBS have turned to investment funds, including the Government of Singapore Investment Corp (GIC), its sister fund, Temasek, and China Investment Corp, for funding that western investors were unwilling to give as stockmarkets plunged. ... Singapore's GIC, for example, which with funds of more than $330bn (£166bn) is one of the world's largest sovereign wealth funds, spent more than £5.5bn on a 9% stake in UBS last year. Shares in the Swiss bank are down 46% so far this year. It spent a further $6.88bn in January as part of a $14.5bn funding round for the embattled US bank Citigroup.

Frank Thomas Checks in From Holland Via Robert Reich's Blog

I have been trying to add an international perspective and flavor to this blog by engaging with guest bloggers and commenters who live in countries other than the US, but who have lived in or are familiar with the US. My feeling is that US citizens could profit greatly from being made aware of how things are done in other countries, that the US is too insular and unaware of or too arrrogant to consider the fact that the way things are done abroad might be superior to the way things are done here at home. I think that we might be able to learn from others and that we shouldn't just assume that we as Americans have all the answers.

So far I have enlisted An Nguyen, an American citizen born in Vietnam, residing currently in Singapore. Also, I have permission from Frank Thomas, an American residing in Holland, who comments frequently on Robert Reich's blog, to post the following remarks regarding my post Sovereign Wealth Funds, State Capitalism and Corporate Socialism:

Couldn't agree more with your remarks about our "Democratic Capitalism" vs. "European State Capitalism." Excellent summary on your part!

I've been in the offshore oil business operating out of Rotterdam, Holland in the 70s, when the big discoveries were being made offshore UK and Norway (and later some smaller discoveries offshore the Netherlands). Since that time, I've always been appalled at how naive and irresponsible our government has been in its relations with oil companies, specifically concerning the tax concessions and the paltry lease deals made with oil firms for onshore drilling acreage, particularly for offshore drilling on oil-gas sites.

Now Washington seems to want to repeat the same mistakes with offshore tracts that appear very, very promising ... unlike Norway which has formed a 50-50 partnership for development of their offshore fields ... a business arrangement all parties are happy with whereby one party's equity input is the potential oil-gas Site (owned by the taxpayers of Norway) and the other party's equity input are the exploration and production development costs to bring oil and/or gas flows on stream to shore for refining.

This profoundly sensible business arrangement has made Norway energy independent while filling their Treasury coffers with considerable funds ... further enhanced by fact they are in addition net exporters of fossil fuels.

As for US Corporate Tax Rates vs. European Corporate Tax Rates, many ill-informed pundits claim (on prime-time TV stations) European rates are higher than US rates ... using this as an excuse to promote for EVEN LOWER corporation tax rates (e.g., McCain). This is typical devious propaganda permeating our political-social discussions in America that has little basis IN FACT.

Firstly, corporate taxes paid in America today are already at a miniscule level of less than 12% of all US taxes paid! Secondly, a recent study by a Congressional committee led by Carl Levin has confirmed that more than 65% of all corporations in America with sales of $50 Million to $250 million pay NO taxes due to special privileges and tax avoidance structures, e.g., involving tax evasion transfer pricing gimmicks to report no profits from US operations. The majority of Foreign firms operating in the States also pay little or NO taxes for same reasons. Thirdly, when taking these factors into account (including favorable tax concessions to oil firms and other larger firms), US EFFECTIVE Corporate Tax Rates are well BELOW European Corporate Rates.

Holland is an example of country that practices "State Capitalism" in many different ways. For example, the economy is going much slower now, so people are saying the government should not increase the current 19% Value Added Tax as planned. Government officials are listening and note that this will lead to a Euro 2 Billion(+-$3 Billion) Deficit in next year's budget. Will this Deficit amount be accepted and funded with Debt Borrowing? ABSOLUTELY NOT! Officials will find a way to cut spending somewhere because it's a Golden Rule here NOT to borrow for Spending shortfalls unless critically necessary ... Borrowing should be only for Long-term Investments.

Thus, Financial Prudence balanced against Social Protection Priorities is alive and well here. I look upon it as prudent "Capitalism with a Conscience," but I also like your phrase, John, "State Capitalism," but I would add, "Combined with Private Capitalism."

Amazing how we Americans continue to allow ourselves to be manipulated by self-serving ideological skulduggery, lobbyist insiders indirectly controlling the purse strings, and pure gross mismanagement of taxpayer monies and assets.

When is enough going to be ENOUGH? Optimistically, no doubt, I'm placing my bets on CHANGE in the next election where a measure of integrity, transparency, and leadership will hopefully return that focuses on the general welfare of ALL Americans.

What the article "Sovereign Wealth Funds, State Capitalism and Corporate Socialism" says about Norway's unique management of its national Wealth, especially from its offshore oil-gas developments, is entirely true. Today, they are only partially using the substantial annual Interest Earned on their gigantic accumulated Funds and preserving the base principle for future generations. In my offshore oil-gas entrepreneurial activities in the 70s, I had many commercial and personal meetings with established Norwegian businesses (quite a number being family owned for generations past and present).

I was always utterly impressed with their down to earth combination of human sensitivity, fairness, and pragmatic business sense. Found the same qualities in the Dutch, so I feel very fortunate. Wish we Americans could rediscover these qualities but am afraid our massive Debt situation places constraints on our imagination and ideological flexibility for how to come out of our convoluted excesses in a balanced, equitable way.

... Frank Thomas

Friday, 15 August, 2008

 

Sovereign Wealth Funds, State Capitalism and Corporate Socialism

by John Lawrence

The competition between capitalism and communism has morphed into a whole new scenario, one in which the US, the principal espouser of "free market" capitalism has voluntarily - due to its trade policies and energy consumption - placed itself in hock to "communist" nations, which are communist in name only, having morphed into a new form of capitalism: state capitalism. Thanks to policies started under Ronald Reagan such as deregulation, free trade and subsidies and tax breaks for big oil companies, other nations have accumulated huge war chests known as sovereign wealth funds (SWFs). In the meantime, the US has run up a $10 trillion national debt and has initiated policies which have resulted in one financial fiasco and meltdown after another, only the latest being the sub-prime mortgage mess. While the US espouses capitalism, the reality is that the government runs on a policy of corporate socialism: tax breaks and subsidies for wealthy corporations, bailouts for large corporations and banks, legislation that favors the phamaceutical and oil industries etc. The US taxpayer is on the hook for some of this. Other bailouts are arranged by the government but actually come from SWFs. Citibank recently was bailed out by Singapore's soverign wealth fund. SWFs stand ready to bail out US corporations in exchange for an equity stake, having tired of US Treasuries. They're also starting to buy US real estate including such landmarks as the Chrysler and Helmsley buildings in New York City.

The US has gone from the world's largest creditor nation to the world's largest debtor nation in just a few short years and routinely goes begging to rich countries like China and Saudi Arabia for bailouts. It all started with Ronald Reagan and his tax cuts resulting in huge budget deficits which added to the national debt. The US has gotten dumb and the communist countries and assorted dictatorships have gotten smart. But some western countries like Norway have gotten even smarter fully integrating its sovereign wealth fund with its central bank and using the largesse to support its citizens. The US' problem partly is that it doesn't even have a central bank, the Federal Reserve being privately owned. As such it's function is limited to regulating the money supply, and by its very nature it can't be a repository of wealth like Norway's central bank can, for instance.

It didn't have to be this way. Jimmy Carter in 1970 put solar panels on the roof of the White House and tried to change the US energy policy. Ronald Reagan promply took them down when he came into office. The Saudis and other oil rich nations including the formerly communist Soviet Union (now Russia) have accumulated their war chests (SWFs) by selling us oil. Norway, a western non-communist nation, has a SWF with money accumulated from selling oil which it actually uses to provide its citizens with pensions and to counterbalance budget deficits in other parts of its national expenditures. China has a $200 billion SWF accumulated by selling the US cheap goods. The US has been dumb enough to run huge trade deficits with China. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if I sell you a dollar's worth of goods and you sell me 50 cents worth and we repeat this transaction over and over again, you're going to end up owing me money. It's as simple as that.

As the espouser of free market capitalism, the US has ended up essentially not with free market capitalism but with corporate socialism in which various private corporations use the state as a tool for furthering their own interests. The state, on the other hand, as it facilitates the enrichment of corporations while undermining its middle class, has not taken on the role of wealth accumulation as other countries have. Instead the US central government has financed itself in the traditional manner by taxation, and, since it is controlled by wealthy private interests, it has only lowered taxes thus driving up deficits and debts. It has not been fiscally prudent or responsible. With no other means of accumulating wealth, it has only run itself into debt. If it had natural resources such as oil that it could sell to the rest of the world or if it had manufactured goods that it could sell to the rest of the world or if it hadn't overreached itself militarily by supporting the world's largest military-industrial complex or if it had raised taxes to cover expenses, the present situation might not have occurred. But then all resources in the US are under private corporate control so there is nothing that would serve as a source of national wealth. Contrast that with Norway in which the state has a 50% interest in all oil sales. That still leaves 50% for Big Oil. For the US, however, 50% is not enough. the US gives essentially all the profits from oil finds on its property to Big Oil. Other states share the profits among their citizens and private enterprise. The US essentially has a weak central government controlled by lobbyists representing corporate interests. The US government itself, supposedly a democracy, does nothing to accumulate wealth in behalf of its citizens the way other nations do. Even Kazahkstan, the butt of the movie Borat's jokes, has a SWF. Kazahkstan may get the last laugh while the US has to eat crow. Are you ready for Borat, the sequel?

On the other hand, China, for example, or even Norway, has a much stronger central government than the US. The communists do not try to micromanage their economies any more, but they retain control over the "commanding heights" by setting overall policy, something the US does not do intelligently. Instead the US lets a swarm of lobbyists each pursuing their own special interests effectively set economic policy for the US in a piecemeal, hodgepodge manner. The result is an incoherent jumble which profits US (now global) corporations, but weakens the US and its citizens as a whole. The US, comprised of a bunch of special interests, has no interest in providing for the good of its people (the general welfare as the Constitution says), only in lowering taxes on corporations and the wealthy.  The denouement is that countries with strong central governments both communist and non-communist are able to set policies which result in their nations' accumulating wealth which then can be at least partially distributed to its people. Sometimes it's just a few crumbs from the table, but that's not very different from the US supply side, trickle down economics. Qatar, for instance, uses its oil wealth to help its citizens attain a high standard of living. The communist countries like China have left economic production up to private enterprise but have retained central control of the commanding heights especially in the accumulation of capital. This is why they represent state capitalism. The SWF is the tool with which communism or state capitalism outcompetes the "free market" or corporate socialist economies such as the US. And it is also the tool with which capital formation can be used as a source of welfare for their people. The US with no strong central government exists primarily for the enrichment of private interests, and, therefore, is not in a position to offer comprehensive overall policies such as universal health care which would benefit its citizens. In fact universal health care would only be to the detriment of the private health care industry which accumulates tremendous profits. The self interest of US corporations has led to the US' impoverishment as a nation.

Meanwhile dazzling new office blocks and swanky Ritz-Carlton and Four Seasons hotels are sprouting out of the sand to cope with all those who want to do business here. In the suburbs of Doha you can drive for miles past the shells of mansions being hastily — and lavishly — thrown up to meet demand for homes that would dwarf those in even the most affluent pockets of America. The 150,000 Qataris enjoy their prosperity. The per capita GDP is more than $20,000, comparable to much of Europe. But Qatari citizens receive many extra benefits from the Government, including a plot of land and a $180,000 interest-free loan towards a house, which the Government builds to the owner’s designs. Water, gas and electricity are free and each homeowner gets a $15,000 gift towards furnishing his home. Qatar has a remarkable welfare state; citizens do not pay income tax but still receive free education and healthcare, even if it means being flown to Britain or the US for an operation. With petrol so cheap that a luxury car can be filled for a few pounds there is really little to worry about, except the blistering hot summers when the temperature can reach 50 degrees. Many Qataris have solved that problem by buying summer homes in Europe and America.

As far as the US criticism of China as a "one party system," the US is a one and a half party system at best. The Republicans have set policy for almost 40 years. Even Clinton governed as a Republican. It was under his administration that NAFTA and the repeal of Glass-Steagall took place. The Democratic party is at least half in the pockets of the corporations. The Republican symps in the Democratic party are known as "Blue Dog Democrats." No wonder they have been ineffective in getting the liberal agenda passed even though they have a majority in both houses of Congress. Half of them vote with the Republicans! The 2008 election is critical because it will determine whether or not there will be a change in direction for the US or whether it will continue down the same road started by Ronald Reagan and continued by the Bushes, the road of corporate socialism.

Let's consider the example of Norway in greater depth. Norway's SWF is essentially an endowment which spends the return on investment (but not the principal) on its citizens' welfare. This is what any prudent capitalist or wealthy person does. Only stupid people spend the principal itself. Intelligent people spend the return to capital. Thus rents, dividends and interest represent the return to capital. Refinancing your house represents spending the capital or principal itself. Norway's central government has fully integrated its SWF into its national budget so that future generations in perpetuity will enjoy the largesse thereof. The US has accumulated a huge national debt such that future generations of taxpayer/debtors will be required to pay it off. They are similar to the ones that refinanced their houses to support their lifestyle. Instead of passing on wealth to future generations such as in the case of Norway, the US will pass on debt to future generations so that wealthy people and corporations of the present generation can get even wealthier. Presumably, they will pass on the wealth to future generations of their own families thus creating an oligarchy. The following explains the exemplary features of Norway's SWF.

Norway's Government Pension Fund-Global (GPF) has a number of exemplary features that could serve as a model for other SWFs. The GPF is one of the largest and fastest-growing SWFs in the world, with total assets amounting to $373 billion at end-2007, or close to 100 percent of Norway's GDP. But size aside, the Norwegian GPF is mostly known for its features, which in many ways are considered best practices by international standards: • The GPF's stated aim is to support government saving and promote an intergenerational transfer of resources. The fund facilitates the long-term management of the government's petroleum revenues. Given the expected population aging in Norway, it serves to pre-fund public pension expenditures. • The GPF functions as a fiscal policy tool, which, together with the fiscal guideline, serves to limit government spending. The fund's capital consists of revenues from petroleum activities. The fund's expenditure is a transfer to the fiscal budget to finance the non-oil budget deficit. The fiscal guideline, introduced in 2001, calls for a limit on the non-oil structural central government deficit of around 4 percent of the assets of the GPF. Since 4 percent is the estimated long-run real rate of return, this rule amounts to saving the real capital of the fund and spending only its return (akin to an endowment fund). • The fund is fully integrated into the budget.The net allocation to the fund forms part of an integrated budgetary process. This process makes transparent the actual surplus of the fiscal budget and the state's use of petroleum revenues. • It pursues a highly transparent investment strategy. The Ministry of Finance—the fund's owner—reports regularly on the governance framework, the fund's goals, investment strategy and results, and ethical guidelines. The Central Bank—the fund's operational manager—publishes quarterly and annual reports on the management of the fund, including its performance and an annual listing of all investments. Detailed information on the fund's voting in shareholders' meetings is also published. • Its assets are invested exclusively abroad. This strategy ensures risk diversification and good financial returns. Moreover, it helps to shield the non-oil economy from shocks in the oil sector, which can put pressure on the exchange rate (so-called "Dutch disease" effects). The GPF has small ownership shares in over 7,000 individual companies worldwide (the average ownership stake at end-2007 was 0.6 percent, against a maximum allowed of 5 percent). • Its high-return, moderate-risk investment strategy has been hitting the mark. Currently, the fund is adjusting its portfolio to its new strategic benchmark of 60 percent of assets in equities and 40 percent in fixed income. There are plans to move gradually into real estate, to improve the risk-return tradeoff. The investment strategy has produced a healthy 4.3 percent average annual real return during the past decade.

Here's another reference that explains the relationship between Norway's central government and the oil companies. If the US made oil leases contingent on the oil companies' sharing the profits with the American people, the US might be able to (1) provide for social security as Norway has done and (2) pay off its $10 trillion national debt. The US could follow the Norwegian model of state capitalism combined with socialism for its citizens, but prefers to follow the model of corporate socialism combined with "fend for yourself" capitalism for its citizens. The results are clear. Norway has the highest standard of living of any country in the world.

For the last four years the United Nations (UN) has ranked Norway as having the highest standard of living in the world. This annual ranking is based largely on average levels of education and income, combined with expected length of lifetime, but also factors like human rights and cultural freedom. Norway is weighed high for its high literacy rate in addition to educational levels and material wealth.

Since 2001 Norway has ranked number one six times in human development, which combines life expectancy, literacy, educational attainment and GDP per capita, edged out only by Iceland in 2007.

Drill Here. Drill Now. Heck, They Could Have Started Drilling Yesterday.

The oil companies already have 68 million acres under lease that they're not drilling on. It doesn't take an act of Congress for them to start drilling there today or yesterday if they'd wanted to. So why the mantra, "Drill here. Drill now."? It just shows what a pandering boob John McCain is. The oil companies already have 68 million acres under lease in the US. Why aren't they frantically drilling already to bring down the price of gas for the American consumer? Put simply, they could care less about bringing down the price of gas for the American consumer and concomitantly their own profits. They just want to use the high price of gas to further their own interests, that is, to get even more acreage under lease so that at some time in the future when the price of gas as set by the world market is even higher, they can make even greater profits.

First, the oil companies in this country now hold 7,000 leases to drill offshore, yet only 20 percent of those leases are producing oil. That is 68 million acres for which they already have the rights to drill. Nearly 80 percent of our offshore oil is already available for leasing -- approximately 54 billion barrels total. They could be drilling in these areas, but they are not. Assuming oil companies drilled in new areas, it would take at least a decade for new production to begin. Just last week, the U.S. Energy Information Administration concluded new drilling would have no impact on oil prices before 2030. Prices would still be determined by the world market, which will be adding billions of new consumers from growing economies in China, India and other countries. OPEC countries control two- thirds of the world's oil reserves. If we add a bit more oil to the market, they can cut their own output to keep prices high.

Now here's what Congress should do. 1) Require the oil companies to start drilling on leases they now hold. If they fail to do so, the leases should be taken back. 2) Require the oil companies to sell directly to the American people oil taken from leases in the US at a price of, say, 60% of the world market price. As the leases they now hold come under full development with the oil not placed on the world market but sold directly to the American people, Congress should then consider adding additional leases but not until then. Is this sufficiently nuanced that the American people cannot understand it? Oh, I see, they can only understand simple slogans like "Drill here. Drill now." Is their attention diverted elsewhere like on football games and reality shows? Poor babies!

Even Paris Hilton has a better energy policy than John McCain.

Drill Here. Drill Now? Why didn't they start drilling yesterday?

Lower Taxes Plus Corporate Bailouts Plus War Spending Equals Fiscal Irresponsibility

Republican Presidential candidates love to promise to lower taxes, but then, when a large bank or other corporation gets in trouble, they rush to the rescue with billions of dollars in taxpayer bailouts. Presumably, all these billions of dollars in taxpayer bailouts are reflected in raised taxes except in the never never land of government finance, no matter how much they spend on war and corporate bailouts, they never raise taxes to cover costs. They just borrow more money from foreigners like China and the Arabs who have accumulated huge amounts of dollars by selling us oil and cheap trinkets. The Soveriegn Wealth Funds (SWFs) of China and the United Arab Emirates step in to bail out the Sovereign Debt Fund otherwise known as the United States. China has a SWF of $200 billion; the UAE, $875 billion. Russia has a SWF of $33 billion. Heck, even Kazakhstan has one of $23 billion. All the US has is a National Debt Fund of $10 trillion. 

So what Republicans are really saying is 'I don't care if the government is fiscally irresponsible as long as they don't raise my taxes.' In a fiscally responsible world, a taxpayer bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, for instance, to mention just one of the recent bailouts, would cause taxes to go up to pay for the bailout which, presumably, by its very nature, was not included in the budget in the first place. If an unprovoked and futile war is undertaken, this would cause taxes to go up to pay for it. But instead they just borrow more money.

Now the Arabs and the Chinese may at some point get tired of buying Treasury notes - especially as they become more worthless - and decide to buy some prime New York City real estate like the Chrysler building instead. They can add this to the Helmsley Building and Essex House, some of their other real estate holdings in NYC. This, of course, is their right because they aren't confined to just buying Treasury notes and bills. Since we need them to finance the ever more bankrupt state governments as well as the Federal government, why not let them buy up our freeways and bridges as well? Let them install toll booths on our freeways and interstates to make their investments worthwhile. Hell, let them buy up all our infrastructure. The government has no problem with this. Republican taxpayers who want to keep their taxes low, have no problem with this. Bush has doubled the Federal debt during his term in office, but this is not a problem because he has enriched the wealthy and the large corporations in the process so it was all to the good.

Now Republicans who supposedly object to the government having the role of transferring money from rich to poor don't have a problem as long as the government is used as a tool to transfer money from poor to rich. They may say that on principal they want to keep their hard-earned money, but if the government uses their taxes to benefit a large corporation like ExxonMobil by giving them tax breaks and subsidies, Republicans don't have a problem with that. Just don't take any of their hard earned money and transfer it to some no good person on welfare who doesn't deserve it. ExxonMobil deserves it, but some homeless person doesn't deserve it. Citibank deserves it, but minimum wage earners don't deserve it. The military-industrial complex and the Pentagon deserve it. Average workaday folks need to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps like any red-blooded American and not expect the government to bail them out. Taxpayer bailouts are only for the rich. This is easy to see because only the rich can afford to hire lobbyists to set policy and write laws which are then ratified by Congress persons who have never read them. Because poor people cannot afford to hire lobbyists, they don't really deserve any transfer of hard earned tax payer money.

If you raised taxes on corporations they would simply move overseas like Halliburton did, so if you want them to stay here in the US you have to actually reduce taxes on them. In fact you have to give them inducements like free land to build on, tax breaks, let them pocket all sales taxes etc. In "Free Lunch: How the Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves at Government Expense (And Stick You with the Bill", David Johnston details how Cabela's sporting goods exacted $32 million in tribute from a local community in order for them not to go elsewhere when they built a humungus sporting goods store that put the local sporting goods emporium out of business. This $32 million was taken in the form of not having to pay any property tax and also pocketing the sales tax. That's how desperate the town fathers of Hamburg, Pennsylvania were to get Cabela's to build their store in their town. Of course Wal-Mart has been operating like this for years. Corporate socialism is OK; just don't try to have socialism for poor people. That's communism and we hate commies.

Sam Walton practiced corporate socialism. As much as he could, he put the public's money to work for his benefit. Free land, long-term leases at below-market rates, pocketing sales taxes, even getting workers trained at government expense were among the ways Wal-Mart took every dollar of welfare it could get. Walton had a particular fondness for government-sponsored industrial revenue bonds, which cost him less in interest charges than the corporate bonds the market economy uses to raise money.

Let free markets prevail! Only it's not really the free market when large corporations use their power to get the government to operate in their interests. It's not only commercial enterprises like Cabela's and Wal-Mart that get out of paying property taxes. Many years ago the military-industrial complex hit on the same idea. Rather than own large plants, they simply lease them back from the Federal government which isn't obliged to pay local property taxes. I wrote in the San Diego Free Press many years ago how General Dynamics pulled this off in San Diego thereby pulling the rug out from under school children who relied on local property taxes for good schools.

Now Republicans don't have any problem with this. They don't have a problem when the government transfers money from poor to rich as long as it doesn't raise their taxes. The old conservative strain of fiscal responsibilty is out the window. Fiscal responsibility would mandate that taxes be raised to fund things like wars and corporate bailouts. But the new conservatives would rather have their taxes lowered and the money borrowed from the Red Chinese and Wahabiist Arabs, not exactly our traditional allies. So I guess this is one aspect of conservatism that is outdated, fiscal responsibility that is. But in any event conservatives only want the government to help people that deserve it. That would be the rich and not the undeserving poor. They need to get up off their asses and go to work preferably at minimum wage. No wonder all the jobs are leaving the country or illegal immigrants have to come into the country to do them. Poor people are too lazy to do the work that needs to be done at a wage their employers can afford to pay. But, thank God the Indians and the Chinese will work for those wages, God bless 'em, and the Mexicans will risk death in the desert to come here and pick our strawberries and lettuce. Without their help lettuce would be $5 a head!

False Viral Email Attacking Obama Bites Cpt. Jeffrey S Porter In Ass

Isn't it wonderful when justice is done? A Utah National Guard member in Iraq started a viral email received by millions of people attacking Obama for snubbing US soldiers at Bagram Air Base on his recent trip to Iraq. Only problem - it wasn't true. As it turns out Cpt. Porter was not even at Bagram Air Base at the time of Obama's visit. Here's the trash from the mouth of Cpt. Porter:

As you know I am not a very political person. I just wanted to pass along that Senator Obama came to Bagram Afghanistan for about an hour on his visit to 'The War Zone'. I wanted to share with you what happened. He got off the plane and got into a bullet proof vehicle, got to the area to meet with the Major General (2 Star)who is the commander here at Bagram. As the Soldiers where lined up to shake his hand he blew them off and didn't say a word as he went into the conference room to meet the General. As he finished, the vehicles took him to the ClamShell (pretty much a big top tent that military personnel can play basketball or work out in with weights) so he could take his publicity pictures playing basketball. He again shunned the opportunity to talk to Soldiers to thank them for their service. So really he was just here to make a showing for the American's back home that he is their candidate for President. I think that if you are going to make an effort to come all the way over here you would thank those that are providing the freedom that they are providing for you. I swear we got more thanks from the NBA Basketball Players or the Dallas Cowboy Cheer leaders than from one of the Senators, who wants to be the President of the United States . I just don't understand how anyone would want him to be our Commander-and-Chief. It was almost that he was scared to be around those that provide the freedom for him and our great country. If this is blunt and to the point I am sorry but I wanted you all to know what kind of caliber of person he really is. What you see in the news is all fake. In service, CPT Jeffrey S. Porter Battle Captain TF Wasatch American Soldier

Now you would wonder why Cpt. Porter would send out this false and lying trash under his own name. Like the coward he is, he never meant to do so. Only problem was his family sent it to some friends under his own name and his name got out. Now Porter's attempt to besmirch Obama has come back to bite him in the ass and he deserves to be court-martialed. Now he's recanting!

This entire e-mail is a fake, an infamous libel against Barack Obama's good name. You see, Jeffrey S. Porter--a man who is obviously unfit to carry a commission in the armed forces of the United States, intended this false e-mail to be mass e-mailed anonymously so that Barack Obama would never get the opportunity to confront his false accuser. But Porter's wife made the mistake of forwarding the e-mail under his real name to friends and family, who soon forwarded it on to complete strangers. In only a few days, the e-mail was tracked back to Porter. When confronted by his superior officers, Porter admitted that the allegations he made in the e-mail were false. The Army Times has also refuted the story and Snopes has refuted it online.

Here's what Cpt. Jeffrey Porter is saying now. Read it and weep:

"I am writing this to ask that you delete my email and not forward it. After checking my sources, information that was put out in my email was wrong. This email was meant only for my family. Please respect my wishes and delete the email and if there are any blogs you have my email portrayed on I would ask if you would take it down too. Thanks for your understanding."

Thank you, you sorry piece of crap!

You know this is the kind of despicable crap that the McCain campaign uses to attack Democrats. The Swift Boating of Obama has begun right out of the box. Viral emails, lies and libels have been in the Karl Rove and Lee Atwater playbook for years. So you have an American electorate many of whom make their voting decisions based not on what the candidate stands for, not on which direction the candidate wants to take the country in, not even on what is in their own best interests, but who are sucked in by a bunch of lies and crap. Obama is a Muslim. Obama doesn't wear an American flag in his lapel. You know the people who perpetrate this kind of crap and who believe this kind of crap deserve what they get: a country in which only the very rich are served, a country based on lies and injustice, a nation of hypocrites, a country on the brink of third world status for the middle class, a country on the brink of a financial meltdown. The Republicans are a bunch of duplicitous liars who tout small government while turning government into an ever larger tool to serve the interests of the very wealthy. There are thousands of lobbyists in Washington whose job is to use government in the interests of wealthy corporations, not to reduce the size of government. The Pentagon budget is half a trillion dollars - larger than the combined military budgets of the rest of the world! Republicans don't want to reduce the size of government; they want to increase the size of the military-industrial complex. The only functions of government they want to decrease in size are the functions which serve the middle class and the poor, such things as guaranteeing a safe food supply, for instance.

McCain's campaign comes down to three slogans and a personal smear campaign on Obama. The three slogans: 1) drill for oil; 2) lower taxes and 3) win the war in Iraq. And then there is the Swift Boating of Obama by means of  viral email campaigns and attack TV ads. Obama better get smart and attack back or he's going to lose. A professorial, above the fray approach will not win the hearts and minds of the American people who in general will believe whatever bullshit is presented to them as long as it is hateful and derisive. The McCain campaign's goal is to demonize Obama just as they demonized Kerry, the Clintons, Al Gore, Dukakis, George McGovern, Hubert Humphrey, Adlai Stevenson and on and on. Now Adlai - there's a suspicious name for you. Sort of hints of unamericaness.

It amazes me how time after time the Republicans get all these suckers to vote against their own economic interests. I may be unemployed but, by God, I'm not voting for anyone that would deny me the right to have an arsenal in my garage, and by the way I'll use my arrsenal to blow away a bunch of liberals if I get frustrated and disgruntled enough. As McCain sloganeers and smear campaigns his road to the White House, with his phony "support our troops" rhetoric, Obama pontificates and sermonizes and ponders. Hillary would have attacked back. And that's the key. Expose the idiotic hypocrite McCain for what he is - a deceiver - who threw his first wife under the bus in order to advance his financial and political ambitions. And by the way Cindy McCain's beer company is now doing business with Fidel Castro. Whooooooo! McCain's wife is a commie. Oooooh!

And as for this Porter guy - brave American fighter for truth and justice - who started a libelous, viral email campaign attacking Obama, he deserves to be court-martialed and exposed for the fool he is. Now how about sending this blog post viral. I challenge the American public to make the truth viral - send this to all of their friends. Restore my faith in the American character. And Obama better get down in the trenches and realize that the campaign for the American Presidency is nothing more than a mud fight and whoever slings the most mud wins, unfortunately.