Motley Blog

Ron Sims is no Jefferson Smith, the lead character from the 1939 Capra movie, 'Mr. Smith goes to Washington'. Sims may well be the administrative/stimulus official to make sure that Obama does not repeat the mistakes of boomer era executives, for example, Norm Rice.

Sims is a real human being, and a pragmatic one, making, what he believes, are honest decisions about weighing practicality with ideals. How he handles his new authority to further advance the idealistic in King County, at this moment in time, will show whether he has succumbed to the temptations and corruption of power or will rise to the constitutional responsibilities of his federal position.

You work for your corrupt lawyer, not he, or she, for you.

Sure, you benefit, but only by agreeing to be a party to the corruption.

And you'd better darn well believe that the Republican Tarp and the Obama Stimulus is only going to benefit the corrupt. Obama is only president because the Chicago Bar has certified that he is someone who can be manipulated through standard PC 'Best Management Practices'.

It's a tough question, are you going to own up to your failures or are you going to sell your soul to the devil in order to NOT be a responsible adult?

Are you a businessperdon who isn't fit to be an assistant manager at a fast food joint? Are you a public servant whose ideas are nothing but a white sheet for your acts of hate against the American public?

Consider the case of Enron. Did any of those lawyers get held accountable? Not a one, and it should've been a lifetime disbarrment for senior counsel as well as jail.

Did we fix the problem? Damn well we didn't, we only repeated the same type of complicated scam throughout corporate and financial America.

And we may well be going to hell for our sins, if we don't send those responsible there damn quick.

I won't come down either way with Kerlikowske, I was pretty much leaving the City as he was coming on board. However, the reasons I left are germane to a measurement of the man and I do have strong concerns, especially considering the history of abuse associated with our local DC 'lobbyists'.

Like Ron Sims, Kerlikowske has also successfully negotiated the minefield of Seattle gender politics. The question though is, at what cost?

Today is the day traditional broadcast TV was supposed to end. Commenting on what was the finest broadcast civic programs, Meet the Press, since the sudden death of long time host Tim Russert seems salient.

Sure, MSNBC still has some thought provoking coverage, but it's not part of the strictly 'public' sphere, it;s paid cable. David Gregroy is just not up to the job - more glib and self-satisfied than Mark Lauer on what was once the best, politically practical, critical program in this country.

Is this the corporate future that Welch, married to a mergers and aquisitions attorney for most of his tenure as president, has in mind for us?

He should be ashamed. MTP was a quality organization and you couldn't keep up a tradition of independent journalism? I guess you, and yours, know best. Or at least you think you do.

I for one disagree. The running of our nation is everybody's business and it is the responsibility of the Press to insure we are all involved, and educated. You and your fellow NYC primadonna punks and your DC lobbyists either need to pay off the deficit and then leave.

You may well think you are better than everyone else, but all you have done is make yourself into no account gutter trash.

BTW, first hit on Google about 'Meet the Press' whose URL doesn't start with msn also doesn't like Gregory, but for different reasons.

Your City's baby boomer power couple's marriage is based not on love, but power. This is power based on hate that advances itself by putting others down, it is a marriage made not in love and heaven but in hell for profit at the expense of others.

Local couples include Judy and Jon Runstad, Barbara Linde and Greg Canova, and perhaps Mayor Nickels and his wife, though I'm not sure about that one.

Wisely the Washington State Legislature refused to fund Seattle's Mercer street redesign through a neighborhood largely controlled by former Microsoft executive Paul Allen (and his professonial staff).

Why, why in the world should we be spending stimulus money 'bailing out' Paul Allen?

New York City vs. Washington D.C.

Ten business days from now, April 5, Microsoft will be holding a virtual 'special' olympics on the servers of the MS network. (The 'real' event was originally founded by Eunice Kennedy Shriver, Schwarnegger's Mother In Law, on the proposal of a Chicago Educator)

**Please note - ridicule of this particular brand of abusive degenerate is not only allowed, but encouraged. Boos will suffice, but if you have personally had your life endangered by these individuals all restraints are removed, per the US Constitution.

I take offense at the New York City financiers and Washington D.C. regulators who cooked up the ripoffs of millions of investors and employees being portrayed as the best and the brightest. The fact that they now seek to continue their illegal activities via a ponzi scheme against my generation on the US Treasury is more than outrageous.

These folks may well have graduated in the upper portions of their Ivy League classes, but they have chosen to apply their intelligence to enrich themselves not by improving the world buy by stealing from it.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, nominated to replace Allen Greenspan during the reign of Bush's Treasury chief, Hank Paulson, made historical precedent in a first ever broadcast interview on 60 Minutes Sunday night.

He hit his marks in his interview and did bring a calm reassuring message to the airwaves. I, for one though, am sceptical.

Perhaps his speechifying is nothing but a defensive move, a la Dick Cheney, someone definitely on the outs in D.C. and 'in' when it comes to media appearances.

To me the central point concerns accountability for bailing out certain firms - a point Bernanke did make - that folks should be held accountable, once the crisis is past.

We have yet to see that. Most tellingly Bernanke completely avoided the question of Hank Paulson and any mention of his firm Goldman Sachs, the Haliburton of the financial world.

Bernanke also restated the need to bail out firms that were 'too big to fail'. Quick action was needed, but breaking up mega firms is very often easy to do. Consider, for example, AIG. The arm that was involved in the sub-prime mortgage scams was completely different from the relatively healthy insurance operations - why not split those up?

It may well be the case that we are in for a short term recovery. I, for one, don't believe we've solved the problem, we've merely taking out yet another loan, this time on the US Treasury as opposed to our personal houses.

It all needs to be paid back, and the price of failure is still failure.

No one is above that law - the only question is how many innocent folks will pay in order to avoid the pain?

And, Mr. Bernanke, are you going to hold Hank Paulson accountable, or not?

Since the 2000 election Ralph Nader's name has most often been discussed in the context of scapegoat for the defeat of Al Gore in 2000. Besides being factually wrong it also merits a historical updating in the context of the current financial crisis.

Perhaps Mr. Rader was right about Corporate America and the Dems being culpable in its crimes?

I, for one, think so. FWIW, I also voted for Al Gore in 2000.

I was also active in the first Nader campaign in 1996 - twas actually the person got to formally nominate him at the 'convention' in Gas Works park for Washington State.

My politics have become more independent since then - pretty much coincident with beling much less involved in the current electoral system in any fashion.

Though these days I might disagree with Nader his is a voice that deserves to be heard.

Now would be a good time.

If one reads between the lines on the barrage of media stories on a topic a very simple, evolving, story.

Perhaps the most important of these today is the foreclosure 'story' - many typical conservatives would have you believe that the whole financial crisis was the result of lower income households purchasing houses they couldn't afford via sub-prime programs that were completely legal and appropriate.

Obama's health care reform effort is laudable - as well as revealing of the structure of power in this Country. Unfortunately due the fiscal crisis and the recent bailouts of right and left, there is no money to do this - or, at least, financially prudent political will.

My long term brainstorm, now to repeat, is somewhat similar to the Wyden/Bennett proposal now being revitalized. I suggest requiring medical coverage for all drug useage, including alcohol.

Specifically, require that to purchase drugs an individual must be have medical insurance - include with this MD review of purchase history. This might seem burdensome but with today's technologies and barcodes on drivers licenses it is just a software fix - with a license that's already supposed to be out in front of the store scanner anyway, right?

This also opens up the possiblity of using marijuana revenues to fund health care, along with a re-structured alcohol taxing system.

And, yes, that does mean I'm saying the pot heads could do a better job with health care than either the Republicans or the Democrats - presumably with a healthy portion of former pot heads in the mix.

For what it is worth, I also support legalization of psychedelics, including Ecstasy, LSD, and Peyote - though use of these should be highly restricted - maybe only once a year, give or take.

By now the whole case of the arrest of Harvard African Studies Professor Henry Lois Gates should have blown over - if it even had ever risen at all to the level of national attention. But it has not, and this is telling. Most revealing was Harvard grad President Barack Obama initially calling arresting officer James Crowley "stupid".

As comedian and commentator Jon Stewart noted, perhaps it was Obama who was stupid - not to mention Prof. Gates himself.

If this were simply a matter of reverse racism without effect it would be easy to let this pass - that would be as appropriate as the dropping of charges against Mr. Gates by the Cambridge officials.

This case is not about race, but about class in America, it is about the elites of America calling anyone who dares to hold them to account "stupid" racists.

The sad fact is that the people who run this Country are smiley faced abusive alcoholics, the only difference between themselves and the stereotypical abusive trailer trash is the price of their booze, and the rest of their lifestyles - to you, me, and every honest, accountable American, born and unborn.

One thing for darn sure, the Cambridge PD understands this problem - and hopefully are setting an example for **every** officer in every department in this Country.

From January 11, 2009:

Harsh Reality in the Age of Obama, #1

Paul Krugman has a timely NYT column on deficit spending, and how it **might** be okay. (If it works!)

Krugman's right on the debt numbers, but besides the additional political hazards he mentions there may be others.

1. The U.S. Housing market has not yet, definitively, found its bottom. Foreclosures resulting from the meltdown of a year ago are just now hitting the pipeline. Home equity loans have been a source of money that has been used to 'stimulate' the economy for quite awhile now - in a period when America's relative economic competiveness is declining. This a borrowed money is not on the government books, but it definitely does effect the overall financial 'credit rating' of the United States.

2. Subsidizing housing (and commercial property!) values with the deficit is a downward feedback loop. Spending deficit money to prop up the equity of property owners will not work, long term.

3. Who are we bailing out? If we pour good money after bad supporting the very people and practices that created the problem in the first place at the expense of honest blue collar America we are subject to a spectrum of problems, of which the least may be political.

Senior United States Senators were admittedly being frightened by Junior Senator Barack Obama pretending to be United States President.

Leading the pack of screaming old white guys was Joe Lieberman, after this incitement by Rachel Maddow:

Meanwhile, in the real world:

(Seriously, perhaps it is time to get rid of Seniority rules in Congressional leadership - allowing us to, among other things, reward a moderate Republican who is willing to lead from the center instead of destroy from the status quo?)

Where's Lowell Weiker when you need him!

There has been much said about the recent five vote Supreme Court decision equating corporations with persons - including accusing the Five Supremes who voted in favor of this decision of treason.

The Constitution sets explicitly high and narrow standards for this crime, noticeably different from English statute and common law. However, for evidence, the Constitution only requires two witnesses.

George Will made an interesting observation on the ABC news program 'This Week' claiming "1/5th of Tea Party folks voted for Obama and 1/3 express support". I quoted this on Facebook and was promptly informed that Will is known to pull statistics out of his ass. As such, I decided to research further. That Facebook friend may well be right, and an analysis of the motivation for the apparent fiction is disturbing.

Here's the clip:

(commenters on the video repeat that question about Will's numbers, but Wikipedia does not.)

Even if this 'analysis' is completely false I do think it is safe to say that Independent Voters, who tilted strongly for Obama in the election, have largely lost favor with Obama. This would include myself, and I am certainly NOT a Palin/Tancredo tea bagger.

I am so proud of the American legal system. Why, without it, we'd be just another corrupt third world Country with the super rich and the very poor masses - with nothing to keep us all in line but reactionary right wing gangs roaming the countryside...

The stock market is plugging along, showing consistent gains - even while the total number of foreclosures go up (don't forget to count all the mortgages delayed in the name of 'mitigation') and so does unemployment (don't forget all the folks dropping off the 'official' statistic).

Sure, Goldman Sachs has a minor civil action against them, but if we hadn't bailed them out they'd be rightly bankrupt, not the new owner of a shattered economy - with a stock market buoyed by TARP bailout funds.

Do we have a Bull Market now, or just another taxpayer financed 'Pump and Dump' scheme waiting for the next round of Pension Fund and individuals to sucker up?

Bull Market? How about a Bull**Shit** Market?

The 2010 Washington State Legislative session has wrapped up - with both the Governor and the Legislature curiously 'closing' government to observing eyes - the results of which are already obvious. These are trying times, but hiding from accountability solves nothing and makes many things worse.

To a larger point, what does this say about our Democratic Party, which controls the Governor's Office as well as both legislative houses?

Does it say this generation of leadership are hypocritical failures only concerned with their personal 'entitlements'? Does it say Christine Gregoire and her many associates in the practice of Law are nothing but Corporate lackeys for the right wing?

Certainly, in Washington State AND Washington D.C., there is the same amount of freedom for an individual under a corporate controlled government as their would be under the government alone - and perhaps even less!

I've been considering the Rachel Maddow interview of Rand Paul over the last week considerably perhaps THE issue of the moment in these changing times. Here's the interview, what looks like a 'racist' ambush to me, if you missed it.

Maddow and Paul

Much of the media picked up on this particular meme very quickly, including the New York Times who quite deliberately misled readers about specifically what was said.

Most of what I've read has been very polarized, and I think missed the crucial issues. On my Facebook page I'm fortunate enough to have some great folks who come to those issues from each direction, but with an open mind. If you have the time to read this through I think you'll get a better sense of this particular zeitgeist issue than you'll get from anywhere else.

Tooley's Facebook Discussion about racism and Rand Paul

(Click through for my personal conclusions.)

Respect for difference of opinion is the foundation of the Constitution, and what is sorely missing in America these days.

Much of the freedom in historical America has been through having a Western Frontier which allowed for the practice of those values, even if they were violated regularly in the Eastern Cities, and pre-civil rights South.

Even though that freedom existed only for northern and western white males, it did exist and the progress it produced was real.

It is a sad historical fact that the fruit that was the civil rights movement of the 60's coincided with the partisan political divisiveness of the Vietnam War and the final days of the frontier in the west. That tragic coincidence continued through the end of the last chapter of the frontier, the completion of the the oil pipeline in Alaska in 1977 and the Corporatist takeover of the economy by Reagan 80's investment bankers and lawyers. (FWIW, the folks running our economy now were sniffing coke at Studio 54 and fostering an continuing alcohol dependency at the time.)

The key to the success of the Libertarian Party, and the future of America is more than just a good PR strategy to counter the likes of the Rachel Maddow attack on Rand Paul on his primary victory in Kentucky early this summer, on civil rights grounds - it is also the Parties ability to include the left - i.e. non-violent anarchists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism_and_violence).

Consider this, what if the white male business America had embraced racial diversity without the need for a civil rights act in 1964?

Running to the government to protect your business is every bit as much an entitlement failure as the so-called 'welfare state'. The hard fact is that if you believe in the free market you **must** be okay with the fact that one of your employees will, one day, out compete you.

Relying on the Judicial Branch of government to create a barrier for your employees to compete by de facto creating a Corporatist Caste system in America contains every evil of Socialism, and more - witness today's America.

One thing this non-violent, limited government, Constitutional Anarchist believes in is the separation of powers among the branches - removing all 'officers of the court' from the legislative and executive branches of government, in as speedy a fashion as practical.

Since the 60's the left has evolved the law to deal with discriminatory abuse - this is a good thing, but misapplied under the direction of the courts. The cycle of abuse is a dangerous thing - in a 21st Century context the American Constitution is designed to prevent exactly that in its protections of individual rights.

There is nothing wrong with determining a persons economic value to society **in part** through governmental decree, including judicial findings of abusive behavior.

It is a true tragedy that it is the abused who becomes the abuser, and in a broader context this is what has happened in America, in the partisan employment spheres of the private right and the public left - under the control of our legal system.

And make no mistake, those individuals that make up our legal system are not victims tragically recreating a cycle, they are fully intelligent humans that have made a conscious choice to abuse via third party for their profit, and sexual control freak.

It is a fact of life that we are not all equal, for the Constitution, and America, to continue to evolve, survive, and succeed, we must do this on merit - and for no other reason.

There are many in right wing America that are using the economic situation they created in failing to realize the competitive economic global environment they operate in to create legions of new members to a financially disenfranchised class. The fact is that it is exactly these people, and these people only - who deserve a government determination of degeneracy - the worst of them no better than a homeless level 3 sex predator.

The word 'nigger' manifests a historical shame in America, never mind the attempts of those that have bought the Tea Party to re-instill racial politics. It is a word we should perhaps not let die - it is a hard fact of life that the human race does produce scum - we just need to make sure it is done justly.

And FWIW, our current legal system can't even manage it's own responsibilities, let along those of the other branches of government AND the entire corporatist economy.

The legal profession has created a monolith - that monolith is most certainly NOT comprised soley of scum, if though led by it. It is however bankrupt - with the responsibility lying along a continuation in direct reverse proportion to position.

There are those that would make it a crime in America today to be poor. But responsibility goes with authority, not the other way around, and if you aren't able to bear the same, you shouldn't be in the game.

Got a problem with that, Nigger?

Dr. Ron Paul has his work cut out for him, attracting droves of the fanatic right wing. His mission here should be the same as it is with the rest of America, personal, individual, responsibility comes first.

Regardless of what the mainstream media tells you Dr. Paul is the real leader of the Tea Party, and one who is positively contributing to the civic dialogue. This October 9 speech to the Virginia Tea Party aptly demonstrates this.

In what now appears to be prophetic Ralph Nader penned a piece defining 'Corporate Socialism'. The article was originally published in 2002 in the Washington Post.

Here's an excerpt; point number one:

Consider the following assumptions of a capitalistic system:

1) Owners are supposed to control what they own. For a century, big business has split ownership (shareholders) from control, which is in the hands of the officers of the corporation and its rubber-stamp board of directors. Investors have been disenfranchised and told to sell their shares if they don't like the way management is running their business. Nowadays, with crooked accounting, inflated profits and self-dealing, it has proven difficult for even large investors to know the truth about their officious managers.

Here's the full text.

I was an active member of the Nader Campaign in 1996, about the same time as the more conservative local Seattle Commons issue - which some perceived as politically inconsistent. I would beg to disagree - and would hope that the best of the right and left would agree with above, and only the worst, disagree.

Having lived in Washington State for the past 25 years I've witnessed, from a distance, the emerging field of intellectual property rights law. (Curiously, this was coincident with the emergence of family law and the rise of women in the profession of legal practice.)

One particular critique I have of legal practice in this State is that the profession itself has taken control over the constitutional property rights of its citizenry, providing them and withholding them as it sees fit.

Do the public own the practice of the law or do they own us, our jobs, our families, and our individual souls? 'Span of Control'; analyzing who really controls what is a good tool to analyze this.

It is a rather curious fact that 'Law and Order' Republicans rely so much on court records to determine wages, all the more so in this intellectual information age. Is this socialism?

In a recent post analyzing some of the curious sexual politics behind the recent repeal of Ronald Reagan's policy of homosexual discrimination I touched on the desirability of avoiding all sexual politics in every workplace. Doing this would actually be the outcome of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' if it were literally enforced, and not merely a media spun euphemism for discrimination also attributed to Bill Clinton.

Consider, if you will, the sexual politics of those Clinton years - where the right wing disrupted the government and nearly overthrew it with nothing more than gossip about consensual sex - under the leadership of Southern History Professor Newt Gingrich as a newly anointed Speaker of the House.l

How is Ron Paul doing in Iowa, whose caucuses are scheduled for January 3rd, immediately after the upcoming holiday season? It looks like Paul may well be nudging out both Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney by a whisker.

Russia Today, an increasingly relevant source of global news claims Paul is winning, citing a study from Public Policy Polling, an organization I know nothing about.

I am aware that Glenn Beck has been pumping Newt Gingrich as of late, and this would explain Newt's recent surprise bump in the polls, a bump that now may be deflating.

Now leading the Republican pack in Iowa Ron Paul has become the focus of media scrutiny, most of which is focused on whether his anti-government approach equates to racism. Alex Jones summarizes these efforts nicely, and I, personally, am reminded of the Gingrich attacks against Bill Clinton in the 1990's.

As always attempting to stay one step ahead of the media machine Motley Tools asks, is Ron Paul anti-gay?

For the full story on this Sacha Baron Cohen (Borat) moment in the movie Bruno, see the full story here.

Seriously, I do believe this is an important subject for debate - and personally, I do believe that we need government involved in establishing basic protections such as in 'civil unions' - for everyone. Marriage should go further than these basic protections, but that is up to the couple themselves, and any church they choose, or choose not, to associate with...

Occupy Portland is establishing itself as one of the smartest, and effective, mass 'occupy' movements - take note of their protest strategy, as many others have done, including with over 15,000 shares on FaceBook. The basic idea here is not one of resistance, but of a fluid response - appropriate for this rain soaked pinnacle of Pacific Northwest ecological urbanism.

And this fluid 'Occupy' response is now going exactly where it should, to the Courts.

After all, we are constitutionally guaranteed recourse against our government, no?

There are those that are saying Chief Justice John Roberts decision was really a duplicitous conservative strategy - defeating the liberal legal commerce clause argument and galvanizing political support in opposition to Obama, but I disagree.

In a curious case the husband of University of Washington Swedish Studies Christine Ingebritsen prosecuted me, in 1994, in a case of striking political similarity to that of the current Julian Assange controversy. I was an employee of the same County at the time as the Prosecutor, involved, through my studies as a graduate student at the UW, in the distribution of government records as part of a neighborhood education effort.

Former Prosecutor Jim Rogers, now a King County Superior Court Judge (Seattle, Washington) and his wife, UW Jackson School Professor of Swedish Studies Christine Ingebritsen.

After many years of consideration, I've corresponded with Professor Ingebritsen about this conspiracy of abusive sexual politics, of which she is, possibly, an unwitting party. The letter is after the jump.

The leadership 'strategy' of the Republican corporate elite is much simpler than you might imagine, simply put all they do is send their Democratic abusers on anyone, including independents like moi, who does not toe their political line.

In such a case, you have two choices - either hate the Democrats and start toeing the Republican Party line OR become one of their abused Democratic Pit Bulls. Doing otherwise only guarantees you a spot in America's corporate concentration camp, the streets of our big cities.

The cycle of abuse, racial and sexual, is a dangerous thing and our Corporate masters have pandered to the degenerate in order to divide and conquer. Though they think they are building a military industrial **empire**, they are, in fact, nothing but "Uber-Perverts" and the font of evil in today's modern world. Not just failures, but f***ing failures.

Christian religion is based on Jewish attempts to fulfill an ancient prophesy, that a 'Son of David' would defeat the Roman Empire. It is time for the Christians to stop being hypocritical spinners and get that job done. FWIW, as far as I'm concerned, I'd be okay with crucifying the lot of them, from 'Herrod' on down. And it shouldn't be all that hard - though our military is by far the toughest in the world the domestic arm of the machine is really nothing but pitiful and disgusting.

Secretary of Defense designate Chuck Hagel (R) has recently come under attack from certain individuals, unnamed here, for being an 'anti-semite' because of constructive statements regarding Israeli behavior.

Though many have commented on the inappropriateness of this, I do not think they go far enough. This sort of whining defense of unjustified military actions is about the most despicable behavior possible in today's world. These 'politically correct' murderers should show some adult responsibility, take their right to bear arms in hand, and blow their own heads off.

Failing that, how about we do a common law/equal justice legal action citing the case law of the Military Industrial Empire's crucifixion of the Jew, Jesus, and all involved?

NPR recently reported that Congress, consisting specifically of the Senate and House of Representatives, has an approval rating of 9%, down, as I recall, from 11% - still ahead of root canals and pedophilia, but not a whole lot less.

Though our mass media has filled our minds with divisive partisan memes, the fact is that these hate filled, control freak, ravings are mentally sociopathic. The plurality of Americans is, to some degree, aware of this, but in our world controlled by a legal and corporate conspiracy there is, at this time, no rational recourse. Witness, if you will, the irrational recourse of random gun violence in America.

Civil rights of individuals are essential, no one will deny this; personally, I argue that they are very similar to one's sexual integrity - the violation of either civil or sexual rights, rape, are very comparable malicious acts.

Defending civil rights is a noble activity, but just like with sexual violence the victims of civil rights violations run a very high risk of becoming offenders themselves later in life.

This is what has happened in Washington State - to, I believe, the entire corporate body of the State itself, not to mention an increasing number of it's private members - corporate and individual.

Partisan politics, the legal profession, and leading members of the corporate leadership community, public and private, are responsible for this, in the final analysis. First among these are the former Attorney Generals Republican Rob McKenna and Democrat Christine Gregoire (a law school cohort of Ted Bundy) - not to mention the lawyer controlled Jack Abramoff conspiring Corporation, Microsoft and it's chief Counsel, Brad Smith - curiously selected by Washington D.C. refugee Jay Inslee to head his transition effort.

Like war in the Middle East, southern border violence has permeated the otherwise satiated and obese American mind. We have been presented a consistent set of perspectives, but is it really the truth?

Among the educated and still thinking citizenry criticism of American actions in the Middle East is well known, such as the moral hypocrisy of the state of Israel. Once the victims of a genocidal holocaust Israel has become the perpetrators of an identical atrocity against the Palestinian people.

In a recently released video the BBC's Arabic Desk, in conjunction with the Guardian website, details the counter-insurgency tactics of the US in Iraq. BBC and the Guardian allege a divide and conquer effort utilizing Shia militias to battle Sunni resistors, utilizing specialized strategies and personnel developed in El Salvador and Vietnam, including the infamous 'Death Squads'

My question for you: Is the American Military, and whomever actually controls it, is engaging in an ongoing relationship with the Drug Cartels of Mexico creating a holocaust zone of genocidal death on both sides of the US border?

TED, and PBS, have chosen Bill Gates as their lead speaker in the premiere of the video broadcast version of the iconic Technology, Education, and Design lecture series.

Having Bill Gates talk about education is like having Ted Bundy talk about women's rights, the prognosticators only revealing the core of their evil. Education for Bill Gates is like his company, not meant to empower creative individuals but to build monoliths of bureaucratic automatons.

President Barack Obama, like every person and every corporate person/government hybrid was not 'too big to fail'. Like all of Washington D.C. and its lobbyist represented corporate collaborators he, at best, did in fact fail.

Still, as the first partially black president he has much to be proud of, even if he did reduce the civil rights of his constituency and the world more so than he advanced those of african descent.

Although many who will help to realize this failure are quite racist the ironic fact is that Obama's failures do not stem from his black half, they come from his white half. Frankly, and rhetorically, his failure comes from his white female 'Hilary' half.

Recent developments in the University of Virginia http:// http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/u-va-fraternity-to-rebut-claims-of-gang-rape-in-rolling-stone/2014/12/05/5fa5f7d2-7c91-11e4-84d4-7c896b90abdc_story.html?postshare=221417802737104rape story are very disturbing.

Perhaps most disturbing is http:// http://www.npr.org/2014/12/08/369402100/fallout-from-rolling-stone-story-changes-conversation-at-uva NPR's coverage, lead by the 'tag-team' of Audie Cornish and Jennifer Ludden which, upon the discovery of these facts decry not the false allegations, but on continuing unsubstantiated hate mongering about college rape.

As they say, rape is not about sex, but about power, control, and violence. I submit, dear reader, an alternative theory for this case - the 'rapists' in this case are NPR, Rolling Stone, and the Hillary white female lawyer establishment, including Obama's DOJ.

Certainly, the blacks of Ferguson, MO are being, in this sense, raped by their police force. Perhaps this has even been a core element of 'policing' under Judeo-Roman law ever since Christ?

The Profiteers
Bechtel and the Men Who Built the World

By Sally Denton

2016

The Reagan era history is just now being compiled and 'The Profiteers' by Sally Dentonis a solid contribution into the emerging canon of the period. The 'Shock Doctrine' by Naomi Klein and 'Subersives' by Seth Rosenfeld among others outline the international and domestic control strategies of these modern masters. The privately held Bechtel corporate 'person' is first among these oligarchs and their corporate socialist no bid construction business did, in fact, build the world from their American West roots.

I have been attending the documentary film festival, Mountainfilm, in Telluride, Colorado and have watched the premieres of two films that portray different products of the Iraq war - 'The Age of Consequences' on global warming and 'Almost Sunrise' on the damage done to our veterans in a war that is perceived by many to be unjust. Both films are resonating strongly with me, each upon its own merits; all the more so in their synergy.

Almost Sunrise

Directed by Michael Collins

Starring Tom Voss and Anthony Anderson

2016

Almost Sunrise tells the deeply personal story of Tom and Anthony, two Iraq veterans damaged by the unjust Iraq War and their journey to healing via a cross country trek. The film advances the diagnosis of 'Moral Injury' and alternative treatments as opposed to the current VA based medication paradigm. Almost Sunrise is both a challenging critique of the Iraq war and an effective salve for its injuries - not the least of which is the community which it is inspiring.

The Age of Consequences

Directed by Jared P. Scott

2016

The Age of Consequences is not your typical global warming documentary, presenting the under publicized analyses of the military on the subject in an easily accessible and thorough risk analysis framework. The summary conclusion comparing the dangers of global warming to full blown nuclear war is one of the big take away's and the positive economic benefits of restructuring our energy system into alternative methods another. The hiring of vets to do this work is also crucial

I personally would extend this climate change analysis to a critique of our Middle East policy since George H.W. Bush - we have spent trillions of dollars defending strategic oil interests whose continued consumption is the biggest threat to the entire world's public safety - not to mention destroying thousands upon thousands of human lives.

The Parties versus the People

How to Turn Republicans and Democrats into Americans

By Mickey Edwards

2012

Mickey Edwards spent 16 years in congress starting with the Reagan years and in leadership during the Gingrich takeover led by many Reagan era College Republicans. In this book he analyzes the crisis level problems of partisan politics and proposes detailed solutions in a compact and easily readable tome. My only critique would be his omission of the legal profession in the partisan context, including the large numbers of that profession occupying our national legislature.

Political parties are not inherently bad - citizens of common disposition will naturally seek each other out and combine to seek out agreed-upon ends. But when the pursuit of party power becomes the end goal and not merely a tool for achieving a better society, it is democracy itself which is laid beneath the guillotine's blade.

I've never met the Trump Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch, but I have been before the Federal Tenth Court of Appeals on three separate occasions. The Court - based in Denver and serving Colorado, Wyoming, Kansas, Oklahoma, Utah, and New Mexico - is a strange hybrid of bi-partisan western progressiveness and more conservative practices. I've only been in the State of Colorado for 6 years now, but it appears that the conservative influences come from the neighboring state of Texas and its oil and gas money. The State Governor, Democrat John Hickenlooper, a former oil and gas engineer, evidences this influence.

The most significant of my appearances before this body dealt with a post foreclosure crisis camping ticket which violated my constitutional rights, and, equally, was used to justify the confiscation of my personal property maliciously and without due process. This property right precedent is important.