IACWE started almost 2 years ago and it has been a fun time.  We’ve grown to amass a fairly sizable audience filled with diverse ideas etc.  We started our website about a year ago because it’s easier to put our full thoughts out on a webpage and we made a few $’s via advertising.

We’re doing better than we could have ever hoped to do and we continue to grow; our viewership continues to be strong.  Unfortunately (or fortunately) my full time job has put me in a position where I won’t be able to maintain both the website, the FB page and the full time job.  Some recent changes at my job are going to require more of my time and time is something I don’t have much of.

So – you’ll see us continue to share stories on FB.  We won’t likely be writing anything on our website very often.  It’s possible that could change but if it does – it will be few and far between at least for the near term.  Who knows what the future holds.

So – check us our on Facebook if you want to read the stories that we think matter.

You an see the full page ad in PDF form HERE.

US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation and Jewish Voice for Peace have paid for a full page ad in Roll Call newspaper which is read by the 20,000 Capital Hill staffers and elected officials who work in Congress on a daily basis.  Up till now – President Obama has seen friction with Israel Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu but has always supported Israel despite the continued problems this causes our country.  I’m one of the people who will proudly say that I have President Obama’s back when it comes to supporting cuts in foreign aid spending to Israel (and most other countries for that matter).

There is a growing movement in America to turn our backs on Israel for its war crimes.  Like America – Israel has a very loud, strong left political movement although that movement is in the minority presently.  What Israel is going through is akin to what Democrats had to live under when George W. Bush was president; many Americans grew tiresome of the hawkish stance and perpetual war of the Bush administration.  In Israel – there are many who are calling for peace with Palestine.

Up till now – America continues to hold Israel’s water in nearly ever regard.  American taxpayers subsidize their Apartheid state and continued occupation of Palestinian lands.  But despite the support for Israel as an idea or as a country … many liberal American Jews (like myself) have been appalled with the Netanyahu administration in Israel.  He is a tyrant on par and just recently suffered an embarrassing setback in elections that showed him still likely maintaining his position as Prime Minister but with a very fragile coalition.

You can sign our petition HERE to stop the $3 billion a year that American taxpayers send to Israel every year.  There is no reason that Americans should have to be choosing between cutting Medicare and Social Security while we continue to give money to a country that is already advanced and fully capable of doing things on their own without American charity.

From their press release HERE:

Washington, D.C. (January 22)–The US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation and Jewish Voice for Peace announced that they are running a full-page ad in today’s special presidential inauguration edition of the influential Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call, which is distributed to nearly 20,000 Capitol Hill staffers and elected officials.

The ad calls on President Obama to hold Israel, which receives more than $3 billion per year in military aid from the United States, accountable to U.S. law. The Arms Export Control Act limits the use of U.S. weapons to “internal security” or “legitimate self-defense.” The Foreign Assistance Act explicitly bans military aid from being sent to any government that engages in a “consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights.”

Citing Israel’s well-documented track record of human rights abuses against Palestinians, the ad asks President Obama to heed the urgent call of 15 major Protestant church leaders; a delegation of  civil rights leaders, some of whom worked closely with Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.; 60,000 supporters of Jewish Voice for Peace and another 20,000 supporters of the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation— all of whom who have asked President Obama to hold Israel accountable to U.S. and international law.

According to Josh Ruebner, National Advocacy Director of the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, “With the onset of President Obama’s second term and the anticipated re-election of Benjamin Netanyahu as Israeli prime minister, the United States must embark on a bold departure in its policies to bring about a just and lasting Israeli-Palestinian peace. First and foremost, this means holding Israel accountable for misusing U.S. weapons to commit systematic human rights abuses of Palestinians. Morally and financially, the United States cannot afford to be complicit in Israel’s ongoing oppression of the Palestinian people.”

Cecilie Surasky, Jewish Voice for Peace Deputy Director stated: “Despite the right-wing Israel Lobby’s efforts to scare Jewish voters, American Jews yet again voted in overwhelming numbers to send Barack Obama to the White House. Polls show there’s more room than ever for Obama to take a strong stand on U.S. aid, and on settlements.  If President Obama goes there, we’ll be ready to back him up. The Israel Lobby just doesn’t represent most American Jews—they represent the increasingly right-wing interests of an Israeli government seemingly bent on self-destruction.”

US Campaign is a national coalition of nearly 400 organizations working to end U.S. support for Israel’s 45-year military occupation of the Palestinian West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip, and to change U.S. policy toward Israel and the Palestinians to support human rights, international law and equality.

http://www.endtheoccupation.org 

Jewish Voice for Peace is a national grassroots peace organization dedicated to promoting a U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East based on peace, democracy, human rights and respect for international law. JVP has offices in NY and CA, over 125,000 supporters, 35 chapters, a Rabbi’s Council, and a youth branch called Young, Jewish and Proud.

http://jewishvoiceforpeace.org/

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton got testy on Capitol Hill Wednesday in response to a query from Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), who called into question her department’s accounting of the Sept. 11, 2012, attack in Benghazi, Libya.

Facing expected scrutiny from Republicans during her testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Clinton appeared to take exception to Johnson’s pointed inquiry into the State Department’s initial report that the attack had been mounted spontaneously as a reaction to an anti-Islam YouTube video.

When Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) asked Clinton why she didn’t make “a simple phone call” to the evacuees to find out, the Secretary of State shot back: “With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans!” she said, “What difference does it make?”:

JOHNSON: Madam Secretary, do you disagree that a simple phone call to those evacuees to determined what happened would have ascertained immediately there was no protest? That was a piece of information that could have been easily, easily obtained. within hours if not days.

CLINTON: Senator, you know, when you’re in these positions, the last thing you want to do is interfere with any other process.

JOHNSON: I realize that. I realize it’s a good excuse.

CLINTON: No it’s a fact. [...]

JOHNSON: Again, we were mislead there was supposedly protests and something spraying out of that, assault spraying out of that. That was easily ascertained that was not the fact and the american people could have known that within days and didn’t know that.

CLINTON: With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans! Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night decided to go kill some Americans?! What difference at this point does it make?! It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again.

Watch the clip:

From what I saw, Hillary Clinton sailed through the hearing without the conservative/Republican/Tea Party so much as laying a glove on her.  Thank you to the GOP for giving the American people the answers they need about Hillary Clinton. Now we are absolutely sure we want her to be the next President of the United States.  She is awesome!

“While nearly a billion people go hungry, Goldman Sachs bankers are feeding their own bonuses by betting on the price of food. Financial speculation is fuelling food price spikes and Goldman Sachs is the No 1 culprit.”
~Christine Haigh, World Development Movement 

Some will point to ever increasing food costs as their proof of inflation caused by an expansionary monetary policy by the Federal Reserve, but that’s not true.  Food costs and other must have commodities are being manipulated by Wall Street so that every time you buy a loaf of bread – you’re funding the bankers.  Every time you buy tortillas – you’re giving pennies at a time to bankers.  Goldman Sachs has invested $44 TRILLION into derivatives (source) with an unknown amount of that being funneled directly into commodities.  They’re cornering the market to make sure they extract their pound of flesh.  Worse yet – they’ve sued the Obama administration for implementing regulations that would limit how banks can manipulate food prices.  The courts ruled on behalf of the banks and against the Obama administration.

It’s time to repeal the Commodities Futures Modernization Act – as we shared HERE; this would not only make the banking system safer … it would also prevent these banks from manipulating commodities prices.  We have reached a point where the investments of capital are not necessarily a benefit to the greater good; in this case – this is a zero-sum game.  Either banks win or consumers win; there is no win-win here.  Someone get the torches or bring out the guillotines; it’s time to create a new framework that gives special preference to how we deal with these bankers under law.  My preferred solution is not to the benefit of the bankers; like I said – it’s a zero-sum game.

The Telegraph explains HERE:

Goldman made about $400m (£251m) in 2012 from investing its clients’ money in a range of “soft commodities”, from wheat and maize to coffee and sugar, according to an analysis for The Independent by the World Development Movement (WDM).

This contributed to the 68 per cent jump in profits for 2012 Goldman announced last week, allowing it to push up the average pay and bonus package of its bankers to £250,000.

The extent of Goldman’s food speculation can be revealed after the UN warned that the world could face a major hunger crisis in 2013, after failed harvests in the US and Ukraine. Food prices surged last summer, with cereal prices hitting a record high in September.

Finance Watch puts a very compelling case together showing how speculation on commodities continues to push prices up further and further HERE:

Despite acknowledgement by investment firms themselves (see quotes below) and conclusions from independent academic research, some industry members and trade associations deny that commodity derivatives markets can affect the price of physical commodities.

They claim that the price of commodities is only driven by supply and demand fundamentals. While there is no denying that there is a long-term, gradual increase of commodities prices due to supply and demand fundamentals, the current speed of such increase and price volatility is simply not linked to those fundamentals, as shown by the following chart.

Now the Dodd-Frank Act passed despite Republican opposition actually placed limits on how much banks can speculate on prices for 28 different commodities.  The Commodity Futures Trading Commission whose chairman Gary Ginsler worked for Goldman Sachs for 18 years pushed through new rules to create limits on how much banks can speculate on commodities despite tremendous bank lobbying.  The banks weren’t happy with the new rules so they sued the government in court.  The federal court sided with the banks.  Reuters explains more HERE:

U.S. District Court Judge Robert Wilkins threw out the tough new rules last month, saying the CFTC needed to prove the curbs were necessary to rein in excessive speculation.

It was a major setback for regulators struggling to implement the sweeping reforms enacted after the 2007-2009 financial crisis and the first for any CFTC rule in the agency’s history.

“Congress mandated us to do this,” Gensler told reporters at a derivatives conference on Wednesday. “I’m looking with my fellow commissioners and the lawyers at all of our options of appeal and potentially, you know, writing new rules and things like that.”

Gensler said it is up to the commission to decide whether to appeal the ruling, but that he would support such a move.

No one knows if the CFTC will appeal this ruling or not.  We recently wrote about a new rule that the SEC agreed to regarding new commodity trading rules that completely screw consumers in favor of the banks HERE:

Copper is a commodity, a finite resource that has a fairly short term supply over the next couple of decades.  There is a fierce global competition for this commodity but the SEC just approved the first exchange traded fund of its kind in the U.S.  J.P. Morgan and Blackrock just received approval to start a copper ETF that will allow speculators to bid on the price of copper; the big difference here is that both of these funds will purchase and warehouse up to 183,000 tons of copper.  Giving investment banks the ability to actually control the real supply of precious metals will lead to one thing – higher prices for consumers across the board.  The SEC just screwed Americans here.

You can read about how Goldman Sachs started profiting off of commodities HERE.  Foreign Policy gives a must read on how Goldman Sachs “created the food crisis” manipulating food markets HERE:

The money tells the story. Since the bursting of the tech bubble in 2000, there has been a 50-fold increase in dollars invested in commodity index funds. To put the phenomenon in real terms: In 2003, the commodities futures market still totaled a sleepy $13 billion. But when the global financial crisis sent investors running scared in early 2008, and as dollars, pounds, and euros evaded investor confidence, commodities — including food — seemed like the last, best place for hedge, pension, and sovereign wealth funds to park their cash. “You had people who had no clue what commodities were all about suddenly buying commodities,” an analyst from the United States Department of Agriculture told me. In the first 55 days of 2008, speculators poured $55 billion into commodity markets, and by July, $318 billion was roiling the markets. Food inflation has remained steady since.

You can find a good explanation and chart to highlight the continued manipulation of food prices HERE:

The rapid serial escalation in prices (starting around April to May 2007 and finishing in February 2008) followed by a serial plunge in prices is a classic sign that commodity price manipulation is occurring.

There is a long list of accusations that Goldman Sachs and other banks are manipulating commodities prices.  For example – Coca Cola accused Goldman Sachs of manipulating prices for aluminum in 2011 HERE:

In recent years, Goldman, among other Wall Street firms, has been in the business of purchasing metals warehouses, according to the WSJ, Goldman’s Detroit warehouse alone holding nearly one-third of the 4.62 million tons in LME-approved warehouses. Now, the London Metal Exchange is investigating Goldman after the investment bank was accused by firms, including Coca-Cola, of purposefully limiting the amount of metals it released to customers.

Coca-Cola, which relies on metals such as aluminum, is reportedly upset with what it views as artificial price inflation. “The situation has been organised artificially to drive premiums up,” Dave Smith, Coca-Cola’s strategic procurement manager told the Wall Street Journal.

Zero Hedge says Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan are manipulating commodities prices through warehousing materials HERE:

The primary driver of this anti-competitive behavior is the fact that GS, JPM and Glencore now control virtually the entire inventory bottlenecking pathways: “In recent years, major investment banks like Goldman and J.P. Morgan and commodities houses like Glencore have been snapping up warehouses around the world, turning the industry from a disperse grouping of independent operators into another arm of Wall Street. The LME has licensed about 600 warehouses around the world.

The transformation has raised questions about whether the investment banks, which also have big commodity-trading arms, are able to use their position as owners of warehouses to manipulate prices to their advantage.“And since the outcome of this anti-competitive delayed tolling collusion ends up having quite an inflationary impact on end prices, the respective administrations are more than happy to turn a blind eye to this market dominant behavior which buffers the impact of deflation on input costs. We may have seen the end of the OPEC cartel.  Alas, it has been replaced with a far more vicious one – this one having Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan as its two key members.

“If you strip out the stimulus, discretionary spending over the last few years has been quite modest and is scheduled to go to levels we haven’t experienced in modern times.”
~Robert Reischauer, a former director of the CBO

Trying to explain the federal deficit to conservatives is a challenge; very few people actually understand the federal budget and where the money is being spent.  So – conservatives struggle to comprehend how a $1 trillion deficit can occur without a splurge of liberal tax and spend policies; after all – Fox News said so.  But alas their elephant sized brains can’t grasp it because so few know the actual data.  This is an issue on the liberal side too, but liberals aren’t the ones calling for impeachment because of the deficit (source).   So – let’s talk FACTS.  The fact is that government spending over the past 3 years has increased at the slowest pace since President Eisenhower in the 50′s.

The chart above shows the deficit as a % of GDP.  Notice how the deficit starts to drop around 92′ and continues to 2001; the deficit continues to increase until 2010 and has dropped to its lowest level since 2008 as a % of GDP.  By the way – this slowdown in government spending in addition to the cuts in state level spending are producing an enormous drag on our economy.  That’s significant because until we get to full employment it is going to be very difficult to address the deficit issue.  The faster we do that – the faster we solve the deficit problem; the longer it takes us – the more it costs the country.

Bloomberg News speaks the truth on the deficit HERE:

Federal outlays over the past three years grew at their slowest pace since 1953-56, when Dwight D. Eisenhower was president. Expenditures as a share of the economy sank last year to 22.8 percent, their lowest level since 2008, according to Congressional Budget Office data. That’s down from 24.1 percent in 2011 and a 64-year high of 25.2 percent in 2009, when Obama pushed through an $831 billion stimulus package.

“If you strip out the stimulus, discretionary spending over the last few years has been quite modest and is scheduled to go to levels we haven’t experienced in modern times,” Robert Reischauer, a former director of the CBO, said in an interview. “Obama signed on to that,” partly in response to Republican pressure.

The slowdown in government spending has helped bring down the budget deficit, especially when measured against the size of the economy. The shortfall fell to $1.1 trillion, or 7 percent of gross domestic product, in the 2012 fiscal year ended Sept. 30, from $1.3 trillion, or 8.7 percent of GDP in 2011. In fiscal 2009, it was $1.4 trillion, or 10.1 percent of the economy, the highestsince World War II.

The deficit probably will fall to $500 billion, or just below 3 percent of GDP, by 2015, as businesses and consumers step up their spending after bringing their own debts down, said Jan Hatzius, chief economist at Goldman Sachs Group Inc. The improving economy will increase tax receipts while lowering government expenditures for benefits including food stamps and unemployment compensation.

Paul Krugman explains the graph above HERE:

What you see is not a sustained upward trend: there’s actually a considerable fall during the Clinton years, reflecting in part falling defense spending, then a more modest rise in the Bush years, mainly reflecting spending on the War on Terror (TM), and finally a temporary surge associated with the financial crisis — but much of that surge has already been reversed.

Now, there’s still stuff out there that will, under current law, lead to rising spending: mainly an aging population plus rising health care costs. And some of that is already affecting spending trends. But the idea that we’ve had some kind of spending surge, and that current deficits reflect that surge, is just wrong, and distorts public discussion.

President Obama has already laid the groundwork for the deficit issues; as we have written HERE - the debt issue is actually already “mostly solved”.  The simple answer in all of this is that we can address the long term deficit problems relatively easily now that President Obama has raised taxes on the wealthiest Americans and corporations.  There will still need to be some cuts but they are manageable and can be achieved in conjunction with increasing revenue by tax reform as Democrats are planning.  Despite what Republicans are yelling to the moon – it is not necessary to cut benefits for seniors on Medicare or Social Security in order to address our deficit issues.

Republicans have two years – or less – to turn away from becoming America’s Christian Confederate Party. They can continue on the course of strict reliance on Christian fundamentalist conservatives with all the baggage that brings: homophobia, racism, subjugating women, opposing public secular education, fear and hatred of science, the endless mobius loopiness of 14th Century ideology and superstition. If they fail – and I think they will – they are likely to take their place as a permanent minority party.

It’s hard to get 70 percent of Americans to agree on much of anything these days. But, for the first time, one of those things is Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.

According to a new poll from NBC News and the Wall Street Journal, released on the law’s 40th anniversary Tuesday, fully seven in 10 Americans say they would oppose the overturning of the Supreme Court decision. And perhaps more remarkably, 57 percent say they “feel strongly” that it should not be overturned…

The poll also shows for the first time that a majority of Americans (54 percent) support abortion rights. And a new Pew Research Center poll largely confirms those findings, showing 63 percent of Americans oppose overturning Roe, while 29 percent would like to see it scrapped. Even Republicans are split down the middle, with 48 percent opposed to overturning Roe and 46 percent who support overturning it…

The trend line is clear: Americans are becoming more accepting of abortion rights…

As they are with issues like gay marriage and illegal immigration, though, Republicans are now caught between their base and the general public.

While much of the GOP base remains firmly anti-abortion rights and those most passionate conservatives would like to see Roe overturned, Republicans need to recognize more broadly that overturning Roe is no longer sound politics.

What’s more, the party has already begun to lose ground on issues concerning women’s rights. Over the last two years, Republicans have struggled with issues like contraception, rape and “transvaginal ultrasounds” — so much so that a pollster at last weekend’s Republican retreat went so far as to urge lawmakers to stop talking about rape altogether.

Abortion isn’t as fraught an issue as the ones listed above, but it’s still a wedge issue that is increasingly working against the GOP and risks turning off female voters, who stuck by President Obama more than a lot of other demographics in 2012.

 ”If you add up all the federal and you look at the disability and the unemployment and the Social Security and the state, my tax rate’s 62, 63 percent.  So I’ve got to make some decisions on what I’m going to do.”
~Golfer Phil Mickelson, 7th highest paid athlete in the world

I always find it odd when rich folks start to claim they pay an exorbitant rate of taxation.  In a flash – I have a brief image of myself ducktaping their mouths and then presenting them with the Zero Dark Thirty treatment … ya know – giving them the business.  Then reality sets in and my rational self takes control and I feel a mixture of resentment and anger at how fucking obtuse these folks are.  First off – Phil Mickelson isn’t paying 62% in taxes; that’s totally bogus.  Even if his accountant sucks – his total tax bill is around 50% on nearly $50 million a year in income.  So Mr. Mickelson is now complaining that only leaves him with $25 million a year; I guess he is going to have “to make some decisions” on what he’s going to do.  We’re going to be starting a charity drive for him soon; stay tuned.

Tough life; how the hell is this guy going to make it.  And does anyone really believe his tax rate is going to alter his decision to play golf?  No.  It won’t.  And if it did – someone else would fill the void.  One of the great parts about capitalism is that there is ALWAYS someone else ready to take over.

Yahoo News has the story on Mr. Mickelson’s comments HERE:

He acknowledged that he could end up leaving his home state of California. And he further agreed that the financial issues were the reason why he pulled out of an ownership team that purchased the San Diego Padres back in August.

“There are going to be some drastic changes for me because I happen to be in that zone that has been targeted both federally and by the state and, you know, it doesn’t work for me right now,” he said. “So I’m going to have to make some changes.”

As with everything in politics, there are (at least) two ways to look at this issue. On one hand, Mickelson is one of the highest-paid athletes in sports, with earnings from tournaments and sponsorship in excess of $40 million per year. Even at 63 percent taxation, that’s probably still enough to scrape by. On the other hand, why should Mickelson have to give up almost two-thirds (or whatever the final figure may be) of his income, whatever that income may be?

Although – if you read the Yahoo article … he later apologizes for making these statements publicly which I give him Kudos for.

I love this article from Forbes entitled “Phil Mickelson, Stop Whining and Give Thanks for your Good Fortune”; an excerpt HERE:

My first reaction is that Phil should talk to his accountant because his effective tax rate is surely lower than 60 percent.  The fiscal cliff deal raised his marginal income tax rate to 39.6% (assuming he’s in the top bracket).  The phase-out of itemized deductions will add about 1.2% and he will also have to pay a combined Medicare tax rate of 3.8% (the regular 2.9% for self-employed people plus the new 0.9% surtax enacted to help finance the Affordable Care Act).  According to the New York Times article, Mickelson will also owe 13.3% in California state income taxes because he’s in the new millionaire bracket.  That adds up to 57.9%, but state income taxes and 1.45% of the payroll tax are deductible from federal income tax, so that reduces their net cost by 5.8% (39.6% of 14.75%).  In net, Mickelson will owe about 52% of his marginal earning in federal and state taxes.

But suppose Mickelson’s upper estimate on his tax bill–63%–were right. Is he saying that a $10 million endorsement deal wouldn’t be worth doing if he only got to keep $3.7 million after tax? Really? Mr. Mickelson, do you understand that the typical American would have to work about 75 years to earn that much money before tax?

Sir, you get paid astonishing amounts of money for playing golf–directly through the purses you win at tournaments and indirectly through all the endorsement deals that come with golf success.  According to Forbes, you are the seventh highest paid athlete in the world, with $4.8 million in salary and winnings and $43 million in endorsements?

And I think Forbes is highly conservative in their math here.  But Professor Burman is an expert on this and I’ll just leave let his math stand.  Basically Mickelson will have to pay half of his income in taxes to the government.  Boohoo.  Mr. Mickelson and other conservatives need to understand the difference between the marginal tax rate and the effective tax rate.  Anyone who doesn’t know the difference should google it.

Mr. Mickelson actually WORKS and has an income that he pays at the highest effective tax rate, but many wealthy people make their money off of capital gains.  Capital gains taxes for people making more than $250k a year has now increased from 15% to 20% as part of the fiscal cliff deal that Obama negotiated.  That was necessary and shows the significant gap between actors and athletes and doctors and lawyers who make lots of money but pay a larger % when compared to the money movers … the capital class like Mitt Romney and Warren Buffett.  In 2010  -Warren Buffett’s effective federal income tax rate was only 11%.  ELEVEN PERCENT.  So within the world of the 1% – there is still a big gap between who pays what.

Forbes has that story HERE:

Warren Buffett has now released a few more details about his 2010 tax bill which show he paid just 11.06% of his adjusted gross income in federal income taxes last year—considerably less than the rate for the 400 highest income taxpayers, or for folks earning $100,000 to $200,000 a year.

According to a letter Buffett sent to Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kansas) that the Congressman posted here, the billionaire had adjusted gross income in 2010 of $62,855,038, taxable income of $39,814,784, and a federal income tax bill of$6,923,494. That makes his effective tax rate, as a percentage of AGI, just  11.06%, compared to an average effective rate in 2008 (the most recent year available) of 18.1% of AGI for the 400 taxpayers with the largest incomes, according to figures reported by the Internal Revenue Service.  (Huelskamp has echoedThe Wall Street Journal editorial page’s demand that Buffett release his full return—a step Buffett says he’ll happily take when Rupert Murdoch, chairman and CEO  of  WSJ owner News Corp.,  releases his tax return too.)

And that’s why you’re about to see a discussion take place about “tax reform” to ensure that people like Warren Buffett and Mitt Romney end up paying what Mickelson pays.  Republicans are against that; we’ll see how that debate takes place and what leverage President Obama can exert here.

In Pennsylvania, one local Republican Committee head has chosen to express his discontent with President Obama‘s reelection and second inauguration in a very public, and some would say controversial, way. Brent Kovac, leader of the local Republican Party chapter, hung an American flag upside down during the inauguration ceremony yesterday. The symbol usually indicates distress by soldiers in times of war. Now, Kovac is facing backlash from the community.

The news station says it spoke with many people who saw the flag, and a lot of them said they didn’t believe the statement was appropriate.

Kovac spoke to local TV news station WPXI:

Channel 11′s Julie Fine talked to the man behind the flag. He said that he doesn’t “regret it at all” because “our nation is in a horrible place.”

I think some people that didn’t know why the flag was flying upside down might find out, and some people that didn’t agree with it might’ve talked to some people who agreed with it.

Since Obama was reelected in November, upside down flags have become a favorite of far-right tea party types. Others have engaged in a more direct expression of their displeasure with Obama, talking to empty chairs — as popularized by Clint Eastwood’s memorable Republican National Convention speech.

This is an example of simple behavior from simple people, sniveling child like reaction to something they don’t like. Our nation might be less of a “horrible place” if partisans started acting more like adults and showed more loyalty to their country than to their party. I think that it’s horrible of Kovac and Republicans like him to do that to the American flag.  I don’t care who you are or who you voted for…you should have respect for this country or get the hell out.

Pardon the very straightforward headline – some things need to be said.  For those who follow IACWE – you’ll know that we view the Israeli government’s actions on par with an apartheid state.  We continuously denounce the actions of the Israeli government … over and over and over; you can see a sample or our works HERE.  So before people get verklempt about my message to Palestinians … I think I’ve established my bonafides relative to my concerns for the Palestinian people.

Israel is voting for a new government on Tuesday 1/22/13.  All the reports show that Prime Minister Netanyahu will win re-election with a more right leaning government i.e. hardliners who move even further away from peace.  Now as much as some in Israel would like their country to be a completely Jewish state; it’s not.  Out of the almost 8 million people who live in Israel; 75% of them are Jewish.  But 20% of them are Arab (source).  20% of any population is a significant swing vote; it’s significantly more than the Latino and African American demos in the U.S.  But – in 2009 … only 53% of Arabs actually voted in the Israeli elections.  In my book – that makes 47% of Arabs in Israel pretty fucking stupid.

Now that’s just stupid.  Now – I get it.  The Arabs who live in Israel remain disenfranchised and laugh at the idea that Israel is this oasis of democracy in the Middle East; because – it isn’t.  It’s great if you’re Jewish but other than that … you’re pretty much fucked.  But I digress.  47% of Palestinians chose in protest to disengage from the political process; precisely the opposite of what they should be doing.  And in doing so – they’re increasing the value of the hardliners who would rather “erase” Palestinians off the map.  Every decision has a consequence and this consequence was very painful for the Palestinians living on the “other side” of the Israeli border.

972Mag explains more on Arabs choosing not to vote HERE:

Arab participation in Israeli elections has been in decline over the past decade-and-a-half. In the 1999 elections, 75% participated; however, in the 2009 elections only 53% voted, and according to some polls, this number is only expected to decrease.

Some Israeli analysts claim that the decline in Arab participation is a result of the frustration from Arab lawmakers, but this is only partly true. Historically, the percentage of Arab voters has been similar to that of Jewish ones. In previous elections, the decline in the Arab vote has been met with apathy from the Jewish population in the country.

The situation has changed this time. Several Israeli newspapers have run opinion columns this week calling on Arabs to vote. The Haaretz newspaper took an unusual step of printing an editorial in Arabic encouraging Arabs to vote. Labor party leader Shelly Yacimovich began an extensive last-minute campaign on Arab websites and Arabic-language social media networks, also hoping to grudge out a few more Arab votes.

This effort could be too little, too late. The Israeli society’s neglect of the Arab community over the past 20 years has led many Arabs to have feelings of antagonism or apathy toward the “only democracy in the Middle East.” “This is not our country,” and “they are all anti-Arab” are just some of the comments I have been hearing over the past two months. The Arabs see no difference between the parties, whether it is the liberal Left or the hawkish Right. Neither side has accepted the Arab minority as a legitimate member with aspirations in a democratic and multi-cultural Israeli society.

Sometimes – people need to say the hard truths.  There is NO ONE to blame other than the Arabs who choose not to vote here.  I’m not here to spoon feed  people with reassuring notions that they’re always right; we’re going to call it like we see it.  We received a lot of anger from liberals when we wrote “Minorities need to step up or stop complaining“; the thought of course was (rightly) that Republicans in America have done everything possible to disenfranchise liberal voters i.e. minorities to the fullest extent possible.  And that’s true.  But that’s not going to fix the problem.  Meanwhile – they keep stealing Palestinian land.

It takes action.  It’s time for the 1.8 MILLION Arabs who live in Israel to go in the streets and protest peacefully against the Zionists who continue to steal Palestinian land. It’s time for a protest that has never before been seen in Israel (and they’ve seen their fair share).  It’s time for every single one of these Arabs to vote not unlike the black community that was galvanized behind President Obama’s first and second election.  Blacks in America understood the stakes; they got it.

And Arabs need to get it too.  And then things will change, but not before that day.  You can’t ask for change – you TAKE it.

“And what I see them doing is saying, ‘Okay, we know we’re never going to be popular again, so we’re going to have to rig it.”
~Chris Matthews  

There is this purveying sense of false equivalency that “they’re all the same”.  In some ways – both the Democrats and Republicans are the same … absolutely.  But in so many ways – they are very, very different.  One of the most nefarious examples are the Republicans across the country who have in various ways pushed through measures to disenfranchise Democratic voters.  After the 2010 wave election – Republicans throughout the country took power in traditionally Democratic states.  They used this temporary power to push through voter ID laws, eliminate same day registration, kicked people off of the voter rolls and they heavily, heavily gerrymandered congressional districts to ensure they would maintain power in the years to come.

The ability to gerrymander districts comes only once every 10 years and works in conjunction with the new census.  Gerrymandering is one of the examples of “they’re all the same”.  When it comes to manipulating voter districts – neither party is better or worse.  They are truly “all the same” in that regard and you can see some examples in Democrat and Republican controlled areas HERE.  But unlike Republicans – the Democratic party has pretty much just stopped their voter suppression techniques right there; they have not attempted to make it difficult for Americans to vote in ANY state.  Republicans used ALEC model legislation to pass voter ID laws in Florida, Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Virginia etc; these laws forced people to wait in line for hours.  Former Secretary of State Colin Powell recently said on Morning Joe that the Republican party needs to stop it HERE:

“Should we really have gone after reducing the turnout of voters in those places where we thought it would make a difference? The Republican Party should be a party that says, ‘We want everybody to vote,’ and make it easier to vote and give them a reason to vote for the party, [whereas] not to find ways to keep them from voting at all.”

So – you’ve got gerrymandering.  You’ve got all of these power grabs to push out Democratic voters and Democrats STILL win one million more votes in the House than the Republican party in the 2012 election.  Except – due to gerrymandering the Republican party was able to still keep control of the House of Representatives.  And Republicans are even bragging about how they rigged the game (source).

But now – it has gotten to a boiling point of douchebaggery.  The Republican party has no limits on integrity and are actively pushing forward with more plans to steal future congressional races.  In Virginia – the state Senate is evenly split 20-20; Republicans can not pass through anything without at least one Democrat backing them.  On the day of President Obama’s inauguration – they waited until the 79 year old civil rights champion State Senator Henry Marsh attended the inauguration; once he left town … they pushed through a new redistricting bill to benefit them for upcoming races.  Talking Points Memo has that HERE:

With Marsh’s absence, Senate Republicans in Richmond had one more vote than Senate Democrats and could push the measure through. The new redistricting map revises the districts created under the 2011 map and would take effect before the next state Senate elections in Virginia and would redraw district lines to maximize the number of safe GOP seats.

The move was a surprise to just about everyone, including Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell who has not yet pledged to endorse the new district lines, which must now go through the GOP-controlled House of Delegates and finally across McDonnell’s desk before final approval.

Some of the sparse details from the AP:

After the measure was sprung on unsuspecting Democrats, its sponsor, Republican Sen. John Watkins of Powhatan, defended it as an effort to create another majority black Senate district. What he didn’t say is that it would create even more GOP-dominant districts.

Democrats are outraged.

I have a hard time believing that Republican Governor Bob McDonnell will refuse to sign it; nor do I believe that he was unaware of the plan here.  Governor McDonnell can’t run for Governor again and there is no fear of accountability with voters of Virginia whatsoever.

Then factor in the recent plan in several states including most urgently – Pennsylvania – to change the way electoral votes are allocated during Presidential elections.  Democrats tend to win Pennsylvania and that’s why Republicans are trying to change the entire way we elect Presidents.  That is worthy of 1 million people in the street protesting this assault on liberty.  If Republicans were willing to support a constitutional amendment to eliminate the electoral college in favor of  a popular voting model; that would be fine.  But – Republicans are pushing through a model where solidly Republican states distribute all of the electoral votes to the winner and solidly Democratic states divvy up electoral votes based on congressional districts (which are gerrymandered).

We’ve written about that HERE:

On Monday, seven Pennsylvania Republican state representatives introduced a bill to make this vote-rigging scheme a reality in their state. Under their bill, the winner of Pennsylvania as a whole will receive only 2 of the state’s 20 electoral votes, while “[e]ach of the remaining presidential electors shall be elected in the presidential elector’s congressional district.”

Pennsylvania is a blue state that voted for the Democratic presidential candidate in every single presidential race for the last two decades, so implementing the GOP election-rigging plan in Pennsylvania would make it much harder for a Democrat to be elected to the White House. Moreover, because of gerrymandering, it is overwhelmingly likely that the Republican candidate will win a majority of Pennsylvania’s electoral votes even if the Democrat wins the state by a very comfortable margin. Despite the fact that President Obama won Pennsylvania by more than 5 points last November, Democrats carried only 5 of the state’s 18 congressional seats. Accordingly, Obama would have likely won only 7 of the state’s 20 electoral votes if the GOP vote rigging plan had been in effect last year.

And I’ll tell you this.  When a Republican president gets elected because of vote rigging; this will breed animosity and hate.  Can you imagine a scenario where a Republican is elected to office because of manipulating votes and then pushing through cuts to Medicare and Social Security.  Who is to say there wouldn’t be a violent uprising?  We don’t know.  But Republicans will wake a sleeping giant and they had better understand that actions have consequences.

I just want to say unequivocally: I hate the Republican party.