West Seattle Blog...

WSB Forum » Open Discussion

1. blackwatch
   Member Profile

   I heard this on NPR last night and it gave me chills. Mainly because Mr. Moyer put into words what I've been feeling. He used the celebrating of the life of Howard Zinn (Author of "The People's History of the United States") to warn of the class war were engaged in at the moment.
   Who else here believes that too many people fell in line to vote against their own best interest in the last election. I and Bill Moyer believe that it's no coincidence. He believes that the upper classes are actively trying to take over the govenment and are succeeding. This last election would contest to that.

   The transcripts are: http://www.truth-out.org/bill-moyers-money-fights-hard-and-it-fights-dirty64766

   Read it, and if you find the speech, listen. Bill Moyer is no hack, and to hear him say these things should cause a reasonable person to sit up and take notice.

   It's later than we think

   Posted 1 year ago #         

2. redblack
   Member Profile

   

   i haven't watched this yet, but i believe moyers knows what he's talking about. thanks, blackwatch.

   i think that this gets to the heart of why obama is such a disappointment to the left.

   my tinfoil hat theory is as follows:

   whether he wants to or not is subject to debate, of course, but the people who own the country won't let him do what he said he'd do while he was on the campaign trail. and i believe they won't let him remove somers, geithner, or bernanke. i used to think he kept them in place to protect himself from wall street, who could take him down if they wanted to.

   now i'm not so sure.

   Posted 1 year ago #         

3. Ken
   Member Profile

   

   Video of the speech:

   http://www.bu.edu/buniverse/view/?v=20ZaW9PO
   Lecture begins about 7 min mark

   Posted 1 year ago #         

4. JoB
   Member Profile

   I agree with moyer and have for some time.

   Unfortunately I believe the progressive expectations of Obama were so much wishful thinking built on campaign rhetoric.

   Obama was law professor. I believe He believes in experts and precedent.

   I think the tell was in the crafting of the health care bill. Single payer didn't even get a seat at the table in the negotiations.

   Experts told him what was possible and that's where he started..

   I think the results are a reflection of the process

   Posted 1 year ago #         

5. miws
   Member Profile

   

   Thank you for that link, blackwatch.

   Long read, but very well worth it.

   I appreciate the fact that it's written, or I guess I should say was originally spoken, in plain English, instead of the obscure words that so many writers use, that though I may have a basic understanding of their meaning, are a huge distraction for me, as my feeble brain tries to decipher them and put them together in a way I can comprehend.

   I just don't understand how otherwise seemingly intelligent people can't, or refuse to see what seems so obvious, as Mr Moyer pointed out, those amongst the super wealthy that are always screaming tax cuts, and are putting millions of dollars into achieving their goal through supporting Eymanesque Initiatives, like minded politicians, etc, that don't have the best interests of the working class, and poor in mind, (is there a difference anymore?) only their own best interest to keep adding to their wealth, that is already at a point that we mere mortals can't even fathom.

   Meanwhile, they stir the pot trying and, sadly succeeding, in getting much of the working/middle class in thinking the "leeching" poor are to blame for all of our financial woes.

   Mike

   Posted 1 year ago #         

6. charlabob
   Member Profile

   

   "Single Payer" got arrested -- when they tried to show up at the table.

   The repugs knew that Single Payer was popular, so they changed the name (framed the dialog) to be "Government Run HealthCare." See mail messages from Fox news henchpeople ordering their "news" readers to use the right (!) words.

   Posted 1 year ago #         

7. Al
   Member Profile

   I heard that too. It pretty much backs up a lot of what I have been reading in the "less mainstream" media, plus the New Yorker. I've been a little wierded out for the last several years because so much of what I read 5 years ago is most certainly coming true, even to the Supreme Court (which Moyer also covered) which should give people real concern but doesn't seem to have much of an effect.

   Watch out when we have to start paying for the oxygen we breathe. This is not a joke.

   Posted 1 year ago #         

8. JanS
   Member Profile

   

   in the P-I today...Joel Connelly's column...what's interesting is the comments after...sheeple, ignorant sheeple, who simply don't like the messenger, and don't give a damn about the message. Let's face it...if you ask the people if they want to pay for anything, the answer will always be a resounding "NO", no matter what. They just don't get it. We can't have it both ways...

   http://www.seattlepi.com/connelly/431956_JOEL17.html?source=rss

   Posted 1 year ago #         

9. WSMom
   Member Profile

   

   http://www.seattlepi.com/connelly/431578_JOEL13.html "Fox News slants language of health care"

   http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brunitedstatescanadara/671.php?nid=&id=&pnt=671&lb=

   "Those who watched Fox News almost daily were significantly more likely than those who never watched it to believe that most economists estimate the stimulus caused job losses (12 points more likely), most economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the deficit (31 points), the economy is getting worse (26 points), most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring (30 points), the stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts (14 points), their own income taxes have gone up (14 points), the auto bailout only occurred under Obama (13 points), when TARP came up for a vote most Republicans opposed it (12 points) and that it is not clear that Obama was born in the United States (31 points). The effect was also not simply a function of partisan bias, as people who voted Democratic and watched Fox News were also more likely to have such misinformation than those who did not watch it--though by a lesser margin than those who voted Republican."

   Posted 1 year ago #         

10. valvashon
    Member Profile

    Bill Moyers has been a hero of mine for quite some time. I was introduced to his wisdom while working for a PBS station in the midwest in the 1980's. Some of the stuff you have to watch while working in television turns out to be quite good. After my move to commercial television and later news production, I continued to follow and watch (and be inspired by) whatever show Bill Moyers was on. Nobody was sadder than me when he quit his show this last time.

    WSMom, I heard the same statistics about Fox News today while listening to Democracy Now!, and believe that they are true. Not meaning to hijack this thread, but let's all remember that they are speaking about the Fox News Channel, the 24 hour cable news (?) channel, not the news on our local Fox Television affiliate, KCPQ (Q-13). Our local news shows, also branded as "Q-13 Fox News" have nothing to do editorially with the Fox News Channel, and only occasionally do we share a bit of video with each other. Our station is owned by Tribune Broadcasting, they do not call the shots in our newsroom, and (thank God) I never bump into Bill O'Reilly in the hall.

    Now please go and explain the difference in what is called "Fox News" to your less media savvy friends.

    Val

    Posted 1 year ago #         

11. blackwatch
    Member Profile

    Great Comments...

    Don't get me started on Fox.

    What Moyer is stating in his speech answers something that has been troubling me for a long time now: How is it that so many good, smart people are being completely taken and fooled?
    Moyers answers that for me: They are being fooled because people with a LOT of money want them to be fooled so they can have it all.
    It has to be a horrible personality defect to have so much and not be satisfied, to think that you need to literally steal the lifestyle from millions of people. And actively work towards tht goal.
    There are some really messed up people out there......

    Posted 1 year ago #         

12. DP
    Member Profile

    

    A) They tell me that voting is still legal.

    B) Note: We lost the battle on I-1098. We did not lose the war.

    When 1098 comes back (and it will) it will probably win by a larger majority than it could have won this time around, and this will be because, in the meantime, we will have wisely taken the opportunity to convince the 1098 "no" voters to change their vote. While convincing them, we can also have a good dialogue with them and listen to their concerns about making government more efficient.

    C) If B) fails, there's still stuff like direct action and non-violent protest.

    Of course, direct action means that you might have to actually turn off your TeeVees and computers and go Outside.

    Outside is where there are lots of trees, people, and other interesting things, but where it's also occasionally been known to rain . . .

    Right, Butterfly?

    

                              I L Y B
     

    Posted 1 year ago #         

13. charlabob
    Member Profile

    

    DP, I've missed what you claim as a connection to Butterfly -- much of what you say doesn't seem at all connected to her -- ????

    Posted 1 year ago #         

14. DP
    Member Profile

    

    I'm talking about direct action, charlabob. Butterfly is all about using direct action as a last resort to solve problems and change people's minds.

    Of course, I'm not advocating that we all climb up into trees, like Butterfly did, in order to prevent "cuts."

    But maybe we could occupy other spaces . . . if you catch my drift.

    —D

    Posted 1 year ago #         

15. charlabob
    Member Profile

    

    Butterfly is radical -- most of what you say is not; that's why I asked.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

16. DP
    Member Profile

    

    Now it is I who do not follow you, charlabob . . .

    Where have I failed to be "radical" where you think I should have been?

    Posted 1 year ago #         

17. blackwatch
    Member Profile

    She's cute but you're not......

    Posted 1 year ago #         

18. JoB
    Member Profile

    DP

    If you believe in occupying public spaces
    Why do you object so loudly when others do?

    This is...after all.. a public space

    Posted 1 year ago #         

19. DP
    Member Profile

    

    I plead guilty as charged to not being cute.

    I plead guilty to teasing the teaseworthy.

    (Perhaps I go too far sometimes, but hey, I get mad when I see people getting bullied.)

    Not guilty to objecting to people occupying this space.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

20. marianne
    Member Profile

    Thanks for that link. Scary stuff stated in plain language. Also timely for me. This past weekend I received a letter from the huge media/entertainment corporation that I worked for 15 years ago saying they were offering an "opportunity" for small shareholders to liquidate their stock with no brokerage fees on the transaction if completed by January 7th. I thought it strange offer when I read the letter and wondered what they were after. Looks to me now that they are one of the corporations trying to buy back their shares to increase their Wall Street appeal as Moyers discussed. Think I'll hold onto my measly amount of stock in my former employer's company (although I really could use the cash) to spite them.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

21. blackwatch
    Member Profile

    DP you have a very high opinion of yourself and it's really not justified.
    Write clearly and stay on topic and there will be no misunderstanding.

    And have a Happy Holiday!

    Posted 1 year ago #         

22. JanS
    Member Profile

    

    wow..judgemental a bit? Open forum..I think people can say more than what you simply want to hear, blackwatch...or..maybe I'm just being presumptuous..

    and Happy Holiday to you...

    Posted 1 year ago #         

23. JoB
    Member Profile

    it is too easy to read these posts through the filter of bad intent...
    especially when the subject is so important.

    the resulting reaction can spur good conversation...
    but only when we comment on ideas...

    when we assume intentions and comment on people
    conversation falters and becomes little more than judgmental one-up-man-ship.

    Not much fun to hear and even less fun to read.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

24. Smitty
    Member Profile

    "the resulting reaction can spur good conversation...
    but only when we comment on ideas...

    when we assume intentions and comment on people
    conversation falters and becomes little more than judgmental one-up-man-ship.

    Not much fun to hear and even less fun to read."

    Damn Teabaggers.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

25. DP
    Member Profile

    

    Maybe we could have an unwritten rule where every time someone described a problem, they would also be expected to offer some kind of workable solution as well. (Emphasis on the "workable.")

    Granted that such a rule would not result in a spontaneous Blog Love Fest, since we often disagree as much about solutions as we do about problems. But discussions are generally more interesting, I think, when they revolve around working out compromises rather than revolving around basic questions of fact, or fault.

    And that reminds me of a story . . . But then everything reminds me of a story.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

26. JoB
    Member Profile

    Smitty...

    i am tickled several shades of pink that you took the time to point out the difference between dissing individuals and dissing political movements:)))

    way to forward conversation!

    Posted 1 year ago #         

27. JoB
    Member Profile

    DP...

    taking contention out of differing points of view isn't my end goal...
    fostering an exchange of ideas is...
    even when those ideas are diametrically opposed.

    vitriol can be a useful conversational gambit when it defines a problem.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

28. DP
    Member Profile

    

    vitriol can be a useful conversational gambit when it defines a problem

    I respectfully disagree with this sentiment, Madame.

    Socratic questioning and analysis can be an effective tool for bringing out the salient points of an argument (i.e., defining a problem).

    Humor can be a good tool also, if it's handled delicately.

    But vitriol? No. Never.

    You can have an englightening argument only with someone whose person and ideas you respect, even if you disagree with them. But you don't throw vitriol at someone you respect; you throw vitriol at someone you're trying to hurt.

    Then too, there's this little problem of "splashback."

    Posted 1 year ago #         

29. JoB
    Member Profile

    DP..

    "You can have an englightening argument only with someone whose person and ideas you respect, even if you disagree with them."

    if that is true all hope is lost

    luckily that hasn't been my experience.
    and i have held the underdog's position in public conversation for a long time now.

    take health care for example.
    I didn't much respect the intelligence of people who parroted the "death panel" drivel fed to us by the far right...
    yet..not only have i had substantive conversation with many people who became exceedingly angry and vitriolic when i challenged those lies ..
    it must have been enlightening too because many of those same people now understand that health care reform didn't go far enough...
    they are embracing the concept of single payer...

    we may see political movement on this yet...

    or... how about don't ask don't tell?
    do you think i respected the people who parroted homophobic rhetoric while our military dismissed qualified translators following 911 because they were gay?
    not so much. but that conversation must have been both substantive and enlightening because not so many years later don't ask don't tell has finally been repealed.

    and... will wonders never cease.. a career politician voiced the idea that attitudes toward gay marriage might be changing.

    When you stand in stubborn resistance to the prevailing popular notion you can expect a good deal of vitriol...
    on the days when i am about to give up in despair that people will ever think for themselves again...
    i remind myself that vitriol is often the acid that wipes a subject clean...

    now if only women would look up from their careers long enough to realize that women's rights are in the most serious jeopardy of my lifetime and tell men that enough is enough.

    it really does matter that the equal right's amendment has not yet been ratified :(

    Posted 1 year ago #         

30. HMC Rich
    Member Profile

    

    Vitriol. I'll take a double on the rocks with some Irony on the side.

    You know JoB, you and your fellow females are relatively sentient. What are you complaining about?

    Let's look at some of this states top females.
    Chris Gregoire
    Patty Murray
    Maria Cantwell.
    The three top political state posts.
    Governor and two Senators. Where are the men? Seems rather sexist to me. (Wink)
    Problem is since Gary Locke left we do not have enough diversity. What are you bleeding hearts going to do about that? Huh?

    Time had an article, "Women On Top". Sorry I omitted a key part of the headline: "Workplace Salaries: At Last, Women on Top". http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html

    Interestingly enough the decline of manufacturing has benefited young single women. The article is interesting.

    I think you should start a new or another discussion on how women's rights are in serious jeopardy. Not being a female there are many things that need to pointed out to this Neanderthal.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

31. dawsonct
    Member Profile

    ...(D)espite falling motorcycle sales, Harley-Davidson profits are soaring – with a second quarter profit of $71 million, more than triple what it earned the previous year. Yet Harley-Davidson has announced plans to cut fourteen hundred to sixteen hundred more jobs by the end of next year; this on top of the 2000 job cut last year.

    The story note: “This seeming contradiction – falling sales and rising profits – is one reason the mood on Wall Street is so much more buoyant than in households, where pessimism runs deep and unemployment shows few signs of easing.”
    ---
    So, supply-siders, how do you explain this? The economy we are suffering now is what economists WARNED us about if we bought into the Republican's neo-liberal economic principles. Yet, you keep pounding your heads against that wall, and insist the rest of us do as well.
    --
    The argument always comes back (since nuance is inconceivable for them) "well if you tax at 100%, blah, blah, blah."
    So the counter to that is, if we tax ourselves at 0%, what kind of society would we end up with?
    I have NEVER met a liberal who thinks all income should be turned over to our government,
    but I HAVE met a number of conservatives who seem to think we can get something, in this case a safe, prosperous, well-run society, for nothing.
    Conservatives are always talking about people needing to take responsibility for their lives and actions, but it always seems to be OTHER people who need to take responsibility.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

32. dawsonct
    Member Profile

    "...(T)he chief economist at Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Ethan Harris, who told the Times: “There’s no question that there is an income shift going on in the economy. Companies are squeezing their labor costs to build profits.”

    Or the chief economist for Credit Suisse in New York, Neal Soss: As companies have wrung more savings out of their work forces, causing wages and salaries barely to budge from recession lows, “profits have staged a vigorous recovery, jumping 40 percent between late 2008 and the first quarter of 2010.”

    Just this morning the New York Times reports that the private equity business is roaring back: “While it remains difficult to get a mortgage to buy a home or to get a loan to fund a small business, yield-starved investors are creating a robust market for corporate bonds and loans.”"
    ---
    Capitalists playing musical capital with other capitalists.
    This is the RESULT of the Republican dream.
    But will the conservatives EVER take responsibility for their actions?
    No, no, no, conservatives PLACE blame, they NEVER accept it.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

33. dawsonct
    Member Profile

    "“Asset booms, a rising profit share and favorable treatment by
    market-friendly governments have allowed the rich to prosper… [and] take an increasing share of income and wealth over the last 20 years.”

    “…the top 10%, particularly the top 1% of the United States –
    the plutonomists in our parlance – have benefitted disproportionately from the recent productivity surged in the US… [and] from globalization and the productivity boom, at the relative expense of labor.”

    “… [and they] are likely to get even wealthier in the coming years. Because the dynamics of plutonomy are still intact.”"
    ---
    DO YOU UNDERSTAND!!?? This isn't Paul Krugman telling other Liberals and Progressives what they already know/suspect, it is the WEALTHY describing the current state of the economy, and how they can continue to control it and profit from it.
    It didn't happen to them by accident, it was deliberately engineered by the hyper-wealthy to benefit ONLY the hyper-wealthy.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.