Articles » peoplesworld

New York leads the way for ‘One Nation' rally

Dan Margolis — Thu, 09 Sep 2010 10:30:00 -0400

NEW YORK -- Based on the mobilization in New York alone, it appears likely that the One Nation rally in Washington D.C. on October 2nd which will call for jobs, better public education and a fix to the nation's economy, could be an overwhelming success.

According to Cheryl McCants, spokesperson for this city's rally organizing committee, "Here in New York State alone we're mobilizing over 1,000 busloads - that we know of."

Given an average of 40 or 50 people per bus, that estimate would mean at least 40,000 to 50,000 people - from only one state and only one form of transportation. In addition, says McCants, there are other buses coming from around New York that are being organized by local groups or individuals and aren't known to the organizing committee.

"And," she continued, "there are going to be several thousand folks who are going to be traveling on their own as well, whether by plane, train or automobile as well as the buses, so there will be a huge contingency and a very large representation of New Yorkers."

The rally, which is being organized by a coalition of labor and community organizations both national and local, has received support and assistance from a number of political leaders, including City Council members filling their own buses.

On September 2, the organizing committee held a major rally on Wall Street against unemployment. Hundreds of people turned out. Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., the New York NAACP's Hazel Dukes and other representatives of labor and community organizations spoke.

Rangel told the crowd that those attending the march would remember it, that it would be something about which they told their grandchildren, and compared "One Nation" to the famous civil rights-era march from Selma to Montgomery.

"What made America great are jobs and dreams and aspirations, not just for us, but for our children," Rangel added. "People come from all over the world, because they know what we got is pride, self esteem, paying rent, paying mortgages, sending our kids off to school." He said the "One Nation" was part of the fight to bring back that spirit.

Dukes said that the extreme right had been doing all it could to stop any progress being made in the fight against poverty and joblessness. That, she added, is a main reason why Rangel has been under fire. She called on those gathered to go back to their communities and tell people, "America will stand, black and white, brown and yellow; all of us will stand together."

McCants says that the organizing committee is planning a host of events, including an outreach specifically to young people at a downtown pub. There, elected officials, including Bill DeBlasio, the city's Public Advocate, will speak.

"This is a true grassroots movement from all walks of life, regardless of your race, your ethnicity, your religious beliefes, your sexual orientation, your gender identity," McCants said.

Photo: Marguerite Herbst

Obama slams Republicans on economy

Joel Wendland — Thu, 09 Sep 2010 09:52:00 -0400

The president came out swinging in a major economic policy speech in Cleveland, Sept. 8, against Republican Party obstructionism on economic recovery. He flatly rejected its plan to give mammoth new tax cuts to the richest Americans and accused its leaders of pushing the "same philosophy that was tried for the last decade which led to the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression: tax cuts for millionaires, cut rules for corporations, and leave the middle class to fend for itself."

Instead, President Obama called for a new package of tax cuts for working families, tax credits for businesses to purchase new equipment and for research and development, and infrastructure projects to spur job growth.

To pay for these proposals, administration officials told reporters the president want to close tax loopholes for big oil companies and other companies that move jobs out of the country.

President Obama said he wants to extend existing tax cuts for Americans earning $250,000 or less, while letting the Bush tax cuts for the very richest Americans sunset.

"We are ready, this week, to give tax cuts to every American making $250,000 or less," the president said. "For any income over this amount, the tax rates would go back to what they were under President Clinton."

He rejected Republican claims that this move would be bad for the economy, citing the high deficit. "We can't afford the $700 billion price tag [for tax cuts for the rich]." He also recalled that with a similar tax code in place in the 1990s, the U.S. economy created 22 million jobs.

When the economic crisis began, President Obama said, "My hope was that the crisis would cause everyone, Democrats and Republicans, to pull together and tackle our problems in a practical way. "

"But as we all know, things didn't work out that way," he said. Ideological and partisan considerations caused "[s]ome Republican leaders [to figure] it was smart politics to sit on the sidelines and let Democrats solve the mess."

House Republican Minority Leader John Boehner, (R- Ohio), offered his party's views on the economy late last month, but, the president said, they were awfully familiar.

"There were no new policies from Mr. Boehner," he explained. "There were no new ideas. There was just the same philosophy we already tried for the last decade - the same philosophy that led to this mess in the first place."

Instead Republicans want to scale back the major accomplishments of the past year and a half. They want to allow health insurance companies to once again deny care for people who are sick and allow the credit card companies to raise interest rates unfettered, Obama pointed out. Republicans want to privatize Social Security and voted against tax credits for higher education.

Indeed, the President continued, Republicans have kept tax loopholes for corporations that move jobs out of the country. "For years, Republicans have fought to keep these corporate loopholes open," he said.

"In fact, when Mr. Boehner was here in Cleveland he attacked us for closing a few of these loopholes - and using the money to help states like Ohio keep hundreds of thousands of teachers and cops and firefighters on the job," the President noted.

Referring to the jobs bill passed by Congress last month, President Obama explained that the closed tax loopholes will help pay to keep teachers in schools, cops on the beat, and firefighters protecting our families.

But Boehner "dismissed these jobs ... as quote 'government jobs' - jobs that I guess he thought just weren't worth saving," President Obama added.

"Mr. Boehner and the Republicans in Congress said no to these projects. Fought them tooth and nail," Obama emphasized.

"Though I should say that didn't stop a lot of them from showing up at the ribbon-cutting ceremonies and trying to take credit," he said, referring to to the fact that numerous Republicans who voted against the recovery act have claimed credit for money brought to their home districts. "That's always a sight to see."

Republican obstructionism and hypocrisy earned additional fire from White House Director of Communications Dan Pfeiffer who told reporters Boehner and the Republicans want to return to the same policies that caused the crisis and hurt America's working families in the first place.

"We know the policies that Leader Boehner and the Republicans are advocating," Pfeiffer said, citing the huge deficits, the financial meltdown, and jobs crisis. "We know what they'll do. We're still reaping the consequences of that."

Deputy Assistant to the President for Economic Policy Jason Furman touted the Obama administration's accomplishments in the economy. In addition to the recovery act, President Obama's legislative accomplishments include the "cash for clunkers" program, extension of the homebuyer tax credit, tax credits for businesses to hire unemployed workers and those involved in infrastructure projects, and the passage of the new jobs bill last month.

Furman also noted that new tax credits the president has proposed would be designed to benefit companies who do research and development here in the U.S. He added that the president wants to pay for new tax credits and infrastructure projects by ending massive government tax subsidies for the biggest oil companies.

"The big oil companies actually pay lower tax rates on their profits than most other corporations in the economy," he said. "Get rid of those tax breaks so the big oil companies are being treated just the same as every other corporation when it comes to taxes."

Furman added that additional revenue could be created by closing some 350 loopholes that still provide incentives for companies who move their profits out of the country or who move jobs overseas. Some of these loopholes had been closed in the August jobs bill to help pay to keep public school teachers in the classrooms.

Photo: Whitehouse.gov

The class struggle - back by popular demand

Scott Marshall — Wed, 08 Sep 2010 14:37:00 -0400

There's no reason in the world why anyone in the left-progressive and labor movements should be afraid of terms like "class struggle" or the" working class." Sure, when the corporate rightwing gets even a whiff of fight back by working people, they start hollering "class warfare." They're bullies. That's what they do. They try to scare people. For those folks I've always wanted a t-shirt that says "It's a Class Thing, You Wouldn't Understand."

But of course they do understand. The capitalist class, the corporate elites, the ruling class, the right wing, the super-rich, whatever you want to call them, they understand. They understand their own class interests, or as my grandmother used to say "which side their bread is buttered on." Truth be told, for the most part, they are conscious of their interest as a class. And let's be honest, they are highly organized. Think Chamber of Commerce. Think National Association of Manufacturers. Think of all the K Street lobbyists. Think of all the industry, banking and investment associations.

But I really want to talk about the other side of the bread: working class consciousness. This is a time of emerging and growing working class consciousness. Our most basic form of organization, the unions and the labor movement, are growing again, not always in size, but in unity, activism and militancy.

It's a mistake to just look at the numbers. We are bombarded by facts and figures about the declining membership of unions. I wonder why? Formal union membership numbers don't come near expressing the breadth and depth of the working class movement. In the first place, those numbers don't include nontraditional forms of the labor movement: workers centers, organizing committees in nonunion shops, and other similar informal, new forms of organization. And those numbers don't include the family and friends of union members who support the goals and struggles of the labor movement.

Further, the numbers don't reflect the broad coalitions unions are a part of and help to lead. We're talking about explicit labor-community alliances like Jobs with Justice and Working America. There are issue oriented alliances that labor formally participates in like the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, Labor for Peace, the Blue-Green Alliance and the Apollo Project.

Then look at the many activist organizations that have strong labor currents, in immigrant rights, in political action, and in civil rights and civil liberties organizations for example.

Numbers also don't reflect those active in working class parties like the Communist Party USA.

So what are some elements of the growing working class consciousness of today? It begins with seeing ourselves as part of the working class and not as individuals. It also starts with the broadest possible definition of the working class. A definition updated for our times. It has to take into account changes in technology to include the many new occupations necessary today for the production of goods and services.

Increasingly labor leaders, workers, and progresses speak of "working families," or "working people," or even "the middle class." In modern usage it is way too narrow to think that only the exact phrase "working class" conveys a class conscious view.

There is growing class consciousness shown in labor's reach for the broadest possible coalitions, and labor's increased independent political action. Examples like the labor walks and labor phone banks run out of union halls including voter registration and get out the vote efforts.

It shows itself in the broad range of labor's role in social and political struggles. Just look at labor's leading role in electing Barack Obama and fighting for health care legislation. Class consciousness is shown in labor and workers efforts in social and political struggles that go way beyond immediate economic interests.

The fight for unity of the class is also a central element of growing class consciousness. The labor movement's role in fighting racism in 2008 to elect Barack Obama set the stage for an even greater push for equality. Likewise labor's unifying stance in support of immigrant workers and against immigrant bashing is a critical class unity question. Labor's greater attention to equality for women, not only on the jobs, but also in labor's ranks and labor's greater attention to younger workers and LGBT workers speaks to labors growing understanding or class unity.

Further the labor movement and workers are thinking much more globally. Larger and larger sections are seeing the need for workers of the world to unite. More and more unions are reaching out to workers around the world trying to figure out a world working class response to capitalist globalization and financialization. World trade union formations are growing and moving inexorably towards united action. This is taking concrete forms in specific industries and between specific unions.

More specific to today, labor is planning, mobilizing, leading, and immersed in the critical 2010 elections. And to quote Richard Trumka, "labor is not a wing of the Democratic Party." In the heat of labor's 2010 election efforts it is also helping to organize the October 2 One Nation March on Washington DC for jobs, peace, education, and equality. Why? Labor and the one nation coalition see a massive march in Washington DC as critical to stopping a right-wing Republican takeover of the House and Senate. Labor is independently taking its issues into all the election campaigns it supports.

Perhaps one of the most important indicators of growing class consciousness is labor's maturity and leadership in the complicated tactics of today's class struggle. Look at labor's role in the health care struggle. Labor led in rejecting all or nothing tactics. Very few in the working class were satisfied with the final health care legislation. Most of labor and most workers were deeply frustrated by the zigs and zags of that struggle and by the compromises. Large sectors of labor and the working class supported single-payer or a full-fledged national healthcare service. Still they did not let frustration get the best of them as others did. And the day after the health care bill passed, they began planning the next steps in fighting for an even better health care system.

Labor is also showing its growing class consciousness in its dealings with the Obama administration and the Democrats. None are more frustrated with the lack of stronger, public works action for jobs, failure to pass key legislation like the Employee Free Choice Act, and other efforts important to the working class. Yet labor is one of the leading sectors of the Obama coalition and shows the way to disagree, even strongly, on specific issues while continuing to build even stronger coalitions that can actually win for workers in key fights.

Lastly, class consciousness is not an arrived at state of mind. It is a collective consciousness. It is a continual process built around the key class struggles of the day. Class consciousness develops on the broadest field of battle over time. It develops in collective class struggle that increasingly reveals the true class nature of the capitalist system to the working class. And it is not spontaneous. At all levels it requires leaders and organization.

Just as the word "socialism" doesn't scare many in labor today. So too, we are not cowed by cries of class warfare. We are the many and they are the few.

A 21st century program for jobs

Communist Party USA — Wed, 08 Sep 2010 14:04:00 -0400

The following is a brief video that describes the current jobs crisis and its solution through a program for jobs in a green, productive, people before profits economy for the 21st Century.

21st Century Program for Jobs from Communist Party on Vimeo.

Do you make too much money?

John Dick — Wed, 08 Sep 2010 13:43:00 -0400

ROYAL OAK, Mich. -- There's this guy named Daniel in the neighborhood where my wife and I carry mail. We see him almost daily as he rides down the street on his adult-sized tricycle. He's always carrying a rake, a broom, or shovel, and many times he's draggin' a gas lawn mower behind his trike. It's the darndest thing to see how this dude can pedal his 3-wheeled velocipede while toting all these implements.

Daniel is not a young man, probably around 50, and he has a noticeable handicap. He walks as if his spine has a curious curve in one of his lumbars. His left arm twists at a strange angle and his left hand has three disfigured digits that pass as "fingers." He has a slight speech impediment that may be the result of many missing teeth. The first time you meet him, you can tell that life has not been kind to this man. The local business owners and caring neighbors pay Daniel to cut their grass, rake their lawns, sweep their sidewalks, pull a few weeds, and shovel the snow. He's a fixture in our community. He never asks for a handout; he told me he will not take charity. Always willing to work, and always a good man with a kind word to say about other folks. And I've never once heard him complain about his personal problems.

Daniel moves around quite a bit, both on his trike and in his housing situation. He currently lives in a cheap studio apartment on Main Street, but in the past his pickup truck was his home. He has nowhere to store his lawnmower or his trike now that his truck died, so we see them chained to a variety of telephone poles and street sign posts around the city. And darn it all, his precious ride and lawnmower have been ripped off more than once. In true Daniel style, he just shrugged his shoulders and said, "I guess they needed that stuff more than me."

This week, I was schlumping the U.S. mail during one of our recent oppressive dog days of summer. Temps in the 90s with humidity right about there as well, my skivvies were goin' in all the wrong places, I felt like I needed to go "commando." Well, here comes good ol' Danny Boy pedaling his trike down Washington Street and draggin' his mower. Instead of yelling "hot enough for ya?" or some other inane remark, he hollers, "On days like this, you guys are way underpaid. You should be making 90 bucks an hour!" I start laughin', so he stops and gets real serious. "I'm not jokin', man. In this heat and especially winter time I don't think you carriers get paid what you're worth. Them bosses in there (he points down the street to the Post Office) make more money than you for sittin' on their butts. You carriers should make a lot more money!"

He was serious, and I thanked him for his thoughtfulness. I also told him he'd make a great Postmaster General with all his wisdom. We both laughed as I went back to my job and him to his.

But the trend in this country is not the enlightened thinking of guys like Daniel who thanks us for the hard work we do. There are many who think we and other public sector workers make too much money!

Do you, the reader, think you make too much money? You're probably laughing yourself silly, but Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels thinks you do. He was recently quoted as saying, "The new privileged class in America" is government employees, who are "better paid than the people who pay their salaries."

Mort Zuckerman, billionaire editor of U.S. News and World Reports says, "We have to escape public sector unions' strangle hold on state and local governments or it will crush us."

Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal's Paul Gigot ominously predicts "a showdown looming across the country between taxpayers and public employee unions over pay and pensions." The Heritage Foundation warns that the "more the government taxes, the more it can pay its unionized workers."

And it's not just these bastions of conservative ideology that think we get paid too much. I use "we" because, as letter carriers, we are public sector employees. We don't get our wages from tax dollars, but when the price of postage goes up you're gonna hear it. We will be blamed because of our "generous" wage and benefits package. A lot of folks are hurting in this Great Recession, and there is a tide of resentment towards the workers who are still making a decent wage. In Michigan, 18% of the work force is unionized with about half of these workers in the "public sector." This includes city, county, state, and federal employees. Nationwide, the number shrinks to 12% unionized, half of that (6%), public workers. At levels that low, it's easy for the demonization to begin.

Public sector is a sterile term. Instead, think of teachers, bus drivers, police officers, fire fighters, clerks, DPW crews, letter carriers, etc. These are all the vital components of any thriving community. And yet, these workers have been under constant assault these past few years with the threat of layoffs and firings. In my town of Royal Oak, the school board just privatized the whole school maintenance department, and this after privatizing the school bus system. These workers were offered new positions at $9.00/ hour. That hurts me and my town. Police and fire positions were eliminated shortly thereafter. In city after city, county after county, state after state, workers are being told, "You need to give something back. You make too much money." Mayor Dave Bing is demanding a 10% pay cut from Detroit's city workers. And I believe the letter carriers may be next on that chopping block.

Do you make too much money? I'll ask that silly question again. If your answer is no, you need to become part of the counter offensive to this glacier of blame and scapegoating of public workers that is fast blanketing our nation's landscape. We need to find out who our political enemies are, Republican or Democrat, and make sure that they do not win political office this year. We need to educate our neighbors, family, and friends that we, as unionists, are fighting to uplift every worker, not just our own. We need to support other unions in our cities, counties, and states so that when the time comes, they will support us. We need to have a vision that when a teacher is laid off it hurts my town. When a bus driver takes a pay cut, it affects my family. When a city clerk is asked to take a furlough day, my standard of living goes down. If we don't make the connections the forces of 'divide and conquer' will win. And I guarantee if we don't start fighting for these folks, they won't care about saving Saturday mail delivery.

I've already heard it from my family members and neighbors. These are hard working folks who don't have the benefits of a union job. As the tax base of our cities, counties, and states is rapidly shrinking, the knee jerk reaction is to blame the "lavish lifestyle" of the union public worker. It is a myth, as I'm sure you agree. Or, maybe, you are right now sipping cognac on your 60 foot yacht in the middle of the Aegean Sea.

But the afore-mentioned right-wing myth makers know it's a powerful talking point. By attacking public workers, they can demonize "Big Labor" and "Big Government" at the same time. But let's not forget the real reason that we're in the worst recession since the Great Depression, with cities and states reeling from shrinking tax revenues. It's the games the Wall Street Banksters played with our economy. To add insult to injury, our tax dollars bailed them out and now public workers are being blamed for the mess.

This is turning out to be a case of class warfare. In the past, we have been called "union thugs" for fighting for a decent standard of living. Instead of shunning that moniker, I've decided to wear it as a badge of honor.

My wife wears a shirt proclaiming "International Troublemakers and Boat-Rockers Union." Get active, get connected, and if Daniel ever runs for office please give him your vote. He doesn't think you make too much money.

Solidarity forever.

P.S. If you see Daniel around town, tell him "thanks" for all the kind words about letter carriers. If you see his trike outside Gusoline Alley, go in and buy him a can of Black Label. As Daniel would say, "None of the fancy stuff for me!"

John "Cementhead" Dick is an active member of the National Association of Letter Carriers, Branch 3126, Royal Oak, Mich.

As GOP says “no” to stimulus, Dems close 10-point Gallup gap

John Wojcik — Wed, 08 Sep 2010 13:02:00 -0400

A top House Republican may have been too quick to call President Obama a "carjacker" yesterday for proposing business tax cuts and infrastructure investment.

Just hours after House GOP Conference Secretary John Carter attacked the president's Labor Day stimulus proposals the GOP had to say goodbye to the 10-point lead they had in last week's Gallup poll of generic congressional preferences.

Gallup's weekly tracking poll, a key predictor of voter's actions in elections, showed Democrats and Republicans tied at 46 percent, down from the 10 point lead the GOP had only a week ago.

The change, Gallup said, was the first time in five weeks where Republicans didn't hold a lead over Democrats. This came only a week after Gallup had called last week's 51-41 percent Republican lead "unprecedented."

The poll, conducted Aug. 30-Sept. 5, does not reflect gains Democrats expect to make as a result of the stepped-up campaigning they began on Labor Day.

Worried about the president's good reception at Labor Day events, Carter attacked Obama yesterday by saying, "offering $200 billion in narrowly targeted business tax cuts and new deficit spending while yoking taxpayers with a $3.8 trillion January tax hike is like a carjacker offering taxi fare before he rides off in your car."

Democrats were quick to point out that Republican opposition to extending business tax cuts that they have long supported was clear evidence that they are playing politics before the midterm elections.

Soon after Carter made his attack, GOP Senator Lamar Alexander reiterated his call for extension of the Bush tax cuts for the rich. "The Bush tax cuts are free, but Obama's tax cuts cost money," Alexander declared.

The Wonk Room's Pat Garofalo was among scores of progressive commentators and bloggers who jumped all over Alexander's remarks: "Sen. Lamar is saying that we have to wait and see 'if we have money' for $100 billion in research and development, but should be spending $830 billion on the very richest Americans without a second thought."

Determined to win on the issue, in a Cleveland speech today, President Obama said he opposes any compromise that would extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy beyond this year.

He made the case again for his Labor Day package of $50 billion for infrastructure spending and $180 billion in expanded business tax cuts.

He also repeated again that he would offset the cost of these measures by closing several loopholes and ending several tax breaks that multinational oil, gas and other corporations now get.

Despite a wide variety of views on the specifics of the president's proposals, progressives agreed that the president has successfully contrasted his economic vision with that of House Minority Leader John Boehner.

The president came out batting for a long term reauthorization of the federal transportation act that would steer investments toward high-speed rail and create an infrastructure bank and called for expanding and extending research tax credits. Under the president's proposal businesses could get the tax breaks for research investments immediately. His proposed bill, although not yet approved by Congress, has a retroactivity clause that takes effect Sept. 8.

The plan, observers note, contrasts sharply with Boehner's latest speech which contained no new formulas for rebuilding the American economy.

In California elections, 'jobs' is the watchword

Marilyn Bechtel — Wed, 08 Sep 2010 10:27:00 -0400

OAKLAND, Calif. - With unemployment officially pegged at 12.3 percent in California, it's clear topic number one for Democratic candidates at all levels will be jobs - good, family-raising jobs - and that the labor movement is fired up and ready to go for candidates who promise to get the state working again.

That was the theme at union sponsored Labor Day events around the state, as former governor Jerry Brown, now running to get his old job back, and U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer, who is campaigning for a fourth term, joined candidates for Congress, state and local offices at rallies in Los Angeles, Oakland and Sacramento.

In Oakland, California Labor Federation head Art Pulaski drew a stark contrast between Brown and his billionaire Republican opponent, former E-Bay CEO Meg Whitman. "In one corner," he said, "we've got the darling of Wall Street, the billionaire big spender, who made her fame by laying off workers everywhere she went. In the other corner, you've got the penny-pincher, who slept on the floor last time he was governor, the guy who created 1.9 million jobs and created the combination of that and the best surplus that California ever had."

Besides the support of the Chamber of Commerce and other business groups, Whitman has already spent over $100 million of her own money on her campaign, dwarfing the far more modest expenditures of Brown's supporters.

Brown highlighted his plan to create half a million jobs in the state through renewable energy projects, comparing it to Whitman's scheme to give corporations and the wealthy $17 billion in tax breaks, which he said would nearly double the state's deficit. "One of the ways we got into the depression is so much of the money was pushed up to fewer and fewer people," he said. "When you have security, you can raise a family, and buy the things that turn this economy around."

Boxer contrasted Congressional Democrats' success in restoring 160,000 teachers' jobs nationwide with the layoff of 30,000 workers by her opponent, Carly Fiorina, before Fiorina herself was fired as CEO of Hewlett-Packard. Pointing out that Fiorina left H-P with $100 million in severance, Boxer added, "No wonder she didn't think it was important for families to get unemployment compensation!"

A moving tribute to area workers suffering plant closings, lockouts, illegal firings, slashing of hours, abysmal working conditions and prolonged contract battles brought the devastating effects of corporate policies up close and personal.

When the auto giant closed the New United Motor Manufacturing Inc. plant earlier this year, "Toyota just ripped the hearts out of our members," United Auto Workers Local 2244 president Sergio Santos told the crowd. "Not only were their jobs taken, their homes are in foreclosure, their families are being destroyed and eventually their health will be affected," he said. With one in five California workers jobless, underemployed, or too discouraged to look for work, Santos said, "we need labor friendly candidates who are going to get behind working families to create good-paying middle class jobs."

Also among those addressing the crowd of nearly 1,000 were U.S. Rep. Jerry McNerney, D-Calif., state Assemblyman Sandre Swanson, D-Alameda, and AFL-CIO Secretary-Treasurer Liz Shuler.

For Boxer and Brown, the day started with the traditional Labor Day mass at Los Angeles' Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels. At the breakfast that followed, LA County Federation of Labor head Maria Elena Durazo told the crowd, "If we do our job right we are going to drive Meg Whitman so far out of politics that she will have spent all of her money - and after the election don't be surprised if we see her in an apron asking people if they want fries with their burger."

At a labor picnic in Sacramento, Brown contrasted his lifelong record of voting in California with Whitman's spotty record of voting at all. "I love California," he said. "That's why at this stage of my life, I want to come back to Sacramento and do everything I can to get California voting again."

Photo: Sen. Barbara Boxer addresses the Oakland Labor Day event. (Marilyn Bechtel/PW)

Ohioans kick off mid-term election fight

Rick Nagin — Wed, 08 Sep 2010 10:12:00 -0400

CLEVELAND -- Tens of thousands of workers and their families took part in Labor Day rallies, marches, festivals and picnics in cities across Ohio honoring labor and kicking off its 2010 campaign to defeat the Republicans in November.

Warning of the extreme danger to the rights working people and to democracy if Republicans win, AFL-CIO President Rich Trumka, Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland and candidates for federal, state and local office took part in the weekend events. Vice President Joseph Biden joined Strickland in a two and half hour march in Toledo. Other major actions occurred in Cleveland, Lorain, Barberton, Columbus, Ashland, Lima, Portsmouth, Fremont and Cincinnati.

In Lorain, where the annual festival Sunday drew 10,000 to 20,000 according to Mayor Tony Krasienko, Trumka defiantly declared that "the working class built this country, we defend it and we're going to take it back!"

"I'm sick of CEOs saying they love America, but hate American workers," he said, calling for electing "economic patriots" like Strickland, Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher running for U.S. Senate and Congresswoman Betty Sutton.

Strickland, running for re-election, faces a strong challenge from former Congressman and Lehman Brothers Executive John Kasich.

"John Kasich is the poster child for everything that's wrong with America," Trumka thundered. "He gives new meaning to the term CEO. For him it stands for Chief Executive Outsourcer."

Sutton faces multimillionaire car dealer Tom Ganley, who Trumka charged "promises to cut the dickens out of Social Security, Medicare and veterans' benefits."

"After Nov. 3," he said. "we can be stronger. We can win the Employee Free Choice Act and guarantee the right of workers to join unions."

But, he said, "if we let the corporate traitors buy this democracy, if John Boehner becomes speaker of the House, there will be no jobs bills, no Employee Free Choice Act, no unemployment extensions and they will try to repeal the health care reform."

Reflecting concern about slow progress on the economy and the so-called enthusiasm gap, Lorain AFL-CIO President Joe Thayer said "Everybody's frustrated. But you have to be frustrated at the right people. We can't have George Bush's henchmen back in office."

Strickland, also speaking in Lorain, voiced the same urgency.

"The future of our state and nation are at stake," he said. "This is the final struggle, the death rattle of the extreme right. This is not the Republican Party we used to know. The Republican Party has been taken over by radical extremists. They want to change our country fundamentally. They want to eliminate Social Security and change the constitution. They see power slipping away from them. They know if they win in Ohio they will be in a good position to win the presidency in two years."

Strickland blasted Kasich for voting for NAFTA, the trade agreement, which cost Ohio hundreds of thousands of jobs, and against providing relief to the affected workers.

"He tried to cut $1 billion from veterans' health care and voted against increasing the minimum wage."

Kasich made $l.3 million at Lehman Brothers in 2008, the year the Wall St. bank collapsed. "It would take a minimum wage worker 96 years to make that much. He thinks he's special."

In the collapse "our state pensions lost $400 million, but Kasich got a $400 thousand bonus," Strickland said, charging that Kasich and the Republicans want to "let their buddies come into Ohio and outsource everybody. That threatens American values."

"I will fight like hell to keep John Kasich from bringing Wall Street values into the office of the governor."

Paul Lemon, AFL-CIO field director in Ohio for Labor 2010, the union's election campaign, said dozens of staff from unions, including the United Food and Commercial Workers, the United Mineworkers and the American Federation of Teachers were being released to work in this key battleground state.

Phone banks have been set up in union halls and other locations in 17 cities. Massive mailings and distribution of literature at work sites are scheduled as well as repeated door-to-door canvassing.

In Cleveland, the North Shore AFL-CIO launched a "Labor 2010 - Count Me In" campaign with this slogan on buttons and posters and signed up volunteers at its Labor Day march and picnic. Strickland and Fisher took part in the event and the governor is scheduled to speak at the federation's monthly delegate meeting Wednesday.

"The fight kicks off today," Lemon said. "We may be behind in polls right now, but there's no question when we get our members out, we will win."

Photo: AFL-CIO's Richard Trumka and Gov. Ted Strickland greet each other at Lorain's Labor Day festival. (Mike Gillis)

Republicans offer "Roadmap" over the cliff

John Bachtell — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 16:52:00 -0400

CHICAGO - If Republicans gain control of Congress in November; the "Roadmap for America's Future" may well be their guiding policy blueprint. Authored by ultra right darling Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), the Roadmap is more "back to the future," and would result in a massive transfer in wealth from the working class to the wealthiest.

According to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, the Roadmap "would give the most affluent households a new round of very large, costly tax cuts; eliminating income taxes on capital gains, dividends, and interest; and abolishing the corporate income tax, the estate tax, and the alternative minimum tax. At the same time, the Ryan plan would raise taxes for most middle-income families, privatize a substantial portion of Social Security, eliminate the tax exclusion for employer-sponsored health insurance, end traditional Medicare and most of Medicaid, and terminate the Children's Health Insurance Program."

Publicly, many top Republican leaders are distancing themselves from Ryan's "Roadmap" because it is a repeat of the Bush policies of the big giveaways to the rich and draconian cuts to social programs. But privately they support it and will wait until after the elections to wheel it out.

Ryan was in town Sept. 1 for a fundraiser for Joel Pollack, a Tea Party Republican candidate for the 9th CD against Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL). A crowd of trade unionists, seniors, and activists from the disabled community greeted him across the street from the Four Seasons Hotel with shouts of "Hands off Social Security."

"In hard economic times like these we should strengthen the safety net, not eliminate it," said Keith Kelleher, president of SEIU Local 880. "Slashing Social Security will pull the rug from underneath 78 million Americans who don't have an employer based retirement plan. No way!"

One of the big lies that keep being told is that the Social Security system in broke and will run out of money. Katie Jordan of the Alliance of Retired Americans reminded the audience that the Federal Government owes the Social Security Trust Fund $2.6 million, much of it spent to fund military build ups and war and tax cuts to the wealthy.

"We can't accept the government has the money to bailout Wall Street but not pay back Social Security. Pay it back!" exclaimed Jordan.

Rene Luna of Access Living said 7 million people with disabilities receive Social Security benefits. He said most are already living in poverty and desperation and Ryan and the Republicans want to make it worse.

"This fight is more than a policy fight, Cong. Ryan," declared William McNary, president of US Action. "This fight is about the soul of the nation. Social Security is a promise from one generation to another, which Cong. Ryan or John Boehner or any of the other Republicans isn't going to break.

"We thought we had won this battle in 2006, but they want to fight it again in 2010," said McNary. "We'll fight them in 2010, 2011 or 2012 and until we drive a stake in its heart and it never rises again!"

‘Machete' is dead on, immigrants are heroes

Pepe Lozano — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 16:25:00 -0400

Movie Review: Machete

Directed by Robert Rodriguez and Ethan Maniquis

20th Century Fox

1 hour, 45 minutes
Rated R

After seeing the movie "Machete," I thought this could quite possibly be the worst film ever or it could be one of those timely political satires perhaps on the verge of pure genius.

For what its worth and despite the movie's hilarious over the top blood bath scenes and outlandish one-liners, the theme of immigrant rights is dead on. Literally.

Given the anti-immigrant hysteria being stirred up by real life right-wing talk show hosts like Glenn Beck or backward state lawmakers like Republican Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, "Machete" reveals just how bad comprehensive immigration reform is needed.

And interestingly enough notable racists, in my opinion, are actually calling the film "racist." The one thing for sure is Co-Directors Robert Rodriguez and Ethan Maniquis got the anti-worker and anti-immigrant hacks on the defense because it openly calls them out for their controversial and racially insensitive positions.

The movie begins with a barbarian looking Mexican federal agent dubbed "Machete" (Danny Trejo) who attempts to take out a drug lord south of the border using his weapon of choice, yes, a machete.

Using his sugar cane sword, Machete the man is a beast slaying machine and decapitates three drug-cartel goons in the opening scene. But he's betrayed by his own men and the Mexican drug lord played by actor Steven Segal, who is absolutely a riot by the way, winds up trapping Machete and killing his wife.

Machete winds up in Texas as a day laborer looking for work when he is hired by the aide of a corrupt senator to assassinate the politician. Sen. John McLaughin, played by Robert De Niro, is a corrupt senator that has made "illegal immigration" the cornerstone of his re-election campaign and supports an electrified fence on the border. He calls immigrants "parasites" and "terrorists" and advocates an all out war on them. The aide uses Machete's assassination attempt to boost his image.

The plot thickens when Machete finds out he's a patsy to stir up anti-Mexican sentiment.

Machete joins forces with an underground band of immigrant rights forces called "The Network," which helps place undocumented workers with jobs and settling in.

The movie shows how immigrant gardeners, dishwashers, pushcart peddlers and allies unite to fight against the militiamen and the senator's tirade against them.

At the film's beginning the senator is seen with a group of all white militiamen along the border hunting and killing immigrants trying to cross, including a pregnant woman.

The film has an all-star supporting cast including Jessica Alba as a U.S. immigration customs agent, Don Johnson as the anti-immigrant militia leader, Cheech Marin as Machete's gun toting brother who happens to be a priest and Lindsay Lohan.

Alba's character at first is a hard line immigration enforcement agent she ends up joining Machete and at one point shouts, "We didn't cross the border. The border crossed us."

Actress Michelle Rodriguez plays "Shé," a revolutionary disguised as a taco stand cook who heads up "The Network," and leads an armed insurrection against the border vigilantes.

The film was originally a fake trailer before the showing of "Grindhouse," a 2007 movie co-directed by Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino. Since then it's received a lot of attention and went viral online spawning the film's eventual production.

Speaking to Time during a recent interview about the electrified fence as portrayed in the film and immigration reform, actor Danny Trejo said he doesn't think the movie is about illegal immigration.

"It's not about the guy sneaking across the border to come work as a day laborer to support his family," he said. "It's about the corruption that goes on that side of the border and the corruption that goes on this side of the border. The only ones who really want a wall are the drug cartels, simply because that will drive the price of drugs way up on this side."

Trejo added, "Every time somebody in politics wants a platform to stand on, they immediately shoot at immigration. But the reality is that nobody has done anything about it."

The film, although a spoof, does a good job of connecting the exploitation of undocumented workers due to a broken U.S. immigration system and companies including Mexican drug cartels that only see immigrants as way to increase their profits. It also depicts the reality of right-wing forces including politicians that use immigration to divide communities and spread fear mongering especially along the border in a way that criminalizes working people.

Machete is not recommended for the squeamish or the humorless, but its satirical message is on point and very entertaining both for Rodriguez fans and immigrant rights supporters. It's only fitting that Hollywood side with the good guys and immigrants in Machete, to no surprise, are just that.

French support union strike vs. Sarkozy’s pension plan

l'Humanite — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 16:14:00 -0400

PARIS (l'Humanité) -- A majority of French people (70%) approve of the Sept. 7 trade union day of mobilization against the bill on retirement, according to an IFOP opinion poll done for Dimanche Ouest-France newspaper.

The slim majority that considers it "acceptable" to raise the legal retirement age from 60 to 62, the key measure in the reform, declined further in September (53% as against 58% in June).

Questioned on the progressive raising of the legal retirement age to 62 by 2018 desired by the government, 53% said it was "totally acceptable" or "acceptable enough," compared with 47% who described it as "totally unacceptable" or "rather unacceptable."

The proportion of those who consider it "totally unacceptable" has risen to 30%, a 7-percent gain since last June. On the other hand, the proportion saying it is "totally acceptable" has fallen by 7 percent, to 21%

The opinion poll indicates there are big differences on the bill to raise the retirement age depending on the age of the person questioned. A majority of those aged 25-34 (52% say it is unacceptable), and those aged 35-49 (53%) oppose the bill.

In addition, a very large majority of French people (70%) approve of the September 7 strikes and demonstrations against the retirement reform, an approval that is highest among those aged 18-24 (87%), white-collar workers (82%) and blue-collar workers (79%).

When the same question was asked regarding the strikes and demonstrations against the retirement reform in May, 2008, 43% of the French people thought the day of action was justified, the opinion poll points out.

This is a "contradictory and evenly split picture: The French think the government project is necessary and courageous, but unfair, and a majority backs the movement that opposes it," Jérôme Fourquet of IFOP commented.

While a very high proportion of those questioned agree that the government "is not very open to dialogue" (69%), "rather unfair in its choices" (67%) and "not attentive enough to questions linked to the difficulty of certain jobs" (62%), a smaller majority recognizes that it is "courageous in its choices (53%) and "determined to maintain the French contributory pension scheme" (57%).

According to 70% of those polled, the government is "acting responsibly with respect to coming generations."

Finally, 76% of workers polled find that the government is "rather inattentive to questions involving the hardship involved in certain types of work."

This poll was taken by the IFOP by telephone on 2-3 September, with a sampling of 957 persons, representative of the French population aged 18 or over, using a method of quotas.

Photo: Commuters are seen in a crowded train of the Paris subway, Sept. 7. French unions launched a major strike Tuesday over unpopular conservative President Nicolas Sarkozy's plans to raise the retirement age from 60 to 62, with walkouts. (Thibault Camus/AP)

U.S.-Cuba Friendshipment founder, Rev. Lucius Walker, dies

Special to the World — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 15:31:00 -0400

A few days and one month after his 80^th birthday, Pastors for Peace executive director, the Rev. Lucius Walker Jr., died today, Sept. 7.

In an e-mail announcement, the Interreligious Foundation for Community Organizing, IFCO/Pastors for Peace, made a brief statement.

"It is with immeasurable sadness that we write to let you know of the passing of our beloved, heroic, prophetic leader the Rev. Lucius Walker Jr. this morning. We will write with more information as soon as arrangements are made. Please keep his family and his IFCO family in your prayers."

Walker was born Aug. 3, 1930, the group said.

Walker helped to found the US/Cuba Friendshipment Caravan Campaign to actively and nonviolently challenge the United States blockade of Cuba. Starting in November 1992, Walker led more than 19 caravans bringing thousands of Americans and thousands of tons of aid, including computers, medicines, bicycles and Bibles, to the island nation.

In June, Walker traveled to Texas to speak about the struggles for peace, justice and international solidarity.

For more articles on Walker and his work, click here. A fuller obituary will be forthcoming.

Photo: Radio Havana Cuba's Bernie Dwyer, back to camera, interviews the Rev. Lucius Walker of Pastors for Peace. (Walter Lippmann)

Obama proposes $50 billion infrastructure bill

John Wojcik — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 13:45:00 -0400

In his Labor Day speech to union members in Milwaukee the president, aiming for a serious reduction in the 9.6 percent unemployment rate, proposed a new $50 billion road, rail and airport re-building plan.

"This will not only create jobs immediately, it's also going to make our economy hum over the long haul," Obama told 10,000 cheering union members.

Republicans immediately attacked the plan with House Minority leader John Boehner, R-Ohio describing it as a ‘doubling down' on the first $862 billion stimulus plan that he said was a "failure."

Observers drew the connection between Republican opposition to infrastructure investment and the hope of big oil companies that they can avoid, as the president intends, their having to pay for infrastructure investment via reduced tax incentives. The initial $50 billion for infrastructure would come, under the president's proposal, by scaling back oil and gas industry tax incentives.

The president's plan would not allow the companies to take advantage of a manufacturing tax credit they now get and it would also eliminate some of the deductions they currently claim on income earned overseas.

The White House plan would rebuild 150,000 miles of roads, construct 4,000 miles of rail and rehabilitate 150 miles of runway.

"It's just the message I want to hear," said Don Burmester, a member of the International Association of Machinists, Local 66 in Milwaukee. "We need to get regular people back to work. I've seen the other party put political games ahead of anything decent to make the president look bad. We need to get the focus back on the economy and away from the political games."

Most progressive commentators, including some who have criticized the president for moving too cautiously, applauded the proposal.

"President Obama finally began to vigorously push the kind of high-profile, re-build America infrastructure campaign that is absolutely essential," said Bob Herbert of the New York Times. "The details of the proposal are less important than whether the proposal itself is a sign that Mr. Obama and his party are ready, at long last, to engage this awful economy with a sense of urgency."

Herbert said the plan was too late to help Democrats in November but could pay off for them later.

The Nobel prize-winning economist Paul Krugman was less excited about the proposal, saying, essentially, that although it was a "good idea," the plan, itself, is "much too small" and that "it won't pass anyway." Given that last reality Krugman wrote: "It makes you wonder why the administration didn't propose a much bigger plan."

Salon's Joan Walsh said, "It's probably not big enough, and even this modest bill probably won't get the Republican and conservative Democratic support it needs to pass. But it's good to see the president acknowledge that the government has a responsibility to continue to spend its way out of this recession, and not merely hinge his program on small business and research and development tax cuts."

The president outlined a proposal for $200 billion in business tax cuts on Sept. 7. It would allow businesses to write off 100 percent of new investments in plants and equipment made between now and the end of 2011. While conservative economists and outlets like the Wall Street Journal are backing the plan, labor-backed economists are not as supportive.

Robert Reich, Secretary of Labor during the Clinton administration, ripped the president's plan for the investment tax breaks, saying, "Big corporations are investing in automated equipment, robotics, numerically-controlled machine tools, and software. These investments are designed to boost profits by permanently replacing workers and cutting payrolls. The tax breaks Obama is proposing would make such investments all the more profitable."

Labor-backed economists have said for many months now that if jobs are to be created in sufficient quantity, the economy needs another fiscal stimulus of several hundred billion dollars. Some have been calling for a massive federal jobs program like the ones that were so successful in the 1930's.

Photo: PW Marguerite Hebrst

Great day for labor: Obama goes to Milwaukee

Michael Synowicz — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 11:23:00 -0400

MILWAUKEE -- There was one clear message everyone in the crowd at Laborfest here took home with them Sept. 6: the true meaning of Labor Day.

It will be hard for the thousands of people in attendance to view this holiday as just another three-day weekend, where picnics, ball games and beer prevail.

"Labor day should not be just a day off, but a day on," said Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis to a crowd of about 10,000 union members and their families.

What she meant was on this day all Americans should reflect on the trials and tribulations of those involved in the labor movement, from the millions of workers who work faithfully at their job to those who fight on behalf of labor.

"God bless the union," she concluded, having a bit of fun with the play on words. (Story continues after slideshow.)

Solis warmed up the crowd -- already jubilant in anticipation of the main speaker -- President Barack Obama. The Labor secretary was joined by a number of local labor leaders and Democratic politicians, along with her "friend" and "amigo" AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka.

Labor's historic and continuing contribution to the country, the economy and November's mid-term elections were all themes coming from the podium. Solis took a few moments to stump for Sen. Russ Feingold and Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett who is running for governor. Feingold is facing a tough re-election race this year.

Trumka, who has given many recent speeches on why preventing the Republicans from taking over Congress is important for job creation and working families, continued that theme, emphasizing the need for unions.

"Brothers and sisters, it's time to make working people number one in the world again," he said. "All work has dignity."

"Franklin Delano Roosevelt once mused to a friend, 'If I were a factory worker, I'd belong to a union,'" Trumka said. "For Barack Obama, however, Roosevelt's statement applies to all work."

Trumka and Sheila Cochran, chief operating officer of the Milwaukee Area Labor Council, inspired the crowd to be "economic patriots," emphasizing the need to manufacture things in the United States.

"Export the things we make," Trumka shouted, "not the jobs that are needed to make them!"

Milwaukee's Cochran urged the crowd to get their cell phones out-right there, right now-and text a simple one word message into it: S-T-R-O-N-G-E-R. At least half the crowd did it, and was instantly connected to the labor council campaign for jobs.

Milwaukee's popular congresswoman, Gwen Moore, riveted the crowd with a little-known page from labor's history. She recalled the Bay View massacre of 1886 when 7,000 building trade workers joined 5,000 Polish workers to strike for an eight-hour work day. However then-Governor Jeremiah Rusk ordered National Guardsmen to "shoot to kill" any workers who attempted to enter the Milwaukee Iron Company in Bay View. When the workers approached the mill the next day, they were fired upon. Seven died including a 13-year old boy.

"So this is what I want to ask you all," Moore said, firing up the crowd, as she then spoke in the vernacular of a slave during pre-Civil War times, "Is we is or is we ain't going back?"

In order to keep the labor movement strong, she insisted upon one important expression of solidarity: workers, union people and Democrats alike must vote.

"If you'll have this president back, then you had better watch his back," she said. "You've got to participate. They don't like anything Barack Obama does in Washington. You were great in '08, do it again in 2010!"

Many in the crowd proudly displayed their union tee-shirts, baseball caps and banners. And concerning the president, the mood was palpable even before he arrived. It was quite a sight when the crowd stood up, en mass, turned 180 degrees from the main stage and rapturously applauded Air Force One as it slowly descended across Lake Michigan on its way to Mitchell International Airport.

President Obama took the podium, and as eloquent as ever, he applauded the union movement. "It was the labor movement that worked so hard for what we all take for granted today."

Of course, the big news was his announcement on the $50 billion new plan to build America's infrastructure.

He applied impeccable logic when he remarked, "It doesn't make any sense to have so many skilled people off of work when there is so much to do."

He then turned his talk to a sustained attack on his Republican opponents.

"To steal a line from our old friend Ted Kennedy," he said, "what do they find about working men and women so offensive?"

"Even when the proposals clearly favor their own constituents, like small business owners, they say 'no'. If I say, 'The sky is blue,' they say 'no.'"

The president finished by saying the Republicans have had their way; their economic philosophy has been tested out-for 10 years-but it was shown to clearly be a dismal failure.

However, Obama said, when you ask them what they want to do next, they shout in unison: we want to go back and do the same thing. "They're betting that between now and November, you're going to come down with amnesia," he said.

The crowd -- an even demographic of African American, Latino and white - shouted out to speakers throughout, "Don't' be a tea-bagger!" or "No more class war!" and "We love you Obama!"

Pauline Athans of Milwaukee said she wholeheartedly supports the president but was quick to point out to those around her what she didn't quite agree with. She would say, "Not I am, but we are."

Photos: Marguerite Hebrst © /PW/not covered under Creative Commons

Nonsense and ignorance spread by Glenn Beck

Vivian Weinstein — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 10:45:00 -0400

By now, you have seen or heard the strange Glenn Beck on radio and TV shows or read one of his books. If you are scratching your head, go to the library and read Alexander Zaitchik's "Common Nonsense: Glenn Beck and the Triumph of Ignorance."

A short time ago, Beck started out as a none-too-successful morning DJ with a bare education who hadn't a thought about politics. He loved to party and was a mean tempered, self centered cocaine addict.

He developed a nostalgic vision of America (that never was) of his grandfather's day, sitting on a porch rocking chair, in a country, "the heartland," with a relatively small government and about 4 million white people.

There were no "evil progressives" leaving one to wonder how slavery ended or child labor, or, who brought about Social Security or the right of women to vote, among other things.

Glenn Beck expresses a strange populist, paranoic, conspiratorial vision of a world divided into ‘them' and ‘us'. Such beliefs, along with delusions of grandeur, righteousness, and self importance, power, emotional instability (likely bipolar) have been seen by those who have worked closely with him.

He is well known for using the airwaves to humiliate people personally. He has always had bursts of anger and difficult relationships, needing constant affirmation and attention. Kind of fits into the drug addict's persona. (my comment)

One of Beck's most infamous incidents was when a friend's wife was on the phone just after having had a miscarriage, and he put her on the open mic and humiliated her.

He moved into the spotlight when regulations were loosened and a few corporations took over most of the radio and TV news and talk channels. He began to talk politics, about which, he admitted, he knew nothing.

When he started picking up on the ACORN situation he would not let go, giving it negative publicity and eventually pushing till ACORN was defunded of its few million dollars. Of course he never talks of Phizer, which was fined billions for Medicaid fraud, or of military contractors' fraud in the billions. He was getting a growing audience and was rallying for far-right ideology. His humor was always berating the ‘elite' educated and he was the champion of the ordinary person. His programs attracted millions of listeners, distrustful of big government while he was protective of big corporations.

When he converted to the Mormon faith, he ended a lifetime of drugs and picked up the "testimonial" tears he is so famous for.

He quickly identified with the most fringe philosophical elements of the Mormon faith in the person of Cleon Skousen. Skousen raged against the intellectual elite, called black children "pickininies," and the slave owners, "victims."

Beck made Skousen's works, which have been called a "joke" by Zaitchik, required reading for his followers. From oblivion, and from the dust heap they are now on the best seller list along with Beck's own books.

Beck cries out, "We need to rescue our Constitution and go back to the founders," despite that the constitution was written as a secular document with no religious references.

The constant contradictions matter little in Beck's books such as "Common Sense," a sort of parody on Thomas Paine's famous pamphlet of the same name that helped spark the American Revolution.

Beck is thrilled with his following, lack of truth notwithstanding. Beck shouts support for Wall Street, which he calls the "victim."

Beck tries to isolate the urban poor and black people from the ‘heartland'. He called Katrina victims "scumbags" and unemployed people, "unamerican ." (my comment)

He sees the corporations involved in the government getting bigger but calls for a world which would leave corporate power free to pollute air, water, and land. He would end government regulations protecting worker safety, food, and the environment and denies global warming.

He supports corporations that support him but talks angrily against corporations that supported Obama or that dropped advertizing on his program when he became very offensive and a huge movement was launched against him by Moveon.

Beck is making millions leading his movement to "take the government back" From whom? The first black American president!

Such racist (although he denies that he is racist), paranoid, conspiracy theorists have existed before in times of hardship. Zaitchik feels that the Beck phenomenon is temporary due to "its operatic nostalgia, opiate history, and tin can Orwellian imagination."

My fear is that when Beck sells so much untruth and hate and lies to a largely fringe element that is armed, we cannot brush it off so easily. His divisive use of people and incitement has not gone unnoticed by Jews and others knowledgeable of the rise of Hitler Germany.

JEERS to CEOs who cut the most jobs and got the most pay!

Jim Lane — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 10:01:00 -0400

JEERS to the 50 U.S. CEOs who laid off the most employees and got paid an average of $12 million each last year! (From Kansas City Star)

CHEERS to the economists who proved statistically that wages are growing at less than half the rate at which they expanded immediately prior to the recession, thus showing that the jobs crisis is making everybody suffer! Economic Policy Institute

JEERS to the 10 banks that received the most bailout money and then, in the first half of 2010, spent over $16 million lobbying against reform! (from Associated Press)

CHEERS to 200,000 or more domestic workers in New York State who won, with a little help from their friends, the first-ever law in the nation that upholds their rights, including guaranteed sick days, overtime pay, a day of rest, protection from discrimination, and notice before termination. (From AFL-CIO blog)

JEERS to the American Petroleum Institute for holding rallies against the moratorium on new gulf drilling just one day before the latest oil platform explosion! (from Texas AFL-CIO E-mail news)

CHEERS to Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) for making plans to introduce a resolution expressing the sense of Congress against raising the retirement age. (From Alliance for Retired Americans)

JEERS to news that the United States has only a second-tier rating compared to workers' rights in the rest of the world. (From Freedom House)

CHEERS to AFL-CIO President Trumpka for blasting the bad August employment news and calling for government action: "As the recovery continues to weaken, the economy desperately needs new government support, both from both fiscal and monetary policy. It's time for our leaders who are true economic patriots to fight to create jobs, reject unfair trade deals and put us on a path to make things in America again." (AFL-CIO blog )

JEERS to the so-called "Roadmap for America" plan being promoted by Illinois Congressional candidate Joel Pollack. Seniors say this plan would dismantle Social Security! (Alliance for Retired Americans) Click here for photos of protest.

CHEERS because new health care benefits are beginning to solve the nasty "doughnut hole" flaw in the 2002 prescription drug law. Also, 2,000 groups have now been approved for early-retiree health care funds. Early retirement for workers is terrific news for the jobless! (Alliance for Retired Americans and Washington Post)

JEERS to the corporate lawyers making up excuses to avoid a provision of the new financial reform law that requires companies to disclose the ratio between a chief executive's pay package and that of a typical employee. (from New York Times)

CHEERS to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) for making it clear that workers can report it when their employers violate safety laws. (From OSHA).

CHEERS to record numbers of American seniors going on-line. (Alliance for Retired Americans)

CHEERS to the magazine editors providing another view of the media-created Sarah Palin. (from Vanity Fair)

CHEERS to the editors who believe that female Wal-Mart employees have a right to sue the company together as a class. (from New York Times)

Graphic: Brad Walker

One local church helps to combat fear

Michael Adam Reale — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 08:56:00 -0400

I was mortified and outraged when I heard that a pastor is planning a "National Burn a Qur'an Day" scheduled for September 11 and encouraged other churches to do likewise. Terry Jones, pastor of the Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida has probably never even cracked open a copy of the Sublime Qur'an for if he had he would see familiar characters such as Moses, Abraham, Jesus, Mary, the angel Gabriel and many others. The word Allah means God in Arabic, regardless of whether one is Christian, Jewish, or Muslim.

I am reminded of the Flushing Remonstrance, a petition to Director-General of New Netherland Peter Stuyvesant, penned in Flushing, Queens, NYC in 1657, which reads in part: "The law of love, peace and liberty in the states extending to Jews, Turks and Egyptians." It is considered a precursor to the United States Constitution's provision on freedom of religion in the Bill of Rights.

Fox News has been fanning the flames with the "Mosque on Ground Zero" segments repeatedly. The Fox Story is an inaccuracy, since it is not a mosque but rather a progressive Muslim Community Center and, it is being built several blocks from Ground Zero. Islam is only one issue that is bubbling at the surface. The swell of anti-immigration in this country is another disturbing trend. At times, the media feeds into our anxieties and some politicians have decided it is in their interests to fan public fears.

Of what are Americans particularly fearful? We are afraid of change. We have anxieties about our economy, joblessness, home foreclosure, et al. Some fear cultural diversity and the perceived disruption in America whilst others embrace the diversity. For me, I think that First Lady Michelle Obama said it most eloquently when she said: "Diversity in this country is a good thing, whether it's gender or race or socioeconomic background or religion ... the more views and experiences at the table make for better outcomes."

Would the American public not be served better by the example set by a conference that was held at a Presbyterian Church in Bethesda, MD earlier this year? The main theme of this conference was "Is there a role for religion and interfaith dialogue in countering the negative effects of fear in the public square?"

The conference was entitled Managing Fear through Faith and was sponsored and hosted by Bradley Hills Presbyterian Church. The conference was co-sponsored by some rather impressive organization such as U.S. in the World Initiative and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. Click here to view photos from the conference.

Equally impressive was the fact that it was co-hosted by Bethesda Jewish Congregation, Idara e Jaferia Mosque, the Journal of Inter-Religious Dialogue, the InterFaith Conference of Metropolitan Washington, and the New America Foundation. Imagine if churches, mosques, and synagogues throughout this country took this example and replicated it?

There were three papers, which I recommend to everyone to read, which were commissioned for this conference. Christian Faith and Life Beyond Fear by Tyler Zoanni, Fear in the Muslim Tradtion by Hafsa Kanjwal, and Fear Beyonf Fright by Joshua M. Z. Stanton

All one needs to do is listen to the tone in people's voices at rallies, in discourse, in interviews to see that fear has gripped us as a nation and as a society. We live in a time of great civil discourse and sadly, there are politicians and political parties who are ready to capitalize on our fears and in doing so contribute to gridlock and polarization in this country. What this Nation needs is a tempering down of fear, we need creative solutions and bipartisan action in order to help solve our problems.

I am also reminded and encouraged by the words of our United States President Barack Hussein Obama in his address to the United Nations General Assembly: Responsibility for our Common Future, September 23, 2009 wherein he said: "We must embrace a new era of engagement based on mutual interest and mutual respect and our work must begin now."

Photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/steevithak/4779308190/sizes/l/in/photostream/

Stop the Republicans from pulling the trigger on Social Security

Joel Wendland — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 21:23:00 -0400

Republican congressional candidates are itching to pull the trigger on Social Security should they gain power, a fact that makes our participation in these elections as important as ever. Republican Party leaders have called for raising the retirement age to force seniors to work longer, gutting benefits, and privatizing all or parts of the program to turn billions from the Social Security trust over to the same Wall Street bankers who caused the crash of 2008.

But we can speak up now to block their efforts and demand Congress protect Social Security from their greedy hands.

We can demand congressional candidates speak up against gutting Social Security like people in Illinois recently who called on Republican Senate candidate Mark Kirk to pledge to protect Social Security from his party's proposed abuses.

According to People's World writer John Bachtell, Kirk has a bad record on working families' issues like this. For example, his vote against a recent jobs bill:

Kirk voted against the $26 billion HR 1586 Education and Medicaid Assistance Act, which among other things saved the jobs of 161,000 teachers including 6 thousand in Illinois alone. The bill saved the jobs of 158,000 other public employees including firefighters and police.

Watch the video here:

The Campaign for America's Future has created a web page that provides resources for voters to find out if their representatives have pledged to protect Social Security and how to put the pressure on them if they haven't. <a href="http://www.ourfuture.org/handsoffsocialsecurity">Check it out here</a>.

The Alliance for Retired Americans has put out this call for us to speak up to block Republican efforts to raise the retirement age:

Tell Congress: Don't Raise Retirement Age! Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) plans to introduce a resolution expressing the sense of Congress against raising the retirement age when Congress reconvenes this month. "This resolution, especially with a large number of cosponsors, can be a good counterweight to proposals at the Fiscal Commission to raise the retirement age," said Edward F. Coyle, Executive Director of the Alliance. In a "Dear Colleague" letter sent to members of the House recently, Giffords said that an increase in the retirement age is simply a cut in benefits. Current cosponsors include: Reps. Travis Childers (D-MS), Paul Tonko (D-NY), Peter DeFazio (D-OR), Laura Richardson (D-CA), Diane Watson (D-CA), Joseph Crowley (D-NY), Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH) and Joe Courtney (D-CT). To ask your Member of Congress to co-sponsor the resolution, go to http://bit.ly/9SbUfN.

What about that darn deficit commission?

A lot of people have rightfully raised concerns about the bipartisan deficit commission and some of the things its members have said about Social Security. Some have expressed fears that suggest they believe what ever that commission or its individual members says or have said will become law.

The important thing to remember is that that commission came into existence as part of a compromise to win Republican votes on economic stimulus and healthcare legislation. Without the compromise where would we be?

More importantly, COMMISSIONS DON'T MAKE LAWS; Congress does. The fight to protect Social Security will center around the midterm congressional election struggle and our ability to prevent Republicans like Republican/Tea Party Senate candidate Rand Paul, who has called Social Security a "ponzi scheme," or Alaska Republican/Tea Party Senate hopeful Jim Miller, who has declared Social Security to be "unconstitutional," or Nevada Republican/Tea Party Senate candidate Sharron Angle who has called for Social Security's privatization, from winning the power to write or pass laws that will harm working families.

Progressive have a special role to play in this fight. But some seem to have given up on it already, mistakenly spreading the impression that the commission's proposals will become law or even that the President supports the commission's proposals even before we know what they are, citing his refusal to denounce extreme comments by some of its members or because he appointed Republicans to it.

But while it is important for progressives to put the heat on the commission and fight to publicize and de-legitimize the extremist assertions of some of its members, why would the President himself undermine the commission before it has even made a pronouncement, as some leftists want him to? For example, why would the White House want to kick Alan Simpson off the commission, whose offensive remarks a about Social Security earned him sharp criticism from many quarters. Politically, Simpson, contrary to his own agenda of course, may now be able to do more good than harm.

So far, the President has limited his political positions regarding possible recommendations from the commission to a rejection of the Republican Party plan to privatize Social Security. This is not because there is any reason to believe he supports raising the retirement age or cutting benefits, as some have suggested as part of their concerted campaign to make him the real enemy of working people and of Social Security.

Instead, there are a few important tactical reasons for the President to not go further on stating his positions explicitly in advance or by firing controversial members of the commission.

First, President Obama doesn't want to appear to set the agenda of a commission that is supposed to be bipartisan and reflecting both the legislative and executive branches of government - especially since <i>a fragile coalition of most of the Senate Democrats and two or three Senate Republicans, which has passed and may yet still pass important pro-working-class legislation,</i> depends in no small part on its existence and the appearance of its bipartisanship.

Second, this commission may propose military spending cuts and taxes on higher incomes that progressive will want to support. There have been important signs that the Obama administration is ready to cut as much as $100 billion from the Pentagon budget. In addition, the administration has outlined a tax plan that allows the Bush tax cuts for the rich to expire, while protecting tax cuts for the working class. If the commission makes recommendations like these, but the President has already undermined its bipartisanship or its legitimacy in advance, why would members of Congress from either party who are of a mind to consider its proposals take them seriously?

Third, back to Alan Simpson. If controversial Republicans are fired and some who are more amenable to Democratic views on things like Social Security are appointed, what happens to the general impression of its bipartisan character. Keeping Simpson makes it less possible for extremist Republicans to denounce it as a tool of the Democratic agenda.

Unlike the pundits (from the left and right) who want to convince people that the President is their enemy, he has to conduct real politics in an arena that reflects a diversity of regional, class, and other interests. Our role should be to put pressure on the point where changes in law actually occur: Congress.

To resolve long-term federal budget issues, we should demand candidates pledge to protect Social Security, pass tax laws that require the wealthy to pay their fair share, and adjust spending priorities to address working families' needs not war or bloated military spending. Those who refuse should not get our support in this election - simple as that.

This is a winnable fight; but not if we promote divisions by taking our eyes of the real enemies of Social Security in the Republican Party and allow them to sneak in the back door of power in this election. There is no third side in this struggle.

Photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/labor2008/2696456049/sizes/o/

Solving the problem of Cuban agriculture

W. T. Whitney Jr. — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 20:54:00 -0400

Revolutionary Cuba, no stranger to big problems, now faces another major challenge. Introducing major economic reforms in June 2008, President Raul Castro centered his government's proposals on changing agriculture. The results are anemic so far, reports Rebel Youth (Juventud Rebelde) correspondent Ricardo Ronquillo Bello.

Agricultural production fell 7.5 percent during the first half of 2010 compared to the first six months of 2009. Cuba's sugar harvest was the lowest since 1905. Of 4.2 million acres of idle state land offered to individuals and cooperatives for long term private use - the centerpiece of Castro's proposed reforms - only 2.5 million acres have been transferred, of which 46 percent are not yet in production.

The necessity for reform stemmed from arable land lying idle, 50 percent of the total, and the burden, which continues, of importing 80 percent of food consumed in Cuba. Annual food import costs approach $2.4 billion. Fallow land resulted largely from the government's 2002 decision to downgrade the sugar industry.

Agricultural ministers have been replaced and food imports reduced. Food purchases in the United States fell from $710 million in 2008, to $528 million in 2009 and to $220 million during the first half of 2010.

Half the land put into new production is dedicated to cattle raising, 27 percent to food crops, and 7.7 percent to rice production. Removal of the tenacious marabu plant from fallow lands has proved time consuming. Transportation resources, seeds, credit, and technical advice are only available irregularly, despite efforts to remove bureaucratic impediments. Private farmers occupying 41 percent of Cuba's arable land account now for 70 percent of the island's domestic food production.

News reports suggest that hundreds of thousands of state workers programmed to lose jobs in the coming years will be directed toward agricultural work. Half of those taking over newly available lands are under 35 years of age.

Agriculture looms large in Cuba, even though 80 percent of the 11.3 million Cubans live in cities. But with expanded urban agriculture, farm workers and family members number four million. Twenty years ago, agriculture - the sugar industry included - provided 83 percent of Cuba's export income. That figure is down now to 15 percent. In 2008 agriculture accounted for 20 percent of the island's GDP.

The residue of a tormented past, including colonial dependency, slavery, and dependence upon monoculture exports, still impinge upon reform efforts. The present attempts follow struggle beginning 20 years ago to overcome disaster caused by the Soviet Union's collapse when imports and GDP fell 80 percent and 35 percent respectively. Agriculture wilted for ten years. Organic farming, urban and sub-urban food production, release of state land to cooperatives, and institution of private farmer markets led to partial restoration

New difficulties include continuing drought and hurricanes in 2008 that destroyed farming infrastructure and wrought damage costing $10 billion. Reduced prices for nickel exports, diminishing yield from tourism, and falling remittances from Cubans living abroad have hit state and personal incomes. The U.S. economic blockade limits access to credit and hampers food sales to Cuba. Foreign vendors, many tied to U.S. corporations and subjected thereby to blockade restrictions, hold back on sales of new agricultural technologies, machinery, replacement parts, tools, and manufactured animal feed. Oxen, used as draft animals during the 1990's, are returning now to Cuban farms.

Other nations besides Cuba have wrestled with agriculture. Tension often prevails between proponents of industrialized agriculture and advocates of small, often family- operated farms over issues of efficiency, profitability, and cultural and ethical values. In socialist countries, planning and implementation must encompass equitable food distribution and agriculture's contribution to the larger national economy.

There is the cautionary tale of the Soviet Union whose last president noted that food production was "the most serious problem facing our nation today." Soon thereafter U. S. economist Joseph Medley suggested, however, that legitimate criticism, "tells us nothing of the magnitude of the goals set, nor of the results achieved.

Paraphrasing U.S. writer and farmer Wendell Berry, Ronquillo Bello concludes: "No matter that our lives are so urban, our bodies live because of agriculture. We come from the land and will return there ... We exist through farming as much as we exist in our own bodies." "Our country [too] comes from the land," he explains. "We have to exist from agriculture as much as we exist in our own bodies."

German pol conducts anti-Muslim campaign

Victor Grossman — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 17:36:00 -0400

BERLIN -- The "mosque menace" is not confined to lower Manhattan or the United States. In many European countries similar alarms are sounded.

Although, according to Sarkozy in France, Berlusconi in Italy and the militarized neo-fascist Jobbik party in Hungary, the danger is more from the Roma people (also called Gypsies), more often than not it's Muslims who are targeted as a "menacing threat."
Switzerland had its referendum against minarets, bleached-blond rabble-rouser; Wilders won third place for his "Hate Islam" party in the Netherlands; now bar-room battlers in Germany are being called to struggle against the Turks and any or all of their Islamic fellow-religionists.

The best-known crusader for Germanic purity at the moment is Thilo Sarrazin, no typical rabble-rouser but a finely dressed, proper looking Prussian-type banker, with bristly mustache and a slightly drooping right eye. To the embarrassment of some of its leaders he has long been a member of the Social Democratic Party, and for years was minister of Finance in the city-state of Berlin.

In those days, his righteous anger was not focused against immigrant groups but against "lower castes" in general, and he wielded sharp scissors against social programs. Since Berlin has been heavily in debt for years, this was long accepted as unpleasant necessity. His notoriety began with comments that the jobless should be satisfied with the dole money they got, or even less; a sausage and some sauerkraut made a good, inexpensive dinner, he pointed out, and as for heating, he found "...people should consider whether they can't get along at home quite sensibly with 15-16 degrees (c. 60 degrees Fahrenheit) by putting on a heavy sweater."

He insisted that pensions should really be cut not raised, and people should take care of pension problems privately, with as little government aid as possible.

As for families he inquired: "How can I arrange things so that only those people get children who can manage with them. Some women get two, three or more children even though they lack the where-with-all" or the "personal characteristics" to see to their education. That means that the social system must be altered "so people are not able to improve their standard of living simply by having children, as is the case today."

All too gradually, Sarrazin became impossible as a Social Democratic minister in a city-state government, especially when the Left Party joined to form a coalition. Therefore he was kicked upstairs into an extremely remunerative job on the top floor of the Federal Bank, a cousin of the American Federal Reserve bank. Before leaving, he fired off a final salvo indicating his new field of endeavor. In an interview targeting especially the three to four million people in Germany with a Turkish background, he asserted: "I don't have to recognize anyone who lives off this state, but rejects this state, and who doesn't properly care for the education of his children while constantly producing more little girls to wear headscarves."

Quite understandably, the Turkish population, citizens and non-citizens, of first, second or third generation, pointed out indignantly that it was they who had done much of the heavy, dirty work in rebuilding West Germany, often at low pay, and who now, in countless cases, were moving into a wide variety of trades and professions. The fact that all too many were still caught in semi-slums, received only second or third class education and were rejected when job hunting, with all the consequences, was not completely their fault. And many were making real contributions to society.

But Sarrazin stepped up his attacks: "The Turks are conquering Germany, just like the Kosovars conquered Kosovo, with a higher birthrate."

He extended his attacks to the many more recent Arab immigrants: "Since Arab boys can't make out with their Arab girls they use easier-to-get lower-class German girls whom they then despise for being so easy to make out with."

At the same time he attacked Turkish men for not marrying in Germany but instead importing "illiterate Turkish women." He insisted that Muslims were less intelligent, and their increase a threat to the general intelligence level in Germany. All of this clearly aimed at building on and increasing existing prejudices and getting groups to look down upon or hate each other.

The unions opposed him, his Social Democratic Party also picked up the criticisms, though an attempt to expel him from his Berlin party group was unsuccessful. His new institution, the Federal Bank, cautiously criticized him for engaging in political statements which had nothing to do with banking, but kept him on in his high managerial position.

Now Sarrazin has published a book, "Deutschland schafft sich ab" (Germany Does Away with Itself), which warns in dire terms that unless German women hurry up and have more children, the country will be overrun and ruled by Muslims in a number of decades. He claims that there are such things as Jewish genes, which he praises, and Turkish genes, which are responsible for the lower intelligence rates. Most leaders of the Jewish Congregation objected to any such references to "Jewish genes" and were highly critical, but some members joined in attacks against the Muslims.

The book was publicized in the entire media with talk shows, reprints, debates. Some, as in the Springer press (similar to Murdoch's media empire), were highly appreciative and reprinted long excerpts, others were highly critical. But the result was that the first edition sold out immediately.

The Social Democratic Party is still thinking over what to do about him (while one of its most prominent "wise men", former Chancellor Helmut Schmidt, expressed barely-disguised affirmation: "If he had expressed himself a little less crudely I could have agreed with much of what he said.")

Therein lay the true danger connected with Thilo Sarrazin: Not in any imagined Muslim rule some day, a totally ridiculous idea when confronted by the facts, but rather that so very many Germans have been infected by the bacteria of nationalism and xenophobia, fearing or hating anything new or strange to them. Such feelings, all too common all over Europe, but have an especially sinister tradition in Germany, especially in times of eonomic depression, which can occur or re-occur almost anytime.

Seventy years ago the menace was supposedly the "Jewish danger". Now it's Muslims.

Two very different reactions should not be overlooked. Gesine Lötzsch, co-president of the Left party, insisted that a man with such views was "intolerable in such a public position." The same party's delegate in the Bundestag, Sevim Dagdelen, herself from an immigrant background, denounced Sarrazin's "racist tirades."

"It is unacceptable that a managing member of the Federal Bank spreads such poison which splits society," she said and called on the Social Democrats to "do something at last and expel Sarrazin from their party" while comparing his views with those of the neo-Nazi National Democratic Party.

Sure enough, the neo-Nazi Internet bloggers were quick to voice support for Sarrazin. With an anti-Muslim group called PRO Berlin making plans to enter next year's elections in the capital city, and with growing ties between racist, anti-Muslim groups in many countries, the call for opposition to Thilo Sarrazin and his propaganda gained dramatic urgency.

Photo: A mosque in Rhein-Neckar-Kreis, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany ( Martin Haesemeyer/CC)