Journaling on estrip is easy and free. sign up here

Dcoffee's Journal

dcoffee
My Podcast Link

09/20/2008 14:18 #45738

Free Market = Faith Based Economy
Category: politics
Bush announces a $700 billion bailout plan. To put that in perspective, the Iraq War so far, over 6 years, has cost around $500 billion. Add the bailout to the $400-$500 billion spent so far on the financial sector, it's over a trillion dollars. The national debt is $9.5 trillion dollars. If all goes as planned, the debt will be over $11 trillion. That's big.

Remember how Bush wanted to privatize Social Security? Put our retirement in the stock market for 'safe keeping', imagine if that would have passed.

This deregulation nonsense has been going on for decades. The New Deal and consumer protections have slowly disappeared. Clinton, Bush, Regan, Nixon, Carter, LBJ, there's a lot of blame to go around. There have been plenty of warning signs too, Enron, the savings and loan crisis, housing bubbles, etc. But still the "Free Market" has been worshiped like some kind miracle that will fix all of our problems.

The Free Market is dead. Good Riddance.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were government agencies created during the New Deal. Privatized under LBJ to balance the budget, deregulated in future years, now we're paying for what they screwed up.

Investment Banks and Commercial Banks used to be separate. This made our money more secure by keeping it away from risky business. Under Clinton, that changed. Now our banks are floating our money in the stock market. If we all wanted to get our money out of our bank, it wouldn't be there, the bank would go bankrupt.

Debt, that's a new trend too. If you wanted a mortgage you used to need to put 25% down, no matter what. Now all you need is the closing costs to 'buy' a house. Credit Cards were basically invented in the 50s and 60s. Now people don't save any money, really America has a negative savings rate. We just make payments, forever... it's the new serfdom, we're all indentured servants.

Railroads, Airlines, Energy, all deregulated, all in trouble. Taxpayers had to pay for Enron, we had to bail out airlines. And trains have been replaced by trucks that hog oil, wear down our roads, and clog our streets.

Why don't we just privatize the Water systems, schools, Social Security, and healthcare too? Leave it up to the invisible hand of the market.

This crap doesn't save us any money, or make us any better off in the long run.

If the government screws up, we vote them out, impeach them, or put them on trial. If the stock market eats our life savings, the companies fold, and we lose everything, maybe a couple people go to jail, but most of the executives get a fat check from a company that they helped bankrupt. And we don't get our money back, unless it's insured by FDIC, a government program from the New Deal.

So Who thinks reducing government regulation of the economy was a good thing? Don't you feel better off now?

The government is corrupt. Money is power, not People. Politicians went along with this crap because it was in their own self interest.

Government has been demonized for the wrong reasons. It's not the regulations and taxes that are the problem. It's the Corruption. It's the influence of money, and the disregard for the welfare of average people.

vincent - 09/22/08 23:09
The perfect example of where deregulation just made life miserable for everyone is the airline industry. We would be so much better off if routes were still regulated. Small cities would still have mandated service and the congestion that we see would not be as bad at certain airports. Yea, you can say that there would be higher prices, but in the end we still ended up paying higher prices even if you don't choose curbside check in and check that extra bag.
dcoffee - 09/21/08 15:32
Wow, (e:libertad) that story completely puts this crisis in perspective. Mortgage problems, Student Loans, declining benefits and wages.

Let me add another example to that list, my mother had to declare bankruptcy because of a medical bill. And she had her tax refund taken every year to pay off her student loans from UB.

Back in the 60s you could raise a family of 8 kids with just one parent working a job as a trucker. That's what happened in my mom's family. Now most people can't raise a family half that size working 2 or 3 jobs. It's because they have so many expenses. Healthcare, childcare, gas, food, insurance, school, retirement. The government does less, and my expenses are higher.

I don't see any evidence that the Free Market, and deregulation have done us any good. All I see is people working more and getting less for it. The government just got out of the way so that private companies can squeeze every last dime out of us. In fact they're even taking money we don't have, or haven't earned yet, through loans.

The interest rates on student Loans have only gone up since I was in college. What if your parents can't afford to pay your college? You start your working life with a huge amount of debt $25 - $70 thousand, even before the credit card and the mortgage. And why do we go to college? To get a decent job with a good starting salary. Even though anyone will tell you that it's more important to be happy doing what you like than making a lot of money. But you have to pay $300 on your loans every month. So why bother studying Political Science and trying to make a difference in the world, when you got bills to pay.

Inequality in this country is at the worst level since the great depression, where the bottom 90% of America only posses 20% of the wealth :::link:::

We need government intervention to fix this mess. Adam Smith was full of crap. And we need to do more than buy Wall Streets problems and mortgage our future.
libertad - 09/21/08 09:50
I have always hated Adam Smith and his "invisible hand". Sounds good in theory but as we can see in practice it really isn't working. It might work for some for a while but eventually government will have to step in to clean up the mess.

I'm really surprised that the bailout plan will supersede the cost of the Iraq war up to this point. I think you are right, it would have been better to help individuals in a program designed to help them save their homes and credit rather than just bail out the banks. My sister is one of the people who had her home foreclosed on. What happened was that after her divorce she couldn't afford the house she lived in so she tried to sell it but without anyone ever looking at it because of the housing crisis. Her only option was to let the banks foreclose. Now her credit is screwed and I worry that if she ever had to find an apartment that she would be denied. It really is not such a good situation for her or for anybody really.

I also feel like an indentured servant in a way. My student loans severely hinder my options and career path. Just recently, I decided to not apply to a job that would be perfect for me but it interfered with my ability to make even more money elsewhere at least in the short term. I work really hard to pay my bills and then there is little left over. I don't even have money to buy things like boots and a decent coat for the winter. The government hasn't bailed me out. My student loan interest rates are locked in forever. Bankruptcy is not an option on student loans, they will haunt you for the rest of your life. I borrowed the money and I will pay it back, but I just wish that I was better off for going to get an education rather than worse off. I worked the entire time I was in school but it wasn't enough so I had to take out the loans. I never used those loans for vacations or clothes or used it frivolously.

There is this idea that if you work really hard you can pull yourself up and achieve this so called American dream. I just don't really think that is true. People might say well you could have just gotten a degree in this or that and be fine but look at how much things have changed. My father and grandfather raised families of 5 and 7 respectively with high school diplomas and both did very well. Now my father went back to school with a degree in math and computers and is struggling to support just himself. I don't even know if he will ever be able to retire. He went from raising a family of five, living on Long Island with an in ground pool to not being able to retire. He has worked harder than anyone I have ever known and now he is stuck not because of his lack of a will but because that is the cards he was dealt.
dcoffee - 09/20/08 22:26
Here's a good way to put the Wall St bailout in perspective. $700 billion means $2,293 per person. Every man woman and child in America would pay that much. That is a lot of cash. How can we afford that? Sounds pretty extreme to me.
tinypliny - 09/20/08 21:25
I am not sure that a concept of pure democracy can ever co-exist with capitalism.

09/19/2008 17:39 #45732

Financial Bailouts
Category: political
We've been watching the government use hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars in order to bail out huge irresponsible corporations that made bad bets in an under-regulated stock market. The CEOs of these corporations still get paid despite the damage they've done. They'll keep their pensions, while the rest of us are losing our life savings. We taxpayers now own their crappiest investments and worst decisions, because we just propped them up by buying their debt with some national debt, even though we already have $9 trillion worth.

This offends me on so many levels.

Here's one point that few are mentioning.

Why are these companies suddenly going bankrupt? Because Americans can't pay their debts. The Loans and mortgages aren't being repaid. Why can't Americans pay? Because the housing bubble popped, and people's homes are now worth less than their mortgages they owe. Or people got varriable rate morgages, now they can't afford the interest. So people are going bankrupt and losing their homes in record numbers.

People leave those homes empty, and declare bankruptcy, they have no good options. People got screwed, so the banks are no longer getting all that money they were promised. So.... now the banks are screwed.

Suddenly the government is willing to shovel cash at rich people who mad terrible choices and led their companies into the ground. But when average Americans lost their homes, we called it a Handout, rewarding people who made bad decisions.

Now it's Wall St, and we call it a Bailout, stabilizing the economy. Well, if you'd helped people stay in their homes and pay their debts, this never would have reached Wall St. Why should the middle class bail out Wall St after we were left to fend for ourselves when we were in trouble.

Anybody know how much money the government has put toward helping citizens overcome the housing crisis? I'll bet it's less than $400 billion. But that's what us citizens has given to Wall St over the past year.

drew - 09/20/08 00:21
Good post.
tinypliny - 09/19/08 21:15
I heard today that the Palindrone/Crypt-keeper duo might possibly win this November. I am scared to think of what might happen then. The whole Alaskan glacier will probably disintegrate due to drilling, America will go to war with a bunch of European countries because it's after all a "mission from God" Himself, abortions will be banned so teenagers and women can die from illegal and unsafe abortions or go to Mexico or Canada to get one, all the dissidents will be fired from all government and public-service posts and nepotism will be the law of the land, health-care will be increasingly taxed and insurance premiums will go up for the average American, people without insurance - who gives a damn about them anyway?, money will be pulled from research and there will be a mass exodus of scientists to Europe and Asia (Singapore and China, in particular), Creationism will be the ONLY doctrine and Science will be terribly unpopular as a subject, the Church will fuse with the government and start witch-hunting once again... ... The possibilities are endless. How exciting.
tinypliny - 09/19/08 21:08
Wrong priorities. :/ What IS up with all this totally random selfish decisions? Don't people of America have any say in these? How could you let this happen? Why aren't there protests and demonstrations of indignation?
dcoffee - 09/19/08 20:44
Speaking of Oil, here's an article on the recent energy bill. An all of the above approach, that also took away the subsidies to Oil companies. It didn't pass because Republicans didn't like the idea of saving $18 billion per year by getting rid of the tax breaks for oil companies. :::link:::
tinypliny - 09/19/08 20:20
This viewpoint is so infuriating. It really makes me think that the government in this country is only after oil of nations around the world for personal gain of a few and now is shovelling all the hard-earned money of the average American into the hands of the few rich ones who probably also were responsible for the whole oil grabbing lying scheme in the first place. :/ Depressing.

09/10/2008 13:17 #45623

Lies, Media, Campaigns
Category: politics
I get really offended when people lie to the public.

What does it say about someone when they repeat a lie over and over again in front of the American people? Especially when that person is trying to get those same people to vote for them. Especially when they're running for the highest office in the land.

McCain, Palin, and the Republicans don't respect democracy, they don't respect you, they think we're a bunch of gullible morons.

They Lie about Obama's tax plan, healthcare plan, energy plan and his voting record. They lie about the bridge to nowhere. They lie about their record, and they say one thing while their actions tell us the opposite.

The Republicans are on record saying facts and issues don't matter, people vote for a composite image of the candidate. Ok, and you're going to build that image with lies? Excuse me, but elections are NOT a fucking game.

This country is in dire straights, but Republicans would rather win an election than offer solutions. Straight talk my ass.

Tell me if Obama, or his campaign has lied about McCain and Palin. I can find false internet rumors, but nothing from the actual Obama Campaign.

The media should call a lie when they see one. There aren't always two sides to a story. Journalists need to set the record straight, and realize that lies are not just a matter of opinion. I've noticed some indications that they may start doing more fact checking, if they don't, they fail.

Sources:


tinypliny - 09/11/08 23:16
You know, I do find that aspect quite refreshing in your country. As a people collectively, you are very honest. I can see how lies come as a shock.

But your current president's been lying for nearly a decade now along with his former PM crony B.grade.Liar across the pond.
dcoffee - 09/11/08 23:09
Another AP article, very blunt about McCain and Palin's Lies. :::link::: The media seems to be reacting, I even saw something mentioned briefly on ABC Nightly news.

But I wonder if Americans are so cynical that we expect politicians to lie. Will people be as outraged as me, or will they just call him a maverick for trying to pull off a big lie? I mean, personally when somebody lies to me in a speech or advertisement, I feel like they're calling me an asshole. "You're an asshole with shit for brains, vote for me". We sue companies for false advertisement, what's different here?

I really have been looking for Obama BS too, I can't find much, all I got are statistics that are slightly exaggerated, or just using the median and calling it the 'average', or using 'working families' income to exclude gains at the top. As the old saying goes, "Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics" Obama works the statistics, McCain/Palin use Damn Lies, even after people call them on it.
dcoffee - 09/11/08 00:03
Starting to Backfire. I think it's cause Obama used the term.. (Gasp! quick, hide the children) "Lie"
Here's the new Obama Ad :::link:::

Here's some new found criticism.
:::link:::
:::link:::
:::link:::
:::link:::
:::link:::
:::link:::
:::link:::

  • sigh of relief*
johnallen - 09/10/08 21:28
The game has begun
tinypliny - 09/10/08 20:40
Politics is just another name for lying and dirt-digging. So this isn't really quite so unexpected, or is it?
jason - 09/10/08 19:06
Arg, I was wrong about the Obama campaign.

:::link:::

I guess I don't know who to believe in anymore.
jason - 09/10/08 18:58
(e:DCoffee) - Did I mention how much I love the Fact Check site? They fact check everyone. Not that too many here will be interested, but they fact checked Obama as well. I was surprised to see that they apply some Glade to the flatulence emanating from the blogosphere. This may be the only really trustworthy body of information we have at the moment.

I don't know how people who cried bloody murder when the Republicans labeled them traitors and such ("Dissent is Patriotic!") can reconcile their hyperbole with that earlier indignant stance. Either it is a case of "turnabout is fair play" where they don't really believe it but want to use it to hurt people politically, or they are unconsciously being hypocritical. As you can see on the Fact Check site, this is not a partisan problem.

And have any of you noticed that the high minded talk of Obama, talking about national unity, and for the bitterness to end, is inspiring almost nobody? I only say "almost" because that is change that I believe in. I've changed my personal behavior in the past few years due to this belief. I know that people who disagree with me have the best interests of the country at heart in most circumstances. Obama's campaign is *clean* as far as I'm concerned when it comes to this, but I think that's about where it stops.
jim - 09/10/08 15:24
Even beyond that Drew, when the lies are exposed they redouble their efforts to put the lie out there and pretend like they're being attacked out of bounds personally instead of being called out for what they're peddling.

I'm not saying it's a Republican thing to do that, but it sure is the McCain/Palin way of operating.
joshua - 09/10/08 14:57
I'm 100% sure you feel the way you do and are not lying about it, but really... saying that McCain, Palin and Republicans don't respect democracy is hyperbole and I suspect that your intense interest in the race is getting the better of you. If you react with outrage at hyperbole such as "liberals are unpatriotic and hate America" I would expect that you would reject the use of similar hyperbole.

drew - 09/10/08 14:27
What has really surprised me is that most of the time when the lies are exposed, not only do the lies continue, but the supporters of the liars don't care!
dcoffee - 09/10/08 13:50
PS, I didn't vote yesterday in the local Dem primary. Getting 4 negative adds in my mailbox daily just turned me off. I was busy, why should I go out of my way to support that crap.

09/04/2008 08:57 #45560

RNC thoughts
Category: politics
I thought Palin delivered her speech very well. She will probably be an asset after all. Seems like she might help the Republicans keep some of their usual voters, I think she shored up the base a bit. She looked like a normal kind of person who supports all of the conservative principles. Kind of makes the party look like it's not just for billionaires.

The conventions are basically a string of monologues, speeches in front of sympathetic crowds. It's much more difficult when you have someone questioning your assertions in a debate, press conference or interview.

The thing that bugs me about the Republicans, at least the ones who get the most attention, is that they don't respect the truth. And when they get up in front of the TV cameras and distort the facts, they are insulting the American people. Say whatever it takes to get elected, turn the elections into lip service, the goal is to win, who cares how you get there.

I watched Romney, Giuliani, Huckabee, some of Lieberman, and Palin. I knew what was bullshit, but not everyone does. I was happy to find this article from the AP when I woke up, At least to AP noticed it too.

Here's an AP fact check of Palin's speech, and some other statements:

And a few debunked claims from Liberman and Fred Thompson:

I want to take people to court who lie to the American people like this.


dcoffee - 09/04/08 19:10
I don't remember the Democratic speakers distorting McCain's record this badly. If I missed something please let me know. McCain may have opposed Bush in the past, but he's changed his mind on everything from torture to tax cuts.

I may have painted Republicans with too broad a brush though, considering Lieberman was one of the worst.
joshua - 09/04/08 16:31
PS - I didn't notice your complaints of the structure of conventions last week.
joshua - 09/04/08 16:30
I can't believe that you'd accuse Republicans of doing what Obama has been doing for the past month.
drew - 09/04/08 09:57
I caught a couple lies, too.

They did what they do well, though. Maybe the election won't be the blow-out I thought it would be.

09/02/2008 15:16 #45540

Way too much news
Category: politics
Police State Now!
At the RNC convention the Police FBI and Sheriffs departments are PREEMPTIVELY arresting journalists and activists who are connected to any and all protests in St Paul. They are arresting people without court approval and holding them on Conspiricy charges, which means they have 36 hours to get evidence against them before they have to let them go.

Pre-emptive Raids? That means breaking into a house and storming into the room with automatic weapons drawn (no bullshit) where peaceful activists are planning protests. Before the activists even set foot in the streets.

independent Journalists are a common target, video and photo equipment is confiscated, erased, and kept for a few days to prevent journalists from exercising their constitutional duty.

This is so extreme that 3 of the top people from the Democracy Now! were detained, including Amy Goodman. For those who may not know, Democracy Now! is independent journalism at its finest, the forerunners of Pacifica radio, and also on TV. They ask the difficult questions, they are always professional, and they get eyewitness interviews from inside jails and conflict zones, their reputation and huge network of independent journalists means they get the critical stories and perspectives that mainstream media misses. The one thing they stand up for above all else is the rights of journalists and average people to know what their government is doing and respond to it, without fear of arrest, injury or death. They have saved many journalist's lives and reputations worldwide, over the years simply shedding light on the injustice of their detention.

Now the challenges of journalists in America are apparently the worst in a generation.



How did the DNC handle the protests there? Well they faced some problems too. Many of the police in Denver were not wearing name tags, a way to avoid persecution for excessive force and other violations. There was a huge free, Rage Against the Machine concert that kicked off a protest march that was determined to enter the convention and read a list of demands from the floor. Tear gas was ready to fly outside the convention as it already had in previous days, but the Obama campaign came out and spoke to the leaders of the protest and treated them with dignity. Crisis avoided. And though it was a small gesture, it did a lot for Obama's credibility among the activists who would likely protest again in November by voting for Independent Parties.

God Hates Republicans
What other conclusion can you make? A hurricane on the anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, that forces their convention to do improv. But the hurricane was not fierce enough to allow republicans to grandstand during the search and rescue effort. The levees barely held. The whole event just served to remind people that Katrina was a whole 3 years ago, and New Orleans is still a disaster.

Republicans trying to out Democrat the Democrats
This is the fun part. McCain finally picks a VP, Sarah Palin, she comes out and appears on the national stage with him for the first time. During that event, both republicans tried to use Democratic talking points as their own. McCain within the first minute of the speech "you want your government to understand what you're going through, to stand on your side and fight for you. That's what I intend to do" I also notice McCain is trying to look like a man of the people more by abandoning the suit and tie, and using a loose button up shirt more often.

Palin's speech was almost a parody of the DNC. She talks first about her family one by one, then her roots as an average schmo in Alaska, before thanking Hillary Clinton and trying to sound like a feminist. And she ends the speech with this "The next 67 days I'm going to take our campaign to every part of our country and our message of reform to every voter of every background, in every political party, or no party at all. If you want change in Washington, if you hope for a better America, then we're asking for your vote on the 4th of November."


I have to laugh, and cheer a bit about this whole thing. The DNC pulled the rug out from under a host of traditional republican issues. Like the faith based free market economy. Trickle Down economics. Tax cuts for the top. Bankrupt the government it's my money. Me first, everyone else fend for yourselves. And foreign policy, reminding us who abandoned an unfinished war in Afghanistan to go fight for some geopolitical pipe dream in Iraq.

I had a feeling that we could change the debate this year. All the energy of the Democrats and progressives determined to turn this country around. An excellent, empathetic leader and speaker like Obama. And the limitless evidence, given to us over the past 8 years, of the failure of the conservative philosophy. All these things create an opportunity to move away from wedge issues, and toward a government that does its job. A government that plans for the future, invites public participation, and maximizes the potential of every American, so that as a country we rise together.

The Liberal philosophy is a patriotic one, I've been talking about it for years. Finally Liberals are not ashamed of their ideas, they used the DNC to show America what we stand for. And America liked it :) They liked it so much, that the McCain campaign freaked out and started trying to turn a man who owns 7 houses, into a man of the people, a working class hero. It realy makes me a little giddy. Probably a good move, but I doubt it will save the Republican Party.

You know more people watched Obama's speech than the Olympics opening ceremonies, and the American Idol finale. In fact there are only 4 football games including the super bowl that got higher ratings this year.
Also Focus on the Family asks people to pray for rain during Obama's speech, no goal, republicans not on God's good side.

It will be interesting to see the RNC, and what happens with their VP choice, much info coming out now. But at least it's entertaining.

Politics is finally more interesting than Reality TV. Hooray!

dcoffee - 09/03/08 15:27
Thanks Josh, "No decent person would want unreasonable and perhaps illegal conduct to be a detriment to her regardless of what she believes." I'm glad you posted again, and glad I held off my response, because that is exactly the point. At first you sounded like you were abandoning the Constitution in favor of "law and order", and that really makes my blood boil. let us never forget that the power of government must be limited. As Americans we are fortunate to be ignorant of life under tyranny, but respect for the Constitution is all that saves us.

I know I already posted this link, but I'm telling you, it will answer most of your questions regarding what actually happened. This is not YouTube, it goes to the Democracy Now website, you can watch all of their shows for free.
:::link:::

You will find in the first 20 minutes of the 9/2 show, a detailed account of what happened provided by all three journalists who were arrested.

And I must backup Democracy Now's credibility, it's not a bunch of liberal opinion pundits. It's closer to Jim Lehrer than it is to Ed Schultz or Keith Olbermann. The only bias is in what stories they decide to cover, not the way they are covered.

hope the video fills in some of the gray area for you both.
joshua - 09/03/08 14:27
I shouldn't ever promise last posts...

I realized based on your reaction that I should clarify that I don't particularly care about Amy Goodman's politics when it comes to this subject. No decent person would want unreasonable and perhaps illegal conduct to be a detriment to her regardless of what she believes. For me the point is simple, perhaps cold. I want to know what happened, period. Amy Goodman's video is one piece of the puzzle and I'm not going to indict the police when we STILL do not know the reason for the arrests.

As for the crunchy granolas - I love them too despite my opinions on their politics. Like I said to my brother last week - it is time to get nervous when the dissenting voices actually go quiet. It may surprise you to hear that I think dissent is patriotic. It just has to be within the rules and people should not be making assumptions regarding the law and how it is applied. Mistakes like that create a hell of a lot of conjecture and at the speed of the Internet that can seriously muddy the waters. Right now people are doubtless speculating incorrectly about the application of the law. It is in everybody's interest to get that right before pointing fingers.
joshua - 09/03/08 14:08
D: I did watch the video. I can't imagine that the reports of violence on behalf of the protesters was made up. Amy actually mentions some of it, in passing though. They definitely didn't film that. Again looking at the video it appears to me that Amy did little to get arrested and seemed shocked, although I have to say that I've seen people get arrested for little more than what she did on the video. She said that she was trying to intervene - the police in the video asked her to move back and when she didn't follow the instruction, that is when they took her. Again, like I said, I expect the facts to win the day and if the police didn't follow proper procedure then they will be punished.

The problem I have with these videos is that in almost all cases something is missing. I don't trust media who are sympathetic to the subjects they are covering.
joshua - 09/03/08 13:54
D: I think asking whether or not it has occurred before is a red herring. The question isn't whether or not journalists have behaved badly enough to be arrested before; the question is whether or not people understand what freedom of speech is and is not. You'll have to excuse my cynicism regarding the press at large; in my estimation this election cycle has proved beyond doubt that most of them are incompetent and lack professionalism.

I have no reason to believe that she did anything wrong, but I'd sure like to know why she and her crew got arrested. If her crew are facing a felony charge I'd like to know why. We aren't getting all sides of the story at the moment, and are being encouraged to believe that the police overstepped their bounds. We don't know that, and the people who *might* aren't speaking up. I'm not about to drink anybody's Kool-Aid - I want facts regarding the why's regarding the arrests and whether or not the law was applied correctly. What we are getting is a lot of conjecture and for me that isn't acceptable.

In regards to detaining 300 people - if that is the law, then that is the law. I'm not going to debate what the law should be rather than what it is. If journalists are caught up in that I would expect that they were not taking part in the nonsense, but it is entirely reasonable that if they were among the people that got corralled they would have been lumped in with the rest, right or wrong. In either case, I expect the facts will come out and the picture will be a lot clearer. If they were arrested without reason, that will come to light beyond a shadow of any doubt.
dcoffee - 09/03/08 13:48
Guys, I can't even respond to some of that crap. Sorry, I want to be civil, I don't know what to say.

Watch the Democracy Now! broadcast from yesterday :::link::: before you look like a fool.

You can see video of two of the arrests by following that link. Amy has the other two on camera describing their experiences for 10-15 minutes. And if you think they're exaggerating or making stuff up, you're beyond cynical, and I have nothing to say.

To answer your points Josh. I have no sympathy for those who commit violence to express their political point. And it's obvious the RNC protests would be worse, took that as a given. "We need more information to have an intelligent conversation about this." true, watch the video.

Oh yea, and the jailed journalists and video cameras would have been able to capture the confrontation and act as evidence to prove if the cop or the protester was in the wrong. We do need more information eh? Maybe we should train the police what the fucking constitution is for.
joshua - 09/03/08 13:40
PS - last comment, promise.

There is no such thing as an advocate for the little guy anymore - John McCain isn't and neither is Barack Obama. Our country got richer during the Clinton years but who really made the money? There is no middle class advocate. Most of these people can't relate to you and I in this regard D. I'll tell you what I worry about - looking at my dad, who has worked extremely hard all his life and is a blue collar individual, thinking there is no politician out there that is an advocate for his interests. I think my Dad will be worse off than his Dad, without question. The working men and women of our country have been taken advantage of. I can't go further without sounding quasi-Socialist. I'm proud of my dad's work ethic and desire to have provided for our upbringing as a single father. Where are the people looking out for him? Forget party politics - we need to focus on doing right by our fathers and protecting the working people of our country! I'm waiting for politicians who mean it.
dcoffee - 09/03/08 13:25
Thanks for providing the counterpoint, although I don't know where this idea comes from. Are there cases of journalists inciting violence or disorderly conduct that I am not aware of? I think this is a baseless hypothetical defense, and it only serves to create cynicism and distrust of journalists. Their job is hard enough as it is, especially the investigative journalists who cover conflict.

Our courts should eventually figure out who was in the wrong, that is if the Constitution has not been flushed down the Whitehouse toilet. I wrote to Democracy Now! urging them to press charges. But that does not make everything ok.

Here's what happens, if they slap you with a conspiracy to riot charge the law says they can keep you for 36 hours, that does not include holidays and weekends. So if you got arrested last Saturday like 300 people did, even if they have no credible evidence, they can legally keep you till the middle of Wednesday. _You have effectively silenced that journalist and confiscated their equipment for three full days._ It's not just the journalist who suffers, it's the public. Whatever they were planning to cover now remains hidden from us. Amy Goodman put it perfectly;

"What is our role as journalists? It's to be the eyes and ears," says Goodman. "There's a reason our profession is explicitly protected by the Constitution â€" because we're the check and balance on power, the eyes and ears. And when the eyes and ears are closed it's very dangerous for democratic society."
joshua - 09/03/08 13:25
The video is on YouTube - :::link::: - based on what I've read about the arrest you'd think she were treated like a terrorist. Like (e:jason) said I'd like to know why it was that she was arrested. My understanding is that she was trying to come to the aid of her producers, who were arrested on potential felony riot charges. What were her producers up to that would cause that? Are we basically assuming that nobody did any wrong and the police acted inappropriately, without any real evidence one way or another? Looking at the video, she gets arrested in the same fashion that anybody would if they tried to resist (however feebly).

I've read a lot of inane commentary referring to the idea of arresting a journalist. Having a press pass isn't an "I can behave any damn well way I please" pass, and yes, you can be arrested if you break the law and you are a journalist. I suspect ignorance of the law in one fashion or another, but it makes me all the more interested in what Amy and her producers did to provoke this sort of reaction, if in fact they did so. We need more information to have an intelligent conversation about this.

Freedom of speech is not the governing principle behind acting like idiots, provoking police with aggressive behavior and lobbing piss bombs. That is mob behavior and the people behind "Recreate '68" do not know the difference, which is why they dare to complain when they get treated like rioters.
joshua - 09/03/08 13:02
This isn't getting any mainstream traction whatsoever - I wonder why. The arrest reports in the media seem to be centering around the 100 or so anarchists that were arrested after busting through barricades, lobbing piss bombs, generating disorder, etc. - hardly the picture of peaceful protesting, David. Were the Democracy Now! group somehow mixed up with that group of people? I imagine so, since they would almost certainly cover
the protesting. I am betting that they were caught in and around the group doing the things that caused the arrests.

Most people don't have the foggiest clue who Amy Goodman is. And look - compare and contrast the way Obama supposedly treated the protests at the DNC but they are NOT comparable. Firstly, most of these people are sympathetic to Obama despite their radical ideals. Secondly, these same activists don't have nearly the same level of vitriol for Obama than they would for McCain. Why do you refuse to acknowledge that many of these people at the RNC are there specifically to cause trouble and get arrested? You have a very romantic idea about what protesting is and should be, but if you look at it in practice at the RNC it is a far cry from peaceful.
jason - 09/03/08 12:38
What is interesting to me is the lack of information about what the producers did to get arrested. I'm told Democracy Now! is going to post video of that as well, but I haven't seen it. That is very curious to me. Charges are pending, and everyone is assumed to be innocent.

If they are innocent, they certainly can fight it in court and win. If they were roughed up too much, they can sue. There is recourse for these people. Why isn't there a lawsuit already lodged? Until the information gaps are filled, I can't just assume anything. If they were wronged, they can and should fight it and embarrass the department.

There is one thing that I think is lacking here, and that is the understanding that a press pass doesn't make you above the law, or immune to police orders. If an officer tells you to not cross a line, and you go ahead and cross that line, it doesn't matter who you are, you are going to get cuffed. If you get in an officer's face and prevent him from doing his job, especially if you refuse to comply with his requests to back off, you are going to get hit with obstruction charges.

So, I'm just not going to assume anything. The facts WILL come out in the end. They always do. If the department is in the wrong, they deserve to pay big, bottom line, and they should pursue it. If the people involved were simply instigators who refused to comply with lawful orders, they should be accountable and pay the consequences. This is going to be straightened out as long as those involved are serious about it and diligent.
dcoffee - 09/02/08 22:06
Update, today's Democracy Now! includes an interview between Amy Goodman and her two producers who were also arrested, Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Nicole Salazar.
:::link:::

This is even worse than it seemed. These journalists, all three, and another from the NY Post, were all arrested at the same time. They were recklessly tackled, grabbed, pinned to the ground and handcuffed, all the while shouting that they were Press.

But here's the worst part, not the violence, the fact that they all had their press passes hanging around their necks as they were arrested. Press passes to get on the floor of the RNC require federal background checks and security clearance, and they have your picture on them.

First of all they were handcuffed, despite the fact that they had their Press passes. Then they stood around for some time asking to be released, and asking that their coworkers be released. While everyone was processed and slowly taken away, they must have encountered more than a dozen officers, some of them ranking coordinating officers I'm sure, and nobody realized that it's illegal to detain journalists who are simply doing their job.

But it gets worse, some guy actually came up to them and said, "hmm, press, you won't be needing these today" and yanked the press pass off their neck. He walked away with their passes, and like any good journalist they demanded to know his name, he didn't respond, a nearby officer said "looks like Secret Service". Oh? if it was Secret Service, they should have definitely known the rules, and said, you can't arrest these people, what did they do? But I bet it was some Blackwater crap, hired guns who are above the law.

This whole thing is beyond outrage.
johnallen - 09/02/08 21:01
They have wiped their asses with the Constitution for the last 8 year, what make you think that they would stop now?
heidi - 09/02/08 20:37
Amy Goodman is my hero!!

:::link:::

The show can be heard in Buffalo on WHLD 1270AM and WBBF 1120AM at 8 a.m. Monday - Friday.
springfaerie - 09/02/08 15:31
The anger that burns through me at the flagrant abuse of first amendment rights is shocking. And let's face it, politics should be more interesting than reality t.v. It's actual reality! Imagine that, huh! Thanks for the info. in the post. It's eye-opening, that's for certain!