REVISED LIST OF AMERICAN PRESIDENTS

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has now undone Obama-era regulations that protected campus victims of sexual assault, and Scott Pruitt just eviscerated Obama's Clean Power Plan. Those are just two pebbles in a bucketful of progressive changes implemented during the Obama administration that Trump, his appointees, and the current Republican-dominated Congress have erased or reversed, with more to come.

The list of Obama-era policies that have already been erased includes expansion of overtime pay, rules to reduce race-based pay differences, protections for women workers, rules to protect investors, a phase-out of private prisons, protections for voters, protections for the Arctic, fracking regulations, fuel-efficiency standards, and of course the Paris Climate Agreement and Obama's clean power plan. Next on the chopping block, the Iran nuclear deal.

The pattern is so clear that we think it's fair to say that a deep, underlying drive shared by Trump and his allies is to undo everything that Obama accomplished during his eight years as President, no matter the merits. Given that Trump kick-started his campaign by weaponizing the rumor that Obama was not born in the United States--birtherism--and so was not a legitimate President, it doesn't seem that far-fetched to infer that Trump and many of his supporters would be delighted simply to erase Obama, 1984-style, from the history books.

Ever helpful, here's a sample from the forthcoming edition of The Real True Americans: Fair and Balanced American History for Real American High School Students:

21-st Century American Presidents:

Bill Clinton, 1993-2001

George W. Bush, 2001-2009

Barry Whatshisname, 2009-2017

Donald Trump, 2017-

Barry Whatshisname

44th US President

2009-2017

Credit: rishtabliss.com

-------
If you enjoyed this post, please sign up for email alerts from zerospinzone.blogspot.com

WELCOME TO 1984, BIG BROTHER AND THE MINISTRY OF TRUTH

"WAR IS PEACE."

"FREEDOM IS SLAVERY."

"IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH."

--GEORGE ORWELL, Nineteen Eight-Four

"HILLARY CLINTON . . . STARTED THE BIRTHER CONTROVERSY."

--DONALD TRUMP, 2016

Credit: Stephen Bettany

Doublethink at its best. The Ministry of Truth will be very busy rewriting the history of the last five years.

For a quick review of Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four, click here.

ORIGINALIST SIN

Institute co-founder, Les Adler, has published an essay or OpEdNews explaining why the Republican refusal to consider any Obama nominee to the Supreme Court qualifies as "an originalist sin." You can read the article here.

 

Kimberley Strassel of the Wall Street Journal reveals GOP game plan for next two years

Kim,

Your piece, "The GOP's 2012 Game Plan" in the WSJ on Mitch McConnell lifted my spirits.

It's always comforting to know we have you and a resident realist in Washington who put the Republican Party above the unnecessary liberal "needs" of the country. Without Mitch we would never have taken back so many seats in Congress. The Republican strategy of the past two years has been the best I've seen in my lifetime as a Republican--take a President who offers hope and bipartisanship and just say no to everything. Limit his accomplishments and register our opposition. The 'green behind the ears' Obama was caught completely off guard--he came into office thinking he could do something for the country! We showed him otherwise. Now, with good game-planning we'll keep him hopping another two years and then we'll put Sarah in office and be able to get those tax cuts back for us rich people. I don't know about you, but I HATE to give money to the government. How else could I have become the multi-millionaire I am?

I can't tell you how excited I am--and that goes for my family too. We flew to France yesterday to look at a new villa (it's 15th century, but new to us). I know we will be able to afford it now. And we stopped by the Caymans on the way home (I'm glad airport security checks for liquids but not for greenbacks--if you get me drift). Boy are we going to have fun, and we can count on Maria and Jose to take care of the place "on the Sound" while we're away.

I don't know what America would do without true Republicans like you to protect the interests of us on Wall Street. Two years ago we thought it was over. And thanks to you and leader Mitch, we're raking it in once more.

I am so sincerely indebted to you and Mitch, I am at a loss for words. Still, you can be sure that I'm not at a loss for other ways to show my appreciation. Now that the Supremes have granted my corporation its free speech rights, I'll be able to help the cause in hundreds of thousands of ways.

Yours truly,

P.S. Did you hear that rumor that Obama is going to be spending $200,000,000 of your money and my money on a junket to India. Hey, me and my buds went there just last year and it didn't cost half that much. We have to put some breaks on that bozo in the WH before he gets out of control--so good luck to you and our Resident Realist.

Lou Miller
for the institute

avandia

"Need, not Greed”

The national media announced yesterday that the nation’s top bankers treated themselves to a whopping $144,000,000,000—that’s 144 billion dollars--in pay and bonuses this year. That is quite a nice reward for a bunch of people who should be held responsible for the financial mess we’re in.

It seems to me that most people do not remember that it was these very same bankers who created and invested in the bundled, unsecured mortgages that just over two years ago pushed the financial and stock markets into freefall. Instead of directing their rage at the people who are responsible, millions of Americans are now taking out their anger at the Obama/Pelosi “axis of evil,” as if they were responsible for the 14,800,000 people who are still officially unemployed in the United States.

It’s not unusual for the public to resort to irrational anger during economic downturns. The question is why the ultra-right-wing Tea Party has been able to energize and direct this outrage. Where have the Democrats, the party of the people, been as lines at food banks and unemployment windows grow?

When Democrats were Democrats, FDR declared a “Bank Holiday” to brake the bank panic of 1933. My proposal for such a holiday is, admittedly, a little different than FDR’s. I propose that the ultra-rich on Wall Street take a holiday and forego their outrageous pay for one year. I propose a total holiday because these bankers argue that if they pay their top talent less, they will jump ship to another firm. So if all these investment geniuses earn the same – nothing -- for a year, none of them will be tempted to jump ship.

It is not that they—prudent, conservative, upstanding, and financially responsible individuals that they are—don’t have some money in the bank for this rainy day holiday. After all, this year’s $144 Billion was preceded by last year’s $139 billion.

What would this accomplish?

The US median income is a mere $43,317 in comparison. Simple division demonstrates that we could create 3.66 million more jobs, cutting the ranks of the unemployed by almost a quarter. If instead we picked the median wage for women we could cut unemployment by almost a third. On the other hand, if the unemployed accepted the minimum wage, $15,080 a year, we could get 64.5% of them back to work.

With all these people back to work, they would be buying goods and creating even more jobs. Pretty soon the federal government would not be paying out unemployment claims and could, responding to recent Republican demands, start balancing the budget. And states, receiving revenues once more from the sales and income taxes on the newly employed wouldn’t have to lay off teachers, nurses, police and firefighters.

Of course, we should not take this proposed “holiday” seriously for a moment. The high finance paper-shufflers and computer wizards on Wall Street would not, for a moment, agree to such an arrangement. Silly me. The Wall Street elite are where they are, doing what they are doing, and pulling in the money they are pulling in because they would never for a moment consider sacrificing for the good of the country or their fellow Americans.

However, engaging in a moment of fantasy does force one to look more closely at reality. Why are these very people who brought economic tragedy upon so many still reaping outlandish financial rewards? Why is all the outrage coming from the Far Right? Where are the political leaders who are willing to stand up to these parasitic financiers and serve the needs of the common, hard working (if jobs were available) individual?

The Founding Fathers were wrong: not all people are created equal. It is true that we still operate in a profit and loss economy—only the profit part is going year after year after year to the very rich and the loss is going to the growing proportion of people at the bottom who continue to lose their jobs, homes and hope for the future.

I’m certain that those who would get jobs under this proposal would not complain about working on a “holiday.”

Lou Miller, Ph.D.

avandia

for the institute

McCain sucker-punches Obama

Remember the Clint Eastwood movie Million Dollar Baby?

The rising star, Maggie Fitzgerald, is winning a crucial match against Billie "The Blue Bear," an older boxer with a nasty reputation. The bell rings at the end of a round. Both boxers lower their guard and turn toward their corners. But from out of Maggie's sight, Billie decks her with a vicious sucker punch. Maggie falls, hits her head on the corner stool, breaks her neck, and ends up paralyzed.

Minus the broken neck, that's pretty much what happened to Barack Obama today.

With Sarah Palin's luster fading and the economy in meltdown mode, Obama surged to a nine point lead in a Washington Post-ABC poll. At 8:30 this morning, Obama called McCain to suggest that, since they agree on many of the key issues, they issue a joint statement on the financial crisis. McCain called back six hours later and said sure, good idea, and went on to suggest that they consider suspending their campaigns until Congress passes a bailout bill. Obama said he'd need to think about that, and suggested that their staffs talk it over.

Obama put down the phone, turned away, and got to watch McCain go on national TV to announce that he, for the sake of the economy and the country, was suspending his campaign and proposing to move back the presidential debate set for this Friday.

It was a nasty but brilliant move, worthy of Carl Rove at his best. To say that it caught Obama flat-footed is a major understatement.

And, just to rub it in, McCain innocently announced that he'll still be happy to work on that joint statement.

In the movie, Clint Eastwood made sure that everyone saw the sucker punch in sickening detail, and despised Billie for throwing it.

In real life, McCain comes out looking like a great statesman, the one candidate who really cares about us.

Assuming that Obama gets sponged off and climbs back in the ring, let's hope that the next time around he won't be quite so naive, nor quite so quick to lower his guard and hold out his hand.

It's a lesson he urgently needs to learn if he's going to be President, and not just in dealing with John McCain.