The bad guys?
The stalemate in Minnesota behind the state government shutdown is regrettable, but fascinating to analyze.
As Macalester College president Brian Rosenberg put it in a StarTrib op-ed, Governer Dayton has done an admirable job of negotiating with himself. He has retreated significantly from his opening positions, hoping to elicit some reciprocal response from the Republicans. Thus far they have adamantly refused any compromise.
From the standpoint of someone who leans "progressive" like myself, it would nominally appear that Koch, Zellers & the rightwing gang represent the evil bad guys, and that our dear embattled governor is simply fighting for the welfare of the most vulnerable citizens. However, this simplistic analysis may not hold together under examination.
The core conservatives in the Republican caucus exhibit religious zeal with their take-no-prisoners stance on revenue increase. For them to compromise would be tantamount to being assimilated by the Borg. Koch and Zellers are under tremendous pressure to find a solution to the stalemate, but must fear the wrath of their rabid colleagues if they weaken. Plus, they know how to count the votes needed to pass a compromise budget.
I'm no fan of Republican philosophy, but there are forces behind the strident anti-tax hysteria that should be looked at. For the past several decades, there has been an upward trend in the level of state and local taxation. The sales tax was originally introduced at a microscopic percentage, with promises that it wouldn't rise. Many will remember the mileposts that it passed - 3, 4, then 5, then 6% - on the way to the present 7.275% in Hennepin County (we get to pay for the Twins stadium without voting on it!).
I'm certain that the "Minnesota Miracle" has done lots of good, and the taxes we pay go for services that many wouldn't want to lose. However, the inexorable trend of growth leads inquiring minds to wonder if there is a limit before the tax rate hits 100%.
Ostensibly, we are governed under a democratic system. In theory, the level of public spending and taxation should reflect the will of the voters. If the majority enjoy the good life in Minnesota, and can see how their tax money is spent beneficially, then a consensus should be easy to reach.
In practice, the growth in cynicism and political polarization make consensus building far more difficult. Budgetary issues are complex and few understand where the money goes. The sense of distrust and disempowerment grows until it solidifies into something as rigid as the "Taxpayer's Pledge" that binds the core faithful to vote against tax increase in any form.
To his discredit, Governor Dayton has inflamed passions by insisting on a "class warfare" approach that makes tax increases on the wealthy a central part of his message. Skilled leadership and a more appropriate message may have had a chance at successful compromise, but that was not in the cards.
Dayton may have painted himself in to a corner from which no compromise can emerge. Perhaps this was by design, based on shrewd calculation that public opinon will rise up against the Republican leadership and hammer them in the next election. If this turns out to have been the strategy, then the "evil" moniker will need to be spread beyond the Republicans to include the governor's office.
It may be that Dayton's only realistic course at this point is to cave completely and then announce to the state that responsibility for the harsh budget rests on the Republicans. If voters disapprove, they can take vent their angst in the next election. A new legistlature will be elected in 2012, but the governor's term runs until 2014.
We can't forget that this dispute takes place in the midst of a deepening depression, and things could get worse before it's over. What happens if projected revenues fall short of even the Republican budget? Somehow the gap between revenues and public need must be addressed in more creative ways than either party has thus far demonstrated.
The ideological divide that separates Governor Dayton from his 2010 Republican opponent Tom Emmer is vast, and indicative of the deepening partisan rift. Dayton only won by the slimmest of margins. If this is a trend that continues in the future, then it could signal an eventual breakdown in our system of governance. The meme of revolution is circulating within global consciousness. Is the present ideological divide a taste of what is to come? Watch a similar drama play out on the federal level, and Stay Tuned.
Lynn
News item: June unemployment statistics released, showing that job creation virtually stalled. If not for the convenient elimination from calculation of long-term "losers" whose unemployment benefits have run out, the unemployment rate would be substantially higher than the official 9.2%. As it is, this figure caused a momentary buzz in Washington, causing Obama to cancel a vacation so he could make a public statement. Essentially his message was "don't worry, better days just around the corner" a la President Hoover circa 1930.
So what do we expect the big guy to do about it? With trillions in stimulus already spent, and budget cutting rhetoric heating up, there isn't much ammunition left - at least within the traditional paradigm. Welcome to the depression.
As I've railed upon many times before, the partisan divide is getting deeper, while neither side addresses the problems truthfully or realistically. One realistic solution to intractable debt is to essentially default through inflation, a fix that already may be quietly underway. Unfortunately, we have Chinese, Russians and other major nations having invested their savings deeply in dollars, who are likely to object. If they bail from the dollar en masse, the precipitous rise in import costs will drive another stake or two into the American economic corpse.
One factor keeping the dollar on life support is the exceptional weakness of the Euro, which is haunted by the specter of the "PIIGS" nations ongoing flirtation with default. Still, when outright default occurs. perhaps beginning with Greece and Portugal, the resulting tsunami may swamp the dollar and the rest of the global system.
Here in Minnesota, we have more the the same partisan polarization, this time resulting in actual shutdown of government. It's hard to believe that positions are so hardened that they would let this happen over less than 2 billion out of a 36 billion dollar budget. The Republicans exhibit religious fervor with their "no new taxes" mantra, while the Governor seems bent on poking the opposition in the eye with a class warfare zeal to "soak the rich". Why not simply split the difference and get on with it??
Shame on them all! Shame on them for proposing more gimmicky accounting shifts that already have caused one bond rating agency to downgrade the state's credit rating. School districts are already in hock by several billion from the last shifts. Again I ask the Republicans, why is borrowing better than taxation? They preach living within our means, but this is not what that entails.
Of course the Repubs are correct to question the enormous rate of growth in the state budget, but let them speak openly of where the money is going and who gets hurt if they arbitrarily slash it back. Most of the increase is in social services and health care, but we are in the midst of a DEPRESSION and have an aging population to contend with. There are major public policy decisions to be made in dealing with these trends, but this should be done in open debate. If the answer is to put poor people out in the street and watch idly as "Hoovervilles" spring up once again, then at least get a consensus from the voters. The results will be ugly, and do we really wish to travel down that road?
Of course poll respondents say "cut the budget" when the question is framed in terms of an impersonal. bloated bureaucracy consuming an ever increasing portion of our earnings. Somehow "they" are spending too much of "our" money, but when it's your own parents affected by cuts in nursing home care, or your children facing curtailed opportunities in school, then it takes on a more personal dimension.
The tragedy is that all of the bailout and stimulus spending was blown without much impact to the average citizen. I saw a statistic somewhere that claimed that the trillions spent on bailout of the Banksters could have paid off every distressed mortgage. Imagine the foreclosure problem instantly resolved! Imagine the difference if the average Joe had access to that kind of assistance. But then that is dreaming; in reality the Banksters Rule while the rest of us Drool.
Lynn
The markets reacted favorably to the latest announced European bailout agreement for Greece, but reaction on Greek streets went opposite. The terms called for increased austerity measures, which in plain terms means the common people get screwed to pay for the sins of the Banksters. Just how much austerity can be forced the "PIIGS" nations of Europe without open rebellion remains an unanswered question.
Back on the domestic front, Republicans walked out of congressional budget negotiations because Dems offended them by broaching the dreaded T word. This time it was the suggested phase-out of certain tax breaks that benefit wealthy corporations and individuals that wedged Republican shorts into a bind. Again I'll ask the rhetorical question of why Republicans think borrowing is better than taxation. Why is the ending of tax loopholes that benefit a wealthy few considered a tax increase?
The debt situation in this country is becoming so dire that one wonders how soon the IMF will be dictating austerity terms to the United States. What will be the response in our streets? It certainly behooves congress to address the escalating national debt while we still posess some sovereignty. However, the solution required goes beyond spending cuts or tax increases. The interest on the debt alone threatens to reach gridlock levels. It's difficult to foresee an end game that doesn't involve default or hyperinflation. The present system is unsustainable, and perhaps was designed that way intentionally.
The opening phase of Great Depression II has been relatively painless due to extended unemployment benefits and other safety net programs. The initial stimulus spending facilitated denial for a time, but a new phase is about to begin in which the harsh reality is fully revealed. This appears to be a necessary aspect of the ending of the pesent age.
Lynn
John Rash writes in the Star Tribune about the "New Digital Divide", which doesn't involve income disparity or socio-economic status, but refers instead to the widening partisan polarization associated with digital media. The part that caught my eye was how liberals and conservatives tend to view the world from increasingly divergent perspectives. The article discusses how the proliferating choices in alternative media may be either cause or effect.
Of course, the increasing polarization in politics is of concern, especially when deeply divided legislators at state and national levels must resolve thorny economic issues. The result is often stalemate and impasse, as is presently the case here in Minnesota.
Rash points out that 40 years ago, political opponents at least agreed on the basic facts of an issue, whereas today opposing camps come from differing views of reality. Depending on one's version of reality, raising taxes to balance the budget could be seen as a necessary annoyance or extremely detestable. Common sense asks why the two sides can't split the difference and avoid a nasty shutdown of government, but within each polarized version of reality, the obvious compromise solution doesn't seem so apparent.
Rash also touched on the increasing tendency to view fundamental facts of science through an ideological lens. Quoting Seth Lewis, he writes "The idea of empiricism is being questioned as never before."
While it's regrettable that Christian Fundamentalists wish to replace scientific theory with religious beliefs, this issue is not so simple. What Rash and Lewis are leaving out of the discussion is that there are divergent views of reality because stratified power structures in science, medicine and academia have often suppressed open-minded inquiry and alternative research. Paradigm defense generally takes precedence over exploration of new ideas, so innovators are marginalized and not published. Because alternative media can provide ordinary people with access to alternative thought and research, it's only natural that distrust of mainstream information would increase.
Plausible examples of alternative science abound, from Michael Cremo's Forbidden Archeology, Richard Hoagland's exposé of NASA concealment of ancient artifacts on the Moon and Mars, or even Minnesota physicist James McCanney's theories on the electrical nature of the solar system.
Is it a problem that many are beginning to distrust the mainstream oracles of truth? Or is this simply a reflection that critical thinking is not dead and that alternative media allow free thinkers to cast their nets a bit wider? I guess the answer depends on which version of reality you embrace.
Lynn
This photo is of my maternal Grandfather, who died about 20 years ago at age 95. On his birthday in mid-October last fall, this photo mysteriously opened itself overnight on my computer. When I turned on the monitor in the morning, his face greeted me. I had forgotten that images scanned from a photo album were even on that computer, and the file names consisted of the long numerical format assigned by digital cameras. Unless viewing thumbnails, no one would guess what each picture contained. As if to make sure this trick had caught my attention, the same thing was repeated the following morning. Some intelligence had picked out the proper image from among several hundred, and opened it on the desktop,
This is an example of the many anomalies that happen frequently in our home, and is not particularly remarkable or unusual in itself. Objects frequently move, polished stones appear from thin air, and our little dog Sophie somehow routinely moves her favorite chewy treats into the far end of my pillowcase or under the bottom bed sheet at bedtime. She accomplishes this while appearing to be curled up and sleeping. Quite a trick.
This is my reality. Is it shared by anyone else? I've collected a few stories in response to my blog articles, but I suspect that for most people, these anomalies would not fit into their definition of reality. As pointed out repeatedly in the channeled Seth material, reality is uniquely perceived by each individual, and yet there is a collective version of reality experienced by most everyone.
This blog is largely about how I perceive reality, and the tentative conclusions reached by my analysis of it. I consider this to be a spiritually-oriented blog, despite commenting frequently on news items or political subject matter. I view my reality through a deeply spiritual lens, and am convinced that we are experiencing a remarkable shift on our planet as one age ends and another begins.
I've made frequent mention that our nation plays a leading role in the "The Evil Empire", for understanding this is vital for understanding the Shift. I'm fascinated by history, and have researched the roots of "Evil" in our nation. Of course I use the term "Evil" in a qualified sense, not propounding a moral or religious slant. The term does seem to fit in a metaphorical sense, since the dark acts perpetrated by the PTB (Powers That Be) would clearly fit most definitions of evil. For example, killing millions of people and contaminating vast areas of Iraq and Afghanistan with depleted uranium (DU) is Evil in my opinion.
I may do a series on the contribution Nazi philosophy has made to the Evil Empire; it's fascinating to trace the history of this.
Lynn
Speaker of the House John Boner (ok it's Boehner, but who can resist?) is threatening a showdown with Obama over the illegal war action in Libya. If he carries through and fights this battle to the finish, my opinion of him will definitely improve.
The intervention in Libya is a clear illustration of how US governmental policy does not reflect the will or interests of the American people. There was absolutely no defensible reason to pick a fight with Muammar Gaddafi. Whatever high-sounding principles we ever pretended to have for "spreading democracy" in the world have long since crumbled into DU-contaminated dust.
Despite looking like a street thug, Gaddafi is one of the least objectionable dictators within that particular genre. He has done a great deal to improve the lives of his people, including a massive water project that promised to turn desert into arable farmland. He "found religion" after Reagan ordered bombing of his palace, and totally swore off terrorism of any kind. He has done NOTHING that threatens our interests for nearly 30 years.
What are Gaddafi's sins that put him on the shit list with the US and NATO? He refused to play ball with the Globalist banksters. He kept Libyan monetary reserves stored in gold in Libyan vaults. His policies were tailored to Libyan interests, rather than be sumissive to the Globalist masters. Most significantly, he kept Libyan oil out of the dominating reach of the Globalists.
For these sins, Gadaffi is as good as dead. The so-called "color revolution" is led by - guess who - Al Qaeda operatives. These are the supposed "good guys" we are blasting up Libya to support? Wait a minute! I thought these were the "bad guys"! We often hear of predator drones taking out Al Qaeda leaders in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and just a few weeks ago the legendary Bin Laden was supposedly dispatched to his reward. What gives? How to tell good Al Qaeda from bad?
Well, do you s'pose that the entire thing is just a ruse? One clue might be that Al Qaeda was invented and chartered by the CIA during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Since they fall into the category of "CIA asset", this understanding should put a different spin on the situation. By the way, one of their first acts in areas of Libya they control was to establish a central bank under control of the Globalists. The oil they are shipping now pours proceeds into Globalist coffers. Look surprised!
Look for every regime in the middle east to be threatened by "color revolutions" unless they submit to Globalist control. We'll see how many get the message following the Libyan example.
Lynn
News Item: Newt Gingrich's nascent presidential campaign crashed and burned as his entire staff bailed. Newt took it in stride, evidently feeling no pain as he and his wife continued on the two-week pleasure cruise that his advisers had urged against.
Newt's a "big picture" kind of guy, who can't be bothered with arcane details, so the patience of his staff apparently was tested beyond its limits. One item that made waves was Newt's recent trashing of Rep. Paul Ryan's proposals for health care an example of "right-wing social engineering".
Newt's comments illustrate the shocking reality of just how far right the political spectrum has shifted since back in the day when he helped define the radical edge of right-wing thought with the infamous "Contract with America". Now Newt can position himself as a mainstream conservative while the new generation of extremists take up their positions on the edge.
The radical right is flirting with fascist philosophy, attacking Big Government while remaining quite comfortable and cozy with Big Corporations shifting power into their domain. In addition, we see elements of class warfare emerging as the Depression deepens. We saw how passionately Republicans defended tax cuts for the rich; Banksters and Wall Street have raked in record profits as the rest of the economy struggles. The first targets on the budget cutting block are unemployment benefits and anything benefiting the poor.
Unfortunately, progressive forces are bereft of leadership. There is no standard bearer leading the battle against creeping fascism. Despite a Liberal-sounding platform, Obama is difficult to distinguish from his predecessor. He squandered his initial political capital on the ill-conceived health care bill, the Gulag at Gitmo remains open for business and warmongering is more robust than ever. The nefarious Patriot Act was renewed with little debate, and the environment continues to be trashed as the EPA apparently allows industry to write the regulations.
My use of the word fascist is not merely a partisan attack on the Right; There is ample evidence that elements of Nazism survived Germany's defeat in WWII. This has been well documented by authors such as Peter Levenda and Joseph Farrell. I find it fascinating to study how this has influenced the rise of the Evil American Empire. More will be forthcoming on this.
Lynn
