Whose Side is He On?

Man in hospital gown
steals $50, tries to flee on
motorized shopping cart.

Red Craig:
Thank you for your long and thoughtful comment. I have looked at your rather thorough and somewhat persuasive web site but have not as yet had time to investigate it as much as I might like. However, I might say briefly: (1) there seems to be quite a difference of opinion about the profitability of nuclear plants, especially relating to the circumstances under which they were built and maintained, (2) If they are so lucrative why are subsidies so often demanded, (3) I think many people have been harmed by the use of nuclear waste, if only in the use of it in armaments, but I suspect in other cases as well, (4) I do not think you should just dismiss Chernobyl and Three Mile so cavalierly, (5) your whole approach seems to be based almost solely on the economics of energy, and (6) Do you really expect me to believe that the technology or techniques for rendering nuclear waste harmless were perfected 50 years ago but no one was allowed to do it? This is like someone inventing fire but not telling anyone about it. Quite frankly, I do not believe it, and on your otherwise thorough account I find no verification for this (did I just miss it?).

I confess to not being certain just whose side President Obama is on. The recent revelations about Timothy Geithner have prompted me to reflect on this. You will recall that Geithner was appointed by Obama and he has fully supported him up until now. There seems to be little doubt that Geithner has been on the side of the financial industry rather than on the side of “we the people.” In any case, if you look at President Obama’s achievements in office you will find them quite impressive. He managed to pass the stimulus bill, he has certainly improved our international standing, he is about to pass some kind of health care bill, has closed Guantanamo (or is in the process), is withdrawing troops from Iraq (or is in the process), has attempted (at least somewhat) to deal with the Israeli/Palestinian problem, has made some changes in lobbying, and I guess other such improvements. But if you think about it, nothing he has done has materially or substantially improved conditions for ordinary citizens. Certainly his escalation of the “war” in Afghanistan and its spill over into Pakistan and now Yemen, has nothing but a negative effect upon our conditions here at home. He has, of course, bailed out the banks and some of our larger corporations. Now it appears he favors the Senate Health Care Bill, widely regarded as a blessing for the Insurance companies, rather than the House Bill which does not (so much). In lieu of a public option he has said he would like greater subsidies for citizens to buy health insurance. But buying health insurance is going to be mandatory, thus giving the insurance companies 30 million more subscribers, and if the plan is more subsidies for individuals to buy this insurance, this is really just giving more money to the insurance companies. He also seems to be in favor of taxing health insurance rather than the wealthy. I cannot comment on his supposedly secret deals with the pharmaceuticals and others, but in general it seems to me he has been and continues to be on the side of the Insurance and Pharmaceutical industries rather than on the side of the ordinary citizens who are the ones with the most pressing and urgent needs.

On the other hand, it is true that Obama has appointed a transgendered individual to an important position, it is also true he seems favorably disposed towards Gays and Lesbians (but has not been very active on their behalf), and he has also appointed many Hispanics, but he has not done away with don’t ask don’t tell (although he easily could have), apparently has not been very interested in African-American problems, and so on. What he has done with respect to these kinds of problems, it seems to me, has been mostly cosmetic, and has done little or nothing to improve the lives of ordinary citizens. More importantly, he has done very little (so far at least) to improve the employment situation, and what he is now doing seems to me more like an afterthought than a well planned attack on such a serious problem. Similarly, his approach to foreclosures seems to be more talk than action. In general he seems not to have lived up to the many promises he made to improve the lives of ordinary Americans. Until he does so I will have to assume he is just another politician in hock to big business and doing their bidding as usual. Given the corrupt nature of our political situation perhaps he has little choice. I wonder if there is anyone who could make a difference? I think the situation may be ripe for a third party, perhaps even Howard Dean.

LKBIQ:
I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. . . . Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money-power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.
Unknown (sometimes attributed to Abraham Lincoln)

TILT:
Opals were believed by many to bring bad luck.