Deteriorating Infrastructure, Exclusionary Secrecy, And Tax Cuts For The Wealthy Undermining Us All

States Feel Left Out Of Disaster Planning

If it isn't bad enough that our total infrastructure is in a dismal state of deterioration, now comes Bush and his gang of fascist thugs to propose even more tax cuts that will benefit the top 10% income earners in our nation, all the while spending trillions elsewhere, and cutting basis services and badly needed infrastructure upgrades in our own "homeland."

Once again we see how evil the secret manner in which Bush and company operate undermines our own integrity, general welfare, and national security.

A decision by the Bush administration to rewrite in secret the nation's emergency response blueprint has angered state and local emergency officials, who worry that Washington is repeating a series of mistakes that contributed to its bungled response to Hurricane Katrina nearly two years ago.

State and local officials in charge of responding to disasters say that their input in shaping the National Response Plan was ignored in recent months by senior White House and Department of Homeland Security officials, despite calls by congressional investigators for a shared overhaul of disaster planning in the United States.

"In my 19 years in emergency management, I have never experienced a more polarized environment between state and federal government," said Albert Ashwood, Oklahoma's emergency management chief and president of a national association of state emergency managers.

The national plan is supposed to guide how federal, state and local governments, along with private and nonprofit groups, work together during emergencies. Critics contend that a unilateral approach by Washington produced an ill-advised response plan at the end of 2004 -- an unwieldy, 427-page document that emphasized stopping terrorism at the expense of safeguarding against natural disasters.

Bruce Baughman, Ashwood's predecessor as president of the National Emergency Management Association and a 32-year veteran of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, said that a draft of the revised plan released to state officials last week marks a step backward because its authors did not set requirements or consult with field operators nationwide who will use it to request federal aid, adjust state and county plans, and train workers.

Bush May Try to Cut Corporate Tax Rates: President Cites Need To Compete Globally

A careful study of our corporate tax rate--after all the loopholes, shelters, scams and frauds are taken into account--will reveal that the average tax paid by big corporations is 5% or less. The corporate tax rate is supposed to be 35%. If all the big businesses paid their fair share of taxes--the full 35%--we would be able to fund all of our infrastructure needs, all of our education needs, and all of our welfare needs without ever having to raid Social Security, privatize anything, or screw with the taxes of the average taxpayer. But that is not what this president, or anyone in Congress, really wants for us. They have all abandoned the principles embedded in our Constitution, and completely ignored the stated purposes of our government as laid out in the Preamble of our Constitution.

President Bush said yesterday that he is considering a fresh plan to cut tax rates for U.S. corporations to make them more competitive around the world, an initiative that could further inflame a battle with the Democratic Congress over spending and taxes and help define the remainder of his tenure.

Advisers presented Bush with a series of ideas to restructure corporate taxes, possibly eliminating narrowly targeted breaks to pay for a broader, across-the-board rate cut. In an interview with a small group of journalists afterward, Bush said he was "inclined" to send a corporate tax package to Congress, although he expressed uncertainty about its political viability.

The president's comments came as he tried to calm volatile stock and mortgage markets and reassure the country that the economy is fundamentally strong. Despite mounting concern over the downturn in the housing market, he dismissed proposals advanced by prominent Democrats to grant government-chartered Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac more freedom to buy mortgages and mortgage-backed securities. And he ruled out any taxpayer bailout of lenders threatened by the subprime home-loan crisis.

But what is not being mentioned is that the banking industry and mortgage companies have done this to themselves through excessive valuation of real estate, usury in lending practices, and de facto redlining of prime real estate.

A good example of this is a piece of property my wife's aunt and uncle bought as a retirement place on East Lake in Holly Grove, Arkansas. Three years ago the property was assessed at $88,000. Most recently, despite the fact that the real estate market is suffering a severe downturn and banks are having trouble managing the mortgage market, the assessment was adjusted for increased value and improvements at $175,000.

Now, anyone that has traveled through most of Arkansas can attest, the housing market and property values down here are severely depressed and there is a lot of property that is vacant, dilapidated, and left for the tax man to auction off (the last auction notice newspaper for my neck of Arkansas had over 400 pieces of property for sale by the state assessor). So how is it that my wife's relatives have suffered almost a 100% increase in property value over three short years? The tax man, the bankers, and those that run the real estate processes in this nation are deliberately trying to price these "good" properties out of the hands of those that dare to use their meager life savings toward assuring their last few years won't be spent in abject poverty. But these real estate manipulators want this property to go to wealthier folks so they can all get a bigger cut of the pie when these properties are sold, assessed, improved, mortgaged, or subject of equity loans.

But none of the money garnered by these folks will be spent on improving our services, our infrastructure, or our lot in life... never mind national security or safety.

Meanwhile, the Enron-like fraud that David Sirota speaks to in his "Hostile Takeover" book continues to rape us all:

Bankruptcy Trustee Sues Big Investor in Refco

And corporate big wigs are allowed to pocket all kinds of money while subjecting workers to unsafe conditions, bilking of their retirement funds based on phony claims of corporate hardship, and a general screwing over of the American working stiff:

Collapse Is Latest Fight For Coal's Best Friend

And there is more proof that we working stiffs are not getting a fair deal:

Masters of the Economy

And of course our entire farming subsidy approach is skewed toward the big money, screwing over some of the hardest working stiffs in our nation: the small farmer:

The Farmer’s Nightmare?

Of course, we shouldn't blame just Bush and his GOP puppets, because the Democrats are just as busy buying into exclusion, secrecy, abandonment of principle and a general screwing over of the average American and the average American family.

Warrantless Surrender: Congress is Stampeded into Another Compromise of Americans' Rights

And, as we are always being told, our money is being well-spent in places other than the US:

Weapons Given to Iraq Are Missing: GAO Estimates 30% of Arms Are Unaccounted For

A genuine example of how the "war over there" is making it safer for us over here.

Manipulating The Polls, The Press, The Media & The Rest Of Us

When a Poll Is Not Really a Poll

We can no longer rely on the polls offered to us as proof that something is, or is not, true, wanted, desired, or in the mainstream of public opinion. Anyone with genuine training in survey, poll and social research methods can attest that over 70% of the polls and surveys taken are poorly designed, have an inherent (and greatly desired) bias in the way questions are offered, and are eventually manipulated before being released to the general public. Even the major polling houses--even the once revered Gallop organization--are releasing polls, surveys and research results that are inherently flawed, often by design.

The research coming out of many--if not most--research centers affiliated with major colleges and universities are under increased scrutiny because the people conducting them are either poorly trained in the methodologies, or are deliberately skewing the results because it will enhance their careers, their influence, or their cash flow from the organizations conducting the polls. Most of the major think tanks have not only an ideological bias, but are deliberately funded by industry and/or political sources that want a specific result. The Brookings Institute, Cato Institute, Heritage Foundation, Democratic Leadership Council, Enterprise Institute, and many other think tanks are biased by not only the ideology and the funding sources, but also by the hiring practices that do not allow competing viewpoints to be expressed in a scholarly manner.

Now we have the GOP holding a straw poll that requires those that wish to participate to pay a fee. This, of course, violates the first rule of thumb regarding legitimate polls: randomization. If only those willing to pay for participating in a GOP political poll are included in the process and outcome, then there is inherently a skew toward those willing to financially support the current GOP leadership.

Even in polls and research that are aimed at a political party and ideology should observe the rules about randomization... but we are living in an era where even the corruption of Tamany Hall, the Teapot Dome Scandal, and Watergate are surpassed in regard to audacity, willingness to do almost anything for control, and plain old manipulative bovine excrement.

It appears that the real goal of this manipulation is to raid the pockets of loyal Republican die-hards and load the coffers of the RNC with "soft money" that can be used outside of the rules that restrict particular candidates. The question now becomes which candidate will the RNC be pushing down out throats after it gets all this soft money? Of course, we can almost guarantee it won't go to support an underdog candidate that might actually have something other than the usual Washington insider bovine excrement and manipulation to offer.

High on the list of superpowers a campaign might wish for would be the ability to manipulate opinion surveys, and on Saturday in Ames, Iowa, Republican presidential contenders will get to live that dream through the Iowa straw poll.

The event, a tradition in election cycles in which there is no GOP incumbent, is billed as an indicator of how party members will vote in the Republican caucus in January. But while no one can stage-manage a random telephone poll, it is open season when any voting-age Iowan or Iowa college student with a $35 ticket has a say.

Few of the 40,000 people who are expected to descend on Iowa State University on Saturday have to reach into their own pockets to pay to participate in the so-called poll. The campaigns are more than happy to cover the entrance fee -- and so much more.

Republican presidential candidates looking to score high in the straw poll lure Iowans to Ames with not only free tickets, but also transportation, food and entertainment.

Before heading in to give a short speech, candidates will hold forth in the tents that each campaign rents around the Hilton Coliseum. (In 1999, President Bush, who carried the day, paid $43,500 for his well-located pavilion and $62,000 for pulled-pork sandwiches.) This year's favorite, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, advertises "music, barbecue and a whole lot of fun at our tent" on his Web site.

The proceeds from ticket sales, tent rentals, parking, etc., will go to the Iowa Republican Party, making the straw poll a bald money-making venture for the state GOP. A former state finance chairman said as much in stark terms to the Online NewsHour: "The Iowa straw poll was devised as a fundraising gimmick for the state party and nothing more than that."

Romney's Cash Beckons Iowans To Straw Poll

Walking A Hard Line On Campaign Trail in Iowa: Can Anti-Immigration Fervor Keep Tancredo in the Race?

More Bad News From The Brits... We Don't Want Any Part Of US's War Crimes

British Criticize Air Attacks in Afghan Region

Now that Gordon Brown is the Prime Minister for Great Britain, we may see more actions of this type. Clearly the British are responding to international pressure to distance themselves from some of the actions taken by US forces and the Pentagon because they clearly violate international law, treaties signed and ratified by the US, and general decency.

Some of my friends are serving in Afghanistan and they are disgusted with the things that are ongoing in that part of the world. They are seeing the fraud and failures first hand, as well as efforts to minimize the fallout, media attention and revelations by troops vis e-mail and letters sent home.

A senior British commander in southern Afghanistan said in recent weeks that he had asked that American Special Forces leave his area of operations because the high level of civilian casualties they had caused was making it difficult to win over local people.

Other British officers here in Helmand Province, speaking on condition of anonymity, criticized American Special Forces for causing most of the civilian deaths and injuries in their area. They also expressed concerns that the Americans’ extensive use of air power was turning the people against the foreign presence as British forces were trying to solidify recent gains against the Taliban.

It takes a lot for a career military officer--in any nation's military command structure--to speak out in this manner. There is a hell of a lot of inherent pressure to shut up, toe the line, and follow orders. But there is a line that good career officers do not willingly cross because it is a violation of international law, a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), specific military regulations (each branch has its own set of regulations), and constitute crimes against humanity.

So, when senior commanders speak, even under the cloak of anonymity, we should listen carefully... and heed the very idea that they are speaking out as a warning that something is gravely amiss.

An American military spokesman denied that the request for American forces to leave was ever made, either formally or otherwise, or that they had caused most of the casualties. But the episode underlines differences of opinion among NATO and American military forces in Afghanistan on tactics for fighting Taliban insurgents, and concerns among soldiers about the consequences of the high level of civilians being killed in fighting.

It is not surprising that US spokespersons are denying these things. Denial is the first line of defense in the military public relations handbook. But even more significant is the fact that denial is the first and only rule under the Bush administration's fouled up way of proceeding when it comes to the so-called "war on terror," the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, and the criminality of its military strategy and actions.

Most of us having served honorably in the US military are ashamed of the way Bush has conducted himself and issued orders in regard to these matters. The use of torture to coerce prisoners is a dishonorable act on the part of any soldier. It is inherently evil and we--the United States--have chastised and criminalized such acts on the part of our enemies in Germany during both World Wars, the Koreans and Chinese during the Korean War, the Vietnamese during that subsequent war, and by those regimes that have routinely used such approaches, including North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt, Turkey, Argentina, Venezuela, Chile, Iran, and elsewhere. But we have been two-faced and hypocritical in the past by allowing other nations to enjoy our aid and support while enduring such criminal actions.

These are criminal acts... and we helped to define them as such by the treaties and international laws that we have helped to establish.

A precise tally of civilian deaths is difficult to pin down, but one reliable count puts the number killed in Helmand this year at close to 300 civilians, the vast majority of them caused by foreign and Afghan forces, rather than the Taliban.

“Everyone is concerned about civilian casualties,” the senior British commander said. “Of course it is counterproductive if civilians get injured, but we’ve got to pick up the pack of cards that we have got. Other people have been operating in our area before us.”

Of course there isn't a precise tally of the casualties: we haven't bothered to count, or even cared to count. But I can empathize with the senior British commander because I have had to pick up after some other idiot has mucked up the project or campaign. I hate picking up after someone else has already shat upon the works.

It is these American teams that are coming under criticism. They tend to work in small units that rely heavily on air cover because they are vulnerable to large groups of insurgents. Such Special Forces teams have often called in airstrikes in Helmand and other places where civilians have subsequently been found to have suffered casualties.

In just two cases, airstrikes killed 31 nomads west of Kandahar in November last year and another 57 villagers, half of them women and children, in western Afghanistan in April. In both cases, United States Special Forces were responsible for calling in the airstrikes.

The use of air strikes indiscriminately is a violation of the Geneva Conventions. In fact, under these conventions and the UN Charter, aggressor troops are required to use specific caution when operating in areas populated by civilians, especially when calling for artillery and air strikes. Evidently, not only has Bush and company ignored these LAWS, but also his own claim to Christianity, decency and American principles.

But the senior British commander, who spoke on condition of anonymity during an interview in July, said that in Sangin, which has been calm recently, there was no longer a need for United States Special Forces. “There aren’t large bodies of Taliban to fight anymore; we are dealing with small groups and we are trying to kick-start reconstruction and development,” he said.

Orders had just come down from the NATO force’s headquarters in Kabul, which is led by Gen. Dan K. McNeill of the United States, re-emphasizing the need to avoid civilian deaths, he said.

“The phrase is: ‘It may be legal but is it appropriate?’ No one is saying it is illegal to use air power, but is there any other way of doing it if there is a risk of collateral damage?” he said.

People seem to be forgetting that it is only "collateral damage" when it isn't your troops or civilians being killed, wounded or maimed for life. Collateral damage is a euphemism for not really giving a damn who was wounded, maimed or killed, as long as they weren't my friends.

A Predictable Outcome... Even As I Said Months Ago

As British Leave, Basra Deteriorates: Violence Rises in Shiite City Once Called a Success Story
Months ago, when under the direction of Tony Blair, the British announced that it would be withdrawing troops from Basra and other southern parts of Iraq just when the US was launching a predictable failure policy of troop surge and retention "in country," I predicted that Basra and other parts of Iraq would erupt in sectarian violence.

Indeed, that has been the case. My information is that the mainstream media is just now getting hold of this information and that the decline into violence and disorder has been ongoing since shortly after the British announced to the world the withdrawal and troop downsizing effort. While the violence is currently between Shi'ites, it is still sectarian in nature because it is based upon the alliance to one of three religious leaders laying claim to leadership for all of the region. Of course, Iranian Shi'ite clerics vying for power in and around Iran are also involved, even if the Iranian government is not.

As British forces pull back from Basra in southern Iraq, Shiite militias there have escalated a violent battle against each other for political supremacy and control over oil resources, deepening concerns among some U.S. officials in Baghdad that elements of Iraq's Shiite-dominated national government will turn on one another once U.S. troops begin to draw down.

Three major Shiite political groups are locked in a bloody conflict that has left the city in the hands of militias and criminal gangs, whose control extends to municipal offices and neighborhood streets. The city is plagued by "the systematic misuse of official institutions, political assassinations, tribal vendettas, neighborhood vigilantism and enforcement of social mores, together with the rise of criminal mafias that increasingly intermingle with political actors," a recent report by the International Crisis Group said.

Why The Rich Get Richer... Congress Gives Them More Than We Regular Folks

America’s Most Coddled

Senator Charles Schumer got partway off the fence this week on the issue of whether the most highly paid Americans — mainly partners at hedge funds and private equity firms — should continue to enjoy a super-low tax rate. Currently, at a typical hedge fund or private equity firm, partners pay a flat tax of 15 percent on most of their mega-earnings. Salaried employees and wage earners — the majority of the work force — face income tax rates as high as 35 percent.

That's right folks, those of us that put the sweat in sweat equity can pay as much as 35% to the tax man, but those of us that do nothing but deposit cash into already fat accounts pay 15%, or less if their funds manager is astute enough to use off-shore accounts, take advantage of tax write-offs, or use tax shelters in an efficient manner.

But you and I cannot take advantage of these very same loopholes, shelters and methods of defrauding the tax man because we are not allowed the same deductions as the very wealthy or the big corporations. According to David Sirota's research, most big corporations pay 5% income tax because they are given so many tax incentives, tax-free subsidies, protectionistic import-export subsidies, and deductions we cannot access. For instance, even though our real estate transactions are a major plank of our retirement and investment strategies--and despite the fact that our mortgage agreements require us to maintain, repair and improve the property--we cannot deduct the cost of repairs, maintenance or improvement except in terms of the interest we pay on any loans we take out. But a corporation can deduct ALL of its costs for maintenance, repairs, upkeep and improvement... in its entirety, amortized over several years. If a corporation decides to lease a vehicle, a property, or equipment, the deduction is not amortized, but taken at full value as it is incurred.

Not only do the wealthy have more access, more influence, and more control over our government, but they do not have to pay for it like the rest of us. We get screwed over by them and our political leaders on a daily basis... and they take a bite out of our salaries as well through usury and unprincipled business practices, including outright consumer fraud that our governments (state and federal) allow to occur freely (i.e. bank fees, late charges on credit cards, over-the-limit fees on credit cards, and gas prices).

The Farm Bill Continues A Legacy Of Fraud, Graft & Power-Brokering

I’m Ripping You Off

That’s right: taxpayers are subsidizing a New York columnist not to plant crops in a forest in Oregon.

That's right, folks, the government is still paying rich folks to plant--or in some cases, not to plant--crops that do not contribute to the economy in a meaningful manner, except to make rich individuals and big agro-businesses richer, or at least tax exempt in some manner or another.

Farm Subsidies Seem Immune To an Overhaul

Farm-state lawmakers expected to prevail in keeping old farm subsidies largely in place, thwarting bipartisan effort to overhaul system and in spite of White House threat of veto; federal payments have long been criticized as enriching big farm interests, violating trade agreements and neglecting small family farms; Speaker Nancy Pelosi, critic of farm subsidies, helps to secure more modest changes, pushing House Agriculture Committee to provide $1.8 billion for programs that aid fruit and vegetable growers and deflating some traditional opposition to farm bill; she notes that bill ends subsidies for richest farmers and closes loophole that let some farmers exceed subsidy limits by owning partnerships in multiple farms; critics in Congress say measure will perpetuate overly generous subsidy system at time when American farmers are well-positioned to weather changes

As taxpayers we have been led to believe that the tax exemptions and subsidies contained in the "farm bill" helps the family farmer and the small to mid-size farming business. But the way it works is that the larger corporate farming industry grabs a lot of these funds, leaving the family farmer, the small-to-mid-size farmer, and the average taxpayer in the wind. Pelosi can claim that this newest version of the farm bill closes some of the loopholes, but it just isn't so. In fact, many analysts agree that it created more holes than it closed. This bill just demonstrates that the Democrats are equally as inept, corrupt and stupid as the Republicans were during their last reign of terror on the American family, taxpayers, and infrastructure.

We need a farm bill that subsidizes producers of quality food crops, not something that makes the farming industry giants richer. We need a farm bill that encourages independent production of legacy and heirloom varieties, organic produce, and high quality food crops. We need to cease subsidies for cotton, tobacco and other crops that are produced for the larger profit=at-all-cost corporations, like R.J. Reynolds and its subsidiaries. We need to cease subsidizing crops that are primarily for export and let the natural market fluctuations control the price of these crops (i.e. milo, cotton, tobacco, feed corn), as well as subsidizing the American divisions of companies like Chiquita Brands that engage in illegal (and immoral) subsidization of terrorists and drug peddling paramilitary rebels in Central and South America. We need to return to basic American values, including above board business operations, placing stringent restrictions on how corporations can deposit its graft into the pockets of our political leaders in exchange for enhanced access and influence peddling, profiteering and fraud that is overlooked by our Congress and Executive Branch, and the overall screwing of those of us that hand over a third of our income to a government we can no longer trust.

Minneapolis Bridge Is Symptom Of Major Infrastructure Decay

Interstate Bridge Collapses Into Mississippi River in Minneapolis

Dozens Missing as Minneapolis Search Efforts Are Halted

Problems With Bridge Uncovered in 1990: Minnesota Officials Warned Span Was 'Structurally Deficient'

3-D Animation of Bridge Collapse

Having traveled by car around and throughout this nation, I can almost certainly guarantee that the bridge collapse in Minneapolis will not be the last bridge over the Mississippi to collapse over the next 10 years. In fact, now that I live in Arkansas, and cross an older steel structure bridge into Mississippi at least two or three times every three or four months, I can guarantee that a lot of the bridges connect east to west (and vice versa) are in danger because they are neglected in the same manner as the bridge in Minnesota, and the levees in Louisiana.

In Massachusetts there has been concern over bridge infrastructure for over 20 years, yet the amount of work done to shore up and maintain these bridges are almost nil. Even when work has been done, the type of work amounts to a band-aid on a gaping wound, or a drop in a bucket considering the work that needs to be done.

Then again, the amount of fraud associated with federal and state infrastructure projects are illustrated by the amount of failures and cost overruns--as well as outright fraudulent billing--associated with the multi-billion dollars spent on the "Big Dig." The engineering design of the "Big Dig" was quite sound. However, the use of substandard materials and methods have caused collapsed tunnels and bridge problems.

Then, too, we have a much neglected inner coastal waterway along the entire Eastern Seaboard that places almost all of our shipping in danger of attack, terrorist attack, or problems of running aground.

The rebuilding of levees in Louisiana--when they are rebuilt--are once again adhering to standards and dimensions that will once again lead to disaster. The Army Corps of Engineers, which was once the epitome of professional excellence in all types of engineering, is now a political football, much in the same way as is the EPA, the entire Department of the Interior, and especially our National Parks systems.

The Mississippi has become treacherous to navigate in many spots because the money we once spent on dredging and maintaining this vital waterway is no longer allocated, or even spent in appropriate ways. In fact, the casinos operating alongside of the Mighty Muddy Mississippi spend more money on maintaining their "waterway status" than most states spend on such things.

Meanwhile, we are spending so much money in Iraq and Afghanistan that estimates now reach as high as 1.5 TRILLION--that's right, TRILLION--on projects that are neither being built in a timely manner, nor according to any standards that would be acceptable to even the least trained taxpayer. In one such case, KBR, a subsidiary of Halliburton, requested payment of over 40% of the contracted price for administrative costs without having built one single structure or even having the proper materials delivered... and our government paid it, without a blink of an eye.

We are--and have been for decades--neglecting our highways, bridges, ports, waterways, railways and airports. We are wasting millions on unnecessary and ineffective airport security methods than on maintaining sufficient runways and safety measures. We are wasting even more millions on secret spying and data collection methods and programs than on efficient ways to assure we can prevent terrorist attacks on our nuclear, chemical and biological infrastructure. When we add the overall neglect of our railways and highways, and the overall neglect regarding HAZMAT and incident response, we see that our nation is vulnerable to the nth degree.

The programs of railway and highway infrastructure--as well as safety and security--that were started by Eisenhower as a means of protecting our nation (all of our interstate highways were initially designed to allow the US military to respond to incidents) are being ignored and neglected.

How many lives must be lost before our leaders will return to standards of decency, true representation and the clarion call of fairness? While our politicians are busy thumping their collective chests on who is better at defending our nation, our risks, dangers and threats rise exponentially... and are ignored while we spend millions on corporations that are defrauding us out of taxes, royalties, subsidies, no-bid contracts and projects that undermine all of the infrastructure laid down by Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson.

What the hell is going on in Washington? A question we need to ask ourselves over the next four election cycles as we considered removing all the pieces of rectal tissue that have been reaching into our collective tax pockets without providing a return on the investment, taking millions in corporate bribes in the form of campaign contributions, and in lining their pockets and beefing up their influence and control dossiers in our Capitol.