Naomi Klein Finally “Gets It”

by Scott Creighton

Naomi Klein has been running around for the longest time supporting the events in Copenhagen like they were a real effort to save the world or something.  I figured she had completely sold out or was so high on her own rhetoric, she couldn’t see the forest for the trees (little pun there). 

Well, one of the most vocal and coherent anti-globalization and anti-neoliberal Friedman economic reform advocates has finally “woken up”.

The woman who literally wrote the book exposing how these globalist monsters have been using their “free-market” reforms to loot nations all across the world for decades, has finally realized the Global Warming Crisis is being used as a massive, world-wide “disaster capitalist” ploy to empower the World Bank and the IMF to do the exact same thing to EVERY poor nation, at will, in whatever sequence they so desire, and all under the ruse of the very same “disaster”… Global Warming.

You know, I just blogged about this, and the headline I put on is “Climate Structural Adjustment,” because this is what the International Monetary Fund was so famous for doing. You need help? Your country is collapsing? Here’s our list of demands: privatize your water, lay off your people. But this is on a massive, massive scale. So, yeah, I would call it blackmail. And I think that, unfortunately, countries are so desperate for aid that they may well accept this terrible deal. And that’s—those are the stakes here.  Klein

Not only has she made these statements on her website and on Democracy Now, but she and HUNDREDS of others at the conference in Copenhagen, got up and walked out to join the protesters outside. Imagine that.

Klein said that it was “the world upside down” at these talks. Serious activists whom have devoted years to this issue, being refused entry to the Bella Center (where the conference is taking place) while oil company executives are walking around freely through out the entire process and attending the “green room” private meetings with political leaders from around the world.  Activists are being arrested outside the talks who have done nothing wrong, but according to the other interviewee, a new Danish law allows for the police to arrest someone PRIOR to them doing anything as long as the police have reason to believe they MIGHT interfere with the conference. Kind of like the “pre-crime” laws Obama bandied about a couple months back.

And, you know, it comes down in the end to these power plays of using aid really as a weapon. And we saw that this morning with Hillary Clinton.  Naomi Klein

Welcome back to the fight, Naomi. We missed you.  If you have a few moments Naomi, read this. It’s All About Globalization, Stupid. WTFU

Advertisements

Keith O Gets Feisty… Finally

Most of you here know that I am not much of a Olbermann fan, haven’t been for a while. The man made his career literally off the corpse of Phil Donahues show when Phil had the bad taste to put people on his show that claimed there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction prior to the illegal invasion of Iraq… then along came Olberman who dutifully ran with a plethora of retired generals and military advisors hyping the war.

But, that said, Mr. Olberman finally took a stand the other night, and it is worth mentioning. He said this healthcare reform bill is nothing of the sort, and it is pretty much a mandate to purchase “protection money” from mobsters.  And he is right.  But then he went even further, said something that I have been thinking about writing and saying for sometime now… as a matter of fact, I did write it in August of this year; he said the president can pretty much consider him a criminal right now because he won’t, under and circumstances, buy insurance under this mandate. 

Now, he does kinda let Obama off the hook a bit, acting as if Obama is being “forced” into this, rather than pointing out like Greenwald does so well that Obama isn’t the victim in all this, he’s actually the perp… but, at least Keith O is finally taking a real stand. We will see how long it lasts.

“I call on all those whose conscious urges them to fight to use the only weapon let too us if this if this bill as currently constituted becomes law.

We Must Not Buy Federally Mandated Insurance if this cheesy counterfeit of reform is all we can buy.

No Single Payer… no sale.

No Public Option… no sale.

No Medicare Buy-In… no sale.

I am one of the self insured, albeit by choice, and I herby pledge that I will not buy this perversion of healthcare reform.

Pass this bill at your peril senators and sign it at your’s Mr. President.

I will not buy this insurance. Brand me a law-breaker if you chose. Fine me if you will, jail me if you must. But if the Medicare buy in goes and the mandate stays, the people who fought so hard and so sincerely to bring sanity to this system must kill this mutated ugly version of their dream because those elected by us, to act for us, have forgotten what must be the golden rule of healthcare reform. It is the same rule to which physicians are bound by oath:

First; Do No Harm.”

***UPDATE*** Looks like Ed Schultz is getting into the act as well… he says the base thinks Obama is nothing more than a sellout, and had a guest on from the insurance industry who said the senate version of the bill has a series of loop-holes in it that the insurance companies actually dictated to members of the senate.  He also points out that as Obama was making his recent fear mongering speech about supporting the Lieberman plan, Max Baccus was standing right by his side. Baccus, as Ed points out, has taken the MOST money from the healthcare/insurance giants, something to the tune of 1500 dollars… per day.

Salon.com’s Glenn Greenwald: Current Health Reform Bill Does More Harm Than Good

Progressive senator Jay Rockefeller, said the following ” I didn’t get some things I wanted. So What? So what. Theres a whole lot of things in there I have been dreaming about for years and years…”

That’s a Rockefeller saying that, by the way…

The interviewer, David Shyster (heehee) tried to stick to the company line by suggesting that “the left” would eventually see all the wonderful stuff in the bill and get on board, or that they were just “angry young men” ready to be mad at the president no matter what he did.  Glen took care of that line of propaganda rather quickly. 

“I don’t think this has anything to do with “anger” or anything that Jay Rockefeller just said. I think the argument of why the bill should be defeated as Dr. Dean is expressing and others is not that “well because we didn’t get everything we wanted, sink the bill”. That’s not it. The argument is much more substantive than that. The argument is that this bill does more harm than good from the perspective of healthcare policy and how our government works. Essentially it requires by force of law, 10s of millions of people who don’t want to be customers of the private insurance industry to become customers of that industry. To write out HUGE checks to Aetna and Blue Cross, while at the same time providing no competition with those corporations, no means of keeping costs under control.  And all of the promises that were allegedly made, all the great virtues of the bill, like eliminating the insurance industries payout caps, or keeping the insurance company from claiming fraud when it comes time that you actually get sick and they try and not cover you, those things aren’t actually in the senate bill. I think what this bill does more than anything else is that it massively increases the profitability of the insurance industry while providing very little benefit and bolstering many of the systemic problems…”  Greenwald

White House as helpless victim on healthcare

by Glen Greenwald, Salon

Of all the posts I wrote this year, the one that produced the most vociferous email backlash — easily — was this one from August, which examined substantial evidence showing that, contrary to Obama’s occasional public statements in support of a public option, the White House clearly intended from the start that the final health care reform bill would contain no such provision and was actively and privately participating in efforts to shape a final bill without it.  From the start, assuaging the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries was a central preoccupation of the White House — hence the deal negotiated in strict secrecy with Pharma to ban bulk price negotiations and drug reimportation, a blatant violation of both Obama’s campaign positions on those issues and his promise to conduct all negotiations out in the open (on C-SPAN).  Indeed, Democrats led the way yesterday in killing drug re-importation, which they endlessly claimed to support back when they couldn’t pass it.  The administration wants not only to prevent industry money from funding an anti-health-care-reform campaign, but also wants to ensure that the Democratic Party — rather than the GOP — will continue to be the prime recipient of industry largesse. 

As was painfully predictable all along, the final bill will not have any form of public option, nor will it include the wildly popular expansion of Medicare coverage.  Obama supporters are eager to depict the White House as nothing more than a helpless victim in all of this — the President so deeply wanted a more progressive bill but was sadly thwarted in his noble efforts by those inhumane, corrupt Congressional “centrists.”  Right.  The evidence was overwhelming from the start that the White House was not only indifferent, but opposed, to the provisions most important to progressives.  The administration is getting the bill which they, more or less, wanted from the start — the one that is a huge boon to the health insurance and pharmaceutical industry.   And kudos to Russ Feingold for saying so

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), among the most vocal supporters of the public option, said it would be unfair to blame Lieberman for its apparent demise. Feingold said that responsibility ultimately rests with President Barack Obama and he could have insisted on a higher standard for the legislation. 

This bill appears to be legislation that the president wanted in the first place, so I don’t think focusing it on Lieberman really hits the truth,” said Feingold. “I think they could have been higher. I certainly think a stronger bill would have been better in every respect.” 

  Continue reading