This is Leadership? Mr. Trump and the Poltics of Resentment

This is Leadership?  Mr. Trump and the Politics of Resentment

“I think these debates are absolute nonsense.  The way these debates are set up there’s almost no interchange of ideas, very little even of personality.  There’s also a terrible thing about this medium – hardly anyone listens.  They sort of get an impression of somebody, and they think they figured them out just by seeing them on television.” 

        -       Gore Vidal, 1968 Debate with William F. Buckley

“Does television run America?   There is an implicit conflict of interest between that which is highly viewable, and that which is highly illuminating.”

        -       William F. Buckley, 1968 Debate with Gore Vidal

By J.M. Hamilton  (11-26-2015)

Nineteen sixty-eight was the first time a major television network interrupted gavel to gavel coverage of a political convention, and introduced political commentary and debate, between a conservative and a liberal pundit.  As posited in the documentary, Best of Enemies, television and political reporting would never be the same.

The tension built until Mr. Vidal called Mr. Buckley a “crypto-nazi,” and Mr. Buckley retaliated by calling Mr. Vidal a “queer,” and threatened physical violence in front of a nationally televised audience. 

Based upon that technical infraction alone, Mr. Vidal won the debate and Mr. Buckley, one of the greatest debaters America has ever produced, knew that Mr. Vidal had gotten the better of him.  Rule number one of debate is never get emotional, and rule number two, is never resort to ad hominem attacks, as the violation of either or both rules detracts from the debater’s arguments.  By resorting to the emotional attack, the debater is also acknowledging their case’s inferiority, or argument’s failings, and conceding the debate. 

But as Mr. Buckley so astutely acknowledged above, what makes for illuminating television, and entertaining television are two entirely different things.  Ipso facto, what makes for intelligent and sound public & foreign policy, does not always give Americans what they yearn for, a quick fix to many of the nation’s ills.  Americans, rightfully so, are exceptionally upset with the political establishment; and particularly w/in the Republican Party, if one believes the polls, the constituency is throwing out the political elite (just as J.M.H. foretold).  The financial and political aristocracy have shafted the interests of everyday Americans for several decades now, and can be found worshiping at the altars of greed, power, and nihilism. 

Even within the Democratic Party, Mr. Sanders, a populist, has forced Mrs. Clinton, the establishment’s candidate, to take notice and tack left.  Mr. Sanders – a liberal - is a worthy and thoughtful adversary, and more than likely, will not allow a group of murderous thugs, called ISIL, to distract from his core message:  namely, the oligarchy owns our government, and has looted Washington for personal gain, via redistribution of wealth from the 99% to the 1%.

On the right, one wishes we could say the “populist” candidates were equally enlightened, but then again, perhaps Mr. Trump is only play acting to his audience?  But I have my doubts.  Early on, Mr. Trump offered some hope…. He talked about taxing shadow banking/hedge funds at considerably higher rates, but then his tax plan came out and it appeared to have been written by Grover Norquist, the plutocracy’s tool.  Mr. Trump said that he was through with nation building and a jingoist foreign policy, but then ISIL attacks Paris and he throws red meat into the crowd, with promises of a more bellicose and adventurist foreign policy.  And as many have seen, these are Mr. Trump’s finer moments.  If Mr. Trump wasn’t so frightening and non-illuminating, he would certainly be considered entertaining.

No one appears to be able to pin Mr. Trump down.  Gaffes, fabrications, and outburst that would ruin other candidates seemingly have no impact upon Teflon-Don; and yet, he leads the national polls, and is headed for a possible Republican nomination.  The establishment (aka the plutocracy) is pulling its collective hair out over his rise, but the elite have brought Mr. Trump upon themselves.  The owners of the Republican Party, the billionaire class, have long ago substituted: the profane for the coherent and logical; racism for racial harmony; wars without end, that have bankrupted the nation, were chosen over a sane/rational foreign policy; and the elite have run the country’s economy into the ground for short term profit maximization, via financial engineering, in lieu of sound long term business fundamentals. 

In short, the establishment created Trump, and now their monster is running around, stirring up the villagers, and threatening to throw Lady Liberty and the Constitution into the lake.  I wish I could say I pity the Robber Barons for their folly and greed, but the Lords of Karma will, likely, exact a heavy toll and are already doing so.  The Villagers of the United States have taken up pitch forks and torches against the establishment.  What the GOP Villagers haven’t quite figured out is that Mr. Trump, albeit not a professional politician, is the very same establishment they profess to loathe.

Either way, their monster, Mr. Trump, is not exactly appealing to “the better angels of our nature,” but is feeding and fueling fear, intolerance, and resentment.  The mark of a great Republican leader, say Eisenhower and perhaps even Reagan, is that they bring calm and a cool head to a crisis.  These leaders soothed the public, not rev-ed it up on rhetorical meth.  And trust me, the foreign policy challenges that Eisenhower and Reagan faced, and the manner in which they conducted themselves in public, make the current Republican field look like amateurs, in their gross exaggeration and fearmongering of the ISIL threat.  Then again, the Republican field, and the establishment, has little more to offer the American public on economic matters, than a failed trickle down ideology, globalization, free trade agreements that gutted the middle class, and tax cuts for the rich. As such, my guess is that the GOP candidates view ISIL, and the Paris attacks, as a road out of perdition. 

ISIL as the GOP’s savior?  Possibly.

What Reagan and Eisenhower demonstrated was that a sound foreign policy, rarely if ever lends itself to the quick fix or unilateral action.  The defeat of National Socialism (i.e. the Nazis) was through a broad coalition of nations, not the least of which was Russia and the Russian army.  The subsequent defeat of the Soviet Union, and communism, spanned many decades and was carried out with the help of many allies, largely though the highly patient policy of containment. 

Now imagine the current crop of GOP candidates telling their followers that the defeat of ISIL will likely take a true international coalition, as the U.S. is bankrupt from the two GOP initiated/failed nation building exercises in Iraq and Afghanistan?  Moreover, imagine the GOP field explaining that to truly solve the ISIL issue, and provide long term stability, will ultimately require: a move to renewable energy; and the spread of democracy in a part of the world, the Middle East, where the West has propped up dictatorships and monarchies for generations for plutocratic profits. 

Unfortunately, that level of honesty is not going to happen (excepting possibly from Senator Paul), because the GOP today, doesn’t do nuance… it perpetuates and feeds geo-political fear and offers up quick fatuous solutions (to hear Mr. Trump tell it, like bombing ISIL back to the stone age; turning away Middle East refugees, fleeing from the terror the U.S. helped unleash; religious persecution; and all manner of intolerance).  Today’s GOP – courtesy of Mr. Trump - does the 15 second sound bite, and entertainment.  And the corporate owned news media eats it up, and regurgitates it to the American public.

When Mr. Trump is forced to deal with the economy, he tells us he’s going to create many jobs, so many jobs (but if one is looking for details from this candidate, there are none to be found).  Instead, Mr. Trump and the GOP generally turn the debate on the economy, into the politics of intolerance, xenophobia, and resentment.  Too many Republican voters are willing to give the plutocracy a pass, and instead blame poor immigrants for their problems.  Trump’s supporters know that the establishment has taken their jobs, but they aren’t quite willing to hold them accountable just yet.  Instead, Trump’s cadres embrace the politics of resentment, that is to say, immigrants to the country maybe obtaining jobs or social benefits, and this is somehow taking away jobs/benefits from white conservative voters; but the reality is immigrants are doing jobs that conservative whites don’t want, or are unwilling to do, and many immigrants are ineligible for federal and state benefits, due to their illegal status.  But that doesn’t stop Mr. Trump from playing to these base fears, and engaging in demagoguery, and not crypto-fascism, but overt fascism.

Mr. Buckley to his credit spent much of his lifetime, attempting to drive Birchers and assorted racist from the Party ranks; but the usually calm and genteel Mr. Buckley lost it against Mr. Vidal, because Gore skewered a nerve.  Mr. Buckley’s response to Mr. Vidal’s charge of crypto-fascism was savage because Mr. Buckley knew deep down within his Catholic soul, the charge - at least among some members of the GOP - was fundamentally true.  Capitalism, unless reined in by the state to insure competition, devolves into crony capitalism, monopoly, and ultimately, state takeover by the elite (i.e. corporatism and worst case, fascism).  There is something about the Republican Party that attracts the elitist, the racist, and the exploiters, and if the political elite are doing their job, these elements must be, continually and vigilantly, purged.  Today’s GOP is utterly devoid of compassion, and has become amoral. 

These are the same folks, Mr. Trump and his crew, who would have turned away a 1930s ship load of Jewish immigrants fleeing Nazi persecution.  What's next - internment camps?

To protect the GOP and capitalism from its worst impulses, Mr. Trump is the very thing Mr. Buckley fought against his entire life.

 

Copyright JM Hamilton Publishing 2015

With friends like these…

With friends like these…

 

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned last year in a leaked classified memo that donors in Saudi Arabia were the "most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide".

-BBC

By J.M. Hamilton (11-13-15)

The U.S. enjoyed a golden moment at the close of the Cold War to persuade authoritarian dictatorships/allies to embrace democracy and address human rights abuses.  Unfortunately, the U.S. did not seize the day, and the U.S., indeed the world, is paying a very steep price for this failure.   In fact, instead of conducting a virtuous foreign policy, U.S. foreign policy all too often is: reactive; myopic; governed and led by short term commercial interests and gains – via the State Department; and driven by the DOD/MIC, which has a financial interest in long and costly wars.  Endlessly, America ends up backing dictatorships and nefarious regimes, as opposed to seeking out genuine democratic reform and championing human rights.  Even the lip service the U.S. pays to human rights and democratic reform is occurring with less frequency.

My critics will immediately say, there JMH goes again, blaming America first.  But if we take a look at the topic of today’s piece, Saudi Arabia, not only will we discover that our “ally” is repugnant (and operates in ways counter to America’s stated values, as well as, our economic and foreign policy interests); but we will also learn that the current economic and political environment presents a golden opportunity to – once again – seek out genuine reform, from several of the Middle East's nastiest dictatorships.  These dictatorships are not only highly destabilizing to other countries in the region, and throughout the world, but, if current economic and political trends continue, show the potential for revolution from within.

Counter to what our government and friends in the State Department tell the American people, the Royal House of Saud is not our friend, and conducts its economic and foreign affairs in ways that are completely inimical to U.S. and Western Democracies’ interests.  So let’s cover this ground first, before explaining the opportunity before the American people and our leadership.  Namely, let’s spell out just how monstrous the Saudi regime is.

1.   First the Saudis are responsible for spending billions of petrol dollars on terrorism.  So for every dollar Western Democracies spend on Saudi imported oil, some percentage of those dollars is being directed at terrorist attacks against the West and Western interests.  In short, every time you buy imported oil at the pump from the Middle East, you are to some degree financing terrorism against the West.  While there are many reasons America should achieve energy independence, and ultimately seek to eliminate fossil fuel consumption, withdrawing revenue from murderous Middle East regimes should rank high on our list. 

2.   Moreover, eighty percent of the Royal House of Saud’s revenue comes from oil sales, which in turn trickles down through the Saudi economy.  We know that it’s the oil revenue that is financing Saudi funded terrorism.  But don’t take my word for it, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton noted:  Saudi Arabia was the most significant source of funding for Sunni terrorist groups worldwide.

3.   Secretary of State Clinton went on to note (as disclosed by WikiLeaks):  “While the Kingdom… takes seriously the threat of terrorism within Saudi Arabia, it has been an ongoing challenge to persuade Saudi officials to treat terrorist financing emanating from Saudi Arabia as a strategic priority.”

4.   Saudi Arabia, along with other monarchies operating in the Gulf, are responsible for the spread of the most militant brand of Sunni fundamentalist religion throughout the world, known as Wahhabism.

5.   Fifteen of the nineteen 9-11 hijackers were Saudi citizens, as was O.B.L.

6.   While the Middle East monarchies helped fund ISIS/ISIL, thousands of Saudi citizens have gone to fight for this terrorist enterprise.

7.   Due to possession of the world’s largest proven oil reserves, the Saudi’s have leveraged petroleum to make the U.S. and other Western democracies do their bidding.  The Iraq war, as well as economic sanctions against Iran, were of tremendous value to the Saudis, as it kept Iraqi and Iranian oil out of much of the market, which restricted supply and kept the price of OPEC/Saudi oil elevated.  The Saudis made tens of billions – perhaps hundreds of billions - off both the Iraq war and Iranian sanctions.  Some of that money was subsequently used to fund terrorism, and spread Wahhabism.

8.   As a result of the Iraq war, ISIS/ISIL was not only formed, but when it subsequently over-ran Iraq, it was able to scoop up a tremendous amount of U.S. military hardware, as well as, U.S. resources contained within Iraqi banks.  In short, while the oil rich monarchies funded ISIS/ISIL, as well as provided soldiers, the U.S. inadvertently supplied and funded same.

9.   Beyond funding terrorism, the Royal House of Saud operates one of the most repressive governments in the world.  In addition to a police force, the Saudi government also has a religious police force, or Mutaween, which enforces a highly repressive religious law or Sharia law.  Women are treated as something less than chattel.  And Saudi Arabia has the third highest execution rate in the world, behind China and Iran.

10.                 Forty-seven percent of all Saudi executions are for drug related offenses, and most executions are performed by beheading.  And yet, a Saudi prince was recently caught with two tons of drugs in 40 suitcases, attempting to pass through Lebanon, within his private jet.  Another example of the hypocrisy with which the regime operates was on full display recently in Beverly Hills, CA, when another Saudi prince was brought up on charges of assaulting prostitutes.  Witnesses also said the prince was engaging in homosexual acts with his aide.  The crime isn't the homosexual act itself, but that it would be a capital offense w/in the prince's own country.  Apparently a two-tiered justice system, one for the elite and for one for everyone else, is not limited to the U.S.

11.                 And Saudi Arabia is not alone.  Many of these same conditions and issues arise in Qatar, the UAE, and Kuwait.  The Middle East monarchies are noted for withholding contracts to Western contractors, if Western governments do not play ball with these despotic regimes wishes and desires.  Whether its overthrowing Egyptian democracy, or sending American men and women to fight wars on the Kingdoms behalf.  When it comes to answering to Saudi and Middle East monarchy demands - historically, Western democracies have often fallen all over themselves.

12.                 Of course, Saudi influence does not stop at the Middle East.  The Kingdom has no fewer than six K Street lobbyist in Washington, including a powerful money man/bundler for the Clinton campaign.  And speaking of Mrs. Clinton, despite her concerns about the Saudis and their funding of terrorism, The Clinton Foundation had zero reservations about taking millions of dollars from the Saudi government.  Obviously, the Saudis are doubling down and counting on a Clinton presidency.

13.                 The U.S. and Britain also arm the Saudis, and their Gulf monarchy friends to the teeth.  But when it comes to actually fighting in the region, you know to defeat the monster the Arab monarchies helped create – ISIS/ISIL, the Saudis are nowhere to be found.

14.                 Economically, the OPEC cartel, with Saudi Arabia as its most powerful member, has held Western democracies’ economies hostage for several decades.  If fact, some economist have argued that every economic down turn, or recession, of the last eight, was proceeded by, or occurred during, an oil price shock or spike.

15.                 In short, when Saudi Arabia isn’t funding terrorism, flying planes into the world trade center, providing fresh recruits for ISIS, oppressing women, spreading fundamentalist Islam, or their princes aren’t running drugs and abusing escorts…. They are busy holding the world economy hostage with a simple turn of OPEC’s oil spigot. 

16.                 With friends like these who needs enemies.  The mass migration out of the Middle East, and into Europe, is in part fueled by Middle East monarchies funding terror.  That, and two very badly botched wars launched by America.

17.                 And despite all this, the U.S. State department recently “welcomed” the Saudis to their new leadership role, that is heading up the U.N. Human Rights counsel.  The State Department is on record as stating:  “We are close allies.”  If there was ever a crossroads between the “experts” in the Washington foreign policy establishment and ordinary Americans, than Saudi Arabia would be the address.  The U.S. reacts and runs around the Middle East, attempting to put out fires that the Saudis and the Monarchy states often play no small role in creating.  But amazingly, the U.S. never gets around to addressing the root cause, the Saudi regime, itself.

But there’s hope.  And unlike the 90s and the tail end of the Cold War, maybe – this time - U.S. leadership won’t blow it.  This hope arrives in the form of increasing U.S. energy independence, an international oil glut, and the price of Brent crude coming in at less than $50 a barrel.  S&P has downgraded the Kingdom’s credit rating, and S&P reports Saudi Arabia’s financial outlook is negative.  Factor in the slowing down of the global economy, and in particular China’s economy (and the resulting lower demand for fossil fuels), and things do not appear to be looking up for Saudi Arabia anytime soon.  In fact, the Royal House of Saud is burning through its hard currency reserves, and is becoming known for paying its bills late.

Other factors that do not bode well for the Kingdom’s future, include, but are not limited to, the growing use of inexpensive renewable energy around the globe (50% of all new power plants in 2014 were renewable energy based), and the increased awareness of the impact dirty fossil fuels are having upon the world and the world’s climate.  The DOD considers climate change to be a national security risk.  Germany provides an excellent example of the oil producer’s fate, as that nation now receives one-third of their energy from renewables.  Arguably, and naturally, there’s is an inverse relationship between the increase in renewables as an energy source, and the consumption of fossil fuels.  And the cost of producing renewable energy is declining all the time. 

Separately, New York’s attorney general has announced an investigation into Exxon Mobil (under the Martin Act), and Exxon’s, alleged, behavior in denying climate change, funding studies denying climate change, while being well aware that climate change existed for several decades.  Some of us are old enough to remember another industry that lied to clients about their product’s toxicity.  Yes, Exxon and Big Oil have the stench of Big Tobacco all over them.

Could lawsuits eventually be brought against the Middle East monarchies?  Martin Act, RICO… who knows, perhaps under environmental law?  The sky is the limit, and AG’s and revenue hungry states have got to be looking at Big Oil and potentially OPEC, and licking their chops.  Perhaps some Saudi princes might eventually end up in The Hague for war crimes?  

Factor in Middle East demographics, such as a large number of younger citizens making up the majority of the population, and the highest global rate of unemployment, and one might argue that these monarchies are sitting on a powder keg.  Stir in a decades-old religious civil war with Iran, and a failed war of attrition in Yemen, and the Saudi’s future looks bleak.  The reality is these monarchies very well may become the Middle East’s next failed states.  (If the Saudi’s abhorrent behavior doesn’t do them in, perhaps their product will?  Last summer, the heat index in parts of Iran and Iraq soared well above 140 degrees.  At the rate climate change is increasing, wars in the Middle East may finally come to an end, because the Middle East may ultimately become uninhabitable.)

And the opportunity for America and Western democracies?  Take full advantage of the situation.  

As the Saudi coffers wither and wane, leverage aid – whether it be economic, foreign policy, humanitarian, or military – for all its worth, to extract real democratic reform, a respect for human rights, and the establishment of a free press.  There’s not a single reason why these regimes should not convert to constitutional monarchies, as a stepping stone to democracy.  The time to establish the roots of democracy, as well as, political parties is now, when the Kingdoms are still relatively stable.  

As we learned in Egypt, the time to set up democratic institutions is not when the crisis, or revolution, is at hand.  The Egyptian people were not well served by Mr. Mubarak, and they will be even less well served by Dictator al-Sisi.  And yet, without pushing for real reform, the U.S. continues to funnel billions in military aid to Egypt.  The MIC and American corporations like it that way.

Of course, America might be in a much better position to push for democratic reform throughout the world, if it cleaned up its own act.  Separating money’s influence from our government, campaign finance reform, term limits, and driving a wedge in the revolving door between government and the private sector have all been discussed in the present presidential election cycle.  Obviously there is much work to do, before this chatter becomes a reality.  Our courtrooms are mired in corruption from the bench; we have the highest incarceration rate in the world, essentially slave labor colonies and the return of Jim Crow; and our family law courts abuse children and families, for lawyer enrichment.  Real reforms need to be enacted here at home, so that America occupies the moral high ground when insisting that these corrupt and crony authoritarian regimes and monarchies reform.  Shutting down K –Street, who represent the Saudis, would be another leap forward for democracy and the American people.

As for candidate Clinton, perhaps the Clinton Foundation should return Saudi donations, and Mr. Podesta should refuse to represent the Kingdom and its lobbying efforts?  What a message that would send: both about Mrs. Clinton’s credibility and sincerity, and it would put the princes on notice that America is not for sale.

No doubt, when it comes to foreign affairs, short-term commercial interest, represented by K Street, will always cry out for the maintenance of the status quo.  After all, quarterly profits demand it.  However, the nature of short term commercial thinking on U.S. foreign policy is that it ends up costing Americans more – so much more – down the road, especially in terms of blood and treasure.  Witness the failed wars in Iraq and Iran, and coming soon, Syria.  

Myopic thinking?  You bet.

Time for the Saudis and the monarchies in the Middle East to clean up their act, and the U.S. should, verbally, shove them in the correct direction.  Humiliation on the global stage, frequently and often, just might provide a cure.  There’s still time. 

P.S.

The fun doesn't stop in the Middle East.  The U.S. should be pushing China, Turkey, Russia, and Egypt to clean up their act as well; but alas, quarterly profit statements prevent the State Department from raising its voice too loudly.

Copyright JM Hamilton Publishing 2015

The Red State Socialist Next Door…

The Red State Socialist Next Door…

Violent Souls, but only as the Hollow Men, the Stuffed Men…

-       T.S. Eliot

Histrionic conservatives exclaimed: Obama favors “redistribution of wealth”! Which is most of what modern government does. And it does this even faster under Republicans than under Democrats.

-       George F. Will, Washington Post

By J.M. Hamilton  10-29-16

Much has been made within the corporate media that Senator Bernie Sanders is a “socialist – democrat” (you know, from the five major corporations that disseminate 90% of the news to Americans).  That is to say, Mr. Sanders is a liberal.  We can expect a lot more of this attempted smear campaign, as Mr. Sanders and his supporters turn up the heat on the Wall Street owned GOP & Clinton, Inc.  But conveniently, the same corporate news media has little to say about the fact that the two political parties, GOP & GOP-Lite/Dems, have overseen a massive redistribution of wealth from the 99% to the 1%, since President Reagan’s inauguration.

JMH has covered this ground before, but it bears repeating: 

1)  Thanks to a quaint theory called trickle-down economics, Mr. Reagan increased the national debt from 1.0 trillion to 2.9 trillion, or a 190%, during his two terms.  This fact really doesn’t fit the GOP’s narrative of their patron saint, but there you have it.
2)  Under the first President Bush (HW), the national debt increased another 150%.  To his credit, HW did not believe in trickle–down, or tax cuts of for the rich (aka Voodoo economics), and he was duly relieved of office for speaking the truth.
3)  Under President Bush II (W), the national debt skyrocketed from $5.68 trillion in 2000 to 9.98 trillion in 2008, nearly doubling the national debt under his watch.  Of course, Bush may have bought into VP Cheney’s quip that “deficits don’t matter,” and we know for a fact that he bought into the redistribution of government largess to the 1%, via tax cuts for the wealthy.
4)  The national debt is expected to double again, per the OMB, by the tail end of President Obama’s second term.  While President Obama inherited domestic and foreign policy catastrophes from President Bush II, not to mention that the President had to deal with a GOP dominated House of Representatives for much of his two terms, he cannot entirely escape responsibility for the budget mess that occurred under his watch.  Mr. Obama made the choice to keep the U.S. immersed in two failed nation-building exercises throughout his two terms:  Afghanistan and Iraq, and now is making moves forward into Syria (JMH would argue, perhaps, as a matter of political expediency – to keep the war lobby/MIC/GOP off his back).
5)  Bottom line, the GOP, Reagan through Bush II, is made up of either: A) reconstructed Keynesians; or B) believes in a failed trickle-down ideology; or C) all the above.  Unfortunately, the GOP only utilized half of Keynes fiscal policy prescriptions, since he recommended raising taxes during prosperous economic times.  If your keeping count that's three GOP Presidents, who nearly doubled the national debt.  One last figure to consider: during this same thirty-five year time frame, state and federal spending as a percent of U.S. GDP has rested consistently within the 30 to 40% range.  So in the land of the free, in the land of rugged individualism and unrequited capitalism, total government spending makes up approximately a third of the U.S. economy.  Factor in a Wall Street crash, and government spending bumped up to nearly half the economy for a period of time.

It all sounds fairly “People’s Republic of the United States” to me: the GOP adopted borrow and spend fiscal policies, so as to subsidize tax cuts for the wealthy, while saddling the government and the economy with trillions in debt and trillions in debt service payments.  Or let’s try a new analogy: like a private equity firm fronting loading profits by maxing out a takeover target's credit line, the financial & political elite have tapped out the Federal government’s credit line to pay for their tax cuts, government privatization, and wars without end.

During the same time frame, it’s no accident that GOP socialism for the 1%, and austerity for the 99%, coincided with ever-growing wage and wealth inequality and stagnating wages.  Throw in free money or exceptionally dovish monetary policy, courtesy of the Federal Reserve for Wall Street, and the table was set for the evisceration of the American middle-class and the American Dream. 

Businesses, multinationals, shadow banking, private equity and Wall Street showed their gratitude for the GOP’s brand of socialism (not to mention free trade agreements), by: offshoring American labor; maxing out/plundering corporate credit lines for executive and stockholder immediate gratification – a private equity specialty; destroying the environment; engaging in financial engineering; merging into monopolies and cartels; the hottest trend - tax inversions; and issuing pink slips and gutting the tax base/American worker.  Many of these same businesses have been getting their way for so long at the government trough, that at the first hint that the government might not yield to their every demand, they threaten to offshore jobs, the tax base, and business.

How very patriotic.  Then again, the government has allowed many sectors of the economy to metastasize into cartels and monopolies, so that politicians have no choice but to yield to corporate demands and surrender to blackmail.

Factor in regulatory, tax, and government capture by the 1% - made permissible by Republican led White Houses, SCOTUS, and GOP led Congresses, and one has to conclude there are no greater socialists than Republicans.  Americans really saw this with the ’08 Wall Street bailouts under the Bush (W) administration; that is, per the usual, the profits of GOP (and Clintonian Dem) backed businesses are privatized, and the bailouts, tax cuts, and social costs are redistributed to the American public/taxpayer – who are left holding the bag.  The GOP, and yes, Dems too, don’t mind bequeathing trillions in welfare to Wall Street banks, but talk about spending an extra billion on indigent children and the GOP controlled House of Representatives acts as if the world might end. 

The GOP wrings their collective hands that welfare might be a corrupting influence…. And welfare can indeed create moral hazard, particularly when it is gifted to the plutocracy.

The difference then between a Republican socialist, and a Sanders socialist, is rather simple:  Republicans believe in redistributing government largess to the 1%, while – let us pray – a President Sanders would redistribute government largess to the 99%, perhaps the 100%.

Our Corporate media has also already begun to attack Senator Sanders on how he’s going to pay for all this “free- stuff” (to use Mr. Jeb Bush’s language).  Mr. Sanders has some ideas, among them: increase taxes on the wealthy, who often pay at rates significantly below the middle class – if they pay taxes at all; a more progressive tax structure (as opposed to the regressive tax structure currently in place); and there’s also the matter of making sure that government vendors/contractors stop shafting the U.S. taxpayer.  For instance, military contractors stick it to the U.S. taxpayer for tens of billions in the form of cost overruns and fraud (it’s hard to put a precise figure on it because the Pentagon isn’t subject to audit), and neither political party has the courage to say a word.  Big Pharma is finally getting the attention it deserves, and Americans are waking up to the shear unmitigated greed with which the pharmaceutical industry operates.  The U.S. is the only Western democracy that does not set caps on Big Pharma’s drug mark ups, and this industry is fiscally disemboweling the United States. 

Time to send some of these CEOs to prison?  You bet.

That’s just the low hanging fruit.  Show JMH a government contractor, like Mr. Cheney’s former company, Brown and Root (aka KBR), and the odds are pretty good that said contractor is taking the taxpayer for a ride.  The odds are also great that these same government contractors are kicking back a gratuity to the U.S. Congress and Presidential candidates, in the form of campaign and Super-Pac contributions.  They might even contribute to the Clinton Foundation.

All of which brings up the obvious need for a constitutional amendment separating money and state.  But I digress.

Tis the Season, and the right-wingers, and GOP-lite/Dems, will attempt to scare us with spooky tales of communist and socialist, failing to mention that there are no greater socialist than red state Republicans and GOP-Lite/Dems.  When Republicans spend on corporate welfare, they make Dems look like amateurs.   So dear reader, the next time you hear the word “socialist” from our corporate news media, or from Senator Sanders’ critics…. Please think of Presidents Reagan, Bush (HW), and Bush II (W), as well as, GOP led Congresses, from Reagan forward.

Not that socialism is always bad, it’s just a matter of where government largess is allocated.  Should government money go to those who are fabulously wealthy, so they can continue to pillage and plunder the planet?  Or should social spending go to those less fortunate so that they can receive a hand up?  (Ditto Capitalism… do we want crony capitalism that enriches an elite-insider-few and favors cartels and monopolies; or real capitalism with plenty of competition that favors the market, consumers, employees, and innovation?)

These are the political questions of our time, perhaps of the 2016 Presidential campaign?

Either way, the U.S. owes a debt to red state Republicans, who have shown America how socialism works, that is exceptionally well for the 1%.   As a result of this hypocrisy, xenophobia and overt racism, the GOP, as a brand, is nearly destroyed.  The double-standard of establishment candidates – speaking out on the evils of socialism – are on full display for all the world to see.

P.S.  Happy Halloween!

Copyright JM Hamilton Publishing 2015