Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
February 23, 2017 Disclaimer: Please read.

Statements and opinions expressed in articles are those of the authors, not Truthdig. Truthdig takes no responsibility for such statements or opinions.

What We Do Now

Truthdig Bazaar
The Terror Dream

The Terror Dream

By Susan Faludi

Drawn and Quartered: Best Political Cartoons of Paul Conrad

Drawn and Quartered: Best Political Cartoons of Paul Conrad

Paul Conrad, William F. Thomas, Richard C. Bergholz

more items

Email this item Print this item

No Hope for the Jobless if a Republican Wins

Posted on Oct 21, 2011
AP / Isaac Brekken

Republican presidential candidates—from left, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, Herman Cain, Mitt Romney, Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich and Michele Bachmann—pose for a photo before a GOP presidential debate Tuesday in Las Vegas.

By Bill Boyarsky

(Page 2)

As I listened to others and considered how long they had been camped there, I was impressed with their staying power and their concern about financial institutions and unemployment. They understand what’s wrong with the country.

There was no such concern at the Republican presidential debate, which took place in Nevada. That state has an unemployment rate of 13.4 percent, higher than the community I had visited earlier in the day. The backbiting among the candidates was pure middle school. For a moment, it looked as though Mitt Romney was getting ready to punch out Rick Perry and that moderator Anderson Cooper, in charge of the playground, would have to intervene. Someone should tell Rick Santorum to lose that smirk. Same with Romney’s painful-to-watch stage laugh and Perry’s newfound debate combativeness.

What was most important about this encounter was that none of them offered hope or even much concern for the unemployed. They want lower taxes for the wealthy. Perry rehashed his idea of putting 1.2 million people to work in the oil business. It’s hard to imagine creating that many jobs in an industry that is so automated that one person can run a 24-pump filling station. Romney wants to balance the budget and repeal health reform. Their real goal, of course, was to appeal to the Republican right wing.

It is painful to contemplate any of them winning next November. But as Obama acknowledged, “It’s going to be a close election because the economy is not where it wants to be, and even though I believe all the choices we’ve made have been the right ones, we’re still going through difficult circumstances.” He told ABC correspondent Jake Tapper that “people who may be sympathetic to my point of view still kind of feel like, yeah, but it still hasn’t gotten done yet.”

None of it will be done if one of these Republicans beat him. The worst fears of the Occupy movements will be realized. There’ll be nothing for the jobless in Norwalk, Las Vegas or anywhere else in the country.


Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Join the conversation

Load Comments
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 30, 2011 at 9:49 am Link to this comment

Focus on Wall Street and those special people those corporations are people too, I suggest the 99 percent has been footing the bill for the jet set for a long time now.

How about the following from ‘The Nation’ “Oil speculation: $82 per month. Ordinary Americans pay extra at the pump because of high-roller gambling in oil futures markets. When gas was nearly $4 per gallon in May, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, professor Robert Pollin estimated [see PDF] the monthly cost of this speculative premium at $82 for the average two-car family. A new report by Better Markets finds that excessive speculation on food commodities also inflates our grocery bills.”

The Nation article goes onto list other inequality’s endured by the 99 percent have been footing. It is important for the anti populous movement to look the other way, for facts and truth are not an option for the 1 percent, yeah out of their mouths lies and BS to keep it status same!


Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 30, 2011 at 9:15 am Link to this comment

I have a pocketful of descriptive words, glad you appreciate
my vocabulary. I’ve no concern where you place yourself on the
spectrum of neutral political views. However, you consistently fail
to make distinctions appearing shallow; a result of your abbreviated
comments: saying I promote a state of insanity for those who would
cozy up to George Bush (your grift is to cherry pick a statement out
of context, a common tactic of those having weak arguments), yet
wouldn’t tolerate (in your useless sarcastic tone) a similar action of
Republican animosity towards President Obama. I counterclaim the
contexts and reasons are antithetical to each other and the reason
one would be fair and the other not. George Bush was in the
ideological grasp of conservative schizophrenia where on the one
hand their entire Weltanschauung is to cut federal expenditures while
directing less revenue for the operation of the country by intensifying
the Reagan economic policies, escalating tax cuts for the wealthy;
and spending on humungous moneyeater of a mistaken Iraq war; his
program of No Child Left Behind a fundamentally punitive law using
flawed standardized testing intruded on the education system that
decreed de facto paralysis direly affecting education of American
children; was responsible for the Patriot Act that increased the powers
of an ever-growing police state’s surveillance abilities and allowing it
to act with less and less impunity and less accountability for its actions.

Further, Bush and 2006 Republican Congress suspended habeas corpus
for enemy combatants, and while it also outlawed torture (as if more
legislation to outlaw torture was needed) that provided the president
to use discretion in determining what constitutes torture, hardly a care
for justice.

Also Bush’s cavalier, detached care about the devastating effects of
Hurricane Katrina; an obvious disinterest in the issue of Black American
discrimination that still exists glaringly shown in the right-wing
conservative white disdain for Obama’s presidency, in spite of a large
contingent of such conservative characters as Herman Cain, Apostle
Claver, Michael Steele, and other Black American conservative talking
heads. My curiosity about Black Conservatism, reading an
essay by a Black conservative, Shelby Steele among others, the Black
Conservative does not really embrace conservative concerns of free-
market libertarianism, or religious fundamentalism, pro-life-ism, trickle
down economics, etc., but their primary reason as given is the stigma of
victimization they resent and want to change from within the system that
still promotes it (also a problem for Democrats, they take an antipodal
view). A laudable Black effort since the only way for them to gain
integrity is to neutralize their self-perception of victimization. But
let’s not fool ourselves that racism is not a pernicious institution in
conservative America that refuses to fund schools, attempts to nullify
the voting rights of blacks and other minority groups, exterminate all
the social programs that would help people of color, and so forth.

By the way, I appreciate the opportunity to list many of my reasons to
debate your charges, Imax, it helps to expose them in broadband again
and punctuates my liberal perspective.

An adequate sample given of my reasons to rebuke Bush, why would I
chafe at the reverse to indulge the opposition of doing the same to
Obama? I certainly wouldn’t claim he has no faults. In contrast to
conservatism, his liberal outlook is not about systematically flaying
Republicans. If he has taken issue with any one of them, it is because
of the unceasing blistering and scorching he has suffered from his first
breath in office and their own reign of terror exacted by their unified
chant to depose him by preventing any program he submitted for
legislation that would help the people of this nation.

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, October 30, 2011 at 4:00 am Link to this comment

Picayune. What a wonderful and useful word.

“But anyone who is cozying up to George (Bush) is insane”. - Shenonymous

It’s easy to see how helpful, generous, and kind you wished to be towed President Bush and his agenda. About as helpful, generous and kind as republicans wish to be toward Mr. Obama?

Interesting that you would suggest that anyone who is obstructionist toward a U.S. President’s agenda is, well, “insane” and bad.

I was against most of the Bush agenda myself.  Making me, of course, an insane and really really bad person. - We must be consistent if we wish to be taken seriously.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 29, 2011 at 11:50 am Link to this comment

Imax, it ain’t my style.  You will have to suffer it and perhaps you
won’t be so picayune.  Ciao!

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, October 29, 2011 at 11:19 am Link to this comment


I now understand your motivations much better.  You’re running for public office.

Here’s to hoping the next time we run into each other you talk less but say more. wink

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 29, 2011 at 9:09 am Link to this comment

Shoot, I did not close my italics.  My bad.  My apologies to the
forum.  I will repeat that last paragraph in hopes it fixes the
If you think “we” Democrats aided Bush and did not try to
throw ?wrenches in his Republican ambitions, you should state your
own case ?being explicit that is.  Be careful of the weezer and aller
fallacy.  I’d hate ?to think you were just a petty Ninja.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 29, 2011 at 9:05 am Link to this comment

I’m impressed you researched my political orientations over the
last four years, while any conversion may or may not have happened,
I maintain there has not.  You must have hours of idle leisure time
to make such an excursion.  You continue what appears to be a
philistine uncultivated habit of providing fuzzy information and
ambiguity in providing a range of 2007-2008 with no specific
examples, an easy way to snidely snipe with whom you disagree,
it shows me one with a callow character; it isn’t likely I have changed
camps in my sentiments.  I have a file of all the comments I’ve ever
made on Truthdig. 

Looking at a few on the site during that time period, the Robert Sheer
article Bush’s Legacy of Failure, does not seem to bear out your
observation, the last one being Jan. 16, 2009; and a few more instances,
from June 16, 2008 on the Scott Ritter forum Dinner with Ahmed; Aug.
31, 2008 Politico McCain Desperate - Truthdig; Oct. 10, 2008; Mar. 9,
2008 The Money Behind the Anti-McCain Ad; Nov. 14, 2007 E.J. Dionne,
Jr., Who Said Politics was Fair?;  Oct. 4, 2008, Politico: Biden Will Go soft
on Palin – Truthdig.  That is a sampling of the more than 6,000
comments I’ve made on Truthdig in the timespan from 2007 to 2008.  If
there was some conversion, you will have to show what you mean.  I’d
like to see it myself.  I don’t mind answering your question but it needs
to show examples.  I always like to face what could be construed as a
fault in my views.  I do believe I’ve been consistent through the years. 
Try being more explicit in your charge of my passion in favor of
obstructionist tactics. 

If you[/] think “we” Democrats aided Bush and did not try to throw
wrenches in his Republican ambitions, you should state your own case
being explicit that is.  Be careful of the weezer and aller fallacy.  I’d hate
to think you were just a petty Ninja.

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, October 29, 2011 at 5:52 am Link to this comment


If you would like to argue that we democrats aided President Bush, or did not attempt to hinder his agenda, that may prove to be interesting.

I’ve read over several of your posts of the past. You were so passionately in favor of obstructionist tactics in 2007-08. It appears you experienced a broad change of heart after Nov. 2008.

Can you briefly explain your sudden shift of opinion?

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 27, 2011 at 4:44 pm Link to this comment

Not meaning to be so tardy in a response to Imax, Oct. 24, 1:37pm
but I did get distracted by a couple of other forums, and work of
course.  It is commendable if you defend rational democratic
position and I would not be among those who would criticize that
intention.  Your clearly strong, succinct and unequivocal position
against demonizing political opponents is also noble (that you think
Sean Hannity is an ass in your opinion, notwithstanding.  I have not
seen any of your laying out what you think Hannity speaks and does.) 

But strawmen, I am mindful of that and have pointed out a couple of
times your falling into that crevasse.  Doing battle is never my intention
but I never shrink when I think I’ve been unduly reproached. 

You introduced Hannity into the discussion Oct. 24, 5:10am as a sort
of mis-en-scene comparison to my earlier unambiguous critique and
expressed perception of what I see as the Republican intensified sole
intention to depose Barack Obama and towards that singular goal their
compressed behavior in Congress to thwart and hinder any of Obama’s
efforts to run a responsible presidency and how that affects my life
and those I care about.  I was quite specific, at Oct. 23, 5:15pm but
you chose to present a hypothetical staging (your strawman example)
of what I might think about Hannity’s making identical claims about
liberals and democrats, as stupid, dangerous and insane.  When I made
the accusation earlier that Republicans are more insane than Democrats,
I again had said why I thought so.  We could have debated those reasons
but that is not what you did.  Rather you set up a strawman subterfuge
with the Hannity counterexample. 

I did not address that ‘what if’ of yours.  I decided to give a smart
mouth denigration of Hannity.  I saw no reason to enter into any
discussion about his views since I had not heard them and would
have to take your word that he in fact claimed liberals and democrats
are stupid, dangerous, and insane.  Then you insisted on using your
fiction with Hannity as grounds to justify your view of no difference
between Hannity and me then judging me on the basis of your fiction.
It is a classic strawman fallacious argument. Then you try again this time
using Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy in the place of Hannity but it is the
same species of argument.  Pulling in, also fallaciously, so many different
and unlike examples is further evidence of your incomprehension of
just how invalid is your argument style for you seem to think the
actions of these men are somehow equivalent to each other as well
as in comparison with Obama.  But you haven’t a clue how unsound
it is to put that menagerie in a comparative line of reasoning.

If you wish to debate what I think are the intentions of the political
parties that is one thing, but you have thrown in everything including
the kitchen sink into your attempt to show what you have judged to be
my narrow and unwarranted critical view of Republicans.  It is true that I
write as if what I say is a reality, I do…and so do you.  It is my
perception of reality, and if anyone disagrees, it is perfectly fine with me,
all it takes is saying as you did at the end of your Oct. 24 8:00am post,
where you said, “I disagree.”

Report this
Hollywood Russ's avatar

By Hollywood Russ, October 27, 2011 at 10:02 am Link to this comment

Great article. Obama is still the candidate of hope. All of the GOP candidates are
the candidates of “nope!” They want to throw even more money at the rich. The
people of this country are getting rightfully pissed off about economic disparity.
The exporting of manufacturing jobs by heartless corporations is the original
domino that fell, in a long line of dominos (ex. NAFTA) that have lead us to this
sad pass. Because of the extreme views of the GOP, I believe that whoever gets the
nomination will have to cater to the Far Right. Independent voters are going to go
over in droves to Obama. He also has a strong base, a political machine that is
from the grassroots, the first grassroots President in my lifetime. Don’t give up on
Obama. He’s going to win next year, and replace a couple more justices: Clarence
Thomas being first on the list for replacement. I also think he’s going to sweep in
a Democratic House and hold onto the Senate, although it won’t be filibuster

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, October 24, 2011 at 12:37 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, - “let’s see if you have defended your political position for any substantial Republican program….”

First.  I’m not here to do battle with anyone. I’m also not here to defend republican political positions. I’m here to listen and, where I am able, defend rational democratic positions.

Clearly I take a strong, succinct, and unequivocal position against all who demonizing political opponents. - I too believe Sean Hannity to be an ass. If anyone were to lay out, as clearly as I do, how I may be thinking and speaking as Hannity does, I would be mindful of what I was told and avoid certain practices.

The use of Straw-men and demonizing differences of opinion.

Maybe you could ponder Roosevelt (Dresden-Japanese Internment) Truman (Korea-Hiroshima/Nagasaki), Kennedy (Bay of Pigs and Vietnam), Johnson (Vietnam) and Obama (vaporizing American citizens without trial) when you complain about mean militaristic republicans and their habit of squelching civil liberties.

Perhaps you could at least consider President Obama when you put up those Straw-men politicians taking money and doling out favors from and to the ‘super-rich”. Otherwise people will think you disingenuous in your complaints. They will think you are too ensconced in political theater.

Report this
skimohawk's avatar

By skimohawk, October 24, 2011 at 10:05 am Link to this comment

I believe you believe what you’re saying.
You still cling to “hope” for the Democrats.
I’ve given up on them, including my local US Congressman, who I’ve been voting for since 1976.
I will not be voting for him again, for two simple reasons: (1) he’s the incumbent, and (2) he’s a Democrat.
Make no mistake: I would never vote for a Republican candidate again either.

Report this

By JohnnySwims, October 24, 2011 at 9:56 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Is the nation’s supply of water contaminated with dumb medicine?

If either a republican or democrat wins the election, America and the world, except the Middle East that trying to be democratic, will continue the status quo.

Only if Ron Paul is a sleeper that would get rid of the Democrats and Republican parties if elected, is there a chance for recovery and real change.

Both parties are dying, they’re just puppets to the 1%‘ers, the dictators.  Puppets are made of dead wood.

Enough reality for the Day.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 24, 2011 at 9:40 am Link to this comment

With no intention to insult, let’s see if you have defended your
political position for any substantial Republican program since
I did not see where you said even once, “I believe….”
In your response to Outraged, IMax, October 23 6:37 am there
is no mention of your political opinion but using a few fallacious
arguments (Strawman, Avoiding the Issue or Question, the Black
or White Fallacy, Ad Hominem), and from then on in all your posts,
you evade any specific rationale and do not defend the Republicans’
holding up confirmations except to note that Democrats did the
same thing.  To say it is a feeble effort is giving you a compliment. 
Your next post, IMax, on October 23 4:10 pm you do not say much
about your “chosen politics or solutions.”  Nothing about your
perspective in your post of IMax, October 24 5:10 am except to say
“it’s politics,” which is a dodge.  What do you mean by “it’s politics?” 

Perhaps you do “sincerely fail to see” my defense of the way I
characterize what I perceive to be my political opponents, those
being all Republicans, your comparing my views with Hannity is also
unsound reasoning.  You do not say where my view is faulty, you simply
say it is similar to Hannity’s name calling Democrats and that I should
now defend against that similarity.  It is irrelevant whether or not
Hannity believes Democrats are stupid or ill-intentioned as that does
not disprove my belief the Republicans’ entire political agenda is
essentially selfish and against the American people’s best interests.

It is also irrelevant what Roosevelt did, Truman, or Bush or Obama have
done.  And you commit the Fallacy of the Lie since I did not say anything
about Republicans being more militaristic and the fallacy of linking that
falsehood with their opposition to civil liberties shows more ineptitude
at reasoning accurately.  I would and do claim they oppose civil liberties
but I would be specific were I to make that claim, the scope of which will
take several posts to list.  Not now, but I will.

Further I did not say Republicans are the party of the wealthy, I
said the Republicans are the legislative supporters and servants
of the wealthy Corporatocrats.  Your entire paragraph about the
wealthy is so full of holes that it will also take a separate post to
respond. Again, not now but I will.  Of course Republicans represent
in every piece of legislation for which they vote for or against is for
the benefit of the Corporatocracy and always against the American
people. They automatically, mindlessly lockstep vote and more than
frequently do not allow even discussion.  You could of course show
where they did not do this.  Their vicious sting is still felt with their
latest unconscionable defeat of the Obama American Jobs Act for the
simple reason to defeat Obama in 2012, and then the smaller provision
that would without any doubt have provided jobs for teachers, firemen
and police.  They traded the welfare of hundreds of thousands of
Americans for their self-serving political agenda.

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, October 24, 2011 at 7:00 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, - “Defend your position from your own perspective”

I believe I have done that. Your retort is that you don’t agree with my position.

Without seeming to be to insulting I see no difference between your views on republicans and Hannity’s views on democrats. Hannity does not appear to be listening. Hannity, not unlike yourself, believes those on the other side of the political divide are either stupid or ill intentioned. I disagree.

I sincerely fail to see how you defend the way you characterize political opponents while simultaneously believing Hannity to be an ass for doing the very same.

As to your argument that republicans are a danger. Militaristic. Opposed to civil liberties.

I would point you toward history. Roosevelt supported the bombing of Dresden and the internment of Japanese Americans (the worst offense of civil liberties in modern America). Truman ordered the use of the atom bomb (300,000 dead). Truman involved America in the Korean war. Kennedy (Bay of Pigs) and Johnson with the Vietnam war (58,000 American lives), etc.

I had complained about Bush using questionable interrogation methods. Well, I’m complaining even more today after President Obama ended interrogations and has opted, in stead, for a ten-fold increase in global assassinations using drones (no capture, no interrogation, no trial). Obama goes a step further in ordering the extrajudicial death penalty for American citizens. - You believe republicans are more militaristic and opposed to civil liberties?

You say republicans are the party of the wealthy. All the while the twenty wealthiest congressional districts in the United States have been democratic strongholds for nearly 30 years. President Obama has taken in more Wall Street money than any candidate in American History.  More than all republican candidates combined. Democrats don’t represent the Wealthy? they don’t represent corporations?

See my point? The narrative of “Us”, the well intentioned, v “them”, the evil people, is political theater. It’s not real. Yet you write as if this is somehow a reality.

I disagree.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 24, 2011 at 5:06 am Link to this comment

Indeed it is politics, and that is how the world works on the politics
of governments.  Being on opposite shores, Imax, does not mean
you and I may not have equally ardent partisan views.  I don’t really
mind that kind of confrontation at all and actually have a respect for
those who have different views than mine who can show with reason
why they do and in view of the fact that I give reasons for my beliefs.
I welcome civil argument on such things.  I do not claim to be an All
Knower. As it happens in the realm of science, doors are always open
to revise perspectives when better veritable information becomes
available.  I do not find much integrity in those who simply give
personal opinions thinking merely their word is sufficient. 

The difference between Hannity and myself, to also be blunt, is that
he is a verifiable asshole who coats his Right-Wingnut views through the
excretory opening at the end of his alimentary canal and that is what he
listens to.  I listen to what the Republicans say and do, so maybe I listen
to assholes too, just not my own.

There is a definite difference in the motives of the two parties which I
briefly listed earlier.  I happen to believe a nation belongs to and has a
duty to the people of that nation not those who can accumulate power
through amassing wealth from questionable and unethical means and
who use that power to insure their domination.  The fact that there are
asshole politicians who declare to be Democrats but who continuously
support calculated Republican decimation of liberal programs is a
temporary fact as these people will be replaced. 

Your using Hannity as an example is merely a strawman foil argument
on your part.  Defend your position from your own perspective or is that
something you cannot do?

Report this

By Payson, October 24, 2011 at 4:38 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

There is hope for simply ignorant people because “ignorance” implies they can be
taught.  One of the greatest threats to our democracy, or what is left of it, is willful
ignorance.  Each side is choosing to take a stand on rhetoric rather than facts. 
Many follow the lying rants of media figures who make millions of dollars to
appeal to one side or another.  It reminds me of people who adhere to religious
beliefs that make their lives worse.  A belief system, however harmful, seems to
make a lot of unfortunate people feel better.  If they don’t have any answers to
difficult questions in life, it is easier to let someone else tell them what to think.
Sadly, the rampant willful ignorance all around us can only be lessened when the
reality becomes so bad that even the most devoted will have no choice but to take

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, October 24, 2011 at 4:10 am Link to this comment


Believe me when I say that I understand how you feel and what you’re saying. I suppose the only question I have is how you may feel and what you may think when Sean Hannity makes identical claims - stupid, dangerous, and insane - when he’s talking about liberals and democrats.

Hannity appears not to be truly listening to democrats outside of the media and Washington. Is what he does accurate? Is what he does helpful?

I’ll hope my bluntness doesn’t dissuade. We do have a real difference of opinion on this topic. My view is that it’s politics. I think, at the very least, it should be taken as such.

Report this
JDmysticDJ's avatar

By JDmysticDJ, October 24, 2011 at 3:32 am Link to this comment

The fight against devious, disingenuous, intelligence is always easier won than the fight against ignorance. The truth will always vanquish the lie, but ignorance is oblivious to the truth. Ignorance will hold to its ignorance with no regard for the truth. Ignorance is unmoved by facts and instead relies on distortion and bias for substantiation.

The contention that Democrats and Republicans are one and the same is refuted by the facts. There is a corporate Political Party, and a Political Party that better represents the people and the evidence that supports that contention is overwhelming, but ignored because of ignorance.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 24, 2011 at 2:43 am Link to this comment

Outraged provides the best posts on this entire thread.  Thank
you, I for one am much obliged.  Corporate swindling and tricking
customers is one thing against which OWS ought to hoot, holler,
scream, bellow even louder.  Citigroup’s 3.8 billion dollar profit
means the public needs to quit Citigroup banks!  Credit Unions or
bona fide “community” banks need to be used. 

As Rachel Maddow asks “What can Democrats do now?”  Re-elect
Obama who will appoint more Supreme Court justices who will vote for
better regulations.  No Republican president would do that, nor will a
Republican Supreme Court.  Frank said it crystal clear exactly what some
of us have been saying for a long time, elect congressmen/women who
will vote for policies and legislation that protect the people.  But the
Democratic Party needs to get with the program and target strategic
elections to make that happen!  The Maddow interview is one that needs
to be watched over and over until it is embedded in the brain so that
when it comes time to vote, the vote counts for the benefit of the people
not the Corporatocrats.

If you stay on the Maddow show, just let it run, a few other stories are
worth seeing as well.  Like the Oakland, California cops program.  Let’s
hope the cosmos of policemen/women in this country remember in the
voting booth who is saving and trying to save their jobs, not the
Republicans!  Obama and Democrats are!

Surely, there can be another attempt to pass such a Dodd-Frank bill!  We
the people need to in fact take back the country the Republicans have
swiped.  Electing Elizabeth Warren to Congress will be one step towards
that goal.

Report this

By munky, October 24, 2011 at 12:52 am Link to this comment

The populace will become more radicalized if a Republican wins the White House in 2008. This would be a good thing. As long as Obama is president, American “progressives” will remain docile and OWS will wither and die.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, October 24, 2011 at 12:06 am Link to this comment

Re: skimohawk

Your comment: “sorry I’m disinclined to pore
through 28 pages of *.pdf file”

You didn’t need to “pore through” the summary, the
2nd page mainly says it all.  However, the rest of
the summary was there for you to assess.  This
summary is a summary of ACTUAL LEGISLATION not
“promises” as you suppose.  The issue here is NOT
that they haven’t done it but how shredded the
legislation became as the lobbyists and Republicans railed against it again and again.

Barney Frank one of the authors of this legislation made that very point on the Rachel Maddow Show recently: (@ approx. 9:15 )

When you make the claim that OWS is “far away from what Democratic candidates (and office-holders) tout as their “platforms” or “policies”.” it is in all actuality as FAR AWAY FROM THE FACTS as you can get.
I’m not saying we don’t have blue dogs in the party but to make the claims you’re making just doesn’t hold water.

As for that “hope” point you were making… well, I admit…. just like I have HOPE in OWS, I still have HOPE in the Democrats as a whole.  In fact, I think it has more to do with the facts than hope per se…. but if that trips your trigger…...sure, call it hope.

Report this
skimohawk's avatar

By skimohawk, October 23, 2011 at 10:26 pm Link to this comment

you’re free to disagree.

sorry I’m disinclined to pore through 28 pages of *.pdf file.

Democrats talk a good game, but they don’t deliver on their promises.
To wit: Iraq
Need I say more?

Keep holding onto that “hope” there. When you finally realize it’s really a part of your anatomy and that’s all you’ve got left, come and talk to me.

Report this

By bdk4, October 23, 2011 at 10:13 pm Link to this comment

Jaded as I am by the proliferation of corruption by money, this article reminds me of Alan Greenspan’s letter of reference praising Charles Keating - for which he was reportedly paid $40,000. I cannot help wondering what Mr. Boyarsky might have been paid to write this article supporting Obama.

It is amazing how many people cannot see the game of party politics which is nothing but an adaptation of the “good-cop, bad-cop” routine. It matters not which party wins or who gets elected, both parties are owned by Wall Street/Corporate elites. The Occupy Wall Street movement is the only hope the people have left.

Report this

By Matthew Borenstein, October 23, 2011 at 9:28 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The corporation syndicates maintain their
dictatorial control through their “Democratic” &
Republican stooges & flunkies. The unprecedented Occupy
Wall St. movement is now - right now - offering the
American people the potential to overcome the
domination of the overlord gangs by liberating
ourselves from their parasitic stranglehold, & that of
their D & R stooges. Provided enough people finally
dump the Democrapic Farty. Flush it down!!!  Matthew in
New York City

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, October 23, 2011 at 8:45 pm Link to this comment

Re:  skimohawk, October 23

Your comment: “what is actually happening on the ground (and in Washington DC) is something far away from what Democratic candidates (and office-holders)tout as their “platforms” or “policies”.”

I disagree.  What about the Dodd-Frank bill?  Two Democrats working to bring regulation and sanity back to the financial sector.  While lobbists and Republicans work double time to undo these necessary adjustments.

Dodd/Frank summary:

Report this

By Fearless, October 23, 2011 at 7:54 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Here we go again: Dems good; Repugs bad. 2004 called, it wants its mindless partisan droning back. How have you not waken up to the fact that Goldman, JP Morgan, et al control both parties?

I mean how can anyone still support Obama? Seriously? Give me one f***ing reason? [Enter regurgitated John Stewart-like faux liberal praise on how Obama killed Gaddafi and “liberated” Libya without any US soldiers getting killed.] Too bad he signed on for NATO to murder 1,000+ Libyan civilians and obliterate one of Africa’s most prosperous self-made societies on the hijacked basis of Gaddafi killing around 200 conspirators (who along with the AL-Qaeda-linked “rebel” mercenaries were probably planted by the CIA).

With bombing campaigns and drone warfare, the US has essentially zero accountability in waging attacks on anyone it wants anywhere, anytime. Sloppy attacks at that; resulting in a disturbing amount of civilian casualties. But hey, they’re not American (most of the time), their skin is brown, not white. Those seven and eight year olds are probably just radical Muslim-creatures who live in the dirt. So who cares, right? As long as American faux liberals get to stroke their little pseudo-intellectual egos and over-identify with their president -who must be hip and “liberal” since he’s black, lean, and mildly articulate. Forget the constitution; forget ethics; forget morality; forget human rights. F*ck you over-medicated, complacent zombies. F*ck the estrogen-laden war-mongering on NPR. F*ck Truthdig.

I just don’t get this country anymore. I hope one day I’ll wake up and realize that I’ve been the delusional one because I felt like an alien since Obama’s first Afghan surge in 09; becoming more disillusioned with each betrayal that lying piece of sh*t shoves in our faces. I absolutely hate the way most of you think or don’t think.

Report this
skimohawk's avatar

By skimohawk, October 23, 2011 at 6:22 pm Link to this comment

the Republican footman in charge is living in the White House.

if I wanted to read either the Republican or Democrat “party platform”, I could easily have logged onto the websites of either the Democratic or Republican National Committees.

what is actually happening on the ground (and in Washington DC) is something far away from what Democratic candidates (and office-holders) tout as their “platforms” or “policies”.

that some are unable or refuse to see reality is much to the benefit of political office seekers, and much to their own detriment, as well as the rest of their fellow citizens.

Report this

By Rixar13, October 23, 2011 at 6:20 pm Link to this comment

“People want a harmonious and just world,” he said. “There is a lot of inequality and injustice in the world, and by these people being here, they are bringing attention to these social problems in the most visible way I’ve seen in my lifetime.”

We must reelect President Obama….

Report this

By Fred Wilder, October 23, 2011 at 5:39 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

It isn’t like the poor or unemployed would be that much better off if the Democratic faction of the Corporatist Party retains power.  The only difference between the Democratic faction and the Republican faction is the temperature of the liquid that is being trickled down on to us as waste from the wine we made and they took.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 23, 2011 at 4:15 pm Link to this comment

What is really comforting Imax, is to know I am not alone. Whatever
are your beliefs, are yours and your right to have.  For my part, I
can only judge what are the deleterious effects of the Republican
Party’s behavior in Congress and how it affects my life and others
that I care about.  Their tentacles are prohibitive of a decent life for
so many it is not only harmful it is also deadly.  It is supremely
healthy to present the truth, which apparently you want to deny in
foggy equivocation.  The reason why this segment of the society is
denounced is their callous self-service at every opportunity.  Their
sole intention to depose Barach Obama from the moment he took his
first breath as President is unconscionable and has been detrimental to
this country. What I do?  Popular among the media and blogs?  M’thinks
you ambiguously exaggerate.  I sincerely believe that the Occupy Wall
Street movement is an undisguised indication that an overwhelming
majority of middle America is fed up with the Corporatocrats and their
Republican footmen.

Report this

By ocjim, October 23, 2011 at 4:04 pm Link to this comment

Has there ever been such a reprehensible group of Americans as the crop of Republican candidates? Actually we could say Republicans in general. In a democracy, how can you have representatives of the people who do harm to democracy consistently?

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, October 23, 2011 at 3:10 pm Link to this comment


It simply doesn’t seem healthy to perpetuate the notion that 40% of the U.S. is insane or evil for disagreeing with my chosen politics or solutions. Not when I can daily see the very same tactics, procedures, hypocrisy and demonization of opponents played out everywhere.

I know that what you do is popular amongst the media and on blogs such as this. I sincerely believe that an overwhelming majority of people, independent, democrat or republican are truly fed up with such things.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 23, 2011 at 3:00 pm Link to this comment

I don’t think it is merely an appearance of difference between
Democrats and Republicans.  The difference could be bracing to
those who haven’t checked out what they are: While Republicans
do, the Democratic Party also has strong core principles, values,
and a historic commitment to a nation of endowed rights and
benefits.  Briefly, asa a reminder…

The power of the government comes from the people. The people
are the ultimate authority over the government. 

On the economy,
Democrats favor greater regulation because of cyclical recessions of
an unregulated economy that can be too perilous for most people to

Republicans view government spending and regulation as an intrusion
on liberty. That by interfering with the natural rhythm of the economy,
the government actually increases the intensity of future recessions.

Government Entitlement Programs
Democrats favor legislated entitlement programs such as Social Security
and Medicare. They tend to think that citizens of one of the wealthiest
countries in the world, they deserve to be taken care of in old age and
when ill.

Republicans believe that entitlement programs are too expensive and
increase our national debt.

Foreign Policy
Democrats to favor as peaceful a foreign policy as is possible. They rely
more on diplomacy to accomplish foreign policy actions.

Republicans usually favor a greater reliance on military power to
accomplish Americans’ goals of a world power.
National Debt
Democrats don’t worry as much about the national debt as do
Republicans. A high national debt yields higher inflation which affects
the rich more than the poor in our society.  Democrats believe that a
higher national debt is a worthwhile trade off for socially beneficial

Republicans favor a slim national debt because they believe the next
generation will have to suffer crippling inflation due to high levels of
government spending now.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 23, 2011 at 2:48 pm Link to this comment

Civil Liberties
Democrats are very cautious about legislating laws and bills that
will limit individual civil liberties as outlined in our Constitution.

Republicans, however, believe that occasionally it is necessary to
lessen our civil liberties in order to protect ourselves against
terrorism and/or crime.

Democrats believe woman have the natural right to get receive
an abortion for almost any reason. It is individual decision having to
do with the right to ownership of one’s own body, is and not something
with which the government should mandate.

Republicans favor making abortions a crime except in the most extreme
cases such as rape or incest and some Republicans do not support even
those two cases. It is their belief that the moral responsibility of the
government to protect the lives of the unborn.

Gay Rights
Democrats generally support equal rights for gays. Most support gay
marriage. They compare the discrimination and bigotry that gays face as
similar to the discrimination which African Americans and other groups
have faced and continue to face in our society.

Republicans go to a holy book, the Bible, for a belief that teaches
homosexuality is wrong. They rarely, if ever, support equal rights,
civil unions, or marriage for gays.

The Environment
Democrats endorse regulations and safety measures that provides
less pollution and a better environment. High on their list is to curb
greenhouse gas emissions and limit the use of fossil fuels.

Republicans, on the other hand, do not believe there is a climate crisis
or a pollution problem. True to form, they believe more regulations
would put unwawrranted stress on a slim economy.

Democrats think it is necessary to raise taxes as the revenue is needed to
fund crucial social programs. Their belief is that the government is more
effective than individuals and businesses at spending money especially
during a recession.

Republicans always move legislation to lower taxes as they want to limit
government. They theorize that tax breaks stimulate the economy more
effectively than government spending.

Defense Spending
Democrats think it is to the country’s benefit to keep defense spending
at the minimum. They feel America is far ahead of every other country
on the planet in terms of military technology and argue that there is no
foreign military that can threaten the US by conventional means. Money
spent on defense could be spent on social programs that the country

However, Republicans firmly believe that spending a high amount on
defense in order to maintain world military superiority. They believe
that a heavily funded military is needed in order to be at the ready to
fight terrorism.

Report this
skimohawk's avatar

By skimohawk, October 23, 2011 at 1:42 pm Link to this comment

so… the author believes there’s more “hope” for the unemployed should Obama be re-elected?
is that supposed to be the message here?
what minuscule shred of evidence has been provided to show three’s a possibility that might be true?

oh… wait… we’re sending more US armed forces into Africa… I guess that will mean great job opportunities in the US Army, huh?

Obama: just another empty suit (or horse, if you will) of another color.


Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 23, 2011 at 8:35 am Link to this comment

There appears a definite difference between the democrats and the Republicans, though their barking lines from the silence of the Donkey to the constant trumpeting of the Elephant, always becoming fuzzy and clear as a bell. Sometimes, I see this as a Kabuki Theater, bad acting and most unreal over animations of silly conjecture and hubris,  though the sad truth is the silly in this Kabuki theater affects the populous lives choreographed by self promoted few!

The Democrats and the Republicans cannot be the same for then Yin and Yan would be an illusion.

Divisive polarization is a necessity for the manipulations of absurdity. For the populous must never catch on to the realities of the game, the 99 percent must be divided enabling the 1 percent to maintain their string pulling controls, always hiding behind their curtain of illusion.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 23, 2011 at 8:24 am Link to this comment

”publicly financed elections would reverse the interference of
interests ?very quickly and efficiently”
  No doubt in my mind,
but how fast do you think Congress would metamorphosize
from what would be perceived as self-inflicted wounds to a less
corrupt system of campaigning for office? While I think Democrats
could resign themselves to it, Republicans would scream bloody
murder, we all know why, that there is not enough money in
government coffers to distribute to the bevy of candidates that
could flood election campaigns, which we see happening in their
current floundering to find a defectless and sound of mind candidate.

The staggering ramifications and extent of what is affected by private
financed elected officials is mind boggling if one gives it due thought.
I’ve always wondered where exactly does the millions upon millions
invested by the wealthy hoping to dominate the operation of society
through bought politicians legislative power go to advertise in their
attempt to influence the electorate of all the candidates’ election
campaigns?  Advertising companies f’sure f’sure, paying for television
time, posters, campaign managers,  Imagine the joy for which the
campaign-related businesses jump when electiontime comes up. 
Seems like the money goes into the economy but with the millions
upon millions that does I wonder to what degree does it in fact help
the economy?

Report this
Oceanna's avatar

By Oceanna, October 23, 2011 at 7:38 am Link to this comment

“Maybe just getting the money out could be a focused starter?”

That’s an inarguable point. But unfortunately, it’s a Catch 22 issue.  Finance
reform bills have a way of being watered down to insignificance or shelved, thanks
to the dependence the senate members, irrespective of party, have acquired from
their backers and donors. 

I believe publicly financed elections would reverse the interference of interests
very quickly and efficiently.  But it seems like an ice cube’s chance in hell that that
could happen anytime soon.

Report this

By balkas, October 23, 2011 at 7:37 am Link to this comment

the more jobless in u.s [and other countries], the better for our awakening
and the health of biota and plants.

50% unemployment wordlwide wld make me very happy; especially if all wld
eat, sleep underoof, see a doctor and wld be able w.o fear to say to the
sybarites: death to sybaritism and maybe also sybarites.

not so long ago, joblessness rate on the planet had hovered ab. 50%. ok,
folks, i think u have not noticed that i spoke an obvious untruth.

actually, until very recently, say, 10-15k y ago, there was no such an
happening as joblessness.

everybody worked; everybody loved to work and some people even sung at

so, what happened to the joy [one of the greatest] of work or to the trust
between people?

do i need to tell u also that? and as a person who finished last in each of his
two yrs of basic ‘schooling’?

ok, ok, uze guyz went to school. too bad! so, i know that what happened to u
also happened to pavlov’s dog.
do i also need to tell what happened to herhim? well, ok?! pavlov was able to
dedog the dog; rendering himher a mental mess, but pavlov was human
enough to turn the dedogged dog into a dog, and he and the dog lived
happily ever after.

or maybe pavlov forgot to do that?

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 23, 2011 at 6:40 am Link to this comment

“republicans are no more insane than democrats may be.
It’s politics.”
  I disagree.  Republicans are more insane than
Democrats may be. And agree, it’s politics.  Insanity is defined
as a relatively permanent psychological disorder of the mind; a
state or condition of being mentally deranged, departing from
proportion or moderation intensely involved and preoccupied
with their own wealth which takes the form of advocating for
the benefit of the Corporatocratic privileged class existing
within a large economically broad spectrum society.  Yes it is
a division of class consciousness:  The analogic 1% vs. the 99%
intentional chronic distribution by Republican legislators.

Some on this website would call them bat-shit crazy. I give that
5 Yups for observation.  There is an essential and principal difference
in ideology.  The Democrats in Congress who do not stick fast to the
basic premises and beliefs of the liberal doctrines of social equality and a
fair distribution of the wealth of a nation need swiftly to be replaced so
that the points of liberalism rises to its rightful social efficacy.

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, October 23, 2011 at 5:37 am Link to this comment


We should all be well aware that holding up confirmations is an age old political tactic practiced on all sides everywhere. - when democrats held up 1/3 of Bush’s judicial nominations we all applauded the stratagem.

Do you think there is enough to be critical of regarding political discourse without muddying up the waters with partisan finger-pointing over issues we all know are practiced equally?

Let us not be bigots. As a whole republicans are no more insane than democrats may be. It’s politics.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 23, 2011 at 3:01 am Link to this comment

Sorry Oddsox, I rushed off my last post and did not write it correctly. This may make more sense! I forgot the word ‘not’ as I intended, which makes more sense.

“It means every single person should be able to vote, donate one dollar to their political choice or proclivities and they should” (NOT) “have the inordinate ability to influence voters with copious amounts of money, like ie: Koch Brothers, Norquest, Grove and this includes unions and any other collective special interests.”

This supports my other comment regarding; “get the money out”

It is my view, politicians are not inclined to support my wishes and hopes as long as they are filthy rich themselves or hoping to be, while rubbing elbows with good old boy sponsors which brings us into cronyism, another major problem.

Occupy Wall Street address many different grievances, lets hope special interests, sponsored provocateurs and the typical charlatans do not destroy the basic message of inequality Occupy Wall Street has brought out of hiding.

Maybe just getting the money out could be a focused starter?

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, October 22, 2011 at 8:43 pm Link to this comment

Just a note regarding how ridiculous Republicans are.  From the Washington Monthly in a story about the confirmation of John Byson for Commerce Secretary:

“But Senate Republicans vowed to block him anyway.  Not because they had objections to him, but because they wanted unrelated policy concessions. Specifically they wanted ratification of trade agreements that the Obama administration already supported. Since President Obama had already agreed to GOP demands, it was extremely difficult for him to give in to GOP demands. Then Republicans made a new demand that the trade deals couldn’t be ratified unless congress also stopped offering Trade Adjustment Assistance funding. At that point, Bryson was being held hostage to the ratification of trade deals that were being held up by Republicans! So the post languished vacant for months. Then finally the trade deals got signed late last week.”

Republicans are simply insane, and when you add religion to their insanity it’s a scary mix.  They’re hell bent on regaining power.  They’re rich, greedy and religious and now they want POWER.

Report this

By liberalnomore, October 22, 2011 at 7:25 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

And it begins . . .  the liberals sooo disappointed with the great republican Barak Obama now circle their wagons and join with the likes of EJ Dionne and Chris Matthews to get us to vote and to vote for the Obama. As a MA resident, I can tell you Mitt Romney is far from the nutcase this Boyar fellow makes him out to be. In fact, kink his hair and give him a really good tan and you have Mitt Obamney. Truthdig, MSNBC,  Huffington Post . . . is there anywhere one can go that isn’t in love with Obama? Oh, Fox.

And let’s do what good liberals are usually aghast at . . . focus on Romney’s religion! Of course if Obama was a Mormon or a Muslim or a Shirley Maclaine idolator, the liberals would be bashing the hell out of people investigating his “religion”. Didn’t that Jesus fellow have something to say about hypocrites? Lawd, I do pray OWS does not hook up with the Dems and gets ever more strident and forceful and in Nov 2012 occupies voting booths everywhere with chants like “Vote Green!” or “Nader/Kucinich” all the while laughing at those silly “I Voted” stickers.

Report this
oddsox's avatar

By oddsox, October 22, 2011 at 3:33 pm Link to this comment

One Person, One Dollar, One Vote.

Leefeller—ah, I see. 
Campaign reform in a simple 9-9-9 -style format. 
I like it.

When I researched the One Dollar One Vote philosophy, it was completely different (see links on previous posts) and I didn’t think you meant that.

Myself, I’d like to see all political gifting by non-breathing persons (both corporations and unions) outlawed. 
But I’m ok with unlimited transparent contributions by individual US citizens.
That means David and Charles Koch can match dollars with Geroge Soros until they’re all 3 broke as far as I’m concerned. 
As long as we all know who’s giving what to whom.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 22, 2011 at 3:06 pm Link to this comment

Odd Sox, I remember wearing an “I like IKE Button” I am not really that old, though I feel it. My comment was tongue in cheek, I apologize for my stretching of reality. I would have voted for Ike if the opportunity had been available to me. He warned the nation about the Military Industrial Complex and I respect his honesty on this. The closest thing to this since was Mike Gravel comments during the first Democrat debate for the Presidential election.

What drives me nuts, is many here on Truth Dig seem to have a large common interest on most subjects, but they seem to bicker on ego building innateness. Just my take!

Quick comment per oddsox request; One person, one dollar, one vote;  what it means to me. It means every single person should be able to vote, donate one dollar to their political choice or proclivities and they should have the inordinate ability to influence voters with copious amounts of money, like ie: Koch Brothers, Norquest, Grove and this includes unions and any other collective special interests.

If you find this uncomfortable let me know why, my opinions are seldom set in stone.

Report this

By scotttpot, October 22, 2011 at 2:18 pm Link to this comment

It is only all about jobs because the media says so.
Unemployment is about 4% more than usual 5-6%.
So why is 6 million extra unemployed over the usual 8 million unemployed so much more important than the ongoing wars,climate change,energy and energy prices,taxing the filthy rich,education,infrastructure,immigration and obesity?
Because the Corporate party can produce endless media distraction and fear
about the economy and avoid discussion or real attention to other issues.


Report this

By scotttpot, October 22, 2011 at 11:24 am Link to this comment

Bill Boyarsky fools no one who has been paying attention for the last 10 years.
The Corporate Party runs this country as Sen. Dick Durbin said recently .
They have created a meaningless electoral process and have infiltrated all of the
regulatory agencies,universities, and media.The Corporate party is our shadow government and is maintained by propaganda and fear.
Obama has done everything John Mc Cain would have done.He just sells it
The Republican wing of the Corporate Party is thrilled with the last 3 years.
Extended tax cuts,a rebounded stock and bond market,new free trade
agreements,no move to a green economy,full support of Israel,military
expansion into Africa and Pakistan,commitment to more domestic
drilling,keeping Guantanamo open,no prosecution of white collar criminals…..It
is amazing someone would try to peddle the notion that there are 2 parties with different ideologies and agendas vying for control .

Report this
oddsox's avatar

By oddsox, October 22, 2011 at 11:05 am Link to this comment

You voted for Eisenhower? 
Wow, hats off to you, my friend. 
Newly-found respect.

I’m surprised to find myself in agreement with you on a wide array of issues and statements from your last post:
“Poor people are not lazy, the middle class is not stupid, all rich people are not opportunists.” Corporations aren’t people. 
Lobbyists have way too much power in DC.

And on some issues, qualified agreement:
Social Security not a true Ponzi Scheme (but not sustainable either).
Labor should have the right to organize and to bargain. At the same time, there should be an accounting for the inherent differences between collective bargaining in public and private sectors.

Maybe we’re just not matched up on the tone.
I see a bright future for our country once we make a few needed changes.
I know most posters here agree we’ve been operating for some tme under a system of Crony Capitalism. 
Some say the problem is with the Capitalism, I say it’s with the Cronies.

As for “One Person One Dollar One Vote,” I’ve been meaning to ask you:  you’re not espousing voting power as determined by wealth or income are you?

please elaborate on that, would you?

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 22, 2011 at 9:56 am Link to this comment

Odd Sox, I also vote issues, so I respect your right to vote issues, even in disagreement. The only Republican I ever voted for was Eisenhower!

The Republicans especially in the Red States have followed the Koch Agenda, and followed the marching orders from ALEC!

I believe peoples labor is all they have to bargain with, so I believe in peoples right to collective bargaining. If the Repulcians had their way, we would only have right to work states, cuts in education, and the round of Republican applause when Cane makes the comment,  people who do not have jobs, ‘it is their own fault’ seems to show an attitude I find disgusting. Job creators and all the sound bites offered by the Repulcians seems cloned to me.

The system seems broke, money is not people nor are corporations. Social Security is not a ponzi scheme. Poor people are not lazy, the middle class is not stupid, all rich people are not opportunists.

Business people like Cane and Romney do not impress me, nor do they support any ideals which I support or believe in. The fact Romney bought companies and shut them down, seems just like what the Republicans want to do with the government. I believe in regulations to control abuses like Wall Street and Oil Companies, one who makes money by manipulations and the other by taking advantage of natural resources. Lobbyists run the halls of congress like rats in a sewer, super packs pour money and buy politicians like ladies of the night, now with impunity with the 403C’s!

Yes the system is broke, corrupt and apathetic to the populous. Hence why Occupy Wall Street has happened, people are hurting and the one percent do not care. The surfs are cannon fodder for their wars of opportunity, consumers for their company tea and pay taxes to support crony capitalism.

Report this
oddsox's avatar

By oddsox, October 22, 2011 at 9:03 am Link to this comment


Naw, actually I’m a registered Democrat(a DINO)and voted for Obama in 2008.
I consider myself a Centrist, but acknowledge that covers a lot of ground & I may agree or disagree with other Centrists depending on the issue.
But I have voted Repub in the past & may again.

And maybe even Green (who you got, Ardee?)under the right conditions.

I’ve always been for eliminating payroll taxes in favor of a consumption tax model for the sake of increased employment.
So Cain’s 9-9-9 caught my attention right away. 
It can easily be tweaked into a progressive model, as I detailed on another thread.

Two points in my earlier post:

1) We’re on the right subject, it’s about jobs.
2) Obama isn’t about Hope & Change anymore.  He’s now the status quo.

Report this

By FRTothus, October 22, 2011 at 7:44 am Link to this comment

Who does Boyarsky thinks he’s fooling?

“The United States has only one party - the property
party. It’s the party of big corporations, the party of
money. It has two right wings; one is Democrat and the
other is Republican.”
(Gore Vidal)

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 22, 2011 at 7:43 am Link to this comment

The job promoters Odd Sox? 999 plan is at least a plan? The Republicans offered us Bush for eight years, two wars and recently to get rid of Medicare. Yes the Republicans have a plan. Lower taxes for the rich, such a plan!

I had suspected many not all of the opposition to the Democrats here on Truth Dig are Republicans in drag!

As for the Republicans:
“But there are signs of hope for changing the jobs environment.”  Thanks for coming out of the closet Odd Sox!

Report this

By FRTothus, October 22, 2011 at 7:42 am Link to this comment

“The United States has only one party - the property party. It’s the party of big corporations, the party of money. It has two right wings; one is Democrat and the other is Republican.”
(Gore Vidal)

Report this

By Rodney, October 22, 2011 at 7:28 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The comment by Outraged says it all. The Republicans
are really trying to turn the the United States into
what we have been fighting against in the Middle
East. A Country where a few control all of the wealth
and political power. A country where money and
cronyism rule the day. Voter suppression for the
minority, reproductive rights of women non-existent.
America becomes a Christian nation with the Christian
religion being taught in schools. The rest of us
becomes poor or work for slave wages. And the shame
of it all is that people still vote for Republicans.
The Republicans have been great at the politics of
division. They told the working class white’s that
they couldn’t get a job because of affirmative
action. Now they tell them they can’t get a job
because illegal immigrants. They act as if white
folks in this country lost jobs from the fruit
pickers and the hotel bed makers. The real reason
America is in shambles is because the rich in this
country are anti-American who only cares about money.
They sent the good paying manufacturing and high tech
jobs overseas in order to avoid paying a fair wage
along with health care and retirement and they
pocketed the difference. They have received billions
in tax breaks, money that is supposed to pay for
roads,bridges,education,health care and public safety
while continuing to tell the middle class their taxes
are too high when actually wages are too low. They
tell the middle class that the poor in this country
who receive public assistance or food stamps are
living for free when some of our soldiers families
actually qualify for food stamps because of low wages
the receive. The wealthy have stolen the American
dream through greed and division. It’s now time for
the middle class to take their country back from the
Republicans who have lied cheated and stolen the
American dream away from all of us.

Report this
oddsox's avatar

By oddsox, October 22, 2011 at 7:18 am Link to this comment

BB, kudos for writing on the correct topic.
It’s all about Jobs now.

Obama’s record is weak. 
If he’s lucky, on election day he may be able to claim 3M new jobs created during his term. 
But, even without drilling down to see what KINDS of jobs, that doesn’t keep up with the increase in population. 
We’d still be around 9% unemployment, up from the already-high 7.7% when he took office.

There is no reasonable hope that, if re-elected, anything will change except for passage of a low-impact Son-of-Stimulus package.


As for the Repub candidates, they’ll not have an easy time it either.

But there are signs of hope for changing the jobs environment. 

Herman Cain’s much-maligned 9-9-9 plan would eliminate payroll taxes—removing a huge obstacle to hiring.

Cain, like Romney, have actual experience in business private-sector business. 

As for Perry’s track record on jobs in Texas—well, ask the jobless in Norwalk if they really care that much if their next job comes from the government or the private sector.
1.2M new oil jobs hard to imagine, you say? 
Even half that would help.

At least these guys have ideas. 
Vs. the status quo which leaves us in a worsening rut.

The election is still over a year away and much can happen between now and then.
But we voted for Hope and Change in 2008. 
We could again in 2012.

Report this

By herbsierra, October 22, 2011 at 6:50 am Link to this comment

regardless of whether the next president is dem or rep - the news is bad for the jobless.  have we not already figured that out?  i can’t believe we’re still stuck in this dem v. rep myre.  and that’s what the dems & reps absolutely love (and the media and wall street) because it takes our eyes off the real ball and keeps us engaged in a meaningless debate that results in more of the same every 4 or 8 years.  we should use our collective energies to get on the same page so we can work to effect some real change.

Report this

By GW=MCHammered, October 22, 2011 at 5:44 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Jobless is what our two grueling parties should be.
They’ve devastated our nation then globalized it.

Report this
Oceanna's avatar

By Oceanna, October 22, 2011 at 5:35 am Link to this comment

We’re the only developed country with a binary political party system.  They’re
limited systems of off/on, either/or and most unfortunately—win or lose.

This resulting winner takes all and the loser losing everything in the two-party
voting system encourages competition over substance,  lobbying and money
over principle; and long, drawn-out pre-election periods that have more to do
with personality, political identities, and scandal than the pressing and
immediate realities.

It’s an obsolete system that encourages a lack of distinction between parties. 
Of course, there’s the ideological grandstanding between the two which
seemingly separates them.  But ultimately, the similarities between the two
parties render the differences pretty inconsequential and irrelevant.  For a brief
example, endorsers of both parties promulgate fear of the other, which I
believe is a blatant intention of this article.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 22, 2011 at 5:15 am Link to this comment

What I do not understand is the Republicans clearly do not represent me, my ideas, hopes and aspirations. There actions done in the Red States borders on fascism and in States like Florida, Wisconsin and Ohio, the Governors make Gadfly look like they got the wrong guy in Libya.

Sure there is money in politics and this is a problem, but in Republican politics the bought and paid for against populist views is obvious. 

One person one dollar one vote, what a novel idea!

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 22, 2011 at 4:00 am Link to this comment

The Republican Party is the Party Against the People


Report this

By falken751, October 22, 2011 at 3:08 am Link to this comment

We are at war, the Republicans are trying to take over our country. They
would have the rich 1% take over this country and the rest of us, the 99%,
peons. We all banded together when the Nazi’s and Japanese were trying to
take over our country, now it isn’t any different. This should be treated as
WAR by us, the 99%. So really, republicans are our enemy, no different than
those that attacked our country in 1941.

Report this

By Marian Griffith, October 22, 2011 at 1:57 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

There is little to choose between democrat and republican. One stumbles to the right out of timidity or apathy, the other does so out of zealotry. For the rest of the country the only difference is the speed with which things get worse.

But what perhaps is not well understood is that the occupy movement is the last peaceful warning that is going to be given.
From here on in things MUST change as continueing to slide into poverty and destituency is no longer an option. The question is if the change is for the better or for violence. And that does not mean that the occupy movement will turn violent but simply that their voiced dissent opens the way for better organised movements that will direct people towards violent revolution.
The USA does not have much in the way of traditional protest movements (unlike most of Europe), but the Koch brothers have already demonstrated it takes but a few months to whip up a significant portion of the population into a foaming at the mouth frenzy over imagined slights, to the point that violence and gunfire were a real possibility.
Should the police pull a Tiananmen square somewhere it will shift the interpretation of government from democracy (such as it is in its feeble state) to dictatorhip, and it will be extremely simple for political opportunists (and agitprop workers) to cement the opinion of government as ‘them’ in the minds of the have-nots, the first step towards violence (is to dehumanise your opposition).

(Investment) Bankers are worried about the hair-cut they are about to receive regarding european debts and are vigorously fighting it every step along the way (while the other half is making the issue worse by making it more expensive for european countries to borrow money and thus increasing the necessity and size of that write off. They should perhaps be a bit more worried about the tiny difference between a (financial) haircut and a (real) cut about 20cm lower, which is what a real revolution might well lead to.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, October 21, 2011 at 10:36 pm Link to this comment

If the republicans win the presidency and/or the
senate and the house NOT ONLY will there be no jobs, but there’ll be no unemployment insurance, no unions, no food stamps, no one to enforce food safety and as soon as they get the chance no food safety regulations AT ALL, there’ll be no contraception, no abortions, no housing help, no heating assistance, lax enforcement of building codes just up until they can do away with them entirely, no educational funding, no worker safety standards, no student loans, no firefighters, no locally elected officials things will be run by CEOs, no pell grants for students, no healthcare especially medicare and medicaid, no social security, no public housing even the shitty stuff, no disability insurance, and the list goes
on….. feel free to add to it.

What we WILL HAVE is a theocracy run by the cronies of monied interests.  They will be brutal.

I’m voting for Obama.

Those who claim that the Democrats are as bad as the Republicans are sadly mistaken.  I hope it’s not to the detriment of us all.

Many groups are attempting to co-opt Occupy Wall
Street, all accusing each other of co-opting “their” movement. It’s looks really stupid from here.  If Occupy Wall Street attacks the Democrats as a whole (exempting specific ones such as Tester and Nelson) they will lose much of the support that they have until now enjoyed.  Remember, they don’t have an astroturf organization to come in and fund this thing, they HAVE to rely upon the people.  IMO, I don’t think there’s ENOUGH people to rely upon if the Democrats are attacked.

Report this
Not One More!'s avatar

By Not One More!, October 21, 2011 at 9:45 pm Link to this comment

The democratic party always says, while serving up the sh*t sandwich, that it’s better than the sandwich offered by the republicans. Hey, I’m not eating either one. They can take their sh*t sandwich and shove it.

Vote third party. Stop giving your consent to the butchers and thieves. It’s killing people.

Report this

By tman, October 21, 2011 at 9:35 pm Link to this comment

Nothing will change in this country until the people march into the capital buildings and grab all the politicians by the neck and throw them in the street.

Report this

By Norecovery, October 21, 2011 at 8:50 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

If one day, we should be so fortunate as to get a Constitutional Amendment, it should include the election ballot option “NONE OF THE ABOVE”...and then, require the process to start over.

Report this

By REED RICHARDS, October 21, 2011 at 8:30 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)


Religion has done quite enough for the world thank you.  What is needed for this entire planet is a complete and unimpeded breakout of some good old Star Trek style Vulcan Logic…..................

Report this

By Lexicron, October 21, 2011 at 6:13 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Be afraid and you’ll never need to think clearly again.

Report this
Misfiteye's avatar

By Misfiteye, October 21, 2011 at 6:02 pm Link to this comment

If I hear one more candidate or anyone else refer to business as job creators i will throw up.

They are profit creators.

If they have to give someone a job to make a profit they will do so, grudgingly.  But if they can improve their bottom line by laying off workers they will jump on it.

I work for a corp. that recently eliminated one whole shift by putting us all on 12 hour days.  They went from five shifts to four.  Same number of people on each shift, same work, just longer hours.

Granted it costs them a little overtime but that’s nothing compared to what they save in non-hourly labor costs (unemployment, workers comp and of course the big one, health care).

They didn’t even have to lay anyone off.  Almost exactly 20% got mad and quit eliminating any possible unemployment claims.

It was a brilliant move at a time of high unemployment.

They are profit creators!

As George Carlin said,
“They don’t give a fuck about us.
They don’t give a FUCK about us.

Report this
Misfiteye's avatar

By Misfiteye, October 21, 2011 at 5:22 pm Link to this comment

And still no jobs.

Report this

By Geez Jan, October 21, 2011 at 5:14 pm Link to this comment

It’s absolutely true that there’s no hope for the jobless if a Republican wins. Unfortunately it’s also true that there’s no hope for the jobless if a Democrat wins, either. They are both corporate-owned parties. The sooner people accept this the better. I’m not holding my breath.

Report this
zonth_zonth's avatar

By zonth_zonth, October 21, 2011 at 4:32 pm Link to this comment

dont worry Democrats, Obama will win by the next election with his 1 billion dollar campaign program.

Report this

By MeHere, October 21, 2011 at 3:58 pm Link to this comment

The country has become impoverished in many areas besides the economy.  There is a state of crisis in everything that is vital to the nation and its future.  The two parties and their supporters have brought us to where we are by ignoring the need for planning and change which were evident a long time ago. There is no sign or glimmer of hope that either the Reps or Dems -both equally corrupt- can do much about it besides offering misleading and token solutions. It’s important to understand that, at this point, these politicians are not able to do anything because their entanglement in the Washington political culture has made even the better ones ineffective. It’s time to take them off life support.

Report this
mrfreeze's avatar

By mrfreeze, October 21, 2011 at 3:03 pm Link to this comment

gerard - Your question “what on earth ails these rich dudes?”

I don’t how you (and everyone else) can’t see the truth. It’s right there in front of you: THE RICH DON’T GIVE A SHIT about the rest of us. In addition to their brazen apathy, most are either sociopaths or suffer from some serious personality disorders. They represent the economic “winners” which doesn’t make them better or wiser….but they are in control and there’s very little you or I or any regular folk can do about it.

Report this
Oceanna's avatar

By Oceanna, October 21, 2011 at 2:40 pm Link to this comment

Be afraid, be very afraid. Do let fear guide you in the voting process with the two-
party system.  Trust that fear!  And yes indeed, be mindful of choice inherent in
the lessor of the two evils.

Fear is reasoning. Fear creates clarity.  It is good and healthy for you. 

Dr. Oceanna Orwell

Report this

By berniem, October 21, 2011 at 2:32 pm Link to this comment

What is probably more true is that there is no hope for America if one of the reactionary wackos wins because if one is disturbed by the #OWS movement all that can be said is “you ain’t seen nothin’ yet!” FREE BRADLEY MANNING(I mean you Mr. POTUS!)

Report this

By AlanSmithee, October 21, 2011 at 2:05 pm Link to this comment

So you better vote for Obama next year or you’ll never have a job again!

Why do I even bother with this “news” site anymore?

Report this

By norman harman, October 21, 2011 at 1:24 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I’m with Johncp: there’s only one political party in this country - The Corporate
Party. And nearly every American politician from Barak Obama, to Rick Perry, to
one degree or another, work for the corporations.

Think about this: between 1992 and 2006, the “really smart guys” on Wall
Street - with the active support of the “smart guys” in the Clinton and Bush
administrations and both sides of the aisle in Congress -  spent all of their time
making obscene amounts of money by passing around bad debts - calling them
“mortgage-backed securities” -  and skimming fees off the top of every trade,
ultimately leveraging their own companies into such massive debt they had no
choice but to continue their giant Ponzi scheme, lest the whole house of cards
come-a-tumbling down.

In 2007, when a few European banks finally decided not to buy anymore
worthless paper, the “tumbling” began in earnest and the panic set in. Where
did all of these free marketeers, these “keep government off business’s back so
we can all prosper” titans of Wall Street run to? They ran to their flunkies, all of
those politicians in both parties they had been buying for the previous 35 years.

And what did all of those bought and paid for flunkies do? They promptly
transferred $16 trillion dollars of taxpayers’ money into the pockets of those
Ponzi schemers (yes, $16 trillion, roughly $50,000 for every man, woman and
child living in this country).

That alone is enough to show just who these slimy shits who are now vying for
our votes work for.

Vote alternative, it’s the only thing that makes any sense.

Report this

By Vac, October 21, 2011 at 1:12 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The shilling for the Democratic party begins yet again. I hope people are becoming immune to this propaganda.
Here is my response: “No jobs for the Jobless if Democrats win”. This system is FINISHED!!
The two corrupt corporate political parties are the left and right hands of the same corporate criminal class.
I have not voted for the two parties for years. We will lose and lose again until we have no more to lose and then there will finally be a revolt (because in this country nothing else has ever worked). Every social advance is through conflict. Maybe sooner than most think. Forget velvet revolutions in the USA.  The fundamental democratic process of addressing of public grievances is irreparably broken which is why there is NO OTHER WAY forward. History repeats itself over and over again. I wish the OWS movement all the luck because appeals to power NEVER work. YOU MUST ASSUME POWER, not ask favors of it. The pain threshold must be higher for “The People” to become politicized and unite on the most basic Constitutional issues that have been violated by ruling CLASS!

Report this
Blueokie's avatar

By Blueokie, October 21, 2011 at 12:56 pm Link to this comment

Not another story telling us how bad things are (as if we don’t know) and how only
the Dims will save us.  Didn’t Pres. Wall Street Puppet sign three (count them,
three) new trade agreements this week (after pushing them way more than say
single payer, mortgage relief, Wall Street accountability, etc. etc. etc.)?  Isn’t he the
one who is about to OK the planet killing Keystone XL pipeline because it
guarantees full employment (or at least a few thousand so a Saudi company can
sell Canadian tar sands to Latin America, and Europe).  The only purpose of the
Dim-ocrates is to give “bi-partisan” cover to Republican policies.  Until that sinks
in and a true opposition is established the Sheldon Wollin concept of “managed
democracy” will be illustrated over and over until it truly no longer matters

Report this

By Mark A. Goldman, October 21, 2011 at 12:36 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

No hope for the jobless if the Democrats win either.

As long as our elected officials have thrown away the Constitution, there’s no hope for freedom, democracy, or legitimate government.  We can attack their policies but that is a waste of time.  Until we replace these people with people who are honorable, we are wasting our time.  I explain all that in the link that follows.  There’s not much time before the next election.  More citizens need to understand this if we hope to turn things around.

Report this

By johncp, October 21, 2011 at 12:32 pm Link to this comment

If a republican wins, that will mean that no one will be able to get a job.  Does that mean that if Obama wins no one will able to get a job?  Am I mistaken?  Isn’t Obama only nominally a democrat?  Wasn’t Lieberman only nominally a democrat?  Isn’t our government full of “nominal” democrats?  How the hell do we know if a politician is truly a democrat?  Based on Obama’s actions, forget his speeches, forget what he “says,” I’d estimate him to be centrist republican.  I’d calll Hillary a centrist democrat, not even much of liberal democrat, let alone a progressive one.  But, in my view, Hillary is certainly a democrat.  But Obama?  Perhaps many will disagree, hoping that you can take a candidate on his word, and Obama is certainly running as a democrat, i.e. making democratic “speeches,” “talking” like a democrat.  But, I don’t believe him.  The “record” speaks louder than anything Obama keeps “telling” peole.  So I’m, in effect, left with one party.  Not an amalgam of the two parties.  Not a two-headed monster that really only serves Wall St. and other super-rich parasites.  All this is further unneeded complexity.  I’m really left with one party.  Not even the old republican party, with a liberal faction, a moderate faction, and a bunch of right wingers.  The only party left, is a republican party; a party with no liberals, but only moderate republicans and emboldened, super-right-wingers.  Obama surely belongs to the first group: a moderate republican.  But there is virtually no democratic party.  We have no presidential candidate, and we hardly have any democratic senatores and congressmen.  What a dilemma.  I won’t vote for republicanism, and I can’t vote for my party, because we don’t have a candidate?

Report this

By felicity, October 21, 2011 at 12:18 pm Link to this comment

It’s becoming painfully clear that the majority of the
American people no longer have equal access to power -
the core principle of democracy. Taxing the super
wealthy and lowering the rate of unemployment are
favored by the majority of Americans. 

It is clear that the Republican Party neither needs to,
wants to, nor will honor what the majority of Americans
are asking of their government.

Report this

By REED RICHARDS, October 21, 2011 at 12:16 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)


As opposed to the fiddling while the country burns Obama?  Like any seriously intelligent person should believe that there will be hope for the unemployed if Obama wins another four year term.

If the topic of this article was not serious, it would actually be laughable…........

Report this
Not One More!'s avatar

By Not One More!, October 21, 2011 at 12:09 pm Link to this comment

I support carrying out public protests for ‘our interests’ as opposed to ‘my interests.’

I see both going on in the Occupy Wall Street protests but I hope they (and unions) start acting to protect the public trust.

What is more important then you losing your house is if people are losing their houses unfairly while banks profit unfairly.

As far as hoping for the democratic or republican party leadership for solutions, they are the problem. How can Obama possible help you. Have you looked at his voting record even before he was elected president? He already has received more money from Wall Street than any other republican candidate. This is payback time for all the good deeds that he did on Wall Street’s behalf. Don’t delude yourself in thinking there is a qualitative difference between Obama and any of the republican candidates.

Vote third party, don’t give your consent to the corporate parties.

Report this
prisnersdilema's avatar

By prisnersdilema, October 21, 2011 at 11:28 am Link to this comment

when unemployement reaches 40 to 50%, and it will, talking won’t be enough anymore….it’s barely making it now…

Don’t count on Obama to save anyone, because he’s one of them…one of the elite, and he shares the same corporate delusions…

Otherwise why would he appoint Jeffrey Imelt as one of his advisors?

So the corporations aren’t really concerned about the elections, because they know they have a pass no matter who wins….

Still as the ranks of unemployed continue to swell, the breakdown of society will accelerate..

Yes there are people that still believe in the old Democratic party, the party of labor, working people, consumer rights…

But believing in the Democratic party is like believing in Ghosts… proof is hard to come by…still many will believe even to the end of this country…..But thats what were faciing now….

The end of America…and if you think anyone of these men, or president Obama has the political will, or the guts to save it.. your mistaken…

It’s going to be up to the people, and they will try to thwart us at every turn…

Report this

By pundaint, October 21, 2011 at 11:22 am Link to this comment

We need a new Religion, the previous Western God has gone over to the side of money worship and we are left both unregulated and amoral.

Blessed are the prosperous because theirs is the kingdom of Earth.  And they’ve funded this church to keep the rest of you submissive, or worse, complicit.

Report this

By gerard, October 21, 2011 at 11:04 am Link to this comment

What on earth ails these rich dudes?  Don’t they have any ideas? Are they frozen in stone? Stupid?
Or what?  I can’t imagine there being any future for them or anyone else in a world where “no CEO is left behind” yet tens of thousands of their fellow-citizens (equal rights, remember?) are holding kids in their arms who are dying of malnutrition, whose brothers are rotting in prison on mariuana and coke charges,whose sisters are out soliciting to make a buck, whose wives can’t get an abortion even though they have no way on earth to support another child.
  All this is morally and psychologically sick. The Occupiers are our one chance to get healthy for a
change. Support them.  They are our children growing up.  Maybe we can get smart and help them scrape the rich slugs off the walls of Congress and clean out the abattoirs of “government”.  Intelligently, non-violently all the way! Democracy desperately needs a renaisance.

Report this
Right Top, Site wide - Care2
Right 3, Site wide - Exposure Dynamics
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right Internal Skyscraper, Site wide