Why hacking should be protected under the Second Amendment of the US Constitution

Over the past five years the term hacktivist has become prevalent. A hacktivist is a person, usually a member of a group, that hacks a mainframe or generally causes cyber chaos for various companies or government institutions in order to make a point. It is effective. Bank of America has been hacked by groups before, and a well as a rather well-known private security firm was hacked by Anonymous. These are some of the latest examples but there are many worthy notations of this type of hackivism. Consider it a type of cyber militia. The right to bare arms and the right to be able to protect ones self and community by hacking entities that would do harm.

“[I]f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights and those of their fellow citizens.” — The Federalist, No. 29

– Alexander Hamilton

So where the point gets sticky is about determining the harm and proving a threat. When dealing with guns, it gets a bit simplistic because the situation is purely physical. People facing each other with weapons makes it easy to see the threat. One could reasonably argue that with a cyber attack it is not a threat to life, but to livelihood, therefore being somewhat less justified to go to the extreme of hacking. However, in today’s multinational conglomerate world, is there another way to hold tyrannical leadership accountable? Is it not a threat if a person dies from a bullet wound or from starving to death is the result not the same?  What if they died because they didn’t have the access to acquire expensive medical treatment, or if they killed themselves because of lack of hope that they will ever be able to escape surmounting debt because of circumstances out of their control? Is it not the same in the end? And what more effective way to protect oneself than to be a hackivist?

For me, it’s too late, I know nothing about hacking. I don’t have that kind of mind. I think this point is important to make.  I appreciate those who do. In a world where tyranny can be so well protected and insulated by law enforcement and government allies, it is nice to know there is a secret society much like the stories of the Knights of the Round Table that have the ability to reach out and touch the untouchables. I believe this was the intent of the Second Amendment, to offer citizens effective recourse in the face of tyranny.  The way a properly equipped musket would be the tool of protection when our nation was born,  a properly equipped laptop is now. The saying goes that an armed society is a polite society. I don’t know about all that, but there is something to be said for the respect that comes with a certain level of concern held by those in positions of power.  That the consent of the governed becomes more real when the governed is on a somewhat even playing field to those that may be tempted to indulge their tyrannical tendencies. Even more so because it in fact is  not a gun, no one physically dies and because as we would train a militia to protect against enemies both foreign and domestic there could be a civil cyber army to take on threats from other nations if needed.

It would not be a right to be taken lightly. The Second Amendment isn’t now. You can’t randomly shoot people on the street and claim Second Amendment rights. It is specific and I would argue a certain best practice model for the Second Amendment should be developed anyway. But in today’s world one cannot protect their family with firepower alone as the Second Amendment currently accommodates. And if such a time comes to need such protections, those who have the ability should have the right to hack in self-defense the way that early American’s were able to bare arms to do as much. That is why hacking should be protected under the Second Amendment of the US Constitution.

Santorum rivals Romney in Iowa. Does it matter?

While experts sift through the results of last night’s completely over-analyzed Iowa caucus. Rick Santorum with a well-timed bump in popularity rivals Mitt Romney for first place in the first Republican contest to select their candidate. This caucus is an encapsulation of the Republican schizophrenia that is prevalent today. The establishment that wants a candidate who is not controversial . Someone who appeals to sensible middle-of-the-road folks that want to send someone competent and steady to the White House –without surprises.

Then they have the evangelical Christian wing who would like nothing more than to legislate their religion nationally, while at the same time balking at other governments who may be run by Islamist groups with similar goals in a different flavor. This is the Republican dilemma mixed in with a little Cult of Paul for spice. It’s not an enviable position and is one that weakens the party further going into the national campaign cycle.

Americans are worried about jobs and Republicans are worried about abortions. Something that might happen in a woman’s lifetime one time, for many not at all and yet listening to the Social Conservative Republicans you’d think callous women all over America go out for Starbucks and an abortion at their local Planned Parenthood every other weekend. The astonishing ridiculousness of that line of propaganda is completely absurd, and yet many really smart people buy into it. Enough to win the Election in 2012? I don’t think so. Coupled with the Libertarian Conservative line of pick yourself up by the bootstraps even if you don’t have boots, message that the GOP strategists have pulled from the 2008 files and are recycling once more comes off to many as a patronizing kick in the gut will come off at the polls with, I would imagine, the same results as 2008.

As I listen to the discussion, the first thing that comes to my mind is does it even matter who is chosen to be the candidate? I think it matters less than it has in the past. The strategists focus on that age old question “Were you better off than you were four years ago?”  They focus on individual policy platforms by each candidate and that worked before when the public was barely paying attention. In 2012 things are completely different. Party branding has burned into the public consciousness since 2010. The question in the voting booth on Election Day will not be “Are you better off than you were four years ago?”  The question will be “Who will protect you from them?”  And who is them, you may ask? Well if you are middle-class or lower them would mean the destructive corporate interests, bankers and Wall Street players that place their bottom line before all else. Starving children and choices between food and medicine are none of their concern. If you are one of these particular corporate interests mentioned, the them is everyone else. And from that question the decision will be made for the next President of the United States.

As such, barring any extremist craziness, it really doesn’t matter who the Republican party chooses as candidate. The next Election will be a referendum on destructive partisan politics, legislating religion, government tyranny on civil rights and regarding very personal private decisions such as how one will live their life and protect their health. People have to know how much you care, before they care how much you know. The Republicans have lost a significant portion of the public’s trust. One candidate alone will not be able to fix that.

Politicians everywhere can learn from the downfall of Russell Pearce

Russell K Pearce is a juggernaut of conservatism in Arizona politics. As a person, he has a charm and charisma that even the most liberal of Democrats could begrudgingly admire, and many do. Although media in it’s laziness only wants to focus on immigration,  so that  people think that this  recall is just about making it easier for people to reside in the nation illegally, couldn’t  be farther from the truth.  Differences about Immigration is  the easiest answer to the question about why Russell Pearce was recalled, but it is not the complete answer. The complete answer is important. Current and future leaders should study the real answer, poli-sci students should dissect it, it has happened before and it can happen again.

 For in reason, all government without the consent of the governed is the very definition of slavery. ~Jonathan Swift

Bad things happen when politicians believe the power given by constituents is theirs personally. The fact is the job description demand those elected to office represent the people who sent them to office. Because of forgetting this important fact, politicians make bad decisions that are catastrophic to political careers. A politician must remember that it does not always matter what he/she personally thinks, what matters is how well the people who vote feel represented by the office the official was elected to uphold. The power the official holds is on loan from the people of his/her district and revocation of that power will occur in light of a forgotten agreement.

Enter the special interests. Smooth talking charismatic folks sent to stroke a politician’s ego. Many are friends and acquaintances from business dealings or social groups. They con the politician, who let’s face it, is open to being conned anyway, gets convinced that the power is theirs personally to use. That they hold the sword and it is theirs to do what they like with it. A special interest representative is like puffer fish they puff themselves up to look like they hold a great impact over the politician’s career. Like any pusher or dealer, they try to convince their prey that they need them, that they would be nothing without them. But they are full of hot air and hold only a small impact when their influence is deflated by the people of the community. The politician, distracted by the special interests, forgets the power belongs to the people. His/her job is only to be a responsible steward of the power on loan to him/her.

The reason why Arizona Legislative District 18 recalled Russell Pearce is that he thought the power was his personally to wield as he wished. He also underestimated the power given to him as Senate President. Being Senate President meant he represented the whole State, not just his district. The decisions he made influenced the State and the nation and required more than a hyperpartisan faction view to represent those who had loaned him the power to use for the good of the entire state ofArizona. He used the power as his own, and he did this regardless of what the rest of the City and State that he represented as Senate President wanted.

He lost touch with the people who gave him the power of State Senate President. He forgot about the consent of the governed. He began to believe that he knew better than everyone else did how things should be. Russell Pearce used intimidation to force special interest bills through the legislature. He dismissed the will of the people of the State ofArizonarepeatedly. He continued to shut them out of the Democratic process that is their right, because he felt the process of Democracy was too messy. It is too messy, but it still needs to happen.  Voters tried correspondence, protest, voter initiatives and various other tools at their disposal to get his attention and only as a last resort did they pull out the big guns of recall.

It is my hope that people like Russell Pearce who desire to hold public office will remember again how this system works. It works when the people offer their power to a representative they trust and that representative uses that power wisely and for the greater good of the people, they represent. When that ideal is lost, the people will pull that power back. It’s best to do what one can to avoid recall in this way as it is not a good situation for anyone.

Response to Ed Show Request

On his November 3, 2011 show on MSNBC, Ed Shultz put out a challenge for someone with an Independent Moderate Centrist Point of View to weigh in on the issues of Education, Unions, and Taxing the Wealthy. Although I am no spokesperson, I thought I’d write down my point of view and others can choose to take the dialog further.

 

As I see it the substantive difference between the Independent Moderate and the staunch Liberal is primary that the Indy Mod point of view is fluid. Not insipid, though I can see where those to the far left or right may at first glance perceive it that way, the Independent Moderate view it is fluid with what reality places before us to decide. No issue exists in a vacuum.  Whereas the staunch liberal and conservative view is set in stone no matter what is going on around it. That is what makes them outdated because the world order is in constant flux and we must be in flux with it.

 

Education

Education is the most powerful tool to combat poverty; a highly skilled workforce is a primary driver of the economic engine of the country. As such, I believe in a full reform of the Education system to comply with the needs of the 21st Century.

This includes:

1)      Starting school at three years old, especially in low-income neighborhoods.

2)      Including more foreign languages in the curriculum.

3)      Education as a national program with room to add local cultural ideals and local history.

  1. This offers the benefit of purchasing power of buying school supplies nationally.
  2. Consistent “branding” everyone truly gets the same curriculum.
  3. Have e-books for textbooks that can be updated easily and more cost effective.
  4. Every child when leaving high-school should have what is the equivalent of an Associates Degree in College now, including the basic liberal arts structure to build from.

4) I would not be opposed to some direct corporate involvement and sponsorship in education. After all we should be educating to the specific tasks needed by the future employers. Yet, we should be educating free-thinkers, innovators and entrepreneurs in every school across America.

So it’s not about throwing money at a broken system. It’s about making the system more in line with the needs of employers and build on that knowledge for the America of  2021 and beyond not the same Educational practices of the America of 1821.

Unions

Unions make companies cumbersome, slow moving and inflexible in many ways. However, in today’s business culture they are essential to workers despite their shortcomings. I am a proponent of a global labor union. Although I am aware in many ways that could be a mess, it seems that the only way to negotiate with a multi-national conglomerate is to be multi-national as well. As the Occupy Movement is world wide it could possibly be the conception of a type of global labor movement. I am in strong support of the Occupy Movement.

Taxing the Wealthy

At this time, because of bad actors and lax policy there needs to be reform to bring things back into balance. As such, I would be more in favor of the Obama plan than the Ryan plan. Reviews of the systems of government is vital to make them more efficient, reduce unneeded redundancy and go line by line to see what is old and no longer serves the public and replace those programs with new innovative programs that are more in line with the needs of modern America. I don’t agree that the wealthiest should have to pay everyone’s tab so to speak, but there needs to be a balance. The economy is like an electrical circuit,  if the money isn’t flowing both ways the circuit doesn’t work.

It is imperative that the tax code become more concise ,  transparent, and frankly fair which is no easy task.

 

I hope this is helpful for Mr. Schultz to get a better idea about where the Independent Moderates stand on the issues.

For more from Sophia Tesch please visit http://www.indymodpov.com which discusses politics from and Independent Moderate Point of View.

we need to focus on education, not abortion

The US Congress has been focusing on abortion a lot lately. Abortion — the word alone causes an immediate and strong reaction, and it should,  it’s horrible when a woman finds herself in need of an abortion. The best plan is to not get into that situation in the first place, if at all possible and that’s why it’s important for the American agenda to focus on education,  not abortion.

I want unborn babies to be saved,  there is nothing better than a baby being born to a mother who is healthy, educated and able to financially and emotionally support her child. But, in order to do that, the focus of the American agenda needs to  provide a better support  to young women in ways that they may become independent, self-empowered people with great goals for becoming a vital part of her community. As such she will be more likely to postpone pregnancy to a time when she is able to take care of her children and to be healthy enough to carry to full-term.  This can be done in three ways, supporting the physical health of young women, support the self-esteem of high-risk young women, instilling within them financial literacy skills, and any support emotional or tutorial needed to finish high school and get a Bachelor’s Degree in a field where she may excel. By giving a young woman the ability to go to college and have something to work toward besides attracting a man at a young age, helps to prevent her from using sex as a method of self-esteem and security which may result in an unplanned pregnancy. This is the most effective way to protect the unborn in America.

I wish you had come to me with your birth control offer years ago so I wouldn’t have had 14 babies.

– Sharon, client #24 from projectprevention.org website. 

Another way to prevent unplanned pregnancy is to make birth control readily available to low-income couples. Statistics show that many unplanned pregnancies are a result of not having the proper birth control available or affordable to low-income couples. It’s important to address unplanned pregnancy as a cultural issue, the glorification of having unprotected sex as a status symbol needs to change, women need to perceive that their ability to bear children is a sacred right and to use their age old responsibility to be discerning about the man allowed to have the privilege of being with her. Our sisters in the animal kingdom know this, they don’t let just any random animal mate with them. They look for the one who will be there to provide and care for the babies once they are born. How did this simple rule of Nature get lost in our culture? Male animals work to be worthy of being a father the status is in being a stable provider of love and objects of necessity to his offspring and mate especially while the babies are nursing. To have this honor males in other species sometimes fight to the death for the chance to be with a female. Not to advocate violence, that’s not my point, my point is to be more discerning about one’s sex partner and not to devalue sex to the extent it has been degraded and devalued in the American culture.  The second part of  the equation is to make birth control readily available to those who could wisely plan their pregnancies, avoiding an unwanted pregnancy. The attack on Planned Parenthood has the distinct unintended possibility of creating more, not less, unplanned pregnancies. Once it gets to that point, once there is the horribly painful situation of an unplanned pregnancy at hand, history shows that people have taken matters into their own hands. It doesn’t have to be that way. The lower cost solution, both in human and taxpayer cost is to focus on a positive way to not let it get that far.

Lastly, there needs to be good pregnancy planning education and sexual health curriculum  in place in public schools. Although people would like to assume that all parents are present, prepared and willing to have “the talk” it simply isn’t the case for many children. They are left to fend for themselves,  given misinformation or no information at all,and many times because they are using bad information to make decisions, things don’t go as planned. Places like Planned Parenthood can offer medically trained professionals with the most up-to-date information to be a resource for “the talk” if needed . It is important that good information is given to young adults so they can make the best choices for themselves.

The best way to stop abortion is through abortion prevention, a good education, self-esteem and a hopeful future worth abstaining  or at least using birth control for, can be some of the best  measures for abortion prevention available. Give young women an attainable, and worthwhile goal to work toward so that their pregnancy can be a planned and joyous occasion as  it is meant to be, which is the best scenario for everyone involved.

we need leaders, not nannies

During my usual morning ritual of cyber surfing,  I saw a post from one of my friends about the Occupy Wall St. phenomenon. I commented on this thread, and so did a Harvard man, telling me I was a hypocrite if I supported the protest and had a 401K or an IRA. I assured the man– I was no hypocrite. He made a remark about America being a nanny state and the protest the equivalent of babies having bottles pulled from proverbial mouths of those who found themselves at the bottom 99% of the economic wealth scale in America. I found the hubris of this comment disturbing. As I moved from that exchange and continued surfing,  I saw a lady’s comment about being so happy to see a comment about Wall St. that wasn’t mentioning the Occupy Wall St. protest, “How are we supposed to take these kids seriously?” She writes over a link for the Zombie walk of  Occupy Wall St. where the marchers chanted “We are contagious!” She didn’t get it. I got it, the idea is contagious and it will spread and it did spread because now there are Occupy Wall St. events happening all over the country  during October, 2011 and maybe beyond.

Just because the elites don’t get it, doesn’t mean the statement has no value, just because they can’t wrap their minds around what it takes to raise a family of four on $1,000 a month doesn’t mean that reality doesn’t exist for a lot of people. Just because they don’t go hungry doesn’t mean that 1 in 4 children in America don’t go to bed at night wondering where their next meal is coming from.  As a matter of fact, I wonder how people who are supposedly so smart (so says their financial portfolio) appear so dumb. Why can’t they figure any of this out? People are tired of mega-bonuses at the top while those working on the front lines with the customers are kept in a constant state of economic uncertainty and stress about paying their basic bills. People can’t believe that after what I call the Wall Street Rape of 2008,  no justice was mitigated for crashing not only the domestic, but global economy, with the sub-prime mortgage scam and the shady derivative markets.

“That’s why they call it the American Dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it.”
― George Carlin

People are looking at the bleak prospects of their future, not only for themselves, but their children. Americans in their 40’s are looking at the very real possibility that they will be caring for their parents, themselves and their children, meanwhile not being able to plan for it,  because their 401K  is on some psychotic roller-coaster and the Congress couldn’t legislate itself out of a wet paper bag. It is all very disturbing and frustrating as the country gets held hostage over a financial cliff for seemingly mundane decisions. But the legislators themselves are in no risk, their healthcare and pension prospects are not in question, their salary not cut 60% as many of their constituents have experienced in the last two years.

Working American people are not looking for hand outs, we don’t need to be spoon fed by a nanny state. That is not the point, and it’s insulting to say, it is not about entitlement. What about the feeling of entitlement of the upper 1% to assume all the money is  theirs. You may create jobs, but our brothers, sisters, fathers and mothers risk their lives at those jobs. You benefit from the security of the military, but who sends their children to the front line to die? You eat the food that the working class grew and put on your table, as the saying goes the wealthy would be eating money if someone didn’t grow and prepare the food for them. Not that one class is better than the other, everyone has a purpose that makes society work well,  but let’s put some things in perspective here.

If your company uses American labor, it behooves you to pay for world-class  education to have the best in an educated labor force.  You want that investment in employee training to have longevity, especially now that labor needs to work to a more mature age, make sure they have good health insurance so that individuals can work longer and be more productive.  You need military support, make sure they have the best resources, and are taken care of when they return home, thank them for the fact that you and your family didn’t have to be in harm’s way. Allow workers  access to nutritious food and kids great parks to play in and become strong citizens, body, mind and spirit. Allow people the ability to squeeze some living out of this life before they pass on, it makes for better workers.  These aren’t great mysteries. This isn’t asking too much. These are the types of ideas that Occupy Wall St. is about.

We’re Americans. Together we prosper, we all have to work together. It used to be understood that wealth and privilege came with a level of responsibility, of community and stewardship, that we all worked together to make capitalism work. But this bastardization is no longer capitalism, it’s corporatism and it’s killing Americans, it’s killing America, and that ‘s what Occupy Wall St. folks are standing up against. They want to restore the possibility of the American Dream, the American ideal. I support them 100%. This type of guts demands respect. This brand of courage makes me even more proud to be an American.

we need politicians, not puppets

Let’s have the members of  House and Senate dress like NASCAR drivers. Prominently place the logos of the companies and special interests that support them sewn to their suits so we know what team they’re on. Because it certainly isn’t ours. More and more it  seems less like a joke and more like a good idea.  “Show us who holds your strings!” the people demand. As those who would benefit from the death of the Department of Labor, EPA, SEC, Fed and other government agencies that protect the people from those in industry who place poor choices and stockholder profits over the general welfare of the people who are unfortunate to live within their corporate spheres of influence. We (middle-middle class working families making less than $250,000 a year) need protection. Hasn’t it been proven time and again that self-regulation doesn’t work?

Corporations don’t just have legislative representation on the payroll, it seems they’ve found a way to influence the government agencies that are supposed to be regulating them. We’ve seen it in the Energy industry and in Finance. The system can’t work if the systems employees aren’t working for we the people. Government agents must be held to higher standards  and accountability for ethical breeches, those holding important regulatory positions have to care about what they are doing, they can’t just be pencil-pushers because the stakes are too high. This is where our system has failed especially in the past decade and it’s not just Americans who are hurting, the citizens of the world have paid in terms of a crashed world economy and through natural disasters like the BP oil spill. The spill wasn’t so long ago and already we have politicians with amnesia wanting to repeat the same mistakes with no changes, no thinking things through, and I wonder how many huge spills can an ecosystem take? Luckily, things are getting better in the Gulf for now. It makes me wonder are we as a country capable of learning from past mistakes?  Are we doomed to repeat the same mistakes over and over?

We need politicians, critical thinking, analytic types; not just winners of a popularity contest, not an employee of a special interest group, but a person who is able to weigh all interests and come up with the best solutions possible. Above party affiliation,  above personal pride, in the best interest of those who live in their constituency and then the nation and the globe accordingly. It seems simple. Yet there is something about DC, possibly something in the water of the Potomac  that seems to make rational people crazy. But it’s not the water is it? It’s the political  sponsors. The Super PACS the special interest interference, lobbyists writing laws. So if DC legislators have sponsors, let’s make it transparent. Have the Congressmen and Senators wear the emblem of their owners on their suits, at least then we can know whose team they are really on.

If it were up to me I’d have more Main Street types voting for the Board of Directors of Lockheed Martin, Monsanto, DuPont, Citibank, Goldman-Sachs and others. If they are truly the ones running our country why don’t we get a vote? It’s supposed to be a representative Democracy is it not? People are so paranoid of a tyrannical government that they allow these tyrants of business to run rampant, it’s a tragedy for America. I don’t think the forefathers and mothers would approve, I don’t think this is the type of life they would have wished for us.

We need politicians not puppets. Is it too late? Time will tell.

we need honesty, not denial of access

We all suspected it right? That the mainstream media is rigged, some outlets more subtle about it than others at first they seemed all the same to me. Then MSNBC became known for its progressive leanings which I likened to artisan whole wheat toast with homemade organic jam, as opposed to the white bread and grape Denny’s jelly of CNN’s bland news fare.

One afternoon in the Spring of 2011 while channel surfing, I tuned in to MSNBC  and was pleasantly surprised (and frankly a little shocked) to see Young Turks host Cenk Uygur taking it to ’em right there on my TV set.  I wondered how his style would translate to TV. I loved his heated and unfettered discussions. I cheered as  he challenged the party talking points of his guests.

All my conspiracy theories about mass media were challenged as I conceded– they let Cenk on MSNBC maybe things really are changing toward more government transparency and honest to goodness debate.  I scheduled my day to be able to be available to watch in the afternoon, something I’d never done before, and then,  one day about a week ago I tuned in and he was gone. Al Sharpton was on in the time slot instead.  My heart sank a bit in disappointment thinking maybe Cenk was on vacation.

And then I saw this:

Part 1

Part 2

Don’t get me wrong I have been to rallies with Rev. Sharpton and I appreciate his work. I just don’t enjoy watching him as host as much as Cenk. He does not seem to be as well prepared  often stumbling on his topics. I don’t see Sharpton giving guests as strong of a challenge nor a new and  innovative perspective. His is the same ball-playing show that other shows offer. It’s not worth scheduling my day for, but I usually check out some highlights online later. Like an interview with Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) that I’ll discuss on another blog.

If we the people can’t have the access to ask the tough questions through our media representatives like The Young Turks then it is fair to ask the question is  Freedom of Speech and more specifically Freedom of the Press an illusion? What we have is some kind of strange opiate of the masses goop that makes us feel like we have the power of speech but it’s not if the leaders we are trying to speak to aren’t listening.

I felt when Cenk was given access to “the big boys” that some progress was actually being made. That he was asking the raw-meat questions  that I wanted answered. That he was as tenacious as I would want to be; not allowing guest to slip out with shallow party talking points. He was actually an accurate, well-informed, intelligent mouthpiece to the establishment conveying a  point of view that was easy to relate to.

I will continue to support The Young Turks on You Tube.  I think there needs to be a strong message from consumers of news and media to Washington DC if you won’t speak transparently to “our guys” we don’t need to have anything to do with you.  We need honesty, not denial of access.

we need to focus on main street, not wall street

A rising tide lifts all boats. This is a phrase originally used by JFK in the 1960’s and it still rings true today. Through the years the phrase has been distorted by conservatives to justify trickle-down economics. You make things “almost free” (as the salesman on a Mexican beach may say of his wares) for the top 5% of wealth holders in America and they will be so touched by the generosity of the nation as to be inspired to make that money rain down on the nation in the form of jobs and abundant prosperity for all. –Amen.

Well things have been trickling down for the last twenty years but it hasn’t been prosperity. It seems to be a mechanical problem. I propose the trickle up theory of economics. It seems after reflection that America would have been better off giving a check of $500,000 to every American rather than giving it to the banks. The banks who by the way still sit on lending money. True many institutions given TARP money have paid it back. However, the lending to stimulate the economy didn’t happen.

What happened was record profits and bonuses. Well good for them. However, it still doesn’t solve the problem. So here’s the thing I am thinking about Wall St. vs. Main St. Wall St. can invest anywhere and they have. They create derivatives and hedge funds to protect their portfolios. Again fantastic for them. They know how to make money and they have the resources to do it. I feel no need to punish them for being good at what they do.

At the same time Main St. who isn’t going anywhere is being fiscally starved of capital. If America were a business Main St. would be our regular customers. They aren’t going anywhere else, they couldn’t if they wanted to at this point. They spend their money locally and it circulates locally, nationally and internationally to manufacturers and customer service centers abroad. Where Wall St. is the spleen and marrow creating and storing the blood of the economy, money. Where government is the veins, arteries and capillaries guiding the flow. Main St. is the heart, keeping things pumping and when the heart isn’t pumping the whole system dies.

“Rising tide lifts all boats”. ~John F. Kennedy

What good is having things to sell if there is no confident consumer to purchase it? The cycle of the economy needs to be complete to work. Main St. doesn’t have the resources that Wall St. has and the people of Wall St. used to understand the important part it played for the nation. I think Wall St .has lost it’s way. When did it become so “Me” and so not “We” where did the patriotism go? And if it is gone forever then the whole dynamic must shift to reflect that. To see Wall St. in an expatriate status.

Main St. isn’t going anywhere. It is the nation. When Main St. does well, everyone does well. It is time that public policy more accurately reflect this reality. The nation has tried the “voodoo economics” of the trickle down theory for a few decades now and it is a failed experiment. I say we put more money in middle-class pockets and they will distribute the money in a very capitalistic way. Rising tide lifts all boats. Grow the tax-base and the rest of these problems will take care of themselves.

we need statemanship, not brinkmanship

“Demotivation – Sometimes the best solution to morale problems is just to fire all of the unhappy people.”~Larry Kersten

If only it were that simple. In Congress that simply is not possible. Hence we have the awkward three-legged race only it has many legs and they are at this time going nowhere. Okay admittedly nowhere is harsh. There is progress being made and President Obama continues to assure us that the gap is closing between Republican and Democrats demands and the debt ceiling will be raised in time to save the United States’ pristine credit rating.

What is the cost?

At what cost? Is the question that comes to mind. What is  the cost to consumer confidence and the American morale in this brinkmanship? Is it worth the cost? So many Americans are facing their own real hardships right now. Is it not self-indulgent for these politicians to be playing these political games when what so many Americans really need to hear right now is “Don’t worry, everything is under control.” That is really what Americans need to hear right now. That is really why people send representatives to Washington D.C. in a crisis. To create innovative ideas to pull this economy up by its boot-straps and make everything okay again. However, that does not appear to be what’s happening.

It is much like the children watching their parents fight. It is scary because the children think to themselves “These are the people in charge?” When the people who are in leadership appear to be out-of-control it is a very unsettling feeling. An unsettling feeling when so many are already so unsettled is bad for morale and that is not good for America.

Americans need thoughtful, dignified statesmanship, not the out-of-control bullying of brinkmanship.

I grow tired of these bundling games. Trying to forcing complex issues through on mandatory legislation to force them down the throats of the voters is not what Democracy is about. Having a small minority hold the majority hostage is not what this is about. Yes we need to get our debt down. Okay. However, how do the Freshman members of Congress get such amnesia about how the money was spent?  In a deep Recession the pumps need to be primed, if it was done well and without interference it is very possible there very likely would be a much more robust tax-base to help repay some of this debt.

It is about investment. What private company is successful when they say “Oh we are low on funds let’s cut back.”? That doesn’t happen. They invest, expand, beg, borrow and steal to get more capital flowing into the coffers. None of this cutting back to create jobs makes sense. The US government is not a household and macroeconomics is not microeconomics — statesmen know this.

What will be left when the dust clears?

My biggest concern at this point is what will be left of American morale and consumer confidence after this debate has ravaged them? How long will it take to bounce back? As this game of chicken is being over-played in DC to make political points with DC insiders. Those who live outside the beltway are losing their patience with the games.