The Moment's "Why" Questions
This confounding moment in American history is raising a lot of important "why" questions for us all. Here's a few that are particularly on my mind right now:
Why is the "sanctity of contracts" only an inviolable axiom when it comes to contracts that ensure Wall Street bonuses, but not union workers wages?
Why has almost nobody objected to the renomination of Ben Bernanke, the guy whose failure to better regulate banks helped destroy the economy?
Why is Rahm Emanuel so often billed as "tough" when he has spearheaded almost every single White House capitulation to corporate interests?
Why do some progressives seem to believe it is OK for progressives to criticize George W. Bush for taking a position, but not OK for progressives criticize Barack Obama for taking the same position?
Why do the same politicians who say we need to spend trillions to save the banking industry oppose spending a fraction of that to save blue collar industries?
Why does Glenn Beck rail on government spending after he publicly backed the Wall Street bailout - and actually criticized it for supposedly being too small?
Why are a tiny handful of corporate Democrats, and not the bigger number of progressives who comprise the majority of the Democratic caucus, billed as holding the all-important "balance of power" in the Senate?
Why do congressmen and senators rail on the supposed awfulness of "government run health care" for the public but never complain about the "government run health care" they enjoy?
Why do we criminalize marijuana but legalize - and promote - alcohol?
Why has the word "reform" so often come to mean "sell out"?
Why does almost every "national" political show on every television network almost exclusively feature guests who live and work only in Washington and New York?
Why do so many political observers insist that a country should be patient during a president's first year, when history tells us that a president's first year is when change has the biggest opportunity to happen?
Why do politicians and the Beltway media pretend Democrats need 60 votes to pass a health care bill through the Senate, when the reconciliation process would allow them to pass major portions of the bill with just 51 votes?
Why do so many political activists and organizations seem to believe the only place to make change is in Washington - and specifically, in the White House - and not in state and local arenas?
Why is deficit spending only bad when it is on programs like health care that would help millions of average people, but deficit spending is perfectly fine when it is on subsidies and bailouts that help a tiny handful of very rich people?
Maybe your answer to these questions that existential question Anheuser-Busch asked us back in the late 1980s - "Why ask why?" Frankly, that might be the only answer.
Robert Reich: Breaking Up the Big Banks, and Why Congress Won't Do It
Two ideas are floating around Washington regarding how to handle 'too big to fail' banks, but only one is supported by the Treasury and the White House. Unfortunately, it's the wrong one.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
With those questions, David, you unmask the real America and American leadership. You don't permit us to go on dreaming that this is a democracy where the majority of Americans are treated equally and fairly; shame on you!
You ask many good "why" questions.
The answer to all of them is based on the power & ownership of America by the four-headed MONSTER consisting of - Wall Street, the unholy land of corporate GREED, Washington DC, the worlds largest brothel where our "elected servants" are dedicated to servicing their corporate John's, The Pentagon, the #1 monetary boondoggle devouring trillions & trillions & trillions over the last 60+ years while unleashing the dogs of endless war & The Main Stream Media, the voice of LIES & FEAR speaking for the corporate masters & the corporate warlords.
Until MONEY is taken out of politics our political prostitutes will continue doing what prostitutes have done since time began, take the MONEY & sell their souls for the MONEY, its always about the MONEY, more & more MONEY!
So you ask "why"? MONEY, MONEY, MONEY!
Until we get corporate money out of our elections nothing will change and the American people will always lose.
One more: Why do politicians insist that something as necessary as health care reform be budget neutral while expenditures for unnecessary wars are carte blanche?
True. Why was $8 billion for health care for children called inflationary when the next day $80 billion for Iraq sailed through with a wimper.
Because we have to protect our men who are in harms way. The solution? Get them out, now.
Why can't we break the imperical cycle of concentrating wealth and perpetual war?
Keep asking these questions. They are the right ones.
Another "why" question would be:
Why is it that the same folks that were gung ho about invading Iraq never stopped to question how much it would cost, and never objected to spending money and sending our military into Iraq, prior to the invasion (when the questions should have been asked). But now, these same folks are very concerned with how much health care is going to cost and if we can afford it. (Here's a hint: it will cost a lot less than the war has cost us) In both cases, we are losing people.
I'm afraid we've long known the answer to most of those questions. My question at this point is "Why did we ever think it would change when we continue to vote for the problem?"
Great post thank you David, it might just get some of the Obama fan club wannabe progressives, who hang out around here thinking about a few things.
An early warning of what was to come from an Obama administration was his campaigns decisions to go with the narrative (the narrative of the man in most cases), rather than to focus on issues.
The answer to all of your questions, Mr. Sirota, is the gatekeepers who glom the levers of power in this nation want to keep it center-right.
Progressives are a significant bloc in this country, but they do not yet have the critical mass to do whatever they want. The naked truth is that, even among Democrats, progressive may make up 40 percent - TOPS - within the party.
David:
Have read, listened to and watched you for years...With great respect. I know that you have an answer for every "why" you listed. Get busy on a book!
we don't need another book. we need some marching orders. we need to be told where to show up and when. we need phone numbers to call, and addresses to write, and the names of some
progressive candidates to run against the dirty dogs - in BOTH parties who are doin us wrong today. we need to figure out strategies for end runs around the status quo. we need to plan
to crack open the beltway and let some fresh air inside that hot house of insiders. the teabaggers
are not the only rabble that's been roused.
Hoping there will be more calling for rousing the rabble. Thanks, Konnie.
Thank you again, David. What is it going to take?
Why doesn't Obama know that we object to the killing of innocent citizens of ALLLLLL other countries?
Why doesn't Obama know that we prefer health care debt to WAR DEBT?
Why hasn't he announced a tax on Wall Street's securities sales to help pay for health care for the poor?
Why hasn't he expired the Bush Tax Cuts for the RICH and started to refill the coffers?
Why doesn't Obama know that the PEACE PRIZE is for wise men that stop wars and effect Peace?
Why can't the semi-black Obama stand up and issue and Executive Order to STOP racial profiling and alllllll police brutality?
What does a Constitutional Scholar do about denial of equal civil RIGHTS to some in US? Stop the nonsense and once and for all declare all rights equal, marriage, gay, purple, poor, whatevah and be done with it?
FIRST: Public financing of elections, no more BRIBES!
I honestly think that the answer to a lot of YOUR questions, is: Obama doesn't want anyone to get hurt. No riots, no shootings, no nothing. President Obama sincerely hopes he can be a "uniter," before he and his administration push forward, in all the directions that are going to make a certain angry irrational segment of the population potentially violent.
I also think a lot of us out here outside "the Beltway" are extremely naive, about the level of corporatist corruption, penetrating every Washingtonian department, almost every office... it's often mentioned that Bush appointees are still in place in many places, hamstringing the political machinery... I don't think enough has been said about what that might actually be doing, to hamstring the agenda of Obama himself. Of course, Obama can't talk about those problems, directly and openly. Part of his overall strategy, is to avoid treating the opposition, like they're the enemy... (Which, I know, is philosophically "right," but for the last year I've felt like I'm watching a horror movie, screaming at the poor hero a series of commands I know he can't hear: for God's sake, President Obama, don't go to THAT house! Jesus, that's a tooth - don't go up on the PORCH! Barack! BARACK! DON'T OPEN THAT DOOR...!)
you've certainly asked all the questions I need answers to.
Terrific questions-It's the answers that are painful.
You got that right......and some of the answers are just plain silly. Look what too much alcohol does just to go with one of the whys? My peeve frankly IS "why is Rahm Emanuel considered tough? Why should we not criticize our President for wimping out on some things which we feel are important enough to be pushed to the top of the to-do list? Why should we not criticize Congress for capitulating to Big Business and most especially Big Insurance? We all felt free to call Bushie on things....and Glenn Beck, well who listens to him anyway? Good points to David as usual!
Because this isn't a democracy; it's a plutocracy.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
