It started with one simple question posed by Senator Bernie Sanders to his constituents in an invitation to a town meeting: what does the decline of the middle class mean to you personally?

Over 700 people replied.

A second question was asked in his e-newsletter, The Bernie Buzz: do you have a story to tell about how gas prices are affecting you?

Over 1200 responses.

"The volume of responses was stunning," Sanders told me. "Most people in my state – especially in rural areas – do not feel comfortable telling people about their struggles. ‘He has it worse than I do, I'll be fine. Thanks for asking.' It's just not a natural thing [to share these struggles]…. The other point that has to be underlined – this is not an interview at the homeless shelter. These are letters from working families, from middle class families… [and] people who've worked their whole lives who expected to have a minimal degree of economic security but are now finding themselves with nothing."

Here are some excerpts from the letters:

A mother and father in rural Vermont: "Due to increasing fuel prices we have at times had to choose between baby food/diapers and heating fuel. We've run out of heating fuel three times…. The baby has ended up in the hospital with pneumonia two of the times."

A man in north central Vermont: "As bad as our situation is, I know many in worse shape. We try to donate food when we do our weekly shopping but now we are not able to even afford to help our neighbors eat. What has this country come to?"

A mother: "By February we ran out of wood [for the wood stove we use for heat] and I burned my mother's dining furniture. I have no oil for hot water…. We are certainly a country in distress."

A 55 year old man: "I have worked since age 16. I don't live paycheck to paycheck, I live day to day…. I can see myself working until the day I die…. I work 12 to 14 hours daily and it just doesn't help…. I am just tired, the harder that I work, the harder it gets."

A man in a small town: "I have what I used to consider a decent job, I work hard, pinch my pennies, but the pennies have all but dried up…. I began selling off my woodworking tools, snowblower (pennies on the dollar), and furniture that had been handed down in my family from the early 1800s, just to keep the heat on. Today I am sad, broken, and very discouraged."

A woman from Northeast Kingdom: "I have always been a big pusher of ‘if you can do something to change your situation, do it'…. [But] it seems like every time [my husband and I] do the right thing and try to move ahead for our family, something out of our control happens in order to slap us back down…. We now find ourselves unsure if we will be able to pay for both the mortgage and our oil next winter."

A working mother of two: "I spend around $150 per week at the grocery store and trust me when I say I don't buy prime rib…. Some nights we eat cereal and toast for dinner because that's all I have. My family has had to cancel our annual trip to the zoo, and we make less trips to see our families in another town due to the increase of gas."

A 71 year old man: "I have been retired since 2000. With the price of fuel oil I have been forced to go back to work just to heat my home and pay my property taxes."

A teacher: "The middle class is no longer the middle class…. I've slipped into the lower class after a winter of double heating costs and now these new economic hits."

Wife and mother of two: "People that I know that have never struggled with money are now frequenting our local food shelf so they can feed their families staple foods! Please listen to our pleas and put ethics first!"

Sanders has read some of the letters on the Senate floor. He says, "This is simply an effort to bring a dose of reality to the floor of the Senate. It's not just Vermont. There are other areas of this country that are worse off. It's important for us to respond to that with appropriate public policies to address this crisis."

Sanders notes that corporate media has completely dropped the ball in informing the citizenry of the staggering economic inequality of our times. "When you talk about the collapse of the corporate media in terms of responsibility," he says, "it's not just the War in Iraq. The other huge story that they have missed is the collapse of the middle class – the fact that we have tens of millions of people working longer hours for lower wages; that we have the highest rate of childhood poverty in the industrialized world. For the first seven years of the Bush administration, [the media was] simply the stenographers for what the President was saying: ‘The economy is robust. We have strong economic growth. Unemployment is reasonably low.' The metaphor is – it's like the operation was a success but the patient died. The economy is doing great, except for 90% of the people in the economy. The reality is that we have the hollowing out of the American economy. Median family income declined by $2500 in the last seven years. 8 million people lost their health insurance. 3 million people lost their pensions. This is a strong economy? You've gotta be insane to believe that. And yet that is what the Bush Administration was talking about and that's what the corporate media kept on talking about."

Sanders believes the mission of progressives at this moment is twofold. "Number one, we have got to let the American people understand that they are not alone," he says. "What ends up happening when the media doesn't talk about the reality facing ordinary people, then people think ‘I must be failing, why can't I make it?'… And the second thing… we have to come up with a progressive agenda which begins to address this economy."

Sanders is bringing together "friends in the Congress, elected officials, and our friends within the progressive community – the environmental groups, the labor groups, the economic groups, social justice, civil liberties, etc." – to pursue an inside-outside strategy, building the agenda and mobilizing support at the grassroots to challenge the corporate wing of the Democratic party.

"The goal here is to raise these issues during the campaign," Sanders says, "and have something to present to Senator Obama the day that he's elected. We know that there is enormous pressure on Obama to be looking to the corporate wing of the Democratic party rather than the progressive wing of the Democratic party. The only way we can move this country in a progressive way is with an agenda supported by the grassroots…. We need to figure out how you do it, how to involve grassroots in the process, and how you raise those issues in intelligent ways in the campaign. Ultimately what this agenda must offer, and what I believe the American people are prepared to support – especially with an inspiring leader like Obama – is a fundamental change in our national priorities."

Sanders has no illusions about the challenges that lie ahead in pushing an agenda that truly represents working and middle class families, and the poor. (It's worth noting hat these class distinctions are increasingly less relevant as the middle class is squeezed.) But he also sees opportunities to meet the greatest challenges that we face.

"I can tell you with personal experience that the power of the financial institutions, the energy companies, the insurance companies, the military-industrial complex – they are unbelievable, each and everyone one of them, and we're dealing with each and every one of them. But we can take them on and we can defeat them if we are mobilized and we have an agenda that we are fighting for," he says. "And the very good news – if you had a president willing to make changes in our national priorities, there are enormous sums of money available to meet the unmet needs of tens and tense of millions of Americans. You have Bush having given hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks. You rescind those tax breaks, you move this country into a progressive tax system, in which you begin to address the incredible gap between the very rich and everybody else through progressive taxation. You can free up huge sums of money to address the problems of childhood poverty, and our infrastructure, and our schools, and the fact that middle-class families and working class families can't afford to send their kids to college…. We have the money to do that."

Sanders cites the waste, fraud and abuse in the $515 billion military budget, and the fact that Democrats are "very timid" in challenging its excesses. For example, the Air Force alone has admitted that it disposes of hundreds of millions of dollars of spare parts annually that it doesn't need. The Department of Defense said it runs on archaic computer systems and "they don't even know where they're spending money. They were honest – they don't know!" As for energy, he sees an analogy to Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the 1941 Congress looking at the war situation and saying, "‘Man, we gotta get our act together." There is an opportunity to transform our system, with solar thermal plants – equivalent to small nuclear plants – supplying 15-20% of the electricity needed in the US; use of photovoltaic – which is making great progress in Germany; wind turbines generate 20% of the electricity in Denmark.

You do these things," Sanders says, "you manufacture these products – wind, solar – in the United States of America. You're gonna create millions of jobs. This is a progressive agenda – what does it do? It reverses global warming, it puts America in a position of leadership internationally, so you go to China and export new technology. It creates jobs, and it also cleans up the environment…. That's huge! We know what to do!"

And, of course, there is healthcare.

"For $2-$3 billion a year – one week of the War in Iraq – you could open up hundreds of federally qualified health centers around America, so that at the end of a year, you will be providing primary health care access to every American. [These centers] provide healthcare to anyone on a sliding-scale basis. They provide the lowest cost prescription drugs available. They provide dental care which is a huge problem all over America. They provide mental health counseling. For $3 billion you could build hundreds of these clinics and every American would have access to primary healthcare…. And by giving people access to healthcare on a regular basis rather than running to an emergency room when they're sick, probably ends up saving us money."

Sanders believes a bold agenda focusing on the needs of ordinary Americans is a winning one – both from a public policy perspective and politically. "I think the people are prepared for bold action across the board. What polls tell us is that not only is there unprecedented economic uncertainty, but that people perceive in so many areas that this country is moving in the wrong direction. I mean, the degree to which we are becoming a second-rate economic power, that our healthcare system is disintegrating, that we have a $9 trillion national debt, that we have the highest rate of childhood poverty – people understand all of these things, and they are wondering what is going on in the country that they grew up in? Say the right thing, and do the right thing, you're gonna win elections…. So, coming out for an agenda that speaks to the needs of the middle-class and working families is obviously good public policy but it's also good politics."

Sanders picks up the booklet comprised of the letters from his constituents. "I want people not to get depressed, and not to become cynical," he says. "This is not Utopian dreaming, we can do these things. We have the resources. It's simply investing where we're not investing. The problems we're facing in this country are, in fact, solvable.

We're currently playing with pennies to address healthcare, the elderly, tuition costs, Head Start. And down the hallway you've got the guys from the Defense Appropriations bill, who are spending money hand-over-fist in the most unaccountable ways. We have the potential to transform America. We have to change our priorities."

---

With reporting from Capitol Hill by Greg Kaufmann, a freelance writer residing in his disenfranchised hometown of Washington, DC.

Comments (99)

1. It's funny. I've heard that the number of billionaires in the US has increased tenfold over the last decade. But the economy certainly didn't increase tenfold.

   The billionaires want to live in the US. They don't want to pay any more taxes. They want to invest in creating jobs in "emerging markets", and are willing to spend millions lobbying to make that easier. But they aren't willing to invest money to help invigorate their own country. Why isn't anyone questioning their patriotism, their love of their country? These are Americans that would only profit from helping their fellow Americans. they just aren't willing to.

   Why are we on the wrong track? Maybe because our mutual funds and 401ks were buying stock in companies that were closing American factories and opening facilities in other countries, instead of investing in companies that were trying to build America.

   Americans have the tools to fix this plight. I don't. But there are hundreds of super-class Americans that do. Rather than tax them more and give more money to an incompetent government, the government and the people need to give them incentives to invest in the country again. I don't know, maybe 5 years tax holiday for income derived from manufactured goods wholly made in the USA.

   The Pentagon has been spending in excess of 500 billion dollars a year to help our national security, and they haven't invested in energy infrastructure, they haven't built a network of hospitals? Big spending clearly isn't the answer. Smart spending is.

   Posted by cassenthri at 06/13/2008 @ 11:57pm

2. nifty read:

   A NATION IN DEBT HOW WE KILLED THRIFT, ENTHRONED LOAN SHARKS AND UNDERMINED AMERICAN PROSPERITY

   barbara dafoe whitehead

   The United States is experiencing a sharply growing polarization in access to institutional opportunities to save and build wealth. For most of the 20th century, nearly all Americans had access to grassroots institutions that helped them build a nest egg. These institutions included local retail banks, mutual savings banks, credit unions, savers' clubs, school savings-bond programs, building and loan associations, savings and loans, and labor union-sponsored savings plans. Some institutions, such as credit unions, building and loans, and labor union plans, grew out of a cooperative, nonprofit banking tradition expressly created for the "small saver." But even local retail banks offered passbook savings accounts and children's savings programs for families of modest means. Together, these institutions constituted a broadly democratic "pro-thrift" sector of the financial service industry.

   Americans under the age of forty today can only gain knowledge of this reality by reading about it in books, for it can no longer be experienced directly. A thrift sector still exists, but it has ceased to be broadly democratic in its reach. The institutions that encourage thrift have moved uptown, catering to upper-income Americans with an ever-expanding array of tax-advantaged opportunities to invest and build wealth. The potential "small saver" has been left behind as prey to new, highly profitable financial institutions: subprime credit card issuers and mortgage brokers, rent-to-own merchants, payday lenders, auto title lenders, tax refund lenders, private student-loan companies, franchise tax preparers, check cashing outlets and the state lottery. Once existing on society's margins, these institutions now constitute a large and aggressively expanding anti-thrift sector that is dragging hundreds of thousands of American consumers into profligacy and over-indebtedness. America now has a two-tier financial institutional system--one catering to the "investor class", the other to the "lottery class."

   The investor class, with ample access to institutions that foster wealth-building discipline, is served by a bevy of insurance agents, tax lawyers, stockbrokers, tax accountants, deferred compensation experts and investment bankers. They are likely to work in organizations with 401(k) plans, profit-sharing, Keogh plans, deferred income compensation and retirement savings programs. The lottery class, on the other hand, works in jobs that offer few pro-thrift benefits. As of 2004, seventy million of America's 153 million wage earners worked for employers without a retirement plan. Rather than being courted by investment firms, they are targets of modern-day, made-to-look-respectable loan sharks. Tens of millions of working Americans who might join the class of savers and investors under more favorable circumstances are being recruited into a burgeoning population of debtors and bettors.

   http://www.the-american-interest.com/ai2/article.cfm?Id=458&MId=20

   Posted by frosty zoom at 06/14/2008 @ 12:12am

3. Great story! Hard to believe the Bush administration created this environment in only seven years. I remember back when Clinton was president, there were no overpaid CEOs back then no sir. The "old" money from the northeast started in the year 2000!

   Give me a freaking break! Where's all the money in this country? I'll tell you, it's in the NORTHEAST and the WEST COAST. Wanna know what else is in the NE and out WEST..... D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-S-!

   You're damn right the rich are getting richer but let's call a spade a spade, just as many DEMS are on the "rich" list as rightwingers.

   If the RICH LIBERALS would just gave three fourths of their net worth to uncle sam, Barack wouldn't have to raise taxes on the MIDDLE CLASS.

   Oh, and speaking of wealthy, that's some nice digs Obama's got in Chi town! And about that poor Rev.Wright that the white man kept down, man... ain't he sufferin'... whew .... times are hard.

   Yeah KVH, great story. But it didn't start with GWB. It's been like this since before the Vanderbilts, Rockefellers, and DuPonts.

   Its capitalism. But I hear Cuba has great healthcare!

   Posted by bleedingheart at 06/14/2008 @ 12:26am

4. "If the RICH LIBERALS would just gave three fourths of their net worth to uncle sam, Barack wouldn't have to raise taxes on the MIDDLE CLASS." Posted by bleedingheart

   God, no! Please don't give the money to the government! Use it to build factories and improve American innovation.

   Posted by cassenthri at 06/14/2008 @ 12:39am

5. Its capitalism.

   Posted by bleedingheart

   whose capitalism?

   Posted by frosty zoom at 06/14/2008 @ 12:47am

6. Posted by bleedingheart at 06/14/2008

   Try thinking for yourself sometime dittohead. If you did you'd notice how amazingly inaccurate your post is. Deconstructing where you're wrong when you're incapable of rational thought is a simple waste of time. I will say this: there is a world beyond Rush.

   Posted by yutsano at 06/14/2008 @ 01:05am

7. Sanders picks up the booklet comprised of the letters from his constituents. "I want people not to get depressed, and not to become cynical," he says. "This is not Utopian dreaming, we can do these things. We have the resources. It's simply investing where we're not investing. The problems we're facing in this country are, in fact, solvable.

   Yes they are. But not through government. When I read all of those letters Sanders cites, I am left with one thought.

   There are 2 kinds of people; those who let life run over them and those who make their own lives.

   While I empathize with the struggles of those cited, I don't sympathize with them. No other country presents as much opportunity to change your circumstances as this one. I am not going to present a long drawn out dialogue on the how; it's done every day; it doesn't require lots of money or great credit.

   It requires determination, a never quit attitude, a strong belief in one's self, and a plan of action.

   Let me cite just one quick example. A friend of mine last year lost his home. He is a house painter by trade and times aren't good now for that in CA. He has only an 8th grade education and 7 children. Both not exactly ideal for ease of making a new start as an entrepeneur. But he did. starting slowly at first, after 3 months, he sold his painting equipment to further invest his new business activity. Now 1 year later he is earning over $4000 per week and business is growing beyond belief. I personally know 30 or more people like my friend in varying degrees of similar desperate financial shape. But rather than whine and look to the government, they have relied upon themselves and their own drive to succeed to change their lives.

   That is the American way. Unfortunately, the left believes that only through government taxation and control can people change their lives.

   It's a shame the left doesn't really believe in people and the abilities that lie within each of us if we will just dare to try.

   BTW, I don't state anything in this regard that I don't live out myself.

   Posted by lvliberty1 at 06/14/2008 @ 02:26am

8. So we'll be turning to government again for a helping hand to raise the standard of living of the masses. The middle class needs a shot in the arm. Then things will return to 'normal' again.-----Posted by frankgrits at 06/13/2008

   And you think you'll get that from MCCAIN????

   (Remember, FRANK, we ALL know who you've said you're voting for. And we all know what his economic "plan" is.)

   Posted by Mask at 06/14/2008 @ 07:12am

9. Back on-topic....

   again, Ms vanden Heuvel, incremental changes. Nothinng "big", no "new New Deal", no "Great Society II: Electric Boogaloo".

   Obama gets elected and some basic programs, fading of the Bush tax cuts, and some modest rollback in the growth of defense spending....and that's it.

   Mainly because we've got a MOUNTAIN of debt we have to pay off, and politically you can't raise taxes enough or gut defense spending enough to pay it off AND pay for a massive new series of domestic spending.

   I sometimes wonder why you let this naivete and idealism go wild and not let people know the difference between what you "hope for" and what's "the best we CAN hope for"?

   Posted by Mask at 06/14/2008 @ 07:16am

10. How about untrammeled hope leavened with a healthy dose of pragmatism instead? Far less arrogantly autocratic IMO.

    Posted by canaar at 06/14/2008 @ 08:33am

11. Why were we so much better off in the 90's?

    Billy Clinton.

    In his first year in office, Billy Clinton saved our nation from bankruptcy, and our currency from devaluation, by making millionaires and billionaires pay up. At the same time, he brought the economy back to life with a judicious dose of tax justice for the workers.

    It's not ideology, it's common sense - the kind of common sense that conservatives once embraced, before they turned into 'movement conservatives'.

    Posted by samcrossett at 06/14/2008 @ 09:12am

12. But consumer credit is a double-edged blade: It can lead to greater opportunity and freedom, but, if promoted deceptively and used recklessly, it can lead to disaster, as the subprime mortgage failure has so painfully revealed. Even before the subprime debacle, however, many Americans were struggling with a growing debt burden. According to the Federal Reserve's measure of burdensome debt, in 2004 the typical family spent more than 18 percent of its income on debt payments, the largest share since the Fed started collecting these data. Moreover, the proportion of families with debt-service payments exceeding 40 percent of their income rose to 12.2 percent in 2004. Consumer loan delinquencies also rose during this period.

    Why are so many Americans struggling with high levels of debt? Some blame individual greed and recklessness, and certainly human frailty and irresponsible choices are part of the story. Others point to a culture of rampant, corporate-driven consumerism, buttressed by marketing techniques so sophisticated as to exceed the imagination of George Orwell himself. If you can find someone who honestly denies that this is part of the problem, sell him a bridge before it's too late. But soaring levels of household debt are also tied to another, often overlooked, source: recent changes in America's institutional and regulatory landscape.

    http://www.the-american-interest.com/ai2/article.cfm?Id=458&MId=20

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/14/2008 @ 09:17am

13. bill clinton!?!?!?!?

    mr. deregulation?!?!?!?

    mr. seltzer??!?!?!?!?

    mr. rubincitigroupclinton??!?!?!?

    bill clinton!?!?!?!?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/14/2008 @ 09:19am

14. BTW, I don't state anything in this regard that I don't live out myself.

    Posted by lvliberty1

    gosh I hope not.

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/14/2008 @ 10:07am

15. BTW, I don't state anything in this regard that I don't live out myself.

    Posted by lvliberty1

    gosh I hope not.

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/14/2008

    So JR, as a good proletarian, you are against personal responsibility, self achievement without dependence on government assistance, success, living out your dreams through your own efforts?

    Why do you continue living in the US?

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 06/14/2008 @ 10:25am

16. Posted by frankgrits at 06/14/2008

    Which candidate's economic plan is closer to Hillary's...

    McCain's or Obama's?

    (dodge in 5...4...3...2...1...)

    Posted by Mask at 06/14/2008 @ 10:29am

17. Posted by marybretbrad at 06/14/2008

    All Newt and the GOP Congress, right, Darin?

    Posted by Mask at 06/14/2008 @ 10:31am

18. LvLiberty-I'm afraid that all these differences you see between people on the left and people on the right simply are not seen in the real world.Most people don't have all left wing or all right wing views and peoples views often change over time.People are pretty much the same regardless of political views and someone on the left is just as likely to pull themselves up by the bootstraps as someone on the right is.When my very left wing wife left her abusive husband she took nothing from him nor did she take any government handouts.She pulled herself up and supported her two kids on her own.I had hippie friends in college who worked and paid for their own education as did my left wing sister.I have seen many right wingers who are on welfare and food stamps and who take advantage of government programs.I know that you want to believe that people on the right are these very happy and very orgasmic people who are rugged individualists and that people on the left are the opposite,but that doesn't play out in the real world.We humans are pretty much the same and that's just reality.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 06/14/2008 @ 10:48am

19. So JR, as a good proletarian, you are against personal responsibility, self achievement without dependence on government assistance, success, living out your dreams through your own efforts?

    you are an ass. I am a selfmade man, in my work and in my education.I am a polymath and an autodidact.I invented my job, (no one else seemed to want it.) and my work is in libraries, where it will presumably enlighten scholars, long after you have been forgotten.

    I am well known and highly regarded by my peers and my clients.

    I have never received gov't assistance.

    my work has been recognized with several fellowships and grants.

    so just go in your little house and go fuck yourself. you are a non entity.

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/14/2008 @ 10:54am

20. We are more or less approaching the situation Canada was in about 20 years ago. A crushing national debt that ate up more and more of their GDP. They finally emerged after a combination of severe belt tightening and tax increases. So it's not impossible to reduce both our personal and national debt ceilings, it just takes a tremendous amount of political will. After that, changing the rules of the game so that actual competition can flourish again will do wonders for our economic status.

    Posted by yutsano at 06/14/2008 @ 11:07am

21. by marybretbrad...

    --The point of this rant is that changing tax rates (socialism) won't change the situation one bit. KVH will still continue to lose ground to the entrepreneurs who continue to increase their wealth when the stock in their companies appreciates.--

    Wrong...

    The point of this 'progressive movement' is that these very investment techniques you so vigorously tout... have recreated a flagrantly unbalanced two tiered society... to the detriment of the vast majority of hard-working families.

    The few 'success stories' are counter balanced by hundreds of thousands of 'diminishments'... but beyond this... the pattern created by 'easy money' investment portfolios is insufficiently hidden behind the quick profits. The guiltless accumulation of investment profits collected 'at the expense' of competitive American industry and the employment security it guarantees here at home... is surely nothing to gloat over.

    Posted by ttr at 06/14/2008 @ 11:11am

22. liverty,

    now listen and listen good you satanic creep

    you are the most Stalinist poster on this site. people who disagree with you are branded traitors and asked to leave this country. it is you who should leave.

    you are the antithesis of what America stands for: tolerance , hospitality, generosity, and honesty.

    "personal responsibility, self achievement without dependence on government assistance, success, living out your dreams through your own efforts?"

    I am the very poster child of these things. I have never even so much as collected unemployment insurance. unlike you I have been sole owner and operator of my business for over 30 years.

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/14/2008 @ 11:56am

23. The Age of Re-Recovery

    http://tinyurl.com/3hcd34

    Posted by hsuBfools at 06/14/2008 @ 12:47pm

24. While Hugo Chavez considers another heating oil donation, the smug & hateful right wing continue their attacks on the poor. The columnist Herb Caen once talked of pensioners who lived on skid row, so they could feel superior to somebody. That's like many on the right, a couple paychecks from disaster & still crowing. Sick.

    Posted by Sorelish at 06/14/2008 @ 12:54pm

25. Isn't ¬^¬ a pastor? Isn't ¬<¬ dependent on the generosity of a flock of strangers? Wouldn't that make ¬v¬ more like a communist- economically speaking, than a capitalist? Or perhaps ¬>¬ isn't really a non-profit? ¬^¬, the dimi-profit or ¬∆¬, the gimme-profit?

    Posted by hsuBfools at 06/14/2008 @ 1:02pm

26. er, ¬^¬, the demi-profit...

    Posted by hsuBfools at 06/14/2008 @ 1:06pm

27. Use it to build factories and improve American innovation.

    Posted by cassenthri

    factories? tell it to the citizens of the rust belt. tell it to the 20,000 GM just laid off. whatta clueless individual.

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/14/2008 @ 3:35pm

28. I should say, a clueless post.

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/14/2008 @ 6:15pm

29. Ahh LV. Once again spouting your partisan BS and being shot down for it. When are you going to realize that your anti-American BS doesn't work here?

    For every example you can give me of someone coming up from nothing to become something, I can give you an example of someone who works their ass off everyday and keeps getting knocked back down. But of course to you, a very judgmental priest, that person is nothing but a failure. You could look at someone who has worked everyday of their life as hard as they can to provide for their families then gets laid off because of job cut backs or because he gets injured as a failure.

    I have plenty of examples of people who have been shuffled through job after job because they develop a single skill set working a factory and then their factory job gets shipped over seas and then go from factory to factory trying to continue to make a living while never taking a cent from the government.

    And just so you know this isn't coming from some socialist leaning government mooch. I am only 21 and I am already apart of the middle class and I accomplished that on my own. I know how to make my way up the ladder yet I still have sympathy for the people who have been knocked down and then kicked repeatedly while they are on the ground because I know the American dream is like the lottery. Two people can work just as hard in the same area and both of them could make it, fail, or only one could make it and one could fail.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/14/2008 @ 7:16pm

30. Bernie's been a great Senator. Remember the 500 bucks we got back in the First Stimulus from Bush...it's was Bernie's idea. He hit the capital running hard and has already made a decent mark there even from a state small in population.And he's so honest that even Republicans respect him.

    "Power?" Why'd they go into politics anyway. We vote for the policies we want those with 'elected' power so they can deliver what we want. Government can do a lot for people: roads, scientific research, protection, stimulation of the economy.

    In contrast, Conservatives want to go back to the famines of the 1800s when true "liberal' economic libertarianism existed: when those who had the money called the tune, and millions starved. Even Otto von Bismarck accepted the need for state services to keep people from going under....thus the beginnings of the modern progressive state with egalitarian taxes and fairness became a necessary goal for modern life.

    Posted by datadave at 06/14/2008 @ 10:17pm

31. Freiheit

    one of your absolute worst.

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/14/2008 @ 10:36pm

32. Isn't ¬^¬ a pastor? Isn't ¬<¬ dependent on the generosity of a flock of strangers? Wouldn't that make ¬v¬ more like a communist- economically speaking, than a capitalist? Or perhaps ¬>¬ isn't really a non-profit? ¬^¬, the dimi-profit or ¬∆¬, the gimme-profit?

    Posted by hsuBfools at 06/14/2008

    I'm not dependent on the people I serve in our ministry. Never have been. I have never taken a salary. Although in one ministry we did live in the back of the church so we got free rent.

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 06/14/2008 @ 11:22pm

33. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/14/2008

    Either you ignored what I actually said or you misinunderstood it.

    I readily acknoweldge all the things you say happen to good people just trying to work honestly. That was not the point.

    KVH and Sanders made these people look like whiners and complainers looking for government assistance.

    My point is that there are two ways to respond to this kind of adversity. Winners in life do not complain about their adversity, but go out and make their own success. That is just a fact of life.

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 06/14/2008 @ 11:28pm

34. Of course there will always be hard working, sober, people who can't get ahead. But they are a rarity in the US.

    Posted by Mike Brady

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/14/2008 @ 11:42pm

35. Ever had a friend 'lovesick", head over heels, whipped, googly eyed OVER a real loser/danger flags everywhere?

    You try pointing out some of the obvious concerns... but your friend's seen the light. And the light is this new stud/babe. He/she's the ONE your friend just knows it. Nevermind that little drug problem, or little not quite ex-boy/girlfriend problem, or little debt issue, or little legal thing. Absolutely everything has an explanation. Yee old blinding light!

    For big W Wingers there may just be the same sort of blind infatuation with the Limbaugh/Ayn Rand/libertarian hero myth.

    Only true believers get it. And per the myth nonbelievers are pan-negative: weak, immoral, afraid, irrational, want a hand-out, etc.

    Reasoning has amazingly little leverage for they so believe they are being supremely reasonable.

    I've certainly been there.

    Posted by winyahn at 06/14/2008 @ 11:43pm

36. For big W Wingers there may just be the same sort of blind infatuation with the Limbaugh/Ayn Rand/libertarian hero myth.

    Only true believers get it. And per the myth nonbelievers are pan-negative: weak, immoral, afraid, irrational, want a hand-out, etc.

    Reasoning has amazingly little leverage for they so believe they are being supremely reasonable.

    I've certainly been there.

    Posted by winyahn at 06/14/2008

    First of all, by your many postings, I highly doubt you have ever been a small government, self reliant advocate.

    Secondly, many of us on the right don't listen to Limbaugh and I have purposely never read Ayn Rand.

    Frankly most of my secular reading and listening is on far left sources. I know what I believe and why. I don't need someone else trying to shape my beliefs.

    How you are raised has far more to do with shaping these beliefs. I come from a family where self reliance has been the norm for hundreds of years. My mother wouldn't even take me to the doctor except in extreme emergency as a boy so I wouldn't become a hypochondriac.

    I think you simply regurgitate the usual talking points of your own far left resources.

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 06/15/2008 @ 12:07am

37. My mother wouldn't even take me to the doctor except in extreme emergency as a boy so I wouldn't become a hypochondriac.

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 06/15/2008

    I see.

    Posted by winyahn at 06/15/2008 @ 12:49am

38. I come from a family where self reliance has been the norm for hundreds of years.

    me, too.

    yet i don't mind using common resources to help people and care for the planet we are made from.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/15/2008 @ 12:49am

39. "My mother wouldn't even take me to the doctor except in extreme emergency as a boy so I wouldn't become a hypochondriac."

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 06/15/2008

    Thus the missing diagnosis of Narcissistic Personality Disorder...

    For the love of God, how can you go from saying that people who work hard and do everything right yet still fail DO exist to saying that winners don't complain about adversity but go out and make their own success? What about those who did everything right but still failed? If they could just conjure up success out of thin air why would they have not done so already?

    Winners" are complaining about their "adversity" all the time. Only the tiniest fraction really "make their own success", and they do it largely by shitting on the little people. And the vast majority DO get handouts FROM THE GOVERNMENT. Our Fearless Leader, for example, was a total fuckup his whole life, a complete failure in everything he touched, until he got rich when a brand new stadium was built with TAX DOLLARS, on a tract of land acquired through EMINENT DOMAIN for far less that market value, for a baseball team he bought with money he was able to BORROW only because of his FATHER'S CONNECTIONS. The rich get billions in government subsidies, yet the lower/working/middle classes are WHINING because we believe life's NECESSITIES should be AFFORDABLE? Just who exactly are you? Horatio Fucking Alger?

    It's easy for the rich to get richer, and they have. Someone claimed that middle class wages HAD increased over the past 25 years...well, not in REAL dollars. Go read David Cay Johnston's book "Free Lunch", then come back and start up again if you still believe all your Social Darwinist bullshit. You can find it online, at most major bookstores, or at your local library. Unless it hasn't been able to get any new books lately because the government funds it used to receive have been diverted to subsidize some CEO's private jet.

    Posted by huzzah at 06/15/2008 @ 01:15am

40. Posted by huzzah at 06/15/2008

    Another whiner

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 06/15/2008 @ 01:58am

41. Posted by huzzah at 06/15/2008

    Another whiner

    Posted by lvliberty1

    he did no whining. he presented a critique of the myth of the self sufficient rich.

    and he is correct.

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/15/2008 @ 08:53am

42. hey kids, remember all those Whig blowhards trashing the Carter administration? well, Bush is making Billy look awfully good.

    that ownership society has been exposed for the shuck it always was. why don't we ask all those folks who have lost their houses

    and jobs.

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/15/2008 @ 10:07am

43. Mainly because we've got a MOUNTAIN of debt we have to pay off, and politically you can't raise taxes enough or gut defense spending enough to pay it off AND pay for a massive new series of domestic spending.

    I sometimes wonder why you let this naivete and idealism go wild and not let people know the difference between what you "hope for" and what's "the best we CAN hope for"?

    Posted by Mask at 06/14/2008 | ignore this person | warn this person

    Well said Mask. The grim reality is that Bush & Congress have already decided where our spending that could have been used for social programs is going to go.

    Devaluation of our currency before it is not even fit for toilet paper will require reduction in massive debt before we default via paying back that debt with worthless dollars. Debt holders are sophisticated enough to realize that they aren't getting an adequate return by getting their interest payments back in worthless dollars. KVH is in this never never land, where there is an unlimited amount of money available to fund progressive social programs and it just isn't so.

    After trying to deal with reduction of debt, other priorities such as restoratioon of funding of social security and medicare needs and rebuilding of our military that has been gutted by Iraq included continued funding of our occupation for the foreseeable future will leave nothing for social programs.

    The US government is in a similar situation that many consumers are. We are way in over our head, and we face a never ending struggle just to keep up with debt service and obligations, in order to keep our heads above water. It will be a miracle if we do. There will nothing left for new progressive agendas. That is a reality that most of us do not want to face.

    Posted by OneVote at 06/15/2008 @ 10:58am

44. "Rather go to bed supperless than rise in debt," Benjamin Franklin

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/15/2008 @ 11:06am

45. by lvliberty1 ...

    --My point is that there are two ways to respond to this kind of adversity. Winners in life do not complain about their adversity, but go out and make their own success. That is just a fact of life.--

    True enough... and 'big government' tends to make us less self reliant... at the expense of the productive sector. Taken as generalities and axioms... these are true enough...

    However... economies always need guidance... and impetus. I believe that these are necessary inputs to free market economic systems... and as datadave so eloquently pointed out... "go back to the famines of the 1800s when true "liberal' economic libertarianism existed..."

    It is far too easy to blame the victims here... and ignore the culpability of a narrow visioned 'questing' on the part of the administration. It is just too convenient for them to pass the 'benefits' of their ownership of society... to themselves... thus producing exclusionary results.

    Simply changing this 'administrative' outlook... will have profoundly positive effects on our morale, and economy.

    BTW lvl... I really appreciate your presence here on this blog, and I deplore the incivility decanted in your direction by those of us here that are 'less fortunate'. Thanks.

    Posted by ttr at 06/15/2008 @ 11:10am

46. easy for him to say:

    Puritanism appealed to smart, middle class people such as Benjamin Franklin's father,

    it is also well to remember that this was the time of debtor's prison.

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/15/2008 @ 11:13am

47. BOTTOM-LINE - - DEBT SUMMARY TABLE AMERICA'S TOTAL DEBT (as of Jan. 1, 2008) - $53 Trillion -

    - add another $60 trillion for other contingencies such as Social Security/Medicare/Medicaid -

    Our Federal Government Debt Report shows $9.2 Trillion of debt as of end CY 2007, the State & Local Government Report shows debt of $2.2 Trillion, and $41.6 Trillion of private (household, business and financial sector) debt is revealed in America's Total Debt Report.

    These sum to $53 Trillion - - equivalent to $175,154 per capita, or $700,616 per family of 4. (This sum does not include the federal government's un-funded contingent liabilities such as social security/Medicare/Medicaid estimated at $57 trillion, plus additional unknown amounts(?) for other contingencies listed below.)

    The following table summarizes Total Debt in America - - as of December 31, 2007

    http://mwhodges.home.att.net/nat-debt/debt-nat-a.htm

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/15/2008 @ 11:13am

48. The US economy is sliding into the toilet, thanks to the GOP (& Rubinomics). Obama is the beneficiary. Each time a voter stops to fill up the tank, another GOP campaign ad is cancelled out. It's a no-brainer no-contest, almost boring (see Frank Rich's column today). The only suspense lies in how large a majority in both houses will Obama carry with him ... all the Dem victors beneficiaries of catastrophic GOP policies.

    Posted by sloper at 06/15/2008 @ 11:47am

49. Steve Scully: "This is a political question in terms of how he gets the nomination, but just from what you have seen, how much support do you think he has among the base of the Republican Party?"

    Roberta McCain: "I don't think he has any. I don't know what the base of the Repub -- maybe I don't know enough about it, but I've not seen any help whatsoever."

    Scully: "So can he then go on and become the nominee of this party?"

    McCain: "Yes, I think holding their nose they're going to have to take him."

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/15/2008 @ 12:30pm

50. --joke alert--

    ...and even their Viagra seems to give 'em half hearted results...

    That grim acceptance... you know, the one that has at least partially shed the denial... that we really have been involved in a 'fascist moment'... probably would have an astringent effect on the economy too...

    It's time we faced our country with the kind of love that nature intended.

    Posted by ttr at 06/15/2008 @ 12:58pm

51. These sum to $53 Trillion - - equivalent to $175,154 per capita, or $700,616 per family of 4. (This sum does not include the federal government's un-funded contingent liabilities such as social security/Medicare/Medicaid estimated at $57 trillion, plus additional unknown amounts(?) for other contingencies listed below.)

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/15/2008 | ignore this person | warn this person

    Simple Loan Payment Calculator

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------

    Result: Monthly payment: 30 Years Interest rate: 5.750% Loan amount: $ 700,000.00 $ 4,085.01 a month

    Interesting - remember we are paying interest on debt while trying to retire debt.

    Looks like we are going to be foreclosed any day now.

    Posted by OneVote at 06/15/2008 @ 1:01pm

52. You can run (your mouth) but you can't hide without massive self-deception -- Going on and on about whining = WHINING

    Say it again! Hallelujah!

    Dictionary: whine v., whined, whin·ing, whines.

    To complain or protest in a childish fashion.

    Ex. ____s are whiney, wackos, unAmerican, feel entitled, want big govt., free lunch, are lazy, undisciplined, lack self discipline, lack self reliance...

    Do this simple analysis: % words/time neocons

    1- are positive / constructive / uplifting (inspire time)

    vs

    2- are negative / sarcastic / derogatory (whine time)

    Posted by winyahn at 06/15/2008 @ 2:34pm

53. Going on and on about whining = WHINING

    Say it again! Hallelujah!

    Going on and on about whining = WHINING

    Golly, I'm going on and on about others whining = WHINING

    Gosh, I'm going on and on about neocon whining = WHINING

    Woops, I'm going on and on about liberal whining = WHINING

    Dern, I'm going on and on about chipmonks lack of self reliant acorn gathering = WHINING

    Posted by winyahn at 06/15/2008 @ 4:01pm

54. by marybretbrad ...

    You've got that right... I was off on a tangent all on my own. Taking your meaning as expressed in your more recent post, I agree with you fully. Business creation and entrepreneurship are some of the most needed endeavors needed in America today. That the people who have succeeded in achieving this are in a tiny minority is relevant... but does not make this country's need for development any less pressing.

    It's a lot more than just being in the right place at the right time... it takes guts and determination... knowhow and grit... and a lot of common sense.

    And persistence.

    Posted by ttr at 06/15/2008 @ 9:18pm

55. marybretbrad...

    Time warped reply to "You didn't understand..."

    Posted by ttr at 06/15/2008 @ 9:22pm

56. we hear a lot about how superior those who run their own business are.

    nothing could be further from the truth. the "guy" who punches a time clock for 30 years in a company is in no way inferior, and deserves our respect just as much.

    it's just different.

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/15/2008 @ 9:35pm

57. Lot of nice alpha / self-reliant / entrepreneurial / careerists are sucky parents (from perspective of kid who never sees them).

    We all know the drill: not willing to work 1000000 hours, want to spend quality time with your kid? "No problem whiner", says the nice alpha / self-reliant / entrepreneurial boss. "Find yourself a socialist, big government job, or suck it up. There's a 'winner' who's hungry, eager to step up."

    Posted by winyahn at 06/15/2008 @ 11:51pm

58. The middle class needs to keep 100% of its income...and it would never need govt again to "help" them..----Posted by JOMAMMA at 06/16/2008

    So you'd favor SOLELY taxing the rich???

    Posted by Mask at 06/16/2008 @ 10:02am

59. for the middle class to pay less taxes, the rich have to pay more.

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/16/2008 @ 10:03am

60. An article today by Rep. John Boehner blames the Dems SOLELY, for the large spike in gas prices. They can lose it all on this one issue.

    Posted by Benchrest at 06/16/2008 @ 10:18am

61. There are thousands of oil wells in the gulf...and none are visible from New Orleans(think enviromentalist).....

    and none, by the way, leaked from Katrina nor the other storms....

    the next question is.. I believe the Chinese are in the Gulf..directly or indirectly..for they are every where we are not visa vie oil...how many of the new wells are American?

    Posted by JOMAMMA at 06/16/200

    I'm not an environmentalist BTW. And reread my posts I didn't say shoot from the coast of New Orleans. I said show them the ones that are off the coast of New Orleans. There are American ones out there. Believe what you want about the Chinese being in the Gulf. But there is no actual proof of it beyond hear say. Which makes it another conspiracy theory like any other. Show hard evidence like a picture of a well which can't be THAT hard if they are only 60 miles off the coast like they are claiming. The Gulf isn't THAT big. You would be able to spot a couple hundred wells if they were out there.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/16/2008 @ 10:20am

62. Posted by JOMAMMA at 06/16/2008

    Perception is everything. Look at the article if you have time.

    Posted by Benchrest at 06/16/2008 @ 10:32am

63. it is not our lack of drilling, it is our unbridled consumption that is the problem.

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/16/2008 @ 10:40am

64. ..the main reason for higher costs is world demand and speculators nervous with the ME..

    so much easier to blame others.

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/16/2008 @ 10:49am

65. and why are the "markets" nervous about the ME? because of amerika's clumsy and disastrous meddling, that's why.

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/16/2008 @ 10:55am

66. "So you'd favor SOLELY taxing the rich???"

    Posted by Mask at 06/16/2008

    That one caught my attention as well.

    Posted by drhammer at 06/16/2008 @ 11:26am

67. .in terms of dollars..the cost of oil is unchanged from 10 years ago....

    Posted by JOMAMMA

    so why is america so hysterical about it now?

    you mean they're nervous about our LEAVING Iraq? and not about invading Iraq? nonsense. most countries have withdrawn their troops from Iraq. that should tell you something.

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/16/2008 @ 11:26am

68. "Did you realize that a nation is drilling for oil 60 miles off the coast of Florida right now? That nation, unfortunately, isn't America. It's China. Simply put, if the Chinese are reaping the economic benefits of energy resources within reach of our shores, so must we. And that's why Republicans will hold Democrats accountable..." John Boehner

    Get the upper hand and frame this issue and you win. Period.

    Posted by Benchrest at 06/16/2008 @ 11:34am

69. we end up with another IRAN after Carter did nothing when the Shah was deposed

    the Shah was a bloody dictator. the US should have withdrawn its support long before. the Iranians did the right thing in giving him the boot.

    as in may revolutions, the cure has not been entirely satisfactorily, but that is a matter for the Iranians to remedy.

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/16/2008 @ 11:57am

70. as far as Iraq, why don't you substitute Germany for the US and Poland for Iraq.

    hey we're there, so get over it. we must stay there lest things get worse. Joseph Goebbels

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/16/2008 @ 11:59am

71. I would say they are nervous becase of Irans posturing, Israel, America bolting Iraq if Obie is in the WH and leaving it a vacunm as we did with Iran after the Shah, and they are nervous about the US economy and the soft dollar...in terms of dollars..the cost of oil is unchanged from 10 years ago....

    Posted by JOMAMMA at 06/16/2008

    I don't know about the withdrawing from Iraq part. If we withdrew it would allow the people there to find some semblance of real government and ability to use their wells which would cause them to start producing more oil. I think they are more worried about a preemptive US invasion which would shut down oil production in Iran as well as Iraq. I'm sure the Pakistanis are licking their lips right now though because if Iran and Iraq are shut down they will be getting even more business by the end of this year.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/16/2008 @ 12:03pm

72. and we end up with another IRAN after Carter did nothing when the Shah was deposed.----Posted by JOMAMMA at 06/16/2008

    Curious...what EXACTLY should Carter have done?

    Posted by Mask at 06/16/2008 @ 12:06pm

73. Sorry, libertarians, but the old "land of opportunity" claim has long ago been exposed as just another dodge for the "I got mine" crowd.

    All of us are not entrepreneurs, Wall Street wizards, or trust fund babies. (Or even particularly lucky.)

    And we are not all substance abusers from single-parent families.

    Yet tens of millions of Americans have spent their adult lives working responsibly every day, paying taxes, obeying the law, and never collecting a dime of "welfare". Many would no doubt loosen your bridgework if you had the stones to accuse them of "whining" to their faces.

    Yet all have seen their purchasing power diminished. Energy, healthcare, housing, food, and most of life's other necessities have increased in cost at at a pace that far outstrips the rate of inflation while real income remains stagnant, or even loses ground. And the cost of a higher education, that magic ticket to a life better than your parents' , is but a dream for a depressingly large number of responsible, hard-working moms and dads.

    This scenario is not the result of some pandemic underachievement. It is the product of commerce without conscience; of unchecked greed.

    You are all so full of shit.

    Posted by drhammer at 06/16/2008 @ 12:08pm

74. ""Did you realize that a nation is drilling for oil 60 miles off the coast of Florida right now? That nation, unfortunately, isn't America. It's China. Simply put, if the Chinese are reaping the economic benefits of energy resources within reach of our shores, so must we. And that's why Republicans will hold Democrats accountable..." John Boehner

    (Since proven to be completely untrue, and acknowledged as such by none other that our esteemed vice president.)

    Posted by drhammer at 06/16/2008 @ 12:10pm

75. maasch, as usual your understanding of Iran and the Shah is compromised by your limited understanding of what transpired.

    On January 16, 1979, he and his wife left Iran at the behest of Prime Minister Shapour Bakhtiar (a long time opposition leader himself), who sought to calm the situation.[26] Bakhtiar dissolved SAVAK, freed all political prisoners, and allowed the Ayatollah Khomeini to return to Iran after years in exile. He asked Khomeini to create a Vatican-like state in Qom, promised free elections and called upon the opposition to help preserve the constitution, proposing a 'national unity' government including Khomeini's followers. Khomeini fiercely rejected Dr. Bakhtiar's demands and appointed his own interim government, with Mehdi Bazargan as prime minister, demanding "since I have appointed him he must be obeyed." In February, pro-Khomeini Revolutionary guerrilla and rebel soldiers gained the upper hand in street fighting and the military announced their neutrality. On the evening of February 11 the dissolution of the monarchy was complete. [edit]Exile and Death The exiled monarch had become unpopular in much of the world, especially in the liberal West. Ironically, these included his original backers who had the most to lose from his downfall. U.S. President Jimmy Carter had supported the Shah, and visited Iran in 1977. Carter overlooked the fact that Iran had significant oil reserves. According to the Shah in his memoir, General Robert Huyser, a top NATO official, came to Iran unannounced with the primary mission of paralyzing the army.[27] Huyser's role was also confirmed by the Shah's top military officials and his last prime minister Shapour Bakhtiar who was assassinated in France immediately after the revolution. Huyser later received a medal from President Carter. Huyser later wrote a book, Mission to Tehran, denying the events and claiming that his mission was intended to protect the Shah and stabilize Iran. This was consistent with the official policy of US and UK that the western alliance with the Shah was genuine. This provided the basis for the Islamic Republic of Iran's accusation that the West backed the Shah. Still, according to some supporters of the Shah,[who?] the leaders of US, UK, France, and Germany in the summit held in Guadeloupe came to an agreement with the US proposal to remove the Shah. The Shah traveled from country to country in his second exile, seeking what he hoped would be a temporary residence. First he went to Egypt, and got an invitation and warm welcome from president Anwar el-Sadat. He later lived in Morocco, the Bahamas, and Mexico. But his non-Hodgkin's lymphoma began to grow worse and required immediate and sophisticated treatment. Reluctantly, on October 22, 1979, President Jimmy Carter allowed the Shah to make a brief stopover in the United States to undergo medical treatment. The compromise was extremely unpopular with the revolutionary movement, which had been angered by the United States' years of support for the Shah's rule. The Iranian government demanded the return of the Shah to Iran to stand trial. This resulted in the the storming of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, and the kidnapping of American diplomats, military personnel and intelligence officers, which soon became known as the Iran hostage crisis. Once the Shah's course of treatment in the U.S. was finished, the U.S. government, eager to avoid further controversy, pressed the former monarch to leave the country. He left the United States on December 15, 1979, and lived for a short time in the Isla Contadora in Panama. Finally he returned to Egypt, where he died on July 27, 1980, at the age of 60. Egyptian President Sadat gave the Shah a state funeral. Mohammad Reza Pahlavi is buried in the Al Rifa'i Mosque in Cairo, a mosque of great symbolic importance. The last royal rulers of the two monarchies are buried there, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi of Iran and King Farouk of Egypt, his former brother-in-law. The tombs lie off to the left of the entrance.

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/16/2008 @ 12:12pm

76. Posted by drhammer at 06/16/2008

    And yet they still printed the article in the paper TODAY.

    Posted by Benchrest at 06/16/2008 @ 12:13pm

77. > Having read cries of outrage about everything that's wrong, I thought I would add my two cents' worth. I think this country would be just about perfect if we: >> >> 1. Scrap the Electoral College, pass a public election financing bill, >> and outlaw all lobbyists. Redraw congressional and state legislative >> districts to stop unfairly protecting incumbents. >> 2. Scrap the tax code, outlaw loopholes for the wealthy, increase taxes >> to the level that will enable government to provide essential services, >> including universal health care. Revise Prop. 13 to separate residential >> property from commercial property and start taxing corporations who have >> gained the most benefit from the late Mr. Jarvis' brainchild. >> 3. Outlaw corporations that export jobs, bank their profits off-shore to >> avoid taxes and undermine unions. Rescind the Taft-Hartley law. Enact a >> 'Living Wage' law and outlaw 'outsourcing' and protect temporary and >> part-time workers from exploitation, >> 4. Scrap the Department of Homeland Security and reform Immigration and >> Citizenship laws and the people who carry them out. Weed out the racists >> who use bureaucracy to victimize visa and citizenship applicants. There >> is no excuse for delays of five to ten years in processing paperwork. >> 5. Scrap the subsidies for agribusiness and tobacco farmers and use the >> money to support green renewable energy sources and help reduce reliance >> on foreign oil. >> 6. Scrap the coal burning power plants and nuclear waste producers, and >> switch to solar, wind-generated and hydro-electric power. Harness the >> tides to produce power, and scrap the 100 year old technology of the >> internal combustion engine entirely. >> 7. Outlaw profit-making on health care. Pass laws (like other countries) >> to stop insurance companies from profiting from health insurance, and >> regulate the pharmaceutical industry. >> 8. Put the teeth back in regulatory agencies such as the FAA, FCC and the >> FDA. Bar former industry executives from decision-making positions in >> agencies that are supposed to regulate their former employers. >> 9. Return the Pentagon to civilian control. Make certain that Blackwater >> and Cheney's former employer Haliburton are forced to account for every >> dollar they have wasted or stolen from the American people and make them >> return every dollar with interest. Stop defense contractors from hiring >> retired generals to shill for them. >> 10. Indict, arrest and try every politician and lackey who promoted or >> assented to torture, special rendition and other suspensions or negations >> of constitutional protections and civil rights during the last seven-plus >> years, and every individual who facilitated the Bush administration's >> high crimes and misdemeanors. This includes Bush and Cheney, their >> ministers, aides, and particularly their lawyers such as 'Professor' Yoo, >> who is, regrettably, now teaching at my Alma Mater, the University of >> California at Berkeley. >> 11. Immediately get American troops out of Iraq. Immediately close the >> illegal prison called Gitmo. Bring home the troops who are sitting in >> Germany for no good reason. Close more than half of our foreign bases >> which were created in the Cold War, and which make no kind of sense >> today. Stop making and buying more and more weapons, we have more than >> enough. >> 12. Raise the tax rate to 50% on anyone who makes more than a million per >> year, and use some of the money to pay off our debt to China. Stop >> importing cheap goods from countries which exploit labor and pollute the >> planet. The 'cheap' goods are too costly! Reduce all imports until we >> have a level playing field and achieve a trade balance - and that means >> scrapping NAFTA etc. >> >> If this sounds like a 'liberal' manifesto, so be it. The result would be >> an America we could all be proud of again. >> >> Felix Schwarz >> 14882 Yucca Avenue >> Irvine, CA 92606 Phone (949)552-0234 (Home) (714) 558-0940 (Work) >> >>

    Posted by Frank_Wood at 06/16/2008 @ 1:15pm

78. However, in material wealth, there were gains in technology. So a $500 TV today, would be a $1000 TV 20 years later, but the $1000 TV today is 100 times better than a $500 TV 20 years ago.

    Posted by marybretbrad

    but much of those price gains are because we are hiding our inflation on the backs of the world's poor.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/16/2008 @ 1:22pm

79. However, in material wealth, there were gains in technology. So a $500 TV today, would be a $1000 TV 20 years later, but the $1000 TV today is 100 times better than a $500 TV 20 years ago.

    Posted by marybretbrad

    plus,

    that's a bad example.

    who cares if the t.v. is better if the programs have gotten worser.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/16/2008 @ 1:23pm

80. ..this added to prevention of drilling in our own country is a big contributer...

    ..the main reason for higher costs is world demand and speculators nervous with the ME..

    Posted by JOMAMMA

    drilling in anwr/coasts would reduce the price maybe by $1.50/barrel.

    ooh!

    current production EXCEEDS demand.

    nose-diving dollar...........

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/16/2008 @ 1:26pm

81. it is not our lack of drilling, it is our unbridled consumption that is the problem.

    Posted by emile duBois

    ta-da!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/16/2008 @ 1:27pm

82. and why are the "markets" nervous about the ME? because of amerika's clumsy and disastrous meddling, that's why.

    Posted by emile duBois

    all the more money for houston, tehran and moscow.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/16/2008 @ 1:28pm

83. ..this added to prevention of drilling in our own country is a big contributer...

    ..the main reason for higher costs is world demand and speculators nervous with the ME..

    Posted by JOMAMMA at 06/16/200

    Jom. You are ignoring that fact that we don't have much oil in our country to begin with. If we tapped our oil reserves we have enough for MAYBE 2 years. The US consumes about 7 billion barrels a year. ANWR has about 6 billion barrels in it and the Coast of Florida has about 10 Billion. So if we went full bore into them we would get 2 years of oil out of them before we went crawling back to the Saudis. We ought as well hold on to our reserves for a real emergency instead of tapping into it and wasting it now.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/16/2008 @ 1:28pm

84. "Did you realize that a nation is drilling for oil 60 miles off the coast of Florida right now? That nation, unfortunately, isn't America. It's China. Simply put, if the Chinese are reaping the economic benefits of energy resources within reach of our shores, so must we. And that's why Republicans will hold Democrats accountable..." John Boehner

    Posted by Benchrest

    THIS ISN'T TRUE, MR BONER.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/16/2008 @ 1:29pm

85. before we went crawling back to the Saudis.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/16/2008 |

    actually, you crawl to the canadians, mexicans and venezuelans.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/16/2008 @ 1:32pm

86. the only mistake the Iranians made was to help get rid of Carter for he was their perfect Patsy and represented the whimpifacation of America...and still dos.

    Posted by JOMAMMA

    DON'T WORRY, AMERICA CAN STILL SQUISH ANYBODY!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/16/2008 @ 1:37pm

87. Also I would like to point out to the Pubs here that many of you often try to accuse the Left of reciting crazy theories and conspiracies but I would like to point out the fact that even your vice president is repeating already accepted to be untrue theories about China drilling off our coast. This theory is not in anyway backed up. The contracts that people based the theory off of do no exist and no one can find any platforms. This theory is just trying to play on the red scare stuff all over again.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/16/2008 @ 1:39pm

88. "But many oil companies from those countries have expressed reservations about how to turn potential crude oil into product. Cuba doesn't have the refinery capacity, and the Cuban embargo prohibits the oil from coming to U.S. refineries, Pinon said.

    The most recent high-profile contract with Cuba went to Brazil's state oil company, Petrobras. Cuba inked a contract with Petrobras in January, allowing the Brazilian energy giant to search for oil in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico that are within Cuba's sovereign territory. Brazil's foreign minister, Celso Amorim, traveled to Cuba last month and talked up the oil business, along with a joint venture between Cuba and Petrobras to produce lubricants."

    Maybe we should break our embargo and cut a deal with Cuba. We could start drilling on their land too at that point.

    Finally hit the right thread.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/16/2008 @ 1:45pm

89. If Bernie Sanders, or any legislator, wants to do something REAL to bring down gas prices, they need to change the rules for trading inelastic commodities such as oil so speculators are unable to drive the price up well beyond the true supply-demand price.

    They can start by reducing margin trading on oil to 50% from 10%, and barring speculators like Goldman Sachs and other trading houses and investors from trading crude unless it is directly related to hedging on the part of an oil-industry related client. (This was the rule before 1999 until it was changed under Clinton's watch!)

    Such rules would push the price of crude down from $130 to $70 almost overnight, and we would see $1.80 a gallon gas THIS year. Of course Goldman Sachs would take a big hit financially, but why should we care about that?

    If Bernie or others in Congress cannot stand up to oil speculators like Goldman Sachs because they dole out a lot of campaign cash, then they have only themselves to blame for the ridiculously high gas prices.

    Posted by Metteyya at 06/16/2008 @ 1:52pm

90. My suggestion would have been to help the Ayatolla Komehni(sp) land his airplane a few hundred yards short of the Tehran airport....

    Posted by JOMAMMA

    you're approaching jibberish here.

    let's compare what Carter didn't do with what Reagan, the traitor, did.

    persuaded the Iranians to hold the hostages longer, for his own political benefit.

    sold arms to Iran, secretly.

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/16/2008 @ 2:16pm

91. Also I would like to point out to the Pubs here that many of you often try to accuse the Left of reciting crazy theories and conspiracies but I would like to point out the fact that even your vice president is repeating already accepted to be untrue theories about China drilling off our coast. This theory is not in anyway backed up. The contracts that people based the theory off of do no exist and no one can find any platforms. This theory is just trying to play on the red scare stuff all over again.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/16/2008

    And yet they still printed the article in the paper TODAY.

    This is called framing an issue, and since when did facts get in the way of that? If the public perceives this as the Dems fault, they are screwed.

    Posted by Benchrest at 06/16/2008 @ 2:16pm

92. Oh, and the snippet of Boehner's article that I typed was the NICE part.

    Posted by Benchrest at 06/16/2008 @ 2:27pm

93. This is called framing an issue, and since when did facts get in the way of that? If the public perceives this as the Dems fault, they are screwed.

    Posted by Benchrest at 06/16/2008

    Nah. Just post some pictures on Myspace of a completely empty Florida coast and people will realize the Chinese aren't drilling anywhere. Then post some pictures of our oil fields off the coast of New Orleans and they will shut up.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/16/2008 @ 2:36pm

94. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/16/2008

    OK, whatever you say.

    Posted by Benchrest at 06/16/2008 @ 2:43pm

95. THIS ISN'T TRUE, MR BONER.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 06/16/2008

    Truth is twelve fifths of politics.

    Posted by Benchrest at 06/16/2008 @ 2:43pm

96. "This is called framing an issue, and since when did facts get in the way of that? If the public perceives this as the Dems fault, they are screwed."

    Posted by Benchrest at 06/16/2008

    "Framing" an issue is the act of structuring a question in a manner that invites and/or confirms your desired answer.

    Telling Americans that the Chinese are drilling for oil off their coast is a LIE, plain and simple.

    And the Republicans, desperate to fellate the oil companies as much as possible before the start of the next administration, own this lie outright.

    Posted by drhammer at 06/16/2008 @ 3:15pm

97. Posted by drhammer at 06/16/2008

    They are just getting warmed up, and you ain't seen nothin yet. They are desperate, and are going to get absolutely nasty. THIS is the issue they want, and they just might get it, and if they do, it's a sledgehammer.

    Posted by Benchrest at 06/16/2008 @ 3:30pm

98. the only mistake the Iranians made was to help get rid of Carter for he was their perfect Patsy and represented the whimpifacation of America...and still dos.

    Posted by JOMAMMA at 06/16/2008

    Yeahhhh. We should go back to the days(that don't actually exist by the way) when we would kill anyone who looked at us funny.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/16/2008 @ 3:50pm

99. Congress created a moratorium on new drilling off the coast in 1981 and every president since then has extended it.

    this puts to rest the lie that democrats won't let us drill.

    how many democrats have we had for pres in that time?

    Posted by emile duBois at 06/17/2008 @ 02:42am