From Dandelion Salad:

July 1, 2008

BY Ralph Nader

The worst top management of giant corporations in American history is also by far the most hugely paid. That contradiction applies as well to the Boards of Directors of these global companies.

Consider these illustrations:

The bosses of General Motors (GM) have presided over the worst decline of GM shares in the last fifty years, the lowering of GM bonds to junk status, the largest money losses and layoffs of tens of thousands of workers. Yet these top executives are still in place and still receiving much more pay than their successful counterparts at Toyota.

GM’s stock valuation is under $7 billion dollars, while Toyota is valued at over $160 billion. Toyota, having passed GM in worldwide sales, is about to catch up with and pass GM in sales inside the United States itself!

GM’s executives stayed with their gas guzzling SUVs way beyond the warning signs. Their vehicles were uninspiring and technologically stagnant in various ways. They were completely unprepared for Toyota’s hybrid cars and for the upward spiral in gasoline prices. They’re cashing their lucrative monthly checks with the regular votes of confidence by their hand-picked Board of Directors.

About the same appraisal can be made of Ford Motor Co., which at least brought in new management to try to do something about that once famous company’s sinking status.

Then there are the financial companies. Top management on Wall Street has been beyond incompetent. Wild risk taking camouflaged for years by multi-tiered, complex, abstract financial instruments (generally called collateralized debt obligations) kept the joy ride going and going until the massive financial hot air balloon started plummeting. Finally told to leave their high posts, the CEOs of Merrill-Lynch and Citigroup took away tens of millions of severance pay while Wall Street turned into Layoff Street.

The banks, investment banks and brokerage firms have tanked to levels not seen since the 1929-30 collapse of the stock market. Citigroup, once valued at over $50 per share is now under $17 a share.

Washington Mutual – the nation’s largest savings bank chain was over $40 a share in 2007. Its reckless speculative binge has driven it down under $5 a share. Yet its CEO Kerry Killinger remains in charge, with the continuing support of his rubberstamp Board of Directors. A recent $8 billion infusion of private capital gave a sweetheart deal to these new investors at the excessive expense of the shareholders.

Countrywide, the infamous giant mortgage lender (subprime mortgages) is about to be taken over by Bank of America. Its CEO is taking away a reduced but still very generous compensation deal.

Meanwhile, all these banks and brokerage houses’ investment analysts are busy downgrading each others’ stock prospects.

Over at the multi-trillion dollar companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the shareholders have lost about 75 percent of their stock value in one year. Farcically regulated by the Department of Housing and Urban Affairs, Fannie and Freddie were run into the ground by taking on very shaky mortgages under the command of CEOs and their top executives who paid themselves enormous sums.

These two institutions were set up many years ago to provide liquidity in the housing and loan markets and thereby expand home ownership especially among lower income families. Instead, they turned themselves into casinos, taking advantage of an implied U.S. government guarantee.

The Fannie and Freddie bosses created another guarantee. They hired top appointees from both Republican and Democratic Administrations (such as Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick) and lathered them with tens of millions of dollars in executive compensation. In this way, they kept federal supervision at a minimum and held off efforts in Congress to toughen regulation. These executives are all gone now, enjoying their maharajan riches with impunity while pensions and mutual funds lose and lose and lose with no end in sight, short of a government-taxpayer bailout.

Over a year ago, leading financial analyst Henry Kaufman and very few others warned about “undisciplined” (read unregulated) and “mis-pricing” of lower quality assets. Mr. Kaufman wrote in the Wall Street Journal of August 15, 2007 that “If some institutions are really ‘too big to fail,’ then other means of discipline will have to be found.”

There are ways to prevent such crashes. In the nineteen thirties, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt chose stronger regulation, creating the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and several bank regulatory agencies. He saved the badly listing capitalist ship.

Today, there is no real momentum in a frozen Washington, D.C. to bring regulation up to date. To the contrary, in 1999, Congress led by Senator McCain’s Advisor, former Senator Phil Gramm and the Clinton Administration led by Robert Rubin, Secretary of the Treasury, and soon to join Citibank, de-regulated and ended the wall between investment banks and commercial banking known as the Glass-Steagall Act.

Clinton and Congress opened the floodgates to rampant speculation without even requiring necessary and timely disclosures for the benefit of institutional and individual investors.

Now the entire U.S. economy is at risk. The domino theory is getting less theoretical daily. Without investors obtaining more legal authority as owners over their out of control company officers and Boards of Directors, and without strong regulation, corporate capitalism cannot be saved from its toxic combination of endless greed and maximum power—without responsibility.

Uncle Sam, the deeply deficit ridden bailout man, may have another taxpayers-to-the-rescue operation for Wall Street. But don’t count on stretching the American dollar much more without devastating consequences to and from global financial markets in full panic.

Consider the U.S. dollar like an elastic band. You can keep stretching this rubber band but suddenly it BREAKS. Our country needs action NOW from Washington, D.C.

…

In keeping with the Independence theme, when are we going to realize that the unregulated free market functions more as a tool of oppression than freedom?

As tomorrow is the 4th of July, I’d like to declare Independence from obnoxious, arrogant, politically-inclined celebrities.

I’m talking about ads like this:

http://theliberaloc.com/2008/06/17/john-cusacks-mccaini-bush-challenge/

John Cusack may have a point, but I don’t need him to tell me how to think of the candidates. I am perfectly capable of making up my own damn mind without the aid of a movie star endorsement.

Of all people, celebrities have the least right to tell us how to live. Their hypocrisy is at times, astounding. John Travolta travels around the world in his own fleet of private jets talking about how we need to invest in alternate fuels and cut energy consumption. A movie star’s home consumes more energy than any 10 of ours, yet they’re the first people to tell us how we need to work for a greener Earth.

Well, pardon me, but stick your self-righteous, self-important political cause up your frighteningly thin, artifically-tanned waxed asses.

In Words That Sell Brands, Grip Fans, & Sometimes Change History, author Steve Cone ranks presidential campaign slogans going back almost 200 years. They are grouped into 4 categories in order of descending relevance and success.

Among the top presidential slogans of all time:

Reagan’s “It’s Morning Again in America”

William Harrison’s “Tippecanoe and Tyler Too”

FDR’s “Happy Days are Here Again.”

Some of the more mediocre campaign slogans in American history include:

Abe Lincoln’s “Vote Yourself a Farm”

John Fremont’s “Free Soil, Free Speech, Free Men, and Fremont”

Adlai Stevenson’s “The Experienced Candidate

And finally, the bad, the worse, and the ugly:

Henry Clay’s mind-numbing “Who is James Polk?”

Jimmy Carter’s “Not Just Peanuts”

and Walter Mondale’s “America Needs a Change.”

The premise of the book is to show how powerful one-liner marketing campaigns have the potential to put a company on the map, change the way we see the world, or even put somebody into the White House. I’d like to take this opportunity to look at 2008’s slogans and explore their impact and effectiveness.

The following folks are now out of the race, and part of it may have been slogans that fell flatter than a pancake run over by a semi.

John Edwards: “Join the Campaign to Change America”

Rudy Giuliani: “Your Money - Your Vote”

Mike Huckabee: “Enough is Enough”

Hillary Clinton: “Ready for Change”

None of these slogans provokes any emotional response, and all of them are vague. So that leaves us with Barack Obama and John Mccain.

Obama: “Change We Can Believe in,” or “Yes We Can”

While there’s nothing breathtakingly original about his slogans, they tap into the larger message of his campaign; the chants of Yes We Can play into his populist image very well, and Change has been the strongest pull in this election cycle. It may not be a home-run, but at least Obama’s marketing team has connected with his supporters and the larger trends in the race effectively. What about Mccain?

The other night I realized that although I’ve been following the race closely, I had no idea what John Mccain’s campaign slogan even was. Today I looked it up and discovered that only very recently, team Mccain settled on “Reform, Prosperity, and Peace.”

That sound you’re hearing is the cartoon sound affect that is played when a character has an anvil dropped on their head. While it’s not the worst campaign slogan that has ever been thought up, it falls dreadfully short on a number of levels. It doesn’t rhyme, it’s not particularly clever, but most of all, it does not tap into the core principles of the Mccain personality. A more effective slogan might be “Strength, Courage, Character,” which would at least emphasize the positive traits that Americans identify with Mccain, and play to his perceived advantage on national security. If “Reform, Prosperity, and Peace” is the best that they can come up with, then John Mccain needs to fire his PR people and find someone who either is a brilliant marketing mind, or at least knows how to package something with a clever title.

How about we come up with one for him? One that will at least reinforce Mccain’s image in America’s mind. I came up with a number of ideas in the last few days, but my favorite so far is this:

John Mccain for America:

“These Eggs are Too Runny. Send them Back.”

I look forward to Seymour Hersh’s updates on the run up to war with Iran in the New Yorker about as much as a kid who knows he’s getting coals in his stocking looks forward to Christmas, but I read them anyway. With each successive report, it becomes clear that the administration is moving ever closer towards open war against Tehran. (The covert one has been going on for some time now.)

Most troubling of all is this revelation, which came shortly after the Gulf incident in which Iranian boats supposedly threatened navy ships.

“The public had supported the idea of retaliation, and was even asking why the U.S. didn’t do more. The former official said that, a few weeks later, a meeting took place in the Vice-President’s office. “The subject was how to create a casus belli between Tehran and Washington,” he said…”

You can read the whole thing here.

I have suspected for some time that the Bush administration has one more trick up its sleeve, that they will commit one more unthinkable act of recklessness before leaving office. It has been obvious that Bush and Cheney are willing to leave the problem of Iraq and Afghanistan to the next President, but now it seems they will burden the next leader of the free world with yet another war.

Last night I was playing Rock Band with some friends and I struggled with the vocals for the Rolling Stone’s Gimme Shelter. My voice strained then cracked when I tried to reach the notes in the chorus.

“War, children, it’s just a shot away. It’s just a shot away!”

Maybe we’re all suffering from the same symptom. I’m certain that there are millions of you out there who can hit the right pitch and get a higher score than I can, but how many of us are really willing to entertain the thought, how many can really find their voice and admit how close we are to another escalation of war?

Today I’m chewing ice chips to sooth my throat after a night of cheap beer and mediocre song scores. Should the administration choose to attack Iran, the war on terror will truly begin, and we’re going to need a hell of a lot more than ice cubes to soothe the wounds that will be forthcoming.

First, I’d better define exactly who a market populist is, before I get 1800 e-mails accusing me of Marxist sorcery.

Mar-ket Pop-u-list: noun

One who embraces the economic philosophy of the free market, globalisation, and free trade with a religious furvor. Market populists must show absolute loyalty to the whims of the almighty deity that is the free market at all times. Customs of the faith include: daily devotion and reflection on the sacred texts of the New York Times and the Wall Street Jounal, kneeling in prayer twice a day in the general direction of the NYSE at 9:30 AM EST, and at 4:00 PM EST, and denouncing heretics who do not share the faith whenever they are met.

Market populists may also exhibit symptoms of blindness, and have a tendency to experience bouts of tone-defness, especially when confronted with evidence that free trade may not be beneficial for 3rd world countries, the American middle class, or non CEOs.

The high priests of Market Populism can be found in editorial boards across the nation, as well as in all levels of state and national government. Their words are to be given the highest regard and at no point should any tone less than absolute reverence be shown towards them.

Heretics such as Thomas Frank, Dennis Kucinich, and Gore Vidal should be villified at the very least, and if possible, brought to justice dead or alive.

…

Before we became obsessed with the idea that markets dictate the success of nations and people, we had a decent thing going. During the post World War 2 boom, the American people experienced an unprecedented success, and the middle class was created. This was not a natural phenomenon. Rather, the creation of the middle class was the result of progressive tax policies, strong labor unions, and heavy regulation from a state still wary from the Depression.

Somewhere along the line we decided that unions had become too powerful, corporations should have the same rights (and even more) than human beings, and that the very idea of regulating the economy was undemocratic and unnatural.

And now we stand where we are today. The gap between the rich and the poor is greater than it has been at any time since surfdom, our natural resources have been pushed to the limit, and any whisper that free trade may be responsible is stamped out by a chorus of a thousand angry new economists in less than an instant. As a whole, we have embraced the free market as more than an economic policy, but as a cultural movement, even as a religion. Proponents of free trade will often support policies that they know absolutely nothing about other than the fact that the title includes the words “free trade” in them.

The only consideration that matters for the market populist is profit.

Should you want a company to stop outsourcing its jobs to 3rd world countries that have sparing, if any labor laws to protect American jobs, they will cry foul because you will be interfering with that company’s unalienable right to profit.

Should you ask a corporation to pay its employees a living wage so that they don’t have to use credit to pay for gas and groceries, they will cry foul because the corporation will then be forced to cut jobs or raise prices.

Nothing can interfere with the will of the free market, and the free market has only one note to play. Freedom.

They have so twisted this notion that market populists believe deregulation is as essential to liberty as the right to vote.

They are so convinced that free trade is good for everyone involved that opponents are accused of wanting to keep the poor poorer.

Some market populists don’t understand what it is all about. They support the policy because it’s a vague, positive notion akin to bringing the world together through trade, while being woefully ignorant of the pain it causes to all but a handful of people.

Other market populists get it, and they just don’t care.

You would think that the housing crisis and the credit crunch would be enough to convince some of these true believers that letting the market regulate itself isn’t the greatest idea, but they’re simply not listening.

The market is not an inherently positive force. It must be directed towards improving the standard of living for the entire country, otherwise it is useful only as a reinforcement of the law of the jungle.

The market is not God. The market is not an equalizer. The market does not have a will or a consciousness or a soul. If you insist on worshipping this economic policy with a zest that would put Jihadists to shame, then don’t be surprised if you find yourself in the 6th level of hell some day.

The supreme court has decided to outlaw the death penalty as a punishment for child rapists.

Today I have already seen a half dozen blogs lamenting the values of those liberal judges, or seething with indignation at the decision. Over the next few days, you will see a great number of outraged people who want with all their hearts to see pedophiles get the death sentence. A whole lot of these people will say that it’s immoral to let a child rapist off with his or her life. What kind of society are we living in when we can’t even kill the most gruesome offenders of the law? A just society.

The court’s statement afterward read that the justices felt that death was a disproportionate punishment for the crime of rape.

And people will cry out “How dare they!”

How dare they take away our right to vengeance.

Make no mistake about it. Those who are clamoring for the heads of sex offenders are not interested in justice. They are only interested in revenge.

Many of his victim’s familys showed up to watch Timothy Mcveigh being executed. One woman remarked after that she felt he went “too peacefully,” that he didn’t suffer enough.

There is no semblance of justice in that statement. It’s time that we got over our ape-like instincts for seeking vengeance and moved on. No man has the right to take another’s life. In my opinion, that includes drug dealers, rapists, terrorists, and tyrants. There is a fundamental logical fallacy at work here: deterring someone from an immoral behavior by implementing an even more immoral punishment is only going to keep us running in circles for all time.

It’s easy to call for revenge, especially against someone who robs a child of their innocence. But that doesn’t make it right. It’s hard to say that even a rapist’s life is worth something, but when we finally are willing realize it and protect it, then we’ll really be getting somewhere.

“Your compassion is not a weakness that your enemies will share.”

“That’s why it’s so important. It’s what separates us from them.”

-Batman

In response to my post about Hillary supporters who plan to vote for John Mccain in November, I received thiscomment yesterday.

“ONLY CLINTON RAN A CLEAN CAMPAIGN. OBLAMA RAN A TYPICAL DIRTY NASTY RACE BASED CHICAGO CAMPAIGN. I HAVE NOT BEEN FOOLED NOR HAVE I HAD A DRINK FROM THE STUPID FOUNTAIN. As for the rules we clinton supporters are mad as hell because the DNC led by Donna Brazilla at the rules committee. Suceeded in Breaking the rules not Following them. For instance the rules State that “NO CANDIDATE MAY BE GRANTED OR RECEIVE DELEGATES IN ANY MANNER ACCEPT AT THE BALLOT BOX” sO TELL ME oBLAMA mORONS HOW DID HE GET DELEGATES FROM MICHIGAN WHEN he was not on the ballot. (by his own choice i might add.)

Also Florida an Michigan were not the only states to break the rules. So did IOWA,NEW HAMPSHIRE and S. CAROLINA.
According to the RULES All States must be treated equally, no special consideration will be given to one state over another. SO ACCORDING TO THE RULES THE DECISION SHOULD HAVE BEEN.
FLORIDA HALF DELEGATES
MICHIGAN HALF DELEGATES
IOWA HALF DELEGATES
NEW HAMPSHIRE HALF DELEGATES
S. CAROLINA HALF DELEGATES
The michigan delegates all to hillary because NOBLAMA WAS NOT ON THE BALLOT. BY RULE HE CANOT RECEIVE ANY DELEGATES FROM MICHIGAN.

we all know what happened and we will not forgive or forget on fall in line. COME NOVEMBER COWARD DEAN D. BRAZILLA AN N. PELOSI WILL HEAR OUR ROAR.

PARTY UNITY MY ASS McCain 2008- Hillary 2012″

I’m going to ignore the easy, obvious puns that such a thing could provoke, (except maybe something about the stupid fountain later on) and get right to the message that lies within.

The Democratic National Committee broke their own rules and awarded Obama every Michigan delegate that was “undecided,” and a couple that had voted for Hillary. What they did was unlawful and they deserve to be punished for their willfull disenfranchising of millions of Hillary’s supporters, who now refer to themselves as PUMAs (Party Unity my Ass,) and are dedicated to doing everything in their power to make sure Obama is not elected in November.

I have a question for the Pumas. If you’re really willing to defy the Democratic party and not vote for the nominee in the general election, why on earth would you throw your lot behind John Mccain? If you’re smart enough to perceive (finally) that the Democrats don’t care about you, then certainly you know full well that the Republicans are guilty of the same sin. If you’re a woman who feels that the mainstream media and the supposedly progressive party undermined the feminist movement during the primaries, why would you vote to keep that system going? John Mccain is not going to do the women’s movement any favors.

The systematic degrading of Hillary Clinton goes far beyond the Democratic party cronies and MSNBC commentators. In order to really give women (not just HRC) a chance to compete evenly, you have to get to the root of that problem, and the Republican party is one of the largest cogs in the machine.

If you’re REALLY fed up with Democrats not representing the values of true change and equal rights, then why don’t you stick it to them, while still staying true to your ideology?

Yes, I am once again, talking about 3rd parties.

Independents are, believe it or not, the largest voting block in the United States. So why do they keep splitting themselves down the middle and not voting for independent parties? Why keep drinking from the stupidest fountain of all?

If the PUMAs want to teach the DNC a lesson by putting Mccain into the White House, they certainly can do that. There are more than enough of them to tip the scales far enough to ensure that Obama cannot win. But if the PUMAs want to teach AMERICA a lesson about the power of voters, then they should throw their lot behind an Independent, and the game would be changed forever. While their choice might not win the White House, creating a legitimate 3rd option to challenge the stagnant Republican and Democrat controlled status quo would do far more for the plight of women and other minorities than checking the box for John Mccain will ever do.

The executive privileges that George Bush has claimed during his tenure in office are far more damaging than many people originally may have thought. I speculated a few years ago that whoever comes into office directly after Bush may be far more dangerous simply because of the situation that they inherit. George W. Bush may have had his own interests in mind when he consistently expanded the reach of Presidential powers, but he set the table for the next President as well. Whoever is elected in November will have the SAME powers that GWB has now, and those powers are far greater than the founders of our country ever intended.

Take, for example, FISA.

Some people will tell you that we need this bill in order to keep track of terrorist communications in and out of the US, and that voting against it is tantamount to treason. The fact is that very little information about terrorist cells has been gained through these ILLEGAL wiretapping operations, and meanwhile it has given the President cart blanche to spy on Americans without a warrant, and gives immunity to telecom companies for rolling over and allowing their customers’ lines to be tapped.

But never fear, when George Bush leaves office, everything will return to normal. Whoever the next President is will gracefully lay down those executive priviledges and restore the checks and balances in our government.

And giant, shroomed-out, purple-colored monkeys might fly out of my ass.

John Mccain has made no pretense about executive powers. He believes in taking the fight to the extremists, and using any methods necessary (including waterboarding) to get the job done.

Barack Obama has promised to restore the balance of power, until a few days ago, when he came out and supported the FISA bill. His argument? Essentially that he can be trusted not to abuse those same powers that Bush has for the last 8 years.

Hrmph. Where have I heard that one before?

“It is with great reluctance that I have agreed to this calling. I love democracy. I love the Republic. The powers you give me I will lay down when this crisis has abated!”

Hint: it wasn’t Harry Truman.

Make no mistake about it. Liberal or Conservative, Democrat or Republican, Palpatine, Hillary, Mccain, or Obama, they all want one thing:

“UNLIMITED POWER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

Every now and then you will hear rumblings from portions of the conservative community about the way that Jesus Christ is portrayed in popular culture. Their argument is that Christ is constantly mocked and maligned on television, in music, and in every other place that the mainstream media touches. Furthermore, they claim that their savior is the only religious icon that is given this treatment. Attempts to mock Mohammed are often shot down out of fears of offending the Muslim community. They say that it’s unfair that their God is treated so differently in the media compared to the others.

And you know what? They’re absolutely right.

Example: Chop Suey by System of a Down:

“Father into your hands, I commend my spirit
Father into your hands
Why have you forsaken me
In your eyes forsaken me
In your thoughts forsaken me
In your heart forsaken, me oh
Trust in my self righteous suicide
I, cry, when angels deserve to die.”

This is a very obvious and open attempt to make light of Christ’s choice to surrender his life. But that’s just rock and roll. How about television?

I am, I confess, a fan of the animated series Family Guy, which fails to show any reverence for anything, but in particular seems to single out Christ as a focal point of ridicule. Here’s a clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkvI4jdciho

If you don’t feel like linking or would be too offended to watch, the clip shows Stewie traveling through time to watch Christ perform in front of a crowd. He sings and dances and makes hand puppets while a stunned audience looks on.

This is one of the less extreme examples of Family Guy’s potshots at Jesus. You might also remember the clip of his return when people snicker at his height “people were shorter back then…” or the Chris Tucker/Christ movie trailer when the show returned to the air.

But television and mainstream music are notorious for their irreverence for religious figures of any kind. What about the fine arts?

Photographer Andres Serrano caused quite a stir when he created a piece entitled “Piss Christ,” that shows a crucifix submerged in urine.

I could keep giving examples, but that would make this a very long, very discouraging post. Take a look for yourselves. If you pay close attention, you will find that Christianity is dragged through the mud in pop culture on almost a daily basis. You will probably find a few angry people denouncing Islam as a violent and perverted religion, but you probably won’t see any Saturday Night Live sketches about it.

At some point in our recent history mocking Christ became no longer politically incorrect. I can imagine that some of this has been caused by an image of bigoted Christianity that is perpetuated by hateful televangelist ministers and people who grossly misinterpret the message of the Bible. (Like the people who picketed Heath Ledger’s funeral with God Hates Fags signs.) But the level at which Jesus is openly mocked in our media has become, in my opinion, unacceptable, and I think I would feel that way even if I was not a believer.

There is a great deal of animosity between parts of the secular community and Christians. But if any progress is going to be made on this front, then we have to remember that tolerance is not a one-way street.

I’m not asking for anyone to get on their knees and convert, I’m just saying that there needs to be more respect shown for Christians in our popular culture.

What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. I hit Mccain for changing his position on offshore drilling, among other things. In the article, I proposed that we stop referring to politicians who change their minds as “flip-floppers,” and start using the more accurate term “liars.”

Barack Obama promised that he would change the way politics are waged in Washington. The basic premise of his campaign is that he will not do things the same old way, that change has come.

There is no greater obstacle to change in America than our campaign financing system. Yesterday, Barack Obama decided that it was better to take the money than to stay true to his promise of reforming the broken system.

If you plan to vote for another slick politician, then good for you. Just please stop telling me that this man is Jesus returned.

Barack Obama is a Senator. He is not the embodiment of fairness, equality, justice, change, and hope. He’s just an ordinary politician who’s far more eloquent than what we’ve come to expect.

If you really want change that isn’t a hollow campaign slogan, I suggest that you stop letting the celebrities tell you how to vote.