Oil companies 1, Environment 0

Oil companies 1, Environment 0 SocialistWorker.org

WASN'T IT Barack Obama who, a year and a half ago, mocked rivals John McCain and Sarah Palin for the frenzied chants of "Drill, baby, drill" at their rallies?

"Drill, Barry, drill!" Perhaps he thought if it were all about him, the American people wouldn't mind. How audacious.

"What kind of slogan is that?" Obama told a Flint, Mich., crowd. "I can see if you're cheerleaders for Exxon Mobil, but that's not a vision for the American future."

It's only a rumor that the President has hired Bush the Elder to head the sales job on this one.

Now, Obama is president, and he's announced his own version of "drill, baby, drill": Plans to open up the U.S. shoreline--from the northern tip of Delaware to the central coast of Florida, and the north coast of Alaska--to oil and natural gas drilling, much of it for the very first time.

"This is not a decision that I've made lightly," Obama said last week. "But the bottom line is this: given our energy needs, in order to sustain economic growth, produce jobs and keep our businesses competitive, we're going to need to harness traditional sources of fuel even as we ramp up production of new sources of renewable, homegrown energy."

Actually, now's the time to head toward a green economy. Spend whatever money will go into drilling on clean alternatives. Electric cars are expensive due to economies of scale. Prices will be able to come down as more are mass produced. If all cars being built were electric, the prices would probably be similar to car prices for the gas based beasts.

I'll let you read the rest of the article. Needless to say, this move should come as no surprise. By now, it should be clear that Obama should be a moderate conservative Republican, should Republicans still have a moderate wing. The choice in 2012 will probably be Obama and a radical Republican. It's time to be looking toward 2014 and 2016.

Federal judge slams Obama administration lawyers’ defense of illegal wiretapping

Federal judge slams Obama administration lawyers’ defense of illegal wiretapping, by John Andrews, via World Socialist Web Site:

A federal judge has rebuffed the Obama administration’s latest attempt to defend illegal Bush-era eavesdropping, ruling that a now defunct US Islamic charity, Al-Haramain, and two of its lawyers are entitled to money damages because government agents failed to obtain a warrant before tapping their phones.

Who wants to bet this decision will be overturned?

District Judge Vaughn R. Walker of San Francisco determined, based solely on publicly available information, that the US government violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) by installing wiretaps to monitor Al-Haramain telephone conversations without obtaining a warrant from the secret FISA court in Washington, D.C.

The gentleman should receive a Medal of Freedom from some future President. It's a first step, and likely to be overturned by a quisling higher court, but at least one judge is on record that the government has overstepped it's bounds. Don't expect Obama or his minions to support this step away from government power.

I'll let you read the rest of the article. Perhaps there was a reason to spy on Al Haramain. I don't know if it was needed or not. If it was that important, FISA provided a way to get a court order to do so. Perhaps FISA is so bad a law that it couldn't stand up to a court challenge. There is one good final quote, though, which sums up the situation quite nicely:

Jon Eisenberg, one of the lead attorneys for the plaintiffs, told the press after the ruling, “The Obama Administration stepped right into the shoes of the Bush Administration, on national security generally and on this case in particular,” adding that “Even though I have the security clearance, I don’t have the ‘need to know,’ so I can’t see anything. This is Obama. Obama! Mr. Transparency! Mr. Change! It’s exactly what Bush would have done.”

Power corrupts. The question is whether Mr. Obama was corrupt before he became President. We know, at least to a small extent, where he is now.

Hoosiers all over again?

Hoosiers all over again? SocialistWorker.org, by Dave Zirin, via Socialist Worker (US):

"WILL IT be a Jimmy Chitwood-Bobby Plump kind of moment?" So said announcer Jim Nantz as it became clear that the mighty Duke Blue Devils, with their championship pedigree, would face the unsung Butler Bulldogs in Monday's NCAA men's basketball final.

Butler is a top five in wins and winning percentage all-time. They've also won two national championships ('24 and '29). They've been building toward this tournament run for the past decade or so.

For the uninitiated, Butler University is located in Indiana, and the finals are in Indiana just seven miles from campus. Therefore, according to the script laid out by CBS, Duke, led by USA Basketball head coach Mike Krzyzewski, is the big, bad Goliath, and Butler plays David, with little more than a prayer's chance. It's an attractive script. It's also complete hooey.

They play in Hinkle Fieldhouse (the best basketball arena ever built - it opened in 1927) on the near northside of Indianapolis. They play a style of basketball Tony Hinkle (John Wooden says he was the greatest coach he ever coached under) would be proud of. Needless to say, Duke's program has been quite successful also, but Butler is not a surprise.

I'll let you read the rest of the article. Enjoy the game, and realize that Duke is also in debt to Indiana basketball for the twins. If you love basketball, then tonight should be a great game for you. Sure, it'll be an old style team slugfest. But, then again, it's being played in the world capital of basketball, and shouldn't be any other way.

Connolly and the 1916 Easter Uprising

Connolly and the 1916 Easter Uprising by Ted Grant (1966) via In Defence of Marxism:

It is impossible to understand the Easter Rising without understanding the ideas of its leader, James Connolly, who considered himself a Marxist and based himself on the ideas of Internationalism and the class struggle. (Written by Ted Grant in 1966 on the 50th anniversary of the uprising.)

Connolly is one of the keys to the rise of Ireland as an independent nation. Britain had subjected Ireland to humiliations to many to list during their occupation and dominance. The Easter Uprising was the starting salvo in the final struggle to rid Ireland of that hated foe.

On 17th April 1916 the Irish Citizen Army, together with the Irish Volunteers, rose up in arms against the might of the British Empire to strike a blow for Irish freedom and for the setting up of an Irish Republic. Their blow for freedom was to reverberate round the world, and preceded the first Russian Revolution by almost a year.

Note that the capitalists were foresquare for the British Empire. It was a labor leader and a Marxist led in the striking of the first blow. If not for Connolly and workers, Ireland may still be in the same straits as the North.

Nowadays all sections of Irish society in the 26 counties hypocritically give support to the "brave and undying heroism of Connolly." The Irish capitalists pretend to honour him. Connolly would have split contemptuously in their faces. He fought them, ever since he attained manhood, in the interests of the Irish workers and of International Socialism. But his most withered contempt would have been reserved for those in the Labour movement, including the leaders of the Labour Party and of the so-called Communist Parties, and of the various sects claiming to speak in the name of Irish Labour, who fifty years after Easter 1916, have not understood that unity of the Irish workers North and South can only be obtained by conducting the struggle on a class basis for an Irish Socialist Republic, in indissoluble unity with the British workers in their struggle for a British democratic Socialist Republic.

I'll let you read the rest of the article. The final paragraph is relevant to today, I think. It is one of the capitalist's main jobs to keep workers from ever being a true orgainized class. It is up to workers around the world to realize this and join together, and as the old song says face the last fight.

Is the U.S. losing its grip in Iraq?

Is the U.S. losing its grip in Iraq? SocialistWorker.org, subtitled The U.S. media proclaimed Iraq’s March 7 election a vindication of the U.S. occupation before the voting even ended. But the reality is different. Michael Schwartz, the author of War Without End: The Iraq War in Context spoke with SocialistWorker.org’s Eric Ruder about what the media failed to grasp—and put recent events into a broader regional context.

U.S. OFFICIALS are trumpeting Iraq’s elections on March 7, 2010, as a triumph for democracy in the Middle East. But the Iraqi government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki showed its weakness, both before the election, and during the results.

Have you been following the election in Iraq? Have you heard how well it turned out from the media? As always (now) with Iraq, things might not be quite as rosy as they're presented.

OF COURSE it's a completely shaded election. In the run-up to the election, there was an interesting kind of ambivalence, let's call it, on the part of the Maliki administration about this election. On the one hand, they spent the last year or so trying to woo local groups that they thought would allow the government, which exists only in the Green Zone, to appeal to the many Sunni and Shia constituencies that were angry at the central government and at the U.S.

At the same time, they began arresting many of the leaders of the Sunni Awakening movement, in an effort to create a double-bind situation in which the local leadership that developed in the Sunni areas would have a choice between going to jail or supporting him.

Hmmm...arresting the opposition ahead of the election. Free and fair, as long as you're not one of the ones who ended up in jail. Perhaps that's okay by modern day US standards for occupied countries.

So it does look like the outcome of the election is going to create yet another set of problems for the U.S. ambition that Iraq become the headquarters of U.S. hegemony in the Middle East.

I'll let you read the rest of the article. Needless to say, Iraq may blow up in our faces, which would mean staying in Iraq past 2011. Hmmmm...maybe things are going just the way the empire wants. It will be interesting to watch and see just how Obama plays his cards in the coming months (and, probably, years).

Double standards on terrorism | SocialistWorker.org

Double standards on terrorism SocialistWorker.org, by Brian Lenzo, via Socialist Worker (US):

NINE MEMBERS of a radical Christian terrorist cell based in rural Michigan were arrested and indicted by federal authorities this past week. Although, you won't hear them referred to like that in the mainstream media.

Can't upset the crusaders, now can we?

Unlike Muslim groups accused of radical or terrorist activity, the U.S. media has been downplaying the connection between the religious ideas of the perpetrators and their planned actions.

Here's the key: The corporate media is a right-wing collective. Yes, many in the media will call themselves liberals outside of work, but when they look at their paychecks they know what row to hoe. But then again, it's hard to go against the establishment.

Want to know the real difference between "radical Muslim terrorists" and "Midwest Christian militias?" Their race and ethnicity. Want to know the real difference between "defending freedom" and "terrorism?" Whether you go along with U.S. plans to dominate the globe or not.

Modern day imperialism, it seems, is en vogue!

I'll let you read the rest of the article. Let your blood boil a bit. Then realize that there are two imperial parties. The Democrats just know how to smile when they push to expand the Empire.