SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: JohnM who wrote (5414)8/19/2003 7:53:18 PM
From: JohnM  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 793622
 
Jim Cramer, in this week's New York Magazine, thinks he knows how the Dems should approach economic issues in the upcoming presidential elections.

Party, Over
The Dems are going after Bush the wrong way on the economy. Instead of blathering on about repealing tax breaks, here’s what they should be talking about.
By James J. Cramer


newyorkmetro.com

Three short years ago, the U.S. economy seemed to be a model of growth: The stock market went up every day, pension and 401(k) plans exploded in value, and interest rates, aided by a shrinking federal deficit, marched inexorably down. Every first of the month, the Labor secretary would come on television and talk about the hundreds of thousands of new jobs that were being created. The Treasury secretary, Hamilton-like, strode among the world’s leaders, offering lessons in how to fix economies the American way.

Now jobs get lost monthly, the stock market seems stuck in the mud, mortgage rates just went up eight times in three weeks, and your pension or 401(k) is insolvent or vastly depleted. To make matters worse, the price of oil is sky-high and rising by the moment. The Labor secretary seems bewildered by the job losses; the Treasury secretary can barely be heard among the grim din of a worldwide economic slump.

Yet somehow, despite the silver platter of gloom, the Democrats have had limited luck in denting this president’s remarkable popularity.

Is that because things aren’t as bad as we think? No, it is because the Democrats have forgotten everything that President Clinton and Bob Rubin taught them. They spend all their time talking about repealing the tax breaks we just got and none of their time talking about fairness. They offer nothing for job creation, and less for growth in general.

What should the Democrats be screaming about instead of raising your taxes, a gambit that failed for Walter Mondale and for George Bush Sr.?

Here’s my multi-point plan to unseat President Bush in a way that makes the economy the issue in 2004:

First, the greatest single issue for baby-boomers is the utter demolition of retirement savings that has gone on in the past three years. Americans believe in fairness; they hate it when top dogs get millions and the pension plans get raided. The flagrant airline-industry-exec packages, the embarrassing IBM and Xerox skims, the new “assumptions” that allow executives to cut pension benefits to boost earnings—can’t any Democrat see this stuff and get as enraged about it as I am? How about the rape of the 401(k)? Many of the plans in the country are beholden to a few really horrible “aggressive growth” managers who kick back fees to the companies themselves for sticking with limited menu offerings. This cozy corroded capitalism has forced millions of classic white-collar workers into working for many more years simply because the government refuses to force the mutual funds to reveal their fee structures—which include the kickbacks. How can the Democrats not see this?

Then there is corporate corruption. The head of the Justice Department’s Corporate Fraud Task Force, Larry Thompson, says that no fraud is too small to go after. But the biggest fraud of all, the $12 billion MCI-WorldCom fraud, gets fast-tracked out of bankruptcy, with no criminal indictments and no scrutiny, even though many of the bad guys still work there and the systems that corrupted things are still in place. Bernie Ebbers, the man who ran the biggest fraud? Not even indicted. (Nor has Jeff Skilling, the man who ran the second-biggest fraud ever, Enron, been indicted. What a travesty!)

To make matters worse, by keeping MCI in the game, the Feds are ensuring the destruction of what was once the single biggest creator of jobs: the telecom industry. But if MCI is allowed out of bankruptcy with almost no debt, you can kiss good-bye those jobs they are fighting for so desperately at Verizon. Doesn’t anyone see that either?

Most Americans think, after the debacle of the past few years, that the stock market is rigged. They think legal casino gambling is better-regulated. The only politician to see this is Eliot Spitzer, who got more votes than the wildly popular George Pataki last time around in his attorney general’s race. Spitzer’s been outspoken in trying to clean up the game. But when the brokerage interests tried to snuff him last month, did any Democratic pol come to his side, even though he represents the key to the votes of those 55 million self-directed pensioners? Nah, another missed boat.

Speaking of spurned silver platters, has anyone from the Democratic Party read ex–CIA agent Robert Baer’s Sleeping With the Devil? This credible source postulates that the coddled Republican-Saudi relationship is based on the love of high oil prices, the GOP’s embrace of opec, and, alas, the dealings of the Republican-controlled Carlyle Group, a defense protectorate of retired GOP bigwigs that takes Saudi money and looks the other way at Saudi terrorism. Why not take up Baer’s challenge and link the GOP to higher energy prices and a coddling of Wahhabism in the name of big profits in the back end from defense contracts and oil profits? Shoot, I bet that one resonates with the Fox News Network, MSNBC, and CNN!

With the radical rise in mortgage rates, plus the beginning of the giant government-bond auctions, why can’t one of the Democratic candidates reach out to Bob Rubin and Larry Summers for some explanation of how the Republicans are going to cause your home to lose value if they don’t do something to rein in government spending? That’s the only linkage to the ballooning deficit voters understand. Rubin tamed the deficit, which let rates drop; now we are going in the other direction because Bush refuses to veto any spending whatsoever. What a great opportunity for a Democrat to say, “If elected, I will retire Alan Greenspan, put Bob Rubin in as Fed chairman, and restore the Clinton legacy of ever-lower deficits and ever-lower rates.” And instead of obsessing about repealing the tax cuts, the Democrats should focus on boosting the capital-gains tax to its older, higher levels.

Somehow I picture Karl Rove laughing his head off in the West Wing, saying to his cohorts, “They should be killing us—instead they’re making us look good!”

You know what? He’s right. The Democrats are beyond pathetic. I guess that’s why this lifelong Democrat and Democratic Party fund-raiser just might be forced to abstain from voting next year.



To: JohnM who wrote (5414)8/19/2003 9:56:41 PM
From: KonKilo  Read Replies (5) | Respond to of 793622
 
It seems as though we have hold of a very deadly tarbaby...does anyone seriously still think that we are going to win this thing? (Or Afghanistan, either, for that matter).

Analysts: Iraq a 'magnet' for al Qaeda

Targets shifting from soldiers to civilians, ex-diplomat says

Tuesday, August 19, 2003 Posted: 9:40 PM EDT (0140 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Iraq is becoming a major "magnet" for al Qaeda terrorists, who now pose more of a threat than remnants of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party, two analysts said Tuesday after a truck bomb killed 17 at the U.N. headquarters in Baghdad.

"A half-dozen U.S. officials who investigate or analyze al Qaeda ... say that Iraq has become an important battleground for al Qaeda in the past several months," CNN terrorism analyst Peter Bergen said.

"The officials use words such as 'magnet' and 'super magnet' to describe the attraction that Iraq has for al Qaeda and other 'jihadists,' " said Bergen, author of "Holy War, Inc.: Inside the Secret World of Osama bin Laden."

James Rubin, a former U.S. deputy secretary of state, agreed that the terrorism milieu in Iraq has changed, pointing to increased attacks against civilian targets and fewer large-scale attacks against U.S. soldiers.

"It is my suspicion that the types of attacks in Iraq are either backed or funded by Islamic extremists."

They are coming from other countries and "see it as a rich place to conduct their bloody business," he said.

"Lets face it, if you are a terrorist in the Middle East and you have a mission to kill Americans, Iraq is now the place you're going to want to go," said Rubin, speaking from London, England.

"We have had an attack on the Jordanian Embassy and attacks on water supplies and power supplies, [and] now the attacks on the U.N., which hark back very much to the attempt of the al Qaeda organization to blow up the U.N. headquarters in New York," said Rubin, who was the State Department's top spokesman during part of the Clinton administration.

Rubin was referring to a foiled plot by a group linked to al Qaeda to blow up New York landmarks, including the General Assembly building, in the mid-1990s.

Bergen said one counterterrorism official told him most of the militants are Saudis who crossed into Iraq from Syria.

Another counterterrorism official told Bergen that Iraq is as attractive to al Qaeda as Bosnia was during the mid-1990s and Chechnya has been in recent years.

Bergen said the official told him that Iraq provides "unlimited targeting, it's right in their back yard and is a very attractive cause for them."

In the past two months, about 3,000 Saudis have gone to fight coalition troops in Iraq, said Dr. Saad al-Faqih, a leading Saudi dissident based in London who has long been a reliable source of information about al Qaeda.

Al-Faqih's information comes from Saudi security sources and sources within the jihadi community in Saudi Arabia.

The Saudis who have gone to Iraq to fight have traveled there via Kuwait, Jordan and Syria, al-Faqih said.

Al-Faqih said one source describes Iraq as "almost like Peshawar during the 1980s," a reference to the city in Pakistan that attracted Muslims from around the world eager to volunteer to fight the Soviets then occupying Afghanistan.

Al-Faqih said Saudis make up about 85 percent of the foreign fighters in the country, but a few of them are Kuwaitis.

The Saudi fighters consider their actions jihad because they see coalition soldiers as unjustifiably occupying a Muslim country, al-Faqih said.

Another factor is that Saudi authorities have cracked down on al Qaeda since May, when terrorists attacked complexes housing Westerners in the Saudi capital, Riyadh, giving al Qaeda members an additional impulse to leave the kingdom.

"It seems perfectly plausible to say, well, you've got al Qaeda people moving into Iraq, and now suddenly you have car and truck bombs, which is a hallmark of al Qaeda. So it's entirely possible that this is al Qaeda," said CNN analyst Ken Pollack, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank.

"On the other hand," Pollack said, "this may simply reflect an increase in the capabilities of ... indigenous [resistance] groups" such as Saddam loyalists, Sunni Muslims and Islamic extremists.

"We know that their operations against U.S. and other coalition forces have been getting increasingly more sophisticated," said Pollack, author of the 2002 book "The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq."

L. Paul Bremer, the U.S. civilian administrator in Iraq, blamed Tuesday's bombing on backers of Saddam's regime.

"We know in general terms who's behind it," Bremer said. "It's people who are fighting against the liberated Iraq that most Iraqis have welcomed. It's people who do not share the vision of a free Iraq with a vibrant economy.

"These are probably people left over from the old regime who are simply fighting a rear guard action by attacking Iraq's assets," he said.

cnn.com