Populist Pablum and Two-Tiered Justice

Anybody noticing that President Obama is running a really bland re-election campaign? The Buffett Rule, under which millionaires would pay a flat tax of 30%, is so weak as to be laughable. Not only does it have no chance of passing and is thus just a sideshow in political Kabuki Theater, it would only raise about $40 billion in revenue over the course of a decade. Contrast this with the loss of more than a trillion in revenue because of the Bush tax cuts.


Nothing at all has been said lately about non-renewal of the so-called Bush tax cuts, nothing about taxing high-speed Wall Street trades. As a matter of fact, W himself came out of the woodwork yesterday to complain they are still called the Bush Tax Cuts, when they should be "another body's tax cuts." His heh-heh-heh appearance and still-untreated language disability reminds us why people were once so enthusiastic about Barack.


The public policy center Demos says a financial-speculation tax is not only long overdue, but would garner billions more revenue than the small ball Buffett Rule. The Eurozone is in favor of such a tax. But, wouldn't you know -- Obama and his bank-friendly Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner don't like it so much. It would cost the donors on whom they so heavily depend to remain in The White House. Writes Wallace Turbeville of The American Prospect:

The Obama administration has voiced doubts about the enforceability of an FST as well fears that the costs would be passed along to ordinary investors and the overall effect would be to raise the costs of capital and hurt growth. These objections are groundless. Enforcement has not proved to be a major problem in the U.K. as just discussed. And ordinary investors may actually benefit from an FST as fund managers have fewer incentives to engage in excessive trading that increases fees for investors. As Ian Salisbury has pointed out, “Excessive trading can be a drag on fund performance because funds' brokerage commissions and other costs are deducted from investors' returns. Trading can also pump up capital-gains taxes that investors pay.” 

Ironically, Obama made his Buffett Rule pitch in Florida, in a public speech crammed amidst several million-dollar fundraisers hosted by the very same wealthy anti-regulation people he is asking to contribute "just a bit more." It was one of those G-droppin' harangues in which his voice frequently strained against the fakery of his own words. Lots of folksy, incredulous stammerin' that rich folks get away with such an outrage. Which is pretty outrageous, considering just last week he signed into law that hilariously-named JOBS Act, which brings deregulation and fraud back to Wall Street. Obama disingenuously called it an opportunity for small investors to cash in on job-creatin' IPOs via that so-trustworthy and anonymous Internet. But in the words of Matt Taibbi, "it couldn't suck worse."


Come to think of it, the de facto campaign slogan of Barack Obama is "I Suck Less." In actuality, though, it should be "I Suck, Romney Sucks. We Both Suck Up to Capitalist Cronies, and You're All Just a Bunch of Suckers."


Not one word, moreover, from Obama on how that much-vaunted 55-member Financial Crime Task Force he announced during his State of the Union address is coming along. The fact is, it is non-existent. If you haven't yet signed the CREDO petition demanding answers from Dear Leader, here is where you can find it. Such petitions usually roll off his tefloned back like water off a duck. But it's fun to imagine that just one infinitesimal droplet of sweat might mar his brow during this election year, give him one nano-second of pause.  


CREDO points out that even were Obama to fill all 55 slots, the effort would still be but a hollow emphysemic wheeze aimed at the criminal conflagration. During the Savings and Loan Scandal of the 80s, more than 1,000 FBI agents were dispatched to investigate those crimes, which pale in comparison to the extent of the still-ongoing Big Bank cataclysm of conspiracy. And Obama's typical passive aggression is deliberate to the extreme. Time (read: statute of limitations) is starting to run out:

President Obama’s record on Wall Street accountability is abysmal. But because of enormous grassroots pressure from activists like you and polling that suggests he needs to take on Wall Street as a part of his election campaign, we have a real opportunity to move President Obama to meaningful action on Wall Street accountability. Time, however, is running out.

President Obama’s first task force at the Department of Justice did little if anything to prosecute Wall Street for crimes that led to the financial crisis. But because of your activism, he announced a new task force and named progressive champion and New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman one of its five co-chairs.

Schneiderman, you may recall, was widely accused of selling out to the Obama Administration when he dropped his serious investigation of the mortgage fraudsters and reached a very bank-friendly settlement. You may also remember that he promised to walk away from the Task Force if it turned out to be a big fat sham. Well -- it has been three months. We are still waiting.


Actually, Schneiderman may be just a little slow on the uptake. Two years after my local newspaper broke the story of a scam involving a Bridezilla who faked terminal cancer in order to score a free wedding and honeymoon, our Attorney General has finally had the woman arrested, charged with fraud and grand larceny, and thrown in the slammer. (H/T Valerie)

"By pretending to have a terminal illness, Vega inexcusably took advantage of the community's hearts and minds, and profited off of their generosity," said Attorney General Eric Schneiderman. "Our office will hold this individual accountable for fleecing the public through lies and deception."

Ironically -- perhaps just humanely -- the cancer bride's alleged victims think she should be receiving mental help instead of jail time. But Eric the Dread has to show that he is strong on Law and Order as it affects the lesser people. Crooks like Jon Corzine and Angelo Mozilo who deceived and fleeced the public are rich and free, because they are VIPs. Punishing them might give the Stock Market the jitters. As President Obama put it in his Buffett fluff-puffer of a speech Monday, "I believe the free market is the greatest force for economic progress in human history."


There you have it. Capitalists rule, working people drool. Straight from Boca Raton (the Mouth of the Rat*), Florida, USA, home of corporate Disneyworld fantasies and Stand Your Ground.

*Reader Jay informs me the literal Spanish translation of Boca Raton is Mouth of the Mouse. Its original name was Boca de Ratones, which would translate into Rat's Mouth. In any event, this pricey Florida resort town was named after a rodent's maw of some sort. According to "Urban Dictionary", Boca Raton is defined this way:

1) Are you from Long Island?
2) Nah, I'm from Boca
1) Same shit
<><> <><> <>  <> <><>

(Photo Courtesy of CREDO)

OWS Occupies Wall Street -- Literally

For the first time since the movement began, Occupiers set up camp on the actual Wall Street in the wee hours today. Forty protesters parked themselves right across the street from the New York Stock Exchange and remained for five hours until the NYPD showed up with the plastic cuffs. There's more on the official OWS site.


And following up yesterday's post, you can read more opinions on the co-optation controversy here and here and here. 


One thing I forgot to mention yesterday was that the 99% Spring's "week of action" just happens to coincide with the Tea Party movement's traditional Tax Day protests on April 15. This feeds into the canard that the Occupy movement is the Democrats' answer to the Tea Party Republicans. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth.


The closest you will come to discovering the official White House position on the Occupy movement is to go to its unofficial think tank, the Center for American Progress. In an interview with the New York Times last month, president Neera Tanden took the "concern troll" approach. (Concern troll definition: a wet blanket who pretends to be on your side by offering "constructive criticism", all the while sowing the seeds of doubt) Tanden says Occupy is not getting as much media attention because of suddenly being rousted from the camps; she does not offer an opinion as to the illegality and immorality of police treatment of the demonstrators. Just that the demonstrators had better find a way to gin up more press:

They have fewer people, and it’s not a new story anymore that there were people protesting in the streets or sleeping in parks. They need to think of new ways to garner attention and connect with people around the country.

Meh. 

Co-Opting OWS: Hollywood Hotties of the One Percent

Count me among those who consider the new "99% Spring" movement just one one more phony patch of Democratic Party astroturf.

The anonymous blogger "Insider" of Counterpunch recently listed eight smoking guns proving a direct link from the 99% Spring to various and sundry Obama veal pen organizations -- most notably, MoveOn.org. That DNC front group, you may remember, came under fire from the real OWSers last fall when it ham-handedly attempted to co-opt the movement for its own fundraising and candidate- boosting purposes.

And now, they're back with week-long "training sessions" throughout the country, to instruct participants on how to peacefully protest and emulate Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. No mention of the general national strike planned by the real Occupy for May Day. As a matter of fact, they're pushing a toned-down, sanitized version of the movement, aimed squarely at the same disenchanted young people who catapulted President Obama to victory in 2008, but who have now left him in droves -- disillusioned, unemployed or underemployed and facing mountains of education debt it will take them a lifetime to repay. 

MoveOn must think the recipients of its email blasts are all naive and star-struck and in their 20s. I got yet another unbelievably annoying invite from them today, asking me to attend their peacenik training school for hip young hippies in a nearby town close to hip Woodstock. For inspiration, they included a short film to convince me it was so going to be worth it. Did it feature such powerhouse figures as Noam Chomsky and Chris Hedges? Of course it didn't!

Instead, this glitzily-produced film, its soundtrack a kitschy guitar and flute piece of elevator music, featured three of today's biggest 20-something stars lecturing grizzled old me how to fight corporatism and Wall Street greed. Two of them -- Penn Badgely and Olivia Wilde -- shilled for Obama's 2008 campaign. The third, Zoe Kravitz, was only 20 at that time, but her musician father Lenny is an ardent Obama supporter and once wrote a song in support of the president. 

Badgely actually plays a rich young one percenter on the hit TV series "Gossip Girl". According to Wikipedia, the series "revolves around the lives of socialite young adults growing up on New York's Upper East Side who attend elite academic institutions while dealing with sex, drugs, and other teenage issues." Badgely was voted one of People Magazines's 25 Beauties and Hotties at 25 in 2011. And Badgely has done film work for MoveOn before -- he appeared in one of its Obama campaign commercials in 2008. What a perfect voice for a faux-Occupy ripoff.

Olivia Wilde is another one percent actress who lists among her forebears the colonialist oligarchs of the British Empire. Olivia, whose parents are hegemonic Beltway diplomats, presumes to tell us to get in the streets and put our bodies on the line. She ranked Number One on Maxim's "Hot 100" in 2009. Oh, and she has previously starred in MoveOn ads supporting Obama. Quelle coincidence.

Zoe Kravitz is apparently new to astroturf activism and politics, and as far as I can tell, this is her first MoveOn gig. But her mother was a Cosby Kid (Lisa Bonet). So she has got that elitist minority vanilla cred, too.

These meritocrats do not mention Obama in their 99% Spring film. They don't have to. But they used some of the same rhetoric he did during his last campaign to hypnotize the young and the restless. The word "change" was uttered. "Are You In?" the young millionaires ask. That's the same phrase on all the Obama ads following me all over the Internet. "Are You In?"

This latest ploy is so obvious as to be laughable. The Occupy Movement is not going to be co-opted by Hollywood tinsel and political platitudes. The Occupy Movement got started because its members were fed up with President Sellout. As "The Insider" wrote,

In MoveOn.org’s short history, the front group has proven that co-option works, but co-opting Occupy Wall Street and the Arab Spring has been no easy task for it this time around.

It has been a particularly tough task because the Democratic Party, which it fronts for, is beholden to Wall Street and the Obama Administration whichMoveOn.org dutifully supports, plans on raising hundreds of millions of dollars from the 1-percent during his 2012 election campaign.

Furthermore, the Obama Administration has been largely responsible for supplying weaponry to suppress the Arab Spring, including in places such asEgypt, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia, to name a few.

MoveOn.org has to tell overt lies in order to paint the Democratic Party and its President, Barack Obama, as a friend of democracy and working class. TheBig Lie, it can be said, is only believable for so long.

When the 99% Spring liberal trust fund babies protest every appearance by Mitt Romney during the upcoming campaign season, and the paramilitary police forces stand benignly by with coffee and donuts for the brave apparatchiks putting their bodies on the line, we'll know for sure how phony they truly are.

Until then, the real OWS is gearing up for the real American Spring, with weekly tactical training sessions in Zuccotti Park. Colin Moynihan, the New York Times reporter who has covered the movement locally from its inception, explains:

To prepare, organizers have held weekly practice sessions, called “spring training,” inside Zuccotti Park, where participants learn about the gong and other tactics, some of them adapted from a British activist group called the Clandestine Insurgent Rebel Clown Army.

Over the course of an hour on Friday, protesters practiced several tactics, including “hup,” which involves a knot of people jumping up and down (and can be used to coalesce a scattered group) and “melt,” in which protesters drift to the ground (used for a ”die-in” or to de-escalate a confrontation).

One tactic, known as “wall,” involved ranks of protesters locking elbows and trotting forward in close formation, and could be used, organizers said, to move quickly while making it difficult for the police to physically break up the group.

Organizers said the sessions, which have been followed by short marches to the stock exchange for the closing bell, are meant to teach participants to work together and instill a sense of camaraderie.

Moynihan, who has had his own taste of NYPD brutality during various camp evictions, noted that the police were watching. And waiting. Something tells me they won't be handing out goodie bags to the real protesters on May 1.  They will be striking too, and if past performance is any predictor, it won't have anything to do with solidarity with the working class.

Roll Me Over in the Clover!

So, are you miffed that you signed up for a chance to attend today's White House Easter Egg Roll and did not get picked? Attendance at this annual event is by the usual class-based, two-tiered selection process. You either received a personal invitation because you are a wealthy or famous VIP, or you waited breathlessly to find out if you were randomly selected in an Internet lottery. A lucky 30,000 common people (aged 13 or under, accompanied by a parent) were chosen, to be herded onto the lawn in five different groups of 6,000 for two hours of roiling, rolling, rollicking fun.

Begun under the administration of Rutherford B. Hayes (or, as Barack Obama mispronounced it in a recent speech, "Rooth-erford") this marks the Egg Roll's 175th anniversary. From the official WH handout: (parentheses mine)

This year’s theme, “Let’s Go, Let’s Play, Let’s Move!,” spotlights the Let's Move! campaign, focusing "on promoting health and wellness and encouraging children to lead healthy and active lives." The White House will livestream performances and events all day at whitehouse.gov/live. Follow the action on Twitter with @LetsMove and @ObamaFoodorama with the hashtag #EasterEggRoll. 

There will be celebrity (not amateurs of the underclass!)  entertainers and celebrity chefs giving cooking demonstrations in the Play With Your Food area, which surrounds the Kitchen Garden and features a mini-farmers market, and fooducation booths. (how irritating a made-up word is that?)  Sports stars (from only A-List teams) leading fitness activities in the Eggtivity Zone, singers will perform on the Rockin' Egg Roll Stage (Janelle Monae, Cody Simpson, Zendaya, China Ann McClain and the McClain Sisters), and A-list actors (not D List!) will read kids books on the Storytime Stage (Sarah Palin impersonator) Julianne Moore, (Idi Amin impersonator) Forest Whitaker, (Big Democratic donor ABC- Disney teeny bopper impersonator) Bella Thorne).

Oh, and it won't be official until Bo the Dog disguised as the Cadbury Bunny appears. Not to go off on a tangent or anything -- but have you ever pondered the monumental arrogance it took for Obama to name his dog after himself? More accurately, he took his initials (BO) and foisted them on the pooch. This would be like FDR naming Falla "Effer", or Clinton naming Socks the Cat "Beecee", or Bush the Younger calling Miss Beazley "Geebee", or to give it the full-bore dynastic patrician cred, "GeeDubyaBee".

Actually, Obama is not the first president to name a pet after himself. John Tyler called his obscenity-spewing parrot "Johnny Ty". Such extreme identification with one's pet must be a characteristic of presidents who profess to being Democrats and then suddenly reveal their true party affiliation once in office.

 The least sentimental of the White House pet owners probably was Lyndon Johnson, who posed for a photograph holding his two beagles, "Him" and "Her" by their ears.

 And who would have guessed that dour-looking George Washington had a sense of humor about his pets -- his four hunting coonhounds were named Tipler, Drunkard, Tipsy and Taster.

A few presidents would be prime candidates for the animal hoarding shows so popular these days. Theodore Roosevelt of course was a life-long and obsessive collector of animals, both dead and alive, with favorites being dogs, cats, pigs and ponies. And taciturn Calvin Coolidge seems to have been one of those humans who more closely identified with animals than people. Besides scores of dogs, he owned a donkey, two lion cubs, an antelope, a pygmy hippo, a couple of raccoons, a black bear and a bobcat. 

But I digress from whatever theme I originally started out with. Actually, I don't think I even had a theme. Forgive me, people. It's Monday. Happy belated Easter and Passover to all!

My Re-election Pledge: To Always Roll Over for Corporate Interests (graphic by Kat Garcia)

An Army of Propagandistas

When the opposition party is so misogynistic that it makes Ted Bundy look like Sir Galahad, all you really have to do to seduce a nation of women into pulling the lever for you is to be your own charming self. When the chair of the RNC utters such crazy talk as calling the Republican War Against Women as fictional as a war against caterpillars, all you have to do is sit back and let the creepy crawly jokes proliferate. Rance Priebus, the inventor of the caterpillar non sequitur, is one slimy species himself. Rance Priebus Rancidus, an easily identified garish garden variety. When he is disturbed, orange horns pop out of his head and emit a foul-smelling spray.

Fight for Larval Liberty!

  

It's nonsense like this, as well as the more psychopathic anti-birth control and anti-choice invective emanating from the right wing fringe that has enabled President Obama to score double-digit leads over Mitt Romney in recent polling. He has wasted no time in "targeting" women in battleground states. Following his pal Rahm Emanuel's advice to "never let a crisis go to waste", he is hosting a women's conference at the White House today to further cement his feminist cred. He has chivalrously called for the admission of rich lady golfers to Augusta. He boldly bumped New York Times editor Jill Abramson from her commencement address gig at all-female Barnard.

And later this month, the Obama Victory Fund is sponsoring a two-day training session for potential Obamettes. Become a propagandista in the president's All-Girl Army! Show how strong you are by putting your money and energy behind a charismatic male politician and become his unpaid shill. Join the BarryWAC, contribute to the BarryPAC.

Warning: this extravaganza for the Ladies Who Lunch is obviously not designed for the 99% -- though if you're under 35 or over 65, you can buy the cheap tickets at "only" $250, with no Barry face time included. From Politico: 

The Obama campaign is hoping to train an army of women at the DNC's national issues conference in Washington, D.C., later this month.

The two-day convention will include remarks by President Obama and strategy meetings on American women, values and the 2012 election as well as economic security and strengthening the middle class.

Confirmed training sessions include: "Talking to Your Neighbor: Persuading Women Voters," "Digital Organizing: Effective Social Media Strategies," "Talking about the President’s Accomplishments," and "Crafting Your Personal Narrative."

A photo with Barry as part of the Army of Women admission package will cost you $15,000. If you fork over $75,800, you'll get a group photo, special seating, special dinner, and your name mentioned in public.

The readers' comments to the Politico article came from the usual tripartate crowd -- the left, the right and the Bots. A sampling:

I don't think Obama has my interest in mind at all. Look at the cost of the tickets.. I am an average American who makes average wages and there is no way I can afford to buy a ticket. If he really wants to train "an army of women", he needs to do it for free.

So.... Omama's camp is going to train an "Army of Women"? by highlighting how the administration “has helped create economic security for women" and convince them to Talk about the President’s "Accomplishments," Hmmmmmm... Tough Task ahead!

The "Talking about the President’s Accomplishments" class will last a total of 30 seconds. Included in the corriculum will be: "We got Bin Laden" and...um...hold on I'll think of it.....

 I think women should be proud and I do well to set a fine example for my daughter's. I encourage my daughters to be independent thinkers who will work to care for themselves and to never rely on anyone to provide for them. Obama is not emphasizing the strength of women at all. He is simply trying to produce more people to sing his praises in the guise of raising women up. More importantly, he is trying to use this as an opportunity to raise money.

Why not have these training session in each state? Some of the price of the airplane tickets could go to pay for the training. Statewide training would be more productive and easier to manage. Statewide training would work better being able to focus on each individual States special interests and needs as well would adapt to the demographics of those particular states. I can't afford to go to Washington the plane tickets alone would block me and then add on to it the tickets. It almost feels as though it is exclusive to the rich women, and not to the Middle class women. I am for Obama, but find that the costs of things are prohibitive. I was excited when I heard about this program, but now that I see the costs, it is unrealistic. And so just like the GOP things go to the rich.

And finally this, my own personal favorite from a male Bot named Michael: You just never liked Obama...If thats th case then fine, But belive me their are alot of women and young ladys out there in Amrica who are more then eager to hear a message of hope and how the world and men would be far far worse off without strong women. Mabye the message that women are better left at home to procreate for men and cook and provide only for the family, mabye that message better suits (R) women. After all Santorm see's women as too weak mentally and physically to serve in our fine military, Gingrich..... well what really needs to be said about him...My point (before i get off of track ) IMHO only one party truly represents the ideas of modern women and truly wants to invest in the future of women and thats the (D) I have not seen one peice of legislation in the last four years come from any (R) person that supports anything regarding womens rights...

Get With the Program, Ladies!

One Nation of Suspects, With Justice for None

Here's just one of many shocking takeaways from this week's Supreme Court decision (Florence vs Board of Chosen Freeholders) allowing strip searches for all prisoners, regardless of the alleged offense: Anthony Kennedy is a judicial pretzel of twisted logic. In his opinion for the majority, Kennedy surmised that since most of this country's mass murderers and serial killers also had records of minor traffic offenses in their pasts, it follows that all traffic offenders might also be mass murderers and serial killers. So making everybody strip naked before joining a filthy, overcrowded jail population will make them safe, make their fellow prisoners safe, and make the poor overworked guards safe. The American citizen has officially been presumed guilty simply by virtue of existing. Keeping. Us. Safe. Sound familiar?

Lead Plaintiff Albert Florence

The Constitution is not just being chiselled away, little piece by little piece. It's being pounded to dust by the sledge hammers of all three branches of government. In the eyes of The Homeland, we are all potential terrorist threats. And the terror comes in endless forms.  Justice Kennedy rationalized that one peachy-keen reason for strip searches is that enforced nudity will allow jail personnel to detect disease and parasites, including.... scabies! Kennedy should keep his medical opinions to himelf, because nobody can detect scabies with the naked eye. Scabies are teensy little mites that burrow under the skin and cause intense itching, mainly at night. Diagnosis is made by taking skin scrapings and examining them under the microscope.

We as a nation are suffering a massive infestation of psychic scabies. The fear of the unknown has crept under our collective skin and made us all nuts. Terror has become a cottage industry. The Supreme Court decision is just one more manifestation of how bin Laden won. Our democracy is not just beginning to be subsumed by the quicksand of  totalitarianism -- it has already been sucked in up to its eyeballs.

That President Obama's Justice Department had filed an amicus brief in the recent court case in support of strip searches should come as no surprise. This administration is going down as one of the most authoritarian and repressive in modern history. No Democratic president since Woodrow Wilson has seized upon, and fomented, fear like this one. It was during World War One that the Espionage Act was passed, making it a crime to be anti-war. It is no coincidence that Bradley Manning is now being charged under the Espionage Act for his heroic whistleblowing of war crimes. It is no coincidence that the same government which forced Bradley Manning to stand naked in his jail cell for weeks is now urging that millions more citizens suffer the same humiliation. Strip-searching is simply a corollary to indefinite detention without charge, and the self-proclaimed right to assassinate people by secret decree. It's an all-inclusive program of The Naked and the Dead.

Let's be clear -- the unfettered strip-searching of suspects has little to do with safety, and everything to do with the cowing of the underclass, and sexual humiliation -- and since the majority of inmates are male, and black -- emasculation. This is especially true for Muslim prisoners, for whom forced nudity is the ultimate horror. Look at Abu Ghraib. Look at Gitmo. Now, look to Rikers Island in New York, the world's largest penal colony.

The Supreme Court decision is just one more manifestation of this country's institutional racism. If you are guilty of walking while black or brown, the next big thing after being stopped and frisked will be getting hauled off to jail and being forced to strip naked, and worse. Writes D.L. Chandler:

Last year alone, the NYPD stopped and questioned almost 700,000 persons, 87 percent of them being either Black or Hispanic. The low level of arrests made by way of this aggressive program is another matter deserving of investigation. Further, one of out of ten African-American men are in prison. According to research from the American Leadership Forum, 1 out of 3 Black boys born in 2001 have the potential to spend a lifetime in jail.

Should a person with a few unpaid parking tickets or missed court dates for a rent hearing be subjected to the same cavity search of a known murderer? The sensible answer is that the criminal proven to have the more violent record should be treated as such. The wide-sweeping assumption that every person with a traffic violation or similar minor offense needs to be treated like the town’s biggest drug dealer is a foolish one.

The practical ramifications of the Supreme Court ruling remain to be seen, says the ACLU. Will police use it as an excuse to strip-search Occupy protesters the next time they're arrested on trumped-up charges of blocking a sidewalk? Judging from the Obama Administration's own amicus brief, the authoritarians have this possibility very much in their paranoid little minds. In oral arguments, according to Steve Bergstein of the Z Magazine blog, a Justice Dept. lawyer said:

"Protesters...who decide deliberately to get arrested... might be stopped by the police, they see the squad car behind them. They might have a gun or contraband in their car and think hey, I’m going to put that on my person, I just need to get it somewhere that is not going to be found during a patdown search, and then potentially they have the contraband with them.” This position would probably be identical to that advanced by a Republican presidential administration.

The arguments, and ensuing decision, justify strip searches because your very presence within an incarceration facility automatically strips you of your civil rights. The legality of your arrest is not taken into consideration. The security of the institution always supersedes individual rights. Wide-ranging deference must always be paid to corrections personnel, says the Obama Justice Department and the concurring Supremes. They don't mention the fact that said corrections personnel are more and more likely to be underpaid and unscreened security guards in private prisons. Or that a lot of the smuggling of contraband into jails is done by corrupt guards and wardens. 

The ultimate irony, of course, is that the liberal members of the Court did not side with the Obama Administration on this one, and for that moment of sanity we should be grateful.

I had been wondering if perhaps the Justice Department would start an investigation of the Supreme Court on suspicion of influence peddling and corruption and financial malfeasance in light of the Citizens United ruling and canoodling with the Koch Brothers. There are indeed grounds for charging Clarence Thomas will failure to disclose his finances and ties with his wife's Tea Party group. There is precedent; Abe Fortas was forced to resign during the Johnson Administration after it was revealed he was on the take from Wall Street. But if past performance is any indication, Eric Holder and his boss will most likely view the judicial jokesters as useful idiots to run against during the campaign.  

Government corruption is nothing new. What is new is that all three branches and their apparatchiks are in it up to their scalps. The wrong people are being strip-searched.

Stay tuned for a grade F for the United States when Human Rights Watch comes out with its next report. As Glenn Greenwald noted in his excellent column today, the strip-searching of detainees is also a blatant violation of international human rights treaties.  

We are exceptional, all right. Exceptionally sadistic.

Arianna Cries While Unpaid Bloggers Strategize

That class action suit by former unpaid Huffington Post bloggers, seeking a one-third share of the site's multimillion-dollar sale to AOL, has been thrown out. A judge decided that since the plaintiffs were once satisfied with the glory of simply getting their stuff published on Arianna's popular site, they have no legal basis to demand their fair share now. Just because it turns out she was making money hand over fist on ad clicks, and then reaped a $330 million bonanza from the sale, doesn't mean the people who made The HuffPo what it is deserve one penny of compensation. You can't rewrite the terms of an agreement retroactively, ruled U.S. District Court Judge John Koeltl this week. Next time, be savvier and demand to get paid for your work upfront, he suggested.

The plaintiffs plan to appeal the decision. Their argument is that an unconscionable unwritten contract can't supersede Wage and Hour Laws. Slavery is still illegal, even if the slaves seem happy. Maybe this is the case that will finally make Justice Clarence Thomas open his mouth. But I doubt it.

Arianna, meanwhile, has just blogged from one of the many international greedwashing-disguised-as-do-gooder forums for the One Percent that she attends on a regular basis. Ironically, during the same week that her starving stable of former writers was getting thrown under the bus in court, she was at Oxford for something called the Skoll World Forum on Social Entrepreneurship. This is yet another pricey confab where the global elites can gather, preen and brag about how they have the power to make the lives of the lesser people (excluding unpaid writers) throughout the world so much better.  Attendance was by invitation only -- but, gushed Arianna, "I wish everyone could be here!"

As usual, today's Arianna blog is all about Arianna and her crocodile tears, and not the details of the hopeless people the convention purportedly addressed. No mention of how this hypocritical author of Third World America is getting to keep that contested third of her AOL haul, thanks to the American judicial system:

It was exhilarating -- and deeply moving -- to hear example after example of social entrepreneurs making quantifiable improvements in lives all around the world. As Stephan Chambers, chairman of the Skoll Centre, put it: "I have cried every day this week. Remember as I tell you this, that I'm male. And British. And from Oxford." I actually cried every hour. But, remember, I'm female. And Greek. And from Cambridge. I also cried when Roy Sekoff, our founding editor, texted me that his father, Arthur, had passed away. Besides being a huge supporter of HuffPost (which he rightly felt contained some of his funny, feisty, passionate DNA), he was an eagle-eyed evaluator of my hair whenever I appeared on TV -- good or bad, he let me know about it.

But enough about your coiffure, Arianna. Let's get back to that court case. The lead plaintiff was labor activist Jonathan Tasini, who wrote over 200 blogposts for the crying kleptocratista.

 He framed the suit as a class action on behalf of an estimated 9,000 bloggers for the website. Now living in Sydney, where he is writing a book and blogging at www.workinglife.org, Tasini (said) that he planned to keep up the fight for compensation. "We're using the lawsuit to spark a movement and an organising effort among bloggers to set a standard for the future because this idea that all individual creators should work for free is like a cancer spreading through every media property on the globe."

Tasini is the same journalist who once successfully sued The New York Times for copyright infringement. The 2001 Supreme Court ruling in his favor stated that the newspaper wrongfully re-licensed his and other freelancers' published work.  The paper was found to have illegally profited by selling their work to such independent data bases as LexisNexis, and it was ordered to award the pool of plaintiffs $18 million.

(I have never submitted an op-ed to The Times, but as part of the caveat for posting comments, they absolve themselves from liability for your content at the same time they reserve their rights to same. The Gray Lady, like any royal, shall have her cake and eat it too -- she can use readers' work in the future, for whatever purpose she wishes. One change made about a year ago is that readers' comments are no longer searchable via Google or other engines. And of course, readers wishing to comment more than 10 times a month must now pay for the privilege, as per the paywall*. The Times also generates revenue via its Google-ized ads on the readers comment pages. That's the main reason I don't submit comments as much as I used to.)

When Tasini filed his lawsuit last year, Arianna was deeply affronted that some people are just not willing to be slaves. You should be grateful we don't pay you, she says, because working for free amounts to Freedom itself! Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose. From the Los Angeles Times:

But while our staff writers have deadlines and commitments, as well as specific assignments, our bloggers can post as frequently or infrequently as they like -- and write about whatever they like, whenever they like, or not at all," Huffington said. "On top of that, they can crosspost their work on their own sites or elsewhere -- they own the rights to their work and can repurpose it in any way they choose."

People blog on HuffPost for free for the same reason they go on cable TV shows every night for free: either because they are passionate about their ideas or because they have something to promote and want exposure to large and multiple audiences," Huffington said. "Our bloggers are repeatedly invited on TV to discuss their posts and have received everything from paid speech opportunities and book deals to a TV show."

If you thought Arianna might have been so upset by the lawsuit that she took Tasini's posts off her site, you'd be wrong. They are there forever, generating ad revenue ad infinitum, enriching the Huffington heirs and investors for generations to come. 

But do check out Tasini's blog, linked above. He calls New York Times reporters "dolts" in one recent entry. Made my day.

* In theory. The Times today reduced its number of freebies from 20 to 10. I guess it was their idea of playing an April Fools joke on the 99%.