9 thoughts on “”

1. To Eric and members of this extraordinary team:

   There is a conspicuous amount of writing talent gathered in this group, beginning with Eric and extending through each of the contributors, some of whom have taken my breath away over the years. Are there any among you who would be willing to create a dramatic piece that would use planets and planetoids in drawing personality and character definitions for each of the roles … throw them together in a fictional story so we can see how they play out in character? It could even be in the format of that magnificent Steve Allen series on PBS, “Meeting of Minds,” that still has a fan following after 40 years. There are many of us who are intimidated by the complexity of astrology, but recognize its value and essential wisdom, and if we were not already stretched in our lives would gladly give it the time and attention it deserves. It is hard to know whether we should be more concerned about a Mercury transit to a personal planet or a grand cross in the cardinal signs that affect our sun and ascendant. One way for armchair astrologers to better understand the hierarchy and interplays among all these players would be to identify them as human characters instead of “attributes.” I have tried to superimpose a stereotypical personality grid over the world history map, assigning periods of time to house progressions and planetary qualities to nation states, but there are too many external variables affecting the outcomes of history to allow the characters to emerge free of anomalous distortions. I’m thinking a work of fiction could help bring the planets to life, and in such a way as to weight them appropriately, allowing a deeper understanding of who they are, how they are likely to behave in different situations, who will come out on top in a contest, and why. It would be an ideal undertaking for any astrological wizard who also loves fiction and cultural anthropology.

   If either or both of these propositions has already been developed and you know where I can find them, I would appreciate knowing where. Otherwise, thanks for being the kinds of superb students of human nature, politics, relationships, and the ways of the universe that enable us to pose such questions to you confidently. With enormous gratitude and respect for all you do …

2. Hello Eric, Planet Waves and Subscribers

   I was looking for something else entirely (as I’m not very technically savvy about astrology), and ran into this article. Any truth to it? I tried the Sky Birthday link which apparently no longer works and the recommendation was to try Stellarius (I think that was the name) instead, but I didn’t know how to go about verifying this info anyway. Here’s a link to the article saying the sun has moved so the “real” signs for people are off by a month:
   http://www.livescience.com/4667-astrological-sign.html

   Looking forward to your comments/elucidation!

3. Hey, it’s the latest edition of “Biased Astrologers posing as credible Analysts”.

   An historic series of scandals and corruption at the highest levels of government and not 1 single reference to it in your rich analysis of what’s going on out there. How convenient that you make the following statement during very troubling times for your hero Obama:
   “Part of being so enlightened often means ignoring or not being able to handle anything on the level of politics, civics, the news or developments in the world.” I know how different this take would be if GW Bush were in office but now that ultra liberal Obama is president you have absolutely nothing to say about his role in the scandals and the crisis his administration is in now that the corruption is being exposed.

   You do however cover the following really really really important news stories of today:
   -lesbian and gay couples can marry
   -TWA flight 800
   -Federal Reserve decided to get out of the stimulus business. (necessary due to Obama’s economic wet blanket and anti-business policies)
   -Monsanto executive won the equivalent of an Oscar for genetically modified food

   Yeah, those are the most important issues facing the nation today. Of course I do appreciate your biased narrative on the typical liberal agenda items:
   – A new study has found that fracking…Yeah, let’s bring up the subject of fracking when a new study comes out that supports your side of the argument. Developing new, domestic energy is just so bad for the sacred environment. Of course there’s never any criticism of China or India, the world’s biggest polluters…let’s just criticize American efforts to become energy independent, even when the approaches involve much cleaner technology and get unemployed people back to work
   -“Ex-Gay Therapy” Coalition Disbands. Hey another reference to the gay community in the same article.
   – GOP Member Advocates Fetal Masturbation – The harshest anti-abortion bill ever – anti-choice activists claim fetuses can feel pain. Really? Wow! Stunningly biased narrative. “anti-choice”, “claim” “fetal masturbation”. Hmmm, I wonder which side of this politically split issue you fall on? Oops, almost forgot your reference to the very credibly neutral commentator Rachel Maddow. Oh, one more thing…when liberals like you force left wing agendas on us against our will are you being “anti-choice”? Can I use your convenient term “Pro-Choice” when I want to own a gun, not pay excessive taxes or opt out of Obumacare?
   – “Illegal immigrants who want to vote in federal elections scored a victory Monday – states cannot block their citizens from registering to vote by superimposing burdensome paperwork requirements”. Hmmm, what side do you fall on here? At least you did acknowledge that they are ILLEGAL immigrants before you imply they should be able to vote. Just what we need, another group to suck on the federal nipple draining our already constrained resources and then empower them to vote themselves permanent benefits.
   – Stand Against Guantanamo Forced-Feeding…Force-feeding a competent person is not the practice of medicine; it is aggravated assault – Hunger strikes are the only meaningful tool that prisoners have in getting needs addressed while incarcerated”. Yeah, these terrorists who have killed innocent women and children are not being treated fairly. Tell that to the family of countless civilians who have seen videos of their loved ones getting beheaded. I guess you believe it’s more humane to let these fools starve themselves to death than to intervene. Suicide vs. force feeding…Wow you liberals are truly warped.
   – “NSA (the National Security Agency, an American spy shop”. Good topical issue to discuss…but no mention of the Obama administration’s role in spying on Americans. Wish I could go back to past articles where I’m sure you bashed GW Bush for his specific targeted wire taps of terrorist suspects. Compare that to the comprehensive dragnet Obama’s minions are placing on everyone in this country. Oh by the way, I counted only 1 reference at all to Obuma throughout your entire article. I guess there’s nothing important going on at the national level or in the political arena to discuss…at least nothing that doesn’t expose him to be either corrupt or incompetent.

   OMG…you actually got something right! Way to go:
   – administration had almost $1 trillion for “stimulus” but instead chose to give away that obscene amount of money on giveaways to special interests. Too bad you didn’t mention Obama’s name in this. At some point the chief executive has to take responsibility for the failures of his administration.

   I’ll go easy on you and avoid discussion of the IRS targeting Obama’s political enemies, the Benghazi scandal, Fast and furious scandal, Obama’s DOJ targeting conservative reporters, drone strikes killing civilians or drone spying on Americans domestically, Kathleen Sebelius shaking down health insurance executives, exempting Muslims from NSA spying, etc.
   My advice to you is spend a little more time working on how to mask your bias in these childish narratives or just simply admit up front that you are left wing liberals and this is just a personal take on how you feel about things. You’re certainly entitled to share those biased feelings, just make sure you state that up front so no one confuses your musings as objective analysis.

   Brendt V
   Astrologer

4. Hi Eric and friends,

   “Thursday, Joseph Ratzinger boarded a helicopter and flew away from the Vatican, the first pope to resign in six centuries.

   (So much for conspiracy rumors that he would not be leaving the Vatican’s walls, lest he be arrested.)”

   I’m amusing myself today by wondering whether and/or how we know where the helicopter had come from, where it was going and to whom it belonged …. 😉

   Thanks for another brilliant and inspiring weekly marathon read.

   Best wishes,

   Clare

5. Really an ironic co-incidence that you are talking Mars-Nessus trust issues and yet you go with Facebook.

   So sad.

   You talk about change in the world, and yet you go with the biggest corporate tool of them all.

6. After reading the Planet Waves email, I look forward watching the Mercury-retrograde Election Spectacle as it unfolds: Reality TV at its best! Astrology may shed light on behind-the-scenes goings-on, however, I hold no illusions concerning the relevance of the national election process to ordinary citizens. No matter who is elected, our personal situations will stay pretty much the same. (Vote locally: that’s where the changes happen that matter in our lives!)
   The Mega-Rich pull the strings in every country on this planet- always have, always will. Here in the US, we are presented with Presidential Candidates much the same way as parents present a 3-year-old with his or her “choice” of outfits to decide between for the day: the parents don’t care which one the child chooses and the child feels like the “Captain of his Destiny”. Harmony is maintained.
   Despite it all, we are living in the best country there is at this time. I am optimistic for the future when I see all the idealistic young people up and coming. We are tiring of corporations running the show and polluting our food, air and water. The “tipping point” is coming, as evidenced by the Occupy Wallstreet movement and its offshoots.
   Thanks, Eric, for a great email!

7. Eric, just read your take on Obama and Romney. Once again, your voice comes through so clearly. I was giggling, groaning, and grooving on your wit and insight. Frightening, but great. Keep up the good work! I echo waterjewel–so glad to be a subscriber.

8. Eric: I am a loyal subscriber. You always ‘get me’ in your readings. I’m a Libra, Taurus rising, Cap moon. Just wrote a piece which is appearing in a number of places. Thought you might be interested.

   By Any Means Necessary; The Republican Agenda to “Mortally Wound” Our Democracy

   Although poverty’s umbilical cord is unambiguously tied to money, the true essence of poverty is powerlessness. It is no accident that at a time when the poverty rate in this country is the highest it’s been since President Johnson declared his War on Poverty, the Republicans are doing everything in their power to take away the one thing the poor can still call their own: their voices.
   When Barack Obama was elected President in 2008 he naively believed that through compromise he could actually bring the two parties together. Instead of announcing that he was the Decider he tried to become the Negotiator. The Republicans wanted none of it.
   In Do Not Ask What Good We Do, Robert Draper reports that on the day of President Obama’s inauguration, Eric Cantor, Jeb Hensarling, Pete Hoekstra, Dan Lungren, Kevin McCarthy, Paul Ryan, Pete Sessions, Tom Coburn, Bob Corker, Jim DeMint, John Ensign and Jon Kyl as well as Newt Gingrich and Republican strategist Frank Luntz, met at the Caucus Room, an upscale restaurant in Washington, DC to discuss how to “mortally wound Obama in 2011 and take back the Senate and White House in 2012.”[1]
   By definition, high treason is a serious threat to the stability or continuity of the state, which makes these self-anointed patriots traitors to America.
   But it doesn’t stop there.
   Kevin McCarthy (R. Ca. Majority Whip) was quoted by Draper as saying “We’ve gotta challenge them on every single bill and challenge them on every single campaign.” McCarthy and his gang can consider themselves successful. They brought Washington to a standstill on more than one occasion, including when they refused to vote for raising the debt ceiling, something their patron saint, Ronald Reagan, had done 17 times. The Republican block led Standard and Poor’s to downgrade America’s debt for the first time in 70 years.
   While there is no denying that part of the partisan animosity is based upon the color of the President’s skin, there is another part that is based on the fact that he is a Democrat. Republican contempt for Democrats was apparent when they spent $39.5 million of taxpayer money to investigate the Monica Lewinsky scandal and another $40 million on the Whitewater controversy. Comparing that to the mere $10.5 million they spent to set up the 911 commission and investigate the whats, hows and whys of the World Trade Center tower bombing lets us know their prioties. Parenthetically the commission did nothing to examine the role played by Marvin Bush, the President’s youngest brother who served on the board of directors of the security firm which maintained security for the World Trade Center Towers up until September 11, 2001.
   George Lakoff,[2] linguist from University of California, Berkley points to the main difference between the two parties. Democrats use the word ‘empathy’ to describe Americans. They model the country after the nurturing family who helps one another and protects those less fortunate from hunger, environmental hazards and illiteracy. It is their belief that all Americans are entitled to food, safety from toxins and an education. If other Americans are unable to care for themselves, it is the belief of Democrats that the government has a responsibility to help.
   Republicans, on the other hand have a mind-set based upon personal responsibility. If you work hard enough you are rewarded. If the work you do is outstanding, your salary and life will reflect that. In other words, people on public assistance are people who don’t work and, if they do, they don’t do it well.
   Unfortunately their belief doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. All we need do is look at Vikram Pandit who, when hired as CEO of Citi, received a $36.5 million “signing bonus.” After the price of Citi stock dropped by 95% and he resigned he received a $15 million payout. Apparently needing a bit of ‘pin money,’ Pandit also sold his hedge fund for $800 million and profited by $165 million.
   Aubrey McClenon, CEO of Chesapeake, was paid $75 million in salary in 2009 even though Chesapeake’s stock price dropped by 50% in 2008. It was recently discovered that he took $1.1 billion in personal loans which he probably won’t be able to pay back. Mr. McClenon has not been charged with any crime and probably never will be.
   The Republican party is a party of fairy tales and lies. If one really wants to address entitlements, look no further than Republicans. They feel entitled to tax cuts on the wealthiest Americans while asking the middle class to pay more. They feel entitled to complain about the debt while doing nothing to increase revenue.
   In fact, when Hank Paulson agreed to become Treasury Secretary in May of 2006, he owned $500 million in Goldman Sachs stock, from his days as CEO of the firm. In order to avoid a conflict of interest, the government rules required that Mr. Paulson sell his shares of Goldman Sachs and in return for the forced sale Mr. Paulson didn’t have to pay capital gains taxes. What he saved and what it cost the government was $200 million in taxes. In other words, Mr. Paulson would have owed the government $200 million in taxes but was able to reap the profit on the stock and not pay a single dime in taxes.
   While Paulson got off tax free, the American people did not. Goldman Sachs was paid $10 billion from taxpayer money.
   Republicans complain that we have the highest corporate tax rates in the world when, in fact, the average corporation pays 3% in taxes, not the 35% that they claim to pay. In fact, many pay no taxes or have a large negative tax rate.
   Rather than use their authority to end the kind of rampant corruption that haunts the corporate world, the Republican party would rather take the low road and undercut the President with racial innuendos.
   When Newt Gingrich called President Obama “the food stamp President” he was playing into the idea that food stamps are synonymous with blacks. What he failed to mention is that state governments, not Congress or President Obama, set up the eligibility requirement for the SNAP program.
   Nor should we overlook the fact that as a result of the recession there are more working poor who are collecting food stamps. In 1990, 42 percent of all SNAP households received cash welfare benefits and only 19 percent had earnings whereas in 2010 only 8% of the poor were collecting cash welfare while 30% had earnings.
   After Gingrich made his statement, Chris Matthews asked him why the failed primary candidate played the race card and Gingrich responded with faked innocence. Why would you think that I was referring to blacks, Gingrich asked. It’s you who are racist, he told Matthews. You’re the one who thought that food stamps were a code word for blacks, not me. Gingrich sealed the race baiting when he called Obama the “laziest” President this country has ever known.
   But Gingrich is being less than honest when he denies his race-baiting. In the past 50 years the connection between public assistance and Afro-Americans has been practically tattooed on the brains of Americans.
   In How the Poor Became Black: The Racialization of American Poverty in the Media, Martin Gilens researched the “racial portrayal” of the poor in the United States from 1950 to 1992. Using Newsweek, Time and U.S. News and World Report, Gilens surveyed 4388 pictures of individual poor people whose race could be determined and the 1256 stories which accompanied them. Combining the coverage from Newsweek, U.S. News and World Report and Time, 53.4% of the poor people pictured were black when, in reality, only 29.3% of blacks in the country qualified as poor.
   In the early 1970’s, welfare and welfare mismanagement became the new media focus. The total number of Americans receiving welfare increased from 2% to 6% in the mid-seventies. Although the number of blacks receiving welfare hadn’t changed, the negative coverage did. Blacks were pictured 75% of the time when, in fact, they only comprised 29.3% of the poor. In fact, the negative portrayal of blacks as welfare recipients was the highest of any point in the 43 years of coverage [3] on the subject.
   But blacks were not the only ones getting attention in the Sixties. Union members had become powerful intermediaries between business and union leaders and union leaders found themselves in the unlikely position of having to listen to their member’s demands. The demands were not limited to money. What union members wanted was a relationship to the work they were doing.
   Blacks wanted similar things.
   Researching class composition in the 60’s, Paolo Capignano [4] found that despite the legal advances made by civil rights leaders, blacks wanted more than just legalities; they wanted to be integrated into the system of production.[5] That presented a problem for the moneyed class because as union workers, as in schools[6] and blacks joined forced what became evident was that there was a “factory-like organization of society where ghettos, unemployment and poverty were not a byproduct of a system nor a transitory malfunction, but a necessary element in social reproduction of capital.[7]”
   In other words, a level of unemployment, poverty and ghetto life must be maintained for the rich to get richer. Despite the Republican claims to the contrary, they really couldn’t afford to have an economy that was thriving on all levels because it would cut into their profits and therefore, their power.
   During the eight years that Ronald Reagan was President, the National Coalition for the Homeless reports that of the 182 cities with populations above 100,000 the number of homeless tripled, the wealthiest 20% of American households saw their incomes increase by 14% and the bottom 20% saw their income decline by 24%. Committed to “trimming the safety net” by cutting domestic programs, poverty increased from 11% to 15% and unemployment rose to 11%.
   Cutting the safety net affected both blacks and whites resulting in a more sympathetic view of the poor. Unlike the 1970’s when 70% of the poor were pictured as black, the 1980’s images of the poor were white. In addition, even though the number of poor blacks hadn’t changed in the past decade magazine portrayals showed “the lowest percentage of blacks [….] since the early 1960s. Overall, only 33 percent of poor people pictured in poverty-related stories during 1982 and 1983 were black.”[8]
   What is the impact of such images? Residents of Michigan and Pennsylvania, where African Americans make up 31 percent of the poor, believe that 50 per cent of America’s poor are black. In Washington and Oregon, blacks constitute only 6 percent of the poor, yet residents of these states believe that the American poor are 47 percent black. Finally, blacks made up only 1 percent of the poor in Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota and Utah, yet Gilens found that responders from these states thought that blacks accounted for 47% of all poor people in the country. Despite the large state-by-state differences in the percentage of blacks among the poor, personal experience appears to have little impact on public perceptions of the racial composition of poverty.[9] And so Gingrich’s denial of an association between color and public assistance is sheer nonsense.
   Gingrich is also wrong when he calls Obama the “food stamp President.” According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition, the number of people receiving the most food stamps under any administration was George W. Bush. During Bush’s last 12 months as President, food stamp recipients tripled from 1.4 million to 4.4 million,[10] the highest in America’s history. Under Obama’s administration the USDA reports that there has been a decrease in people collecting food stamps. November, 2011 saw the second month of decline; 134,418 less people received food stamps then the month before.
   Truth-telling and facts are not important to Republicans. It’s fairy tales they’re after and the one which begins with Ronald Reagan lowered our taxes and led us out of recession is nice, as far as fairy tales go. The truth, however, is something else. By the time he left office, Reagan tripled the Federal Debt from $800 billion to over $3 trillion and raised the debt ceiling 17 times.
   Ronald Reagan’s Presidency is also responsible for the transfer of wealth in this country. Between 1979 and 2007 the share of household income after transfers and federal taxes going to the top 20 percent increased from 43 percent in 1979 to 53 percent in 2007. The top 1 percent saw their income more than double, climbing from nearly 8 percent in 1979 to 17 percent in 2007. During that same time period, the bottom 20 percent of income earners received about 7 percent of after-tax income in 1979 but by 2007 their share of after-tax income had fallen to about 5 percent. The remaining 60 percent of Americans saw their shares of after-tax income decline by 2 to 3 percentage points. [11]
   Nobel laureate Paul Krugman’s 2007 book The Conscience of a Liberal calls the post-1979 period “The Great Divergence.” There have always been rich and there have always been poor but why is it, Krugman ponders, that during the late eighties and nineties, when money seemed to be everywhere did 80 percent of it go to the top 1%? He also asks why, during the first decade of this century, when productivity was up by 20 percent did none of the money show up in the wages of the middle and lower classes? [12]
   Outsourcing is one reason for many of our problems. As Americans began losing their jobs to foreign workers, America found itself losing two revenue streams. One was from American corporations who, in 2009, paid more income taxes to foreign governments than our own[13] and from American workers who weren’t working. Instead of paying taxes, many were collecting unemployment. That cost the government $44 billion in 2009 alone.[14]
   With all the noise that Republicans are making about the deficit one would think that they would want to increase revenues and return to the economic policies of President Clinton.
   When he took office in 1992, 10 million Americans were unemployed, the country faced huge deficits left by the Reagan and Bush administrations and poverty and welfare were growing exponentially. Clinton raised taxes on the wealthiest Americans, gave laborers tax credits, required welfare recipients to prove they were looking for work and invested in education, training, science and research.
   The results were 22.5 million jobs new jobs, median family income increased by $6,000 and the unemployment rate was the lowest in 30 years. By the end of his administration home ownership reached 67.7% and there were 7 million fewer Americans living in poverty than when he took office. When he left office, the budget was balanced and the coffers had a surplus of $237 billion, the largest surplus ever. But the Republicans wanted nothing of the Clinton economic plan.
   So it’s not a balanced budget that the Republicans are after. Rather than encourage the policies that put the country in such good stead they resorted to any means necessary in order to get George W. Bush elected. I don’t know why. The man was a failure in his life as a businessman[15] but that didn’t matter to them. They knew that if a Republican was in office they, like he, would be bailed out.
   And so the Republican party went to work on guaranteeing George W. Bush’s election. His brother Jeb, then Governor of Florida, ordered state troopers to plant themselves near polling places in black polling areas and then insisted on searching each car as they arrived to vote. That delayed the voters for as much as 4 hours. In other Democratic areas 2 pieces of ID were required when, in reality, only one was needed. In addition, Kathryn Harris, Jeb Bush’s Secretary of State, hadn’t added the 36,000 newly registered voters to their voter rolls so they were turned away.
   Ballot boxes in traditionally Democratic and African-American districts were ‘lost.’ “GOP agitators were shipped in from Washington D.C. by the Republican national leadership, stormed the Dale County Canvassing Board, punched and kicked one of the officials, shouted and banged on their office doors, and generally created a climate of intimidation that caused the board to abandon its recount and accept the dubious pro-Bush tally.”[16]
   To quote Josef Stalin, “It’s not the people who vote that count. It’s the people who count the votes.”
   Different tactics bringing similar results were practiced during the 2004 election. Although not much has been made of the 2004 election, Parenti et. al. write about how that election was stolen as well. Democratic precincts experienced record turnouts but the makers of the touch screen machines, all Republican party contributors,[17] didn’t provide enough to Democratic districts. The results were a 7 hour wait in most Democratic polling places. Needless to say, many infirm and elderly couldn’t tolerate the wait.
   None of the Republican precincts experienced a shortage of voting machines.
   In Lucas County, Ohio, another Democratic district, no one could find the key to open the door to the office where the people would vote so no votes were cast. In Hamilton County many absentee voters could not cast a Democratic vote for president because John Kerry’s name had been “accidentally” removed when Ralph Nader was taken off the ballot.[18]
   My favorite story is about the count that took place in Ohio’s Perry and Cuyahoga counties. Bush won more votes than there were registered voters. According to election officials the turnout rates were in excess of 124% and in a small conservative suburban precinct of Columbus, where only 638 people were registered, the touchscreen machines tallied 4,258 votes for Bush.[19]
   As the 2012 election grows near, there will undoubtedly be more stories similar to the one about Republicans paying $3.1 million to a Republican consulting firm that submitted fraudulent voter registration forms in Florida. Or the story about college students who were hired to ask would-be voters who they were for before registering them. If they were for Obama, the students were told not to let them register. The Republicans are the ones looking for voter fraud but, so far, the only fraud found has been theirs. Bill Maher puts it in perspective by pointing out that since 2000 there have been 10 instances of in-person voting fraud. “Ten,” says Maher. “Out of 146 million voters. More people go into the voting booth and get hit by lightning while being attacked by sharks than commit this crime.”
   The greater question, which has not been addressed, is why the Republicans are so keen on keeping Democrats from voting. There are some who don’t think that all citizens should have the right to vote. The Ethics of Voting author Jason Brennan argues that voting involves decisions for the “common good” and since some people haven’t really considered what that means, they shouldn’t have the right to vote. Brennan compares voters to doctors. If someone doesn’t go to medical school, Brennan argues, they shouldn’t be able to operate on a patient, so why should someone be allowed to vote who doesn’t understand the issues. Brennan’s assumption is that someone who knows all the issues will make a decision based on the common good. Not true. In addition, the Constitution guarantees all American citizens the right to vote.
   Analyzing why the Republicans are so bent on keeping Democrats from voting is their idea of what the “common good” is. Democrats believe in a national responsibility to help those in need. Republicans see the world through a more narrow prism as tea party members made clear when they shouted yes to a question asked at the Republican primary. Should a young uninsured person lying in a coma in the hospital be allowed to be die Wolf Blitzer asked Ron Paul. Without giving the candidate a chance to answer, the audience responded with a resounding “yes.”
   There is no question that the country is in trouble. There is also no question that each Republican administration has sunk us further into an economic ditch. Greed and racial divide have been the Republican goal in order to hold onto their wealth and power and as pointed out by Capignano, unemployment and poverty are a necessary element in the social reproduction of capital. To that end the Republicans will do just about anything to secure this election.
   In order to preserve this great country there needs to be federal, not state, officials overseeing the polling places, particularly in African-American districts. If names are purged from the voting rolls there must be accountability and if a voting booth is not open, for whatever reason, voters must be allowed to vote in another polling place. In addition, the same amount of voting booths must be provided in both Republican and Democratic precincts. If any of these criteria are missing, there should be phone centers set up to take the reports. This may sound extreme but if we can send representatives to oversee elections in nations with a questionable history of voter rights then we can certainly do the same for America.
   Our lifeblood is at stake.
   ________________________________________
   [1] Democrats Condemn GOP’s Plot to Obstruct Obama as “appalling and sad.” The Guardian April 26, 2012. Ewin MacAskill.
   [2] What Conservatives Really Want, George Lakoff
   [3] Ibid. Gilens.
   [4] U.S. Class Composition in the Sixties Capital’s “New: Dimensions”: The Kennedy Initiative
   [5] U.S. Class Composition in the Sixties Capital’s “New: Dimensions”: The Kennedy Initiative. p. My italics
   [6] There were 86 different teacher’s strikes in 1968
   [7] op. cit.
   [8] Ibid.
   [9] Gilens, p. 23-24.
   [10] Factcheck
   [11] Congressional Budget Office as quoted in Barry Ritholtz, Who is getting Richer? Poorer? A LOT Richer? The Big Picture. Oct. 27, 2011.
   [12] The Great Divergence, Entry 1: The United States of Inequality, Slate, Sept. 3 2010
   [13] As Companies Outsource, There Is No Need for Them to Hire In America, Business Week, December 11, 2010
   [14] Ibid.
   [15] Worse Than Watergate: The Secret Presidency of George W. Bush, John W. Dean The Bush family name saved George W. Bush from his failure of CEO and chairman of Arbusto/Bush Exploration and Spectrum 7. At Harken, Bush didn’t fare much better but while he was relieved of day-to-day management responsibilities he still served on the board of directors.
   [16] Michael Parenti, Political Blog. May 2007. The facts and figures were collected by Parenti and sources in his Political Blog.
   [17] Diebold, Sequoia and ES&S
   [18] Parenti, Voting Fiasco for Bush.
   [19] Ibid.
   [20] Ibid.

9. Eric is a genius. Just read the current Planet Waves email and found many astro he wrote about I have already been experiencing this week. So glad to be a subscriber.