Joe Manchin is the New Hero. Is There Anything Heroic About Him?

The corporate media has now made Joe Manchin into a hero because he suggests he may be willing to accept a climate package arrangement. Likewise, the Democrats are applauding Manchin’s alleged coming around to the party’s environmental positions. Both the media and the Democrats miss the real issue. The real issue is how is it that in a democratic nation that the United States supposedly is, Manchin can spurn the will of the majority, even though he represents less than one twentieth the number of voters that California senators represent and less than one tenth the number of voters that New York’s senators represent. All four of those senators favor progressive environmental legislation. Do the media ever raise this issue? Never. Does the Democratic Party raise them? Never. Yet it’s the key issue that needs to be raised and brought to the attention of the people of this country because only a radical overhaul of the nation’s political system will allow for the kinds of changes that are needed and that most people in the U.S. support.

 

Not only should the Democratic Party raise the issue, but they should strip Joe Manchin of his chairmanship of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and, in fact, should kick him out of the party. Why did the Democrats allow him to be chairman in the first place, since he opposed all of Obama’s energy policies, as well as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Repeal Act of 2010, voted to eliminate federal funding for Planned Parenthood, supported Trump’s border wall and immigration policies, voted to confirm Grett Kavanaugh’s appointment, etc., etc. etc. Are the Democrats showing their true colors by kowtowing to Manchin instead of kicking him in the butt? 

 

U.S. Foreign Policy: Myanmar versus Venezuela

The repressive military government in Myanmar (Burma) just put to death 4 pro-democracy activists. It’s been a year and a half since it came to power through a coup annulling the results of democratic elections. Yet the only sanctions imposed by Washington on that nation are against 4 individuals. Compare that with the sanctions in place since 2017 against Venezuelan oil, gold, its digital currency (the Petro) and confiscation of property such as CITGO and $342 million dollars of Venezuelan central bank (BCV) deposits in Citibank. The double standards are just too blatant, and yet not a word from the corporate media pointing to such an obvious example of hypocrisy. 

 

“Hard work” in the words of Defense Secretary Austin is a euphemism for budgetary cuts for social programs

 

Lloyd Austin was quoted today as saying: “We’re pushing hard to maintain and intensify the momentum of donations” for Ukraine. “This will be an area of focus for the foreseeable future, as it should be, in terms of how long our allies and partners will remain committed ... There’s no question that this will always be hard work making sure that we maintain unity.”

Why doesn’t Austin call a spade a spade? What does he mean by “hard work?” And what does he mean by “aid?” If nearly all the “aid” is military aid, why doesn’t he call it that? Another example of Washington double-speak.

Obviously “hard work” means sacrifice and the sacrifice doesn’t mean cutting the Pentagon budget or increasing taxes on corporations and millionaires. It means letting the social security program go down the tubes so that within a decade there will be drastic cuts in social security pensions, as well as Medicare and Medicaid. It also means drastic reduction in Pell Grants and other student aid programs so that a college education becomes an exclusive privilege for the children of the rich. Etc., etc., etc.

 

It’s high time that Bernie Sanders-AOC followers in the Democratic Party face the issue of U.S. imperialism head on, rather than bow to the pressures of the corporate media, as they did when they ratified the $40 billion dollar package of mostly military aid for Ukraine. Progressives need to demand that Washington actively push for negotiations to end the absurd war in Ukraine, rather than attempting to “win” it, as Austin himself explicitly calls for.

Voting in Maryland for the first time: The July 19 primaries

Trump's candidate for governor, Dan Cox, won. Needless to say, I had nothing to do with that. (The candidate I opted for, Jerome Segal, a 1960s anti-war person, didn’t seem to have done that well.) But it is worrisome because the Democrats win all the elections in Maryland except that of governor. The Republicans in MD, like in MA, often win the gubernatorial elections with the checks and balances argument. The current governor is a Republican but not a right-winger like Cox, who will face the Democratic nominee, Wes Moore, endorsed by Oprah Winfrey. The checks and balances argument (hopefully) may not hold up in November. 

 

U.S. Diplomacy toward Venezuela and Saudi Arabia: "Do as I say, not as I do"

A number of companies and governments throughout the world (Jamaica, Repsol, etc.) have been asking or considering asking Washington for “permission” to purchase Venezuelan oil or to invest in the Venezuelan oil industry. Washington had “prohibited it” on grounds of alleged violation of human rights in Venezuela. How do the leaders and the people of these nations feel now that Biden has cozied up to Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman, who even the CIA revealed gave the orders to murder journalist Jamal Khashoggi, who was chopped up into pieces?

 

“ISRAEL IS WORKING WITH ARAB ALLIES TO DESTROY IRANIAN DRONES, A SIGN OF THE GROWING TIES THAT PRESIDENT BIDEN IS TRYING TO SHORE UP” - Headline in today’s NY Time.

Washington is throwing gasoline on the fire. In the midst of a world economic crisis, the U.S. is doing everything possible to escalate tension and bellicose conflict. At the recent G-20 conference in Indonesia, Blinken adamantly refused to meet with Lavrov, his Russian counterpart. Rather than talk of a negotiated settlement, U.S. spokespeople either explicitly (as do Zelensky, Austin, Hillary Clinton, etc.) or indirectly talk of defeating Russia on the battlefield, even though from a military viewpoint, the Russians are winning the war. U.S. intelligence, rather than accurately gather information is more interested in information for propaganda purposes than a realistic assessment of what’s going on (this is a tendency that goes back at least to Bush II). And this propaganda function rubs off onto the media, thus explaining the obscene degree to which the U.S. media sides with Ukraine and even headlines Ukraine’s allegations as if they were undisputable facts. Nobody in the White House provides any notion of where all this is going to lead. It’s as if they don’t care. Not only is the world’s economy going down the tubes, but WW III looms on the horizon. One can’t help but think that this is just one more example of how under capitalism war is the means to overcome economic crises. And who, by the way, are those “Arab allies” that the NY Times talks about?  They are among the most undemocratic nations on the face of the earth. One doesn’t have to support Russia’s invasion (I certainly don’t) to recognize that Washington is largely responsible for this conflict, even before the invasion began and all the way up to the present. 

 

THE UPCOMING G-20 MEETING IN BALI, INDONESIA

U.S. rules out the possibility of Blinken meeting with Sergey Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister. That’s been the State Department’s strategy since the Ukrainian war began. In addition, it’s trying to get the host, Indonesia, to invite Zelenski. One more demonstration of how much the U.S. wants to put an end to the war in Ukraine. Does the U.S. arms industry have anything to do with its position? Selling and giving away billions of dollars in weapons may actually be good for the U.S. economy. More important than the world-wide economic hardships produced by the conflict, let alone the loss of lives.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/g-20-meeting-may-lead-to-wider-divisions-over-war-in-ukraine/ar-AAZff1p?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=32af0e0b384f4bd1acc79267e6b079c3