From marksafron at att.net  Sat Dec  1 10:40:46 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2012 10:40:46 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] As Companies Seek Tax Deals,
	Governments Pay High Price
Message-ID: <63975916-33B6-4E68-95F6-B4BBA77A157F@att.net>


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/02/us/how-local-taxpayers-bankroll-corporations.html?emc=na

As Companies Seek Tax Deals, Governments Pay High Price

When the automaker released a list of factories it was closing during bankruptcy three years ago, communities that had considered themselves G.M.?s business partners were among the targets.

For years, mayors and governors anxious about local jobs had agreed to G.M.?s demands for cash rewards, free buildings, worker training and lucrative tax breaks. As late as 2007, the company was telling local officials that these sorts of incentives would ?further G.M.?s strong relationship? with them and be a ?win/win situation,? according to town council notes from one Michigan community.

Yet at least 50 properties on the 2009 liquidation list were in towns and states that had awarded incentives adding up to billions in taxpayer dollars, according to data compiled by The New York Times.

Some officials, desperate to keep G.M., offered more. Ohio was proposing a $56 million deal to save its Moraine plant, and Wisconsin, fighting for its Janesville factory, offered $153 million.

But their overtures were to no avail. G.M. walked away and, thanks to a federal bailout, is once again profitable. The towns have not been so fortunate, having spent scarce funds in exchange for thousands of jobs that no longer exist.



One township, Ypsilanti, Mich., is suing over the automaker?s departure. ?You can?t just make these promises and throw them around like they?re spare change in the drawer,? said Doug Winters, the township?s attorney.

Yet across the country, companies have been doing just that. And the giveaways are adding up to a gigantic bill for taxpayers.

A Times investigation has examined and tallied thousands of local incentives granted nationwide and has found that states, counties and cities are giving up more than $80 billion each year to companies. The beneficiaries come from virtually every corner of the corporate world, encompassing oil and coal conglomerates, technology and entertainment companies, banks and big-box retail chains.



The cost of the awards is certainly far higher. A full accounting, The Times discovered, is not possible because the incentives are granted by thousands of government agencies and officials, and many do not know the value of all their awards. Nor do they know if the money was worth it because they rarely track how many jobs are created. Even where officials do track incentives, they acknowledge that it is impossible to know whether the jobs would have been created without the aid.

?How can you even talk about rationalizing what you?re doing when you don?t even know what you?re doing?? said Timothy J. Bartik, a senior economist at the W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research in Kalamazoo, Mich.

The Times analyzed more than 150,000 awards and created a database of incentive spending, which is searchable on the newspaper?s Web site. The survey was supplemented by interviews with more than 100 officials in government and business organizations as well as corporate executives and consultants.

A portrait arises of mayors and governors who are desperate to create jobs, outmatched by multinational corporations and short on tools to fact-check what companies tell them. Many of the officials said they feared that companies would move jobs overseas if they did not get subsidies in the United States.

Over the years, corporations have increasingly exploited that fear, creating a high-stakes bazaar where they pit local officials against one another to get the most lucrative packages. States compete with other states, cities compete with surrounding suburbs, and even small towns have entered the race with the goal of defeating their neighbors.

While some jobs have certainly migrated overseas, many companies receiving incentives were not considering leaving the country, according to interviews and incentive data.



Despite their scale, state and local incentives have barely been part of the national debate on the economic crisis. The budget negotiations under way in Washington have not addressed whether the incentives are worth the cost, even though 20 percent of state and local budgets come from federal spending. Lawmakers in Washington are battling over possible increases in personal taxes, while both parties have said that lower federal taxes on corporations are needed for the country to compete globally.

The Times analysis shows that Texas awards more incentives, over $19 billion a year, than any other state. Alaska, West Virginia and Nebraska give up the most per resident.

For many communities, the payouts add up to a substantial chunk of their overall spending, the analysis found. Oklahoma and West Virginia give up amounts equal to about one-third of their budgets, and Maine allocates nearly a fifth.

In a few states, the cost of incentives is not significant. But several of them have low business taxes ? or none at all ? which can save companies even more money than tax credits.

Far and away the most incentive money is spent on manufacturing, about $25.5 billion a year, followed by agriculture. The oil, gas and mining industries come in third, and the film business fourth. Technology is not far behind, as companies like Twitter and Facebook increasingly seek tax breaks and many localities bet on the industry?s long-term viability.

Those hopes were once more focused on automakers, which for decades have pushed cities and states to set up incentive programs, blazing a trail that companies of all sorts followed. Even today, G.M. is the top beneficiary, public records indicate. It received at least $1.7 billion in local incentives in the last five years, followed closely by Ford and Chrysler.

A spokesman for General Motors said that almost every major employer applied for incentives because they help keep companies competitive and retain or create jobs.

?There are many reasons why so many Ford, Chrysler and G.M. plants closed over the last few decades,? said the G.M. spokesman, James Cain. ?But these factors don?t mean that the companies and communities didn?t benefit while the plants were open, which was often for generations.?

Mr. Cain cited research showing that the company received less money per job than foreign automakers operating in the United States.

Questioned about incentives, officials at dozens of other large corporations said they owed it to shareholders to maximize profits. Many emphasized that they employ thousands of Americans who pay taxes and spend money in the local economy. 

(What about the 19 states that give employee's state taxes back to the companies? This was mentioned in the book "The Fine Print." Hear the interview on "Fresh Air" 9/27/12: http://www.npr.org/2012/09/20/161477162/a-close-look-at-your-bills-fine-print      Great show, M.S.) 



For government officials like Bobby Hitt of South Carolina, the incentives are a good investment that will raise tax revenues in the long run.

?I don?t see it as giving up anything,? said Mr. Hitt, who worked at BMW in the 1990s and helped it win $130 million from South Carolina.

Today, Mr. Hitt is the state?s secretary of commerce. South Carolina recently took on a $218 million debt to assist Boeing?s expansion there and offered the company tax breaks for 10 years.

Mr. Hitt, like most political officials, has a short-term mandate. It will take years to see whether the state?s bet on Boeing bears fruit.

In Michigan, Gov. Rick Snyder, a Republican in his first term, has been working to eliminate most business tax credits but is bound by past awards. The state gave General Motors $779 million in credits in 2009, just a month after the company received a $50 billion federal bailout and decided to close seven plants in Michigan.

G.M. can use the credits to offset its state tax bill for up to 20 years. ?You don?t know who will take a credit or when,? said Doug Smith, a senior official at the state?s economic development agency. ?We may give a credit to G.M., and they might not take it for three years or 10 years or more.?

One corporate executive, Donald J. Hall Jr. of Hallmark, thinks business subsidies are hurting his hometown, Kansas City, Mo., by diverting money from public education. ?It?s really not creating new jobs,? Mr. Hall said. ?It?s motivated by politicians who want to claim they have brought new jobs into their state.?

For Mr. Hall and others in Kansas City, the futility of free-flowing incentives has been underscored by a border war between Kansas and Missouri.

Soon after Kansas recruited AMC Entertainment with a $36 million award last year, the state cut its education budget by $104 million. AMC was moving only a few miles, across the border from Missouri. Workers saw little change other than in commuting times and office d?cor. A few months later, Missouri lured Applebee?s headquarters from Kansas.

?I just shake my head every time it happens, it just gives me a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach,? said Sean O?Byrne, the vice president of the Downtown Council of Kansas City. ?It sounds like I?m talking myself out of a job, but there ought to be a law against what I?m doing.?

Outgunned by Companies

For local governments, incentives have become the cost of doing business with almost every business. The Times found that the awards go to companies big and small, those gushing in profits and those sinking in losses, American companies and foreign companies, and every industry imaginable.



Workers are a vital ingredient in any business, yet companies and government officials increasingly view the creation of jobs as an expense that should be subsidized by taxpayers, private consultants and local officials said.

Even big retailers and hotels, whose business depends on being in specific locations, bargain for incentives as if they can move anywhere. The same can be said for many movie productions, which almost never come to town without local subsidies.

When Oliver Stone made the 2010 sequel to ?Wall Street,? in his mind there was only one place to shoot it: New York City. Nonetheless, the film, a scathing look at bankers? greed, received $10 million in tax credits, according to 20th Century Fox.

In an interview, Mr. Stone criticized subsidies for industries like banking and agriculture but defended them for Hollywood, saying that many movies can be shot anywhere and that their actors and crew members pay state income taxes. ?It?s good,? Mr. Stone said of the film subsidies. ?Or like basically the way business is done. I don?t understand what the moral qualm is.?

The practical consequences can be easily seen. The Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, a conservative group, found that the amount New York spends on film credits every year equals the cost of hiring 5,000 public-school teachers.

Nationwide, billions of dollars in incentives are being awarded as state governments face steep deficits. Last year alone, states cut public services and raised taxes by a collective $156 billion, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal-leaning advocacy group.

Incentives come in many forms: cash grants and loans; sales tax breaks; income tax credits and exemptions; free services; and property tax abatements. The income tax breaks add up to $18 billion and sales tax relief around $52 billion of the overall $80 billion in incentives.

Collecting data on property tax abatements is the most difficult because only a handful of states track the amounts given by cities and counties. Among them is New York, where businesses save an estimated $1.1 billion a year in property taxes. The American International Group, the insurance company at the center of the 2008 financial crisis, continued to benefit from a $23.8 million abatement from New York City at the same time it was being bailed out with $180 billion in federal money.

Since 2000, The New York Times Company has received more than $24 million from the city and state.(!)



In some places, local officials have little choice but to answer the demands of corporations.

?They dictate their terms, and we?re not really in a position to question their deal terms,? Sarah Eckhardt, a commissioner in Travis County, Tex., said of companies she has dealt with recently, including Apple and Hewlett-Packard. ?We don?t have the sophistication or the resources to negotiate with a company that has the wherewithal the size of a country. We are just no match in negotiating with that.?

Local officials can find themselves across the table from conglomerates like Shell Oil and Caterpillar, the world?s largest maker of construction equipment.

Shell has been offered a tax credit worth as much as $1.6 billion over 25 years from Pennsylvania, which competed with West Virginia and Ohio for an energy production facility. Royal Dutch Shell, the parent company, made $31 billion in profits in 2011 ? about $3.5 million every hour. The company?s chief executive made $13.1 million last year, according to Equilar, an executive compensation firm. Pennsylvania predicts that the plant will create thousands of long-term jobs, but it did not require them in exchange for the tax credit.

Caterpillar has received more than $196 million in local aid nationwide since 2007, though it has chastised states, particularly its home base, Illinois, for not being business-friendly. This year, Caterpillar announced a new plant in Georgia, which offered $44 million in incentives. Local counties chipped in free land and other aid, including $15 million in tax breaks and $8.2 million in road, water and sewer repairs.

The company, whose profits are soaring, recently froze workers? pay for six years at several locations, arguing that it needed to remain competitive. A spokesman for the company, Jim Dugan, said it employed more than 50,000 people and invested billions of dollars nationwide.

Local officials typically have scant information about the track record of corporations, like whether they lived up to job assurances elsewhere. And some officials acknowledged that they did not know to what extent incentives were a deciding factor for companies.

?I don?t know that there?s a way to know other than talking to the businesses, and the businesses telling us that that was a factor in creating jobs,? said Ken Striplin, the city manager of Santa Clarita, Calif., which gives tax breaks in a designated enterprise zone. ?There?s no box that says ?I would have created this job without the enterprise zone.? ?

California is one of the few states that have been cutting back on incentives. But that does not mean its cities are following suit. When Twitter threatened to leave San Francisco last year, officials scrambled to assuage the company.



Twitter was not short on money ? it soon received a $300 million investment from a Saudi prince and $800 million from a private consortium. The two received Twitter equity, but San Francisco got a different sort of deal.

The city exempted Twitter from what could total $22 million in payroll taxes, and the company agreed to stay put. The city estimates that Twitter?s work force could grow to 2,600 employees, although the company made no such promise.

A Twitter spokeswoman said the company was ?very happy to have been able to stay in San Francisco.? City officials did not respond to inquiries.

Like many places, San Francisco has been cutting its budget. Public parks have lost about $12 million in recent years, though workers at Twitter will not lack for greenery. The company?s plush new office has a rooftop garden with great views and amenities. Enjoying the perks, one employee sent out a tweet: ?Tanned on Twitter?s new roof deck this morning as some dude served me smoothie shots. This is real life??

A Zero-Sum Game

It was the company every state had to have. In 1985, General Motors was looking for a spot to manufacture its Saturn, a new compact car that would compete with Japanese imports and create thousands of American jobs.



Incentives were not in wide use, and several states had only recently changed their constitutions to allow them.

In fact, when G.M. announced the search, its chairman, Roger Smith, said the perks would not be a predominant factor. ?Tax breaks can?t make a silk purse out of a sow?s ear,? Mr. Smith told The Detroit Free Press. He said G.M. planned to avoid states that had large debts or lackluster schools.

Undeterred, some 30 states stepped forward in what became a full-out competition. One official, Bill Clinton, then the governor of Arkansas, traveled to Detroit offering income tax credits and sales tax exemptions worth nearly $200 million.

Mr. Smith essentially kept his word and chose Tennessee, which had put together a relatively small package. Reid Rundell, a retired G.M. executive, said in a recent interview that it had come down to geography. ?The primary factor was distribution for incoming parts, as well as outgoing vehicles,? Mr. Rundell said.

But the gates had been opened. In 1992, South Carolina lured BMW with a $130 million package; the next year, Alabama got Mercedes-Benz at a price tag that topped $300 million.

?What the auto incentives did back then was really raise the profile of economic incentives both within companies, in government and in the public?s eye,? said Mark Sweeney, who worked for the South Carolina Commerce Department in the 1990s and now advises companies on obtaining government grants.

By 1993, governors were regaling one another at a national conference with stories of deals beyond the auto industry, including a recent bidding war for United Airlines that drew more than 90 cities. The airline had set up negotiations in a hotel, and its representatives ran floor to floor comparing bids, said Jim Edgar, then the governor of Illinois.



Mr. Edgar said he had called for a truce, concerned that the practice was unfair to companies that did not receive incentives. But many states would not sign on, he said, particularly those in the South, where businesses were moving.

?If you?ve got some states doing it, it?s hard for the others not to do it,? Mr. Edgar said. ?It?s like unilaterally disarming.?

Soon after, economists at Federal Reserve branches were questioning the use of incentives. One, in Minnesota, used mathematical proofs and game theory to show that competition between states did not increase overall economic value. Several other economists have since called the practice a zero-sum game.

A group of taxpayers in Michigan and Ohio went as far as suing DaimlerChrysler after Ohio and the City of Toledo awarded the automaker $280 million in the late 1990s. The suit argued that it was unfair for one taxpayer to be given a break at the expense of all others.

The suit made its way to the Supreme Court, and G.M. and Ford signed on to briefs supporting Daimler, as did local governments. The National Governors Association warned the court that prohibiting incentives could lead to jobs moving overseas. ?This is the economic reality,? the association said in a brief.

The governors offered no hard evidence of the effectiveness of tax credits, but the Supreme Court did not consider whether they worked anyway. In 2006, the court concluded that the taxpayers did not have the legal standing to challenge Ohio?s tax actions in federal court.

The tab for auto incentives has grown to $13.9 billion since 1985, according to the Center for Automotive Research, a nonprofit group in Ann Arbor, Mich. G.M., the top recipient, was awarded $3.3 billion of the aid. Since 1979, automakers also closed more than 267 plants in the United States, about half of which still sit empty, according to the center.

The auto industry and some local officials have long argued that auto companies create so many jobs and draw in so many supporting suppliers that all taxpayers benefit. Even if companies shut down years later, as Saturn did in Tennessee for a few years, the trade-off is worth it, they said.

?I do believe that if a state ever is going to create incentives,? said Lamar Alexander, who was Tennessee?s governor in 1985 when Saturn selected the state, ?the auto industry would be by far the No. 1 target, because an auto assembly plant is a money target.?

Still, Mr. Alexander, now a United States senator, said that recruiting a large factory today would be more expensive. ?It has changed a lot,? he said. ?It?s almost become a sweepstakes.?

G.M. Gets Into the Act

G.M. may have initially minimized the role of local dollars, but as the company?s financial problems grew, incentives became a big part of its math.



The actions of the company were described in more than two dozen in-depth interviews with former company officials, tax consultants and governors and mayors who have dealt with G.M.

The automaker?s real estate division, Argonaut Realty, oversaw the hunt for the most lucrative deals. Up and down the corporate ladder, employees were encouraged to push governments for more, according to transcripts of public meetings and interviews. Even G.M. plant managers knew that the future of their facilities depended in part on their ability to send word of big discounts back to Detroit.

Union representatives were enlisted to attend local hearings, putting a human face on the jobs at stake. G.M.?s regional tax managers often showed up, armed with tax abatement wish lists and highlighting the company?s gifts to local charities.

?We knew what our investment of X amount meant to the community, and we knew we needed to partner with the community to be successful,? said Marilyn P. Nix, who worked as a real estate executive at G.M. for 31 years until retiring in 2005.

At the top of G.M., executives reviewed the proposals from various locations and went where the numbers added up.

?I know people like to blame the industry for taking advantage of the incentives, but you go back to what your fiduciary responsibility is to the stockholders,? Ms. Nix said. ?As long as you?ve got people that are willing to better the deals, the management owes it to their stockholders to try to get the best economic deal that they can.?

For towns, it became a game of survival, even if the competition turned out to be a mirage.

Moraine, Ohio, was already home to a G.M. plant in 1997 when the company pushed hard for additional incentives. G.M. said it was looking for a place to accommodate more manufacturing.

Wayne Barfels, the city manager at the time, said a G.M. representative had told officials that Moraine was competing with Shreveport, La., and Linden, N.J. After the local school board approved property tax breaks, The Dayton Daily News reported that the other towns had not been in discussions with G.M.

The school board considered rescinding the deal, but allowed G.M. to keep it after a company official apologized. In 2008, G.M. shut the Moraine facility.

In towns where General Motors remains, local officials praised the company. ?I can say they have been a great partner to us,? said Virg Bernero, the mayor of Lansing, Mich. ?It would do something to the psyche of this community if they were not here. I mean, I just praise God every day.?



Looking to lure businesses beyond automakers, states have routinely bolstered their incentive tool kits. In 2010 alone, states created or expanded about 40 tax credits and exemptions, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The nature of the credits has also changed. New ones are geared toward attracting technology and green energy companies, but it is hard to know whether 15 years down the road they will thrive or wind up stumbling like the automakers. And many modern companies, like those in digital technology, can easily pack up and leave.

?I don?t see anything that suggests that Twitter and Facebook are better bets in the long run,? said Laura A. Reese, the director of the Global Urban Studies Program at Michigan State University. Ms. Reese advises local governments to invest in residents through education and training rather than in companies where ?it?s hard to pick winners.?

Yet states try to do it all the time. In 2010, Rhode Island, which has the nation?s second-highest unemployment rate, recruited Curt Schilling, a former Red Sox pitcher, to move his video game company from Massachusetts. The company, 38 Studios, had never released a game and was not making money, but the governor at the time had the state guarantee $75 million in loans.

The company failed and dismissed all of its roughly 400 workers this May. Rhode Island taxpayers are now on the hook for the loans.

Officials said part of the difficulty was that communities do not get much say in a company?s business strategy.

?We, as communities, stake our futures with these people who are supposed to know what they?re doing, and sometimes they don?t,? said Arthur Walker, a businessman in Shreveport and former chairman of the city?s chamber of commerce.

Mr. Walker and other officials in Shreveport know firsthand. In 2000, they were worried that G.M. would close a plant in their area and responded with a generous proposal: the city would cut the company?s gas bill and provide work force training grants. In addition, G.M. would benefit by a recent increase in one of the state?s income tax credits.

Eager to encourage innovation, Shreveport officials suggested ways the city could assist G.M. in building electric cars. ?We wanted to be part of the future,? said Mr. Walker, whose brother worked at the plant.

G.M. took the city?s incentives but not its business advice and began building the giant Hummer there.

?We knew they needed to build green cars ? I mean, who builds a Hummer for the 21st century?? Mr. Walker said. ?It was a losing proposition that we found ourselves in. We couldn?t win because those people weren?t making the correct business decisions, in my view. When it didn?t work, we?re the ones left holding the bag.?

The Hummer was discontinued in 2010, and the Shreveport factory closed this August, the final victim of G.M.?s bankruptcy.

Ypsilanti?s Losing Battle

For much of the last 20 years, Doug Winters has been agitating for General Motors to be held accountable.

Mr. Winters, the attorney for Ypsilanti Township and several other places around Ann Arbor, has lived in Ypsilanti all his life. His grandmother labored at the local plant, Willow Run, during World War II, when it made bomber planes. People in town still proudly point out that a woman known as Rosie the Riveter worked there as well. After the war, when G.M. moved into the plant to manufacture its automatic transmission system, his father got a job.

Mr. Winters loves the history of Willow Run but hates what he views as corporate hypocrisy: G.M. asked for government help on the one hand and then appealed to free-market rationales for closing shop.

Over the years, Ypsilanti granted G.M. more than $200 million in incentives for two factories at Willow Run, Mr. Winters said. ?They had put basically a stranglehold on the entire state of Michigan and other places across the country by just grabbing these tax abatements by the billions,? he said. ?They were doing it with a very thinly disguised threat that if you don?t give us these tax abatements, then we?ll have to go somewhere else.?



Ypsilanti first sued G.M. in the 1990s to prevent the company from closing the factory at Willow Run that made the Chevrolet Caprice.

The town had granted the company tax incentives after the factory manager argued that G.M.?s ability to compete with other carmakers was at stake, documents in the lawsuit show. The tax break and ?favorable market demand,? said the plant manager, Harvey Williams, would allow the automaker to ?maintain continuous employment.?

Nevertheless, G.M. shut the factory. A lower court found in favor of Ypsilanti, but the ruling was reversed on appeal. The judge said that a company?s job assurances ?cannot be evidence of a promise.?

In 2010, when the company closed the remaining factory at Willow Run, Mr. Winters sued again. This time, Ypsilanti argued that the automaker should have been forced to close overseas factories instead, especially since American taxpayers had bailed out G.M. In addition, Ypsilanti sought to recover money from G.M., saying the company had agreed to reimburse the town for some incentives if it left.



So far, Ypsilanti?s claims have not been addressed. They were complicated by G.M.?s bankruptcy, which allowed the carmaker to emerge as a new company and leave some of its liabilities and contractual obligations behind.

When asked whether the new G.M. has civic responsibilities to its former factory towns, Mr. Cain, the company spokesman, said: ?Our obligation to the communities where we do business is to run a successful business. And when we prosper, it allows us to do more than just turn the lights on and make cars.?

He also said that since the bailout, ?G.M. has invested more than $7.3 billion in its U.S. facilities, and we?ve created or retained almost 19,000 jobs in communities all over the country.?

Matthew P. Cullen, who oversaw real estate and economic development for G.M. until he left the company in 2008, said the automaker was aware of its impact on communities. He said that what happened with G.M. was the result of an entire industry changing and that there had been no bad intentions.

?If you go forward in good faith doing everything you can and make the investment, then you?re partners,? Mr. Cullen said. ?Sometimes partnerships in business work, and they work for 60 years. And in some cases, they don?t, and it doesn?t make you a bad partner.?

Some towns that are still dealing with the fallout of plant closings might disagree. In Pontiac, Mich., tax revenues have fallen 40 percent since 2009 after the old G.M. knocked down buildings on its property, resulting in lower tax assessments, according to the city?s emergency manager.

In Ypsilanti, an entity set up to sell off G.M. property is marketing the plant as valuable. At the same time, it has been arguing for lower property taxes on the grounds that its plant is not worth much.

Ypsilanti?s supervisor, Brenda Stumbo, said the township would be stung hard by further revenue cuts. Ypsilanti has already slimmed down its Fire Department, and city workers are juggling multiple jobs. There are seven to 10 home foreclosures a week, giving the township the highest foreclosure rate in the county, Ms. Stumbo said.

?Can all of it be traced back to General Motors?? she said, listing auto suppliers that closed after G.M. did. ?No, but a great deal of it can.?

Nonetheless, Ms. Stumbo said that if G.M. would bring jobs back to town, she would be willing to grant the company more incentives.

But Mr. Winters is not so sure. He said he would never support more incentives without stronger protections for Ypsilanti. ?They?ve done a lot of damage to a lot of people and a lot of communities, and they?ve basically been given a clean slate,? he said. ?It?s a ?get out of jail free? card.?



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121201/054c9e32/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PastedGraphic-2.tiff
Type: image/tiff
Size: 2972 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121201/054c9e32/attachment.tiff 

From marksafron at att.net  Sat Dec  1 16:32:01 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2012 16:32:01 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] C.R.
Message-ID: <0C56BFF6-BB4E-4202-9D91-646102CC1E04@att.net>

From Anya:
Below is a link to an article about the current CR president Kathy Smith and her previous occupations. She was actually working for Mendocino College before CR. Also, she was recently married which is why her name is Smith now and no longer Lehner. 
http://www.northcoastjournal.com/blogthing/2012/03/15/new-college-of-the-redwoods-president/


1. The dean position at the Mendocino campus is being eliminated. This means that our current dean, whose contract ends June 1st, will not be replaced. 

2. CR's custodian, maintenance man, lab tech, library tech, and
administrative office assistant were all laid off. Their last day will
be January 31st.

3. Out of the five layoffs listed in #2 everyone except the
administrative office assistant has the option of being rehired, but
their hours will be reduced from full time to 19 hours a week and they
will no longer receive benefits.

4. Our financial aid officer is retiring at the end of the year, and she
is not being replaced. She will be coming back very part time in the
spring semester, but beyond this there is no plan to provide a new
financial aid officer.

5. Our IT person is retiring at the end of this fall semester, and he is
not being replaced. This means we will have no one to repair computers or help with technical problems.

6. Out of the 38 layoffs district wide, five of them took place on our
little campus.

7. Please get the word out that people can contact Barbara Rice, the
trustee for the Mendocino Coast, at barbrice at mcn.org.They can also
contact CR's President Kathy Smith at kathy-smith at redwoods.edu. The more people that contact these two women with their concerns on this issue the more attention it will get.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121201/8ffe2696/attachment.html 

From ndevall at mcn.org  Sat Dec  1 16:59:11 2012
From: ndevall at mcn.org (Norman de Vall)
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2012 16:59:11 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] C.R.
In-Reply-To: <0C56BFF6-BB4E-4202-9D91-646102CC1E04@att.net>
References: <0C56BFF6-BB4E-4202-9D91-646102CC1E04@att.net>
Message-ID: <F3B13C27-E59C-4FB9-BE5C-2B32C74F7A03@mcn.org>

I think it's time for a Citizen's Committee to meet with
MCC and Santa Rosa JC.  This is reminiscent of 
citizen push-back 20 + years ago.  We can initiate a
pleblicite and attempt to merge our college district
with another community college. As before CR et al
will take our tax share, spend it somewhere else and
return less and less to the district.
Norman de Vall
former CR Marine/Maritime Technologies Instructor

On Dec 1, 2012, at 4:32 PM, Mark Safron wrote:

> From Anya:
> Below is a link to an article about the current CR president Kathy Smith and her previous occupations. She was actually working for Mendocino College before CR. Also, she was recently married which is why her name is Smith now and no longer Lehner. 
> http://www.northcoastjournal.com/blogthing/2012/03/15/new-college-of-the-redwoods-president/
> 
> 
> 1. The dean position at the Mendocino campus is being eliminated. This means that our current dean, whose contract ends June 1st, will not be replaced. 
> 
> 2. CR's custodian, maintenance man, lab tech, library tech, and
> administrative office assistant were all laid off. Their last day will
> be January 31st.
> 
> 3. Out of the five layoffs listed in #2 everyone except the
> administrative office assistant has the option of being rehired, but
> their hours will be reduced from full time to 19 hours a week and they
> will no longer receive benefits.
> 
> 4. Our financial aid officer is retiring at the end of the year, and she
> is not being replaced. She will be coming back very part time in the
> spring semester, but beyond this there is no plan to provide a new
> financial aid officer.
> 
> 5. Our IT person is retiring at the end of this fall semester, and he is
> not being replaced. This means we will have no one to repair computers or help with technical problems.
> 
> 6. Out of the 38 layoffs district wide, five of them took place on our
> little campus.
> 
> 7. Please get the word out that people can contact Barbara Rice, the
> trustee for the Mendocino Coast, at barbrice at mcn.org.They can also
> contact CR's President Kathy Smith at kathy-smith at redwoods.edu. The more people that contact these two women with their concerns on this issue the more attention it will get.
> 
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.
> 
> For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121201/252d8e3e/attachment.html 

From marksafron at att.net  Sat Dec  1 17:18:05 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2012 17:18:05 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Let's get Elizabeth Warren on the Senate Banking
	Committee.
Message-ID: <CDEA5B7A-4494-4877-8C1C-38E5409C6C38@att.net>

Hey folks,

Will you help me fight to get Elizabeth Warren on the Senate Banking Committee?

For years now, Wall Street has held sway over the Senate Banking Committee. The committee is stacked with industry-friendly Republicans and Democrats whose largest donors are big banks. Through this cozy influence, Wall Street has managed to ride out scandal after scandal relatively unscathed.

Which is exactly why Wall Street is terrified of Elizabeth Warren. After spending millions to defeat Senator-elect Warren, Wall Street is opening its purse again in a frantic attempt to block her from the Senate Banking Committee and prevent themselves from being held accountable for their greed. On this decision, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has the final say, which is why we need to get him to stand strong. Americans finally have someone in the Senate who will stand up to Wall Street, but first we need to make a stand for her.

Tell Majority Leader Harry Reid: Don?t block Elizabeth Warren for the Senate Banking Committee. http://action.sumofus.org/a/warren-senate-banking-committee/64/?sub=taf

Thank you, Mark 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121201/c61e67c1/attachment.html 

From nsdusoir at mcn.org  Sat Dec  1 18:12:38 2012
From: nsdusoir at mcn.org (Howard Ennes)
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2012 18:12:38 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] You are invited to a holiday concert
In-Reply-To: <878C7A6A-DBB5-4E23-9005-6F9B30FA1C7F@mcn.org>
References: <AEAD4FDAE106400BB57148119EE9FA8E@DellPC>
	<878C7A6A-DBB5-4E23-9005-6F9B30FA1C7F@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <74EE2500-592F-42EE-BCB1-CDA51DACA3FD@mcn.org>

My dear IRENE ??

	That's a hard choice . . . Would supporting the Chorus have a positive effect on the College situation and perhaps be a chance to show that Occupy is aware of the issues?  

	Is there a leaflet or flyer of some sort that describes what is happening and that could be distributed at the door?  At both or either of the concerts?

	Could a few Occupiers be corralled to attend and help?  This might be something Occupy could do right away . . . I'm copying this to the Occupy List Serve in case anyone else wants to step up.
														
													
On Dec 1, 2012, at 5:38 PM, Irene L. Malone wrote:

> This is the other concert I heard about.  Would you prefer this to the Pt. Cabrillo one?  [ "My Grandfather's Fiddle ?? Stories of the Solstice" ]

> Irene
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
>> 
>> Dear Friends,
>> 
>> You are cordially invited to the College of the Redwoods Chorus winter concert at the Mendocino
>> Presbyterian Church on Main Street. The chorus will perform on Friday evening, December 7,
>> at 7 p.m. and on Saturday afternoon, December 8, at 2 p.m.
>> 
>> The program includes music by Rollo Dilworth, Greg Jasperse, Dennis Janzer and Johann Michael Haydn.
>> 
>> Other featured artists are Trebl'e Women and Sine Nomine.
>> 
>> The concert is sponsored by the Mendocino Presbyterian Church and admission is free. Donations at the
>> door are gratefully accepted; portions of the proceeds will go to the Mendocino Presbyterian Church Historical
>> Preservation Fund and to the College of the Redwoods Community Chorus scholarship fund.
>> 
>> Hope to see you at our concert, and please share this message with friends. Thank you.
>> 
>> Fran Schwartz
>> franamie at cs.com
>> 937-1352
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
>> Version: 9.0.930 / Virus Database: 2634.1.1/5427 - Release Date: 11/29/12 11:34:00
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121201/430b18d7/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PastedGraphic-8.tiff
Type: image/tiff
Size: 29830 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121201/430b18d7/attachment.tiff 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Sun Dec  2 11:26:17 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2012 11:26:17 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] bounced letter
Message-ID: <7A17CD3D-BEC9-4F66-9CC3-991B3B289964@mcn.org>

Tammy, Your letter bounced for some reason ( wouldn't go through). Might be that you are sending it to other addresses than Occupy list serve.
To keep spam out, they have it set up for just our address.    occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org
Here are some other considerations:

About the List Serve:

 Always put the topic in the Subject Line. (So the moderators can easily create an abstract.) 

If you have comments to one person, please reply to them only. (So others are not involved in a private discussion.)

Only send from you own email address - one email address per member. 
 
Nothing over 300kb. No attachments.About 3 small pictures plus text.

For longer articles include the link and a brief paragraph about the article.

To keep the digest as readable as possible trim articles before sending,  if possible.

Also:  Keep it all civil.
We were set up as a way for Occupy members to converse and send Occupy relevant stuff.

We generally are not promoting candidates.on the list serve. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121202/c58918cf/attachment.html 

From tammysue_123 at att.net  Sat Dec  1 21:43:14 2012
From: tammysue_123 at att.net (Tammy Davis)
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2012 21:43:14 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] C.R.
In-Reply-To: <F3B13C27-E59C-4FB9-BE5C-2B32C74F7A03@mcn.org>
References: <0C56BFF6-BB4E-4202-9D91-646102CC1E04@att.net>
	<F3B13C27-E59C-4FB9-BE5C-2B32C74F7A03@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <E0E7B50A943E4E59A09A54743E9AB51F@Windows7HP>

Thank you to all who have forwarded this email.

I am now taking finals at CR in Fort Bragg and in less than 2 weeks, I will be eligible to transfer to a 4 year program (and I am looking at Humboldt). I may however not be able to afford continuing my education right now because of the skyrocketing costs. I do not understand all of the factors that go into decisions made to increase tuition costs and budget issues that lead to layoffs and pay cuts of faculty, but I am learning. I will contact both Barbara Rice and Kathy Smith, but I wanted to share a question that I have already submitted to CR board members. I did a little research on 2 year versus 4 year schools. About 10 years ago, there were proposals being made around the country to allow 2 year schools the option of implementing 4 year programs. There are a number of US schools who have been doing this and the idea was proposed in California (San Diego County) in January 2010. But I couldn?t find evidence of the idea going anywhere. I think it is an awesome idea that would benefit everyone. Ten times the funding, greater opportunity/access to obtain a 4 year degree, better pay for instructors (finally), and stronger community. Maybe there are obstacles here that I?m not yet aware of that would make this an impossibility. But I would sure like to know what they are so we could at least try to overcome them.

Thank you again for the info,

Tammy Davis

From: Norman de Vall 
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2012 4:59 PM
To: rkarch at mcn.org 
Cc: occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org 
Subject: Re: [Occupymendocino] C.R.

I think it's time for a Citizen's Committee to meet with 
MCC and Santa Rosa JC.  This is reminiscent of 
citizen push-back 20 + years ago.  We can initiate a
pleblicite and attempt to merge our college district
with another community college. As before CR et al

will take our tax share, spend it somewhere else and
return less and less to the district.
Norman de Vall
former CR Marine/Maritime Technologies Instructor


On Dec 1, 2012, at 4:32 PM, Mark Safron wrote:


  From Anya:
  Below is a link to an article about the current CR president Kathy Smith and her previous occupations. She was actually working for Mendocino College before CR. Also, she was recently married which is why her name is Smith now and no longer Lehner. 
  http://www.northcoastjournal.com/blogthing/2012/03/15/new-college-of-the-redwoods-president/ 


  1. The dean position at the Mendocino campus is being eliminated. This means that our current dean, whose contract ends June 1st, will not be replaced. 

  2. CR's custodian, maintenance man, lab tech, library tech, and
  administrative office assistant were all laid off. Their last day will
  be January 31st.

  3. Out of the five layoffs listed in #2 everyone except the
  administrative office assistant has the option of being rehired, but
  their hours will be reduced from full time to 19 hours a week and they
  will no longer receive benefits.

  4. Our financial aid officer is retiring at the end of the year, and she
  is not being replaced. She will be coming back very part time in the
  spring semester, but beyond this there is no plan to provide a new
  financial aid officer.

  5. Our IT person is retiring at the end of this fall semester, and he is
  not being replaced. This means we will have no one to repair computers or help with technical problems.

  6. Out of the 38 layoffs district wide, five of them took place on our
  little campus.

  7. Please get the word out that people can contact Barbara Rice, the
  trustee for the Mendocino Coast, at barbrice at mcn.org.They can also
  contact CR's President Kathy Smith at kathy-smith at redwoods.edu. The more people that contact these two women with their concerns on this issue the more attention it will get.

  TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.

  For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.

For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121201/0306e48c/attachment.html 

From tammy at mcn.org  Sun Dec  2 10:29:51 2012
From: tammy at mcn.org (Tammy Davis)
Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2012 10:29:51 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Thank You Howard...
In-Reply-To: <678D6943-5BFC-48D3-B5B8-3ED8BA0C6AFF@mcn.org>
References: <678D6943-5BFC-48D3-B5B8-3ED8BA0C6AFF@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <F9297E70F2E84F41817C9E906C832DB6@Windows7HP>

for sharing this humbling video. This one, The Girl Who Silenced the World for 5 Minutes, also puts everyone?s daily worries in perspective.

From: Howard Ennes 
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2012 8:42 PM
To: Howard Ennes 
Subject: You got problems?


This may help you think about your own problems and how to approach them . . .  I know that watching this young man helps me to see more clearly: 


              www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=9xwCG0Ey2Mg 

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2793 / Virus Database: 2634/5928 - Release Date: 11/30/12
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121202/9613cfcb/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 16764 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121202/9613cfcb/attachment.jpe 

From agnes at mcn.org  Mon Dec  3 06:16:55 2012
From: agnes at mcn.org (Agnes Woolsey)
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 06:16:55 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fwd: Re: News for City Council correction #2 on
 website
In-Reply-To: <50B963C9.3060702@mcn.org>
References: <50B963C9.3060702@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <50BCB457.5040506@mcn.org>




-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Re: [Occupymendocino] News for City Council correction on website
Date: 	Fri, 30 Nov 2012 17:56:25 -0800
From: 	Agnes Woolsey <agnes at mcn.org>
To: 	Richard Karch <rkarch at mcn.org>



Please visit www.nationalcommonwealthclubgroup.net to read

> On Nov 28, 2012, at 10:10 AM, Agnes Woolsey wrote:
>
>> Dear Occupy,
>>             I found a wonderful article on C.J.s website called Ending
>> Foreclosures with Local Solutions by Michael Sauvante of the
>> Commonwealth Group that I will use to speak to the F.B. City Council,
>> noting what San Bernadino City Council did.
>>
>>   They passed a resolution authorizing their staff to create a request
>> for proposal, a formal mechanism  to address the glut of underwater
>> borrowers by purchasing for considering  plans to address the glut of
>> underwater borrowers.
>> You can read it yourself, an enlightening 8 pages.
>> Of course i will use only 3 minutes worth of it.
>> Agnes
>>
>>
>> TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.
>>
>> For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org
>




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121203/18cf6986/attachment.html 

From marksafron at att.net  Mon Dec  3 07:44:47 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 07:44:47 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] You on a Million-dollar Bill
Message-ID: <073903F3-3C63-4B80-A052-757CB27B1CFA@att.net>

Hey Folks,

A group of 54 high-profile CEOs just used $43 million in lobbying money to buy their way into a meeting for ?Fiscal Cliff? talks. If they?re buying access to protect their interests, who?s going to represent us?

That?s why I signed my name to an 8-foot ?Million-dollar Bill? being delivered to Senate Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker John Boehner. I want to ask them ?Hey! Where?s MY meeting??

Will you join me in demanding that politicians protect our interests during the 'fiscal cliff' negotiations? Click here to act now: http://represent.us/cliff/

From rkarch at mcn.org  Mon Dec  3 10:53:55 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 10:53:55 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fwd: Reduction in Coast Court Public Meeting
References: <DA23EA54-8D82-4CAB-8510-F19D873BCB29@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <D1F89EEE-3548-4C58-B0F5-F95D99D7D9A2@mcn.org>

> All tested and should open up right away. Enjoy! rk
> 
> http://mendocoasttv.org/ReductioninCoastCourtPublicMeeting112912.html#featured

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121203/ab1aa249/attachment.html 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Mon Dec  3 16:01:38 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 16:01:38 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Reagans Welfare Queen Found
Message-ID: <51F4F16C-8D6F-4299-864D-D592DCED22F6@mcn.org>

http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/13127-reagans-welfare-queen-found

Reagan's "Welfare Queen" FOUND!
Monday, 03 December 2012 16:17
By Thom Hartmann and Sam Sacks , The Daily Take | Op-Ed


131
font size   Print Email
Good news everyone, after more than thirty years of searching by the news media, Ronald Reagan?s infamous ?Welfare Queen? has finally been found. She lives in Bentonville, Arkansas.
?She has eighty names, thirty addresses,? Reagan warned during his 1976 run for President about a nameless, Cadillac-driving woman who?s conning the social safety net. He added: ?She?s got Medicaid, getting food stamps, and she is collecting welfare under each of her names.? In total, Reagan said, ?Her tax-free cash income is over $150,000.?
For more than thirty years, Republicans have used the existence of this ?Welfare Queen? to justify their attacks on public spending and prove that the ?welfare state? has run amok. Yet, her identity has never been revealed. After decades of searching, the best and brightest minds in the field of journalism were never able to discover who?s behind the wheel of the ?Welfare Queen?s? Cadillac, or if she even existed.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121203/06970fba/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: blank.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 43 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121203/06970fba/attachment.gif 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Mon Dec  3 23:25:44 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 23:25:44 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] No Wonder Eminent Domain Mortgage Seizures Scare
	Wall Street
Message-ID: <12EFB86C-EAC9-4067-BE27-A7C9771B7456@mcn.org>


No Wonder Eminent Domain Mortgage Seizures Scare Wall Street

There is a great disturbance in the force.
 Print
 Reprints
 Email

inShare
34


Wall Street's political operatives ? the American Bankers Association, American Securitization Forum, the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, and the Financial Services Roundtable ? wrote a panicked letter to the Supervisors of San Bernardino County in California to express "strong objection" to a proposal by a startup mortgage company. The letter conveys the unmistakable threat that Wall Street will sic its lawyers on the county and will "likely be reluctant to provide future funding to borrowers in these areas."

The proposal is that the county use eminent domain to buy underwater mortgages, almost half the mortgages in the county. The mortgage company, working with the county, would then negotiate new mortgages with the homeowners that they could afford. If the proposal worked as planned, the county would get relief from the foreclosure crisis, the mortgage company would make a profit, and the idea would spread to other counties and towns.

A legal challenge by Wall Street might be expensive to fight, but the arguments are pretty flimsy. 

( story continues...)

http://www.americanbanker.com/bankthink/eminent-domain-mortgage-seizures-terrify-wall-street-1050811-1.html?zkPrintable=1&nopagination=1

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121203/dca11e33/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: print-icon.png
Type: image/png
Size: 3685 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121203/dca11e33/attachment.png 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: reprint-icon.png
Type: image/png
Size: 3692 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121203/dca11e33/attachment-0001.png 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: email-icon.png
Type: image/png
Size: 3660 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121203/dca11e33/attachment-0002.png 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Tue Dec  4 09:34:11 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 09:34:11 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Occupys-Response-to-Disaster-Go-On-The-Offensive
Message-ID: <D857E075-0B88-4187-92BD-19341F5B1D23@mcn.org>

http://readersupportednews.org/off-site-opinion-section/83-83/14856-occupys-response-to-disaster-go-on-the-offensive

Sign at the Church of St. Luke and St. Matthew on Clinton Ave. in Brooklyn (batmanwi.com/Jenna Pope)

The best response to disaster: Go on the offensive
It has been more than a month since Hurricane Sandy. Windows of opportunity that have opened will soon close again, and we need to seize the moment. Compared to just a week or two ago, there are now fewer volunteers, fewer people reading the mass emails from Occupy Sandy, fewer hubs in active service. And just like before, the vultures are still circling, hoping to use this period of crisis to replace flooded bungalows and moldy housing projects with the fancy condos and luxury hotels they?ve always wanted. Just like before, the underlying systems and crises ? social, economic, political and environmental ? still exist, and are still causing damage much deeper than any hurricane ever could on its own.
by Yotam Marom | December 3, 2012
We?re usually inclined to fight power when it is being carried out, but that?s often too late to stop it. Similarly, we?re inclined to fight powerwhere it is most felt ? in our communities, in the poor neighborhoods and communities of color around the city, in the ghettos that separate the many from the few who profit from their exploitation. That, too, is a mistake, because the powerful make decisions far, far away from there.

Yes, the windows are closing, but there?s still a bit of time and a ton of potential to make the shift from relief to resistance. If we want to protect our communities and prepare ourselves for the many battles ahead, we have to go on the offensive. If we want to really have a say, really change the rules of the game, we have to take the fight from where power is felt to the heart of the beast where it originates ? from Far Rockaway and Staten Island to Wall Street and City Hall.




Sign at the Church of St. Luke and St. Matthew on Clinton Ave. in Brooklyn (batmanwi.com/Jenna Pope)
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121204/184e7c6c/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: img_0419.jpeg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 39863 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121204/184e7c6c/attachment.jpeg 

From agnes at mcn.org  Tue Dec  4 14:20:41 2012
From: agnes at mcn.org (Agnes Woolsey)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 14:20:41 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fwd: BRUNCH - SATURDAY DECEMBER 15TH FROM 8:00 TO
	11:00 AM
In-Reply-To: <50BE4DFA.9090205@mcn.org>
References: <50BE4DFA.9090205@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <50BE7739.50307@mcn.org>

Dear friends of Occupy,
I plan to go to a workshop at the Sports Center at 10:00 all about 
balance. As an aging senior balance is essential to keeping one step 
ahead of a broken hip or damaged knee.. However I can come to the brunch 
at 9:00 am if anyone else could join me that would be more enjoyable.
Agnes


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	BRUNCH - SATURDAY DECEMBER 15TH FROM 8:00 TO 11:00 AM
Date: 	Tue, 04 Dec 2012 11:24:42 -0800
From: 	Bob Bushansky <rcsevents at mcn.org>
To: 	Virginia Taylor <VZAG at mcn.org>, "Sylvia E. Bartley" <nhh at mcn.org>, 
Agnes Woolsey <agnes at mcn.org>, Alice Bauer <abauer1148 at ATT.net>, Barbara 
Foote <bmfoote2001 at yahoo.com>, Bob Bushansky <erb at mcn.org>, Britta 
<Britta at mcn.org>, Carolyn Mann <mann95432 at yahoo.com>, Charles Bush 
<cbush at mcn.org>, Chris & Buffy Maple <chrism at mcn.org>, Cleone Gardens 
Inn <cleonegardensinn at yahoo.com>, "Dennis W. Simonson" 
<dwsimonson at comcast.net>, Suzanne Felton <SuFelton at mcn.org>, Elizabeth 
Swenson <eswenson at mcn.org>, Gin Kremen <ginpaul at comcast.net>, Henrietta 
<gardnrz2 at mcn.org>, Henrietta Steiniger <steinigr at mcn.org>, Hilarie 
Coate <CALLIOPE at WELL.COM>, Howard Ennes <nsdvsoir at mcn.org>, Jack/Joan 
Carlson <seawolf at mcn.org>, Jackie Wallenberg <jwoll at mcn.org>, Jennifer & 
Thomas Owen <jowen at mcn.org>, Kira Magness Rafanan <klm1674 at hotmail.com>, 
Lena Pardini <1pardini at mcn.org>, Leona Walden <pacrdg at mcn.org>, Malcom 
Dunham <mandm at saber.net>, Marta Mackenzie <mmackenz at mcn.org>, Maureen 
Eppstein <maureenE at mcn.org>, Meg Courtney <mcourtney1 at mcn.org>, Merry 
Winslow <max at mcn.org>, Mike Stone <mrstone at mcn.org>, Stephen Holcomb 
<s.holcomb at ymail.com>, Nicholas Brownrigg <5thbt at comcast.net>, Norman & 
Roen Mallory <mallorg at mcn.org>, Pat & Jerry Duarte 
<mendohouse at hotmail.com>, Pat Campbell <pat at cwcranch.com>, Patricia 
Burton <PatwycoffBurton at Gmail.com>, Rachel Binah <rachel at mcn.org>



Dear Friends of the Senior Center,

Our next monthly benefit food event is a week and a half away. We will
be doing a Crab Omelette Brunch on Saturday December 15th from 8:00 to
11:00 AM. Other choices are: Eggs any style and Sausage or Strawberry
French Toast. The donation cost of $12.00 includes Mimosas and/or Cafe
Royale.
Before during and after the Brunch we will be featuring a silent auction
- Plus - The Attic Thrift Store will be open and holding a 1/2 off
Everything Sale* (* Does not include Consignments).

Please save the date to shop and eat or just eat or just shop. Hope to
see you on the 15th.

Looking ahead, also save the date of January 12 for our signature event
- The Wild Mendocino Dinner. Thank you for all that you do.

Bob Bushansky




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121204/a12b4ed7/attachment.html 

From agnes at mcn.org  Tue Dec  4 14:25:18 2012
From: agnes at mcn.org (Agnes Woolsey)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 14:25:18 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fwd: Occupy show - part 1 at least
In-Reply-To: <AAD1F1A6-19CD-410A-B7FC-7FEF5E7F5FEB@mcn.org>
References: <AAD1F1A6-19CD-410A-B7FC-7FEF5E7F5FEB@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <50BE784E.8040601@mcn.org>




-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Occupy show - part 1 at least
Date: 	Tue, 4 Dec 2012 11:38:54 -0800
From: 	Elizabeth Swenson <eswenson at mcn.org>
To: 	Agnes Woolsey <agnes at mcn.org>



Agnes,

I have had to put the Occupy Town Hall video on Foreclosures for Wed Dec 
12 at 7pm. I know you wanted it sooner, but we do not have the editing 
time available to be sure to get it done until next week as we have 
other work, small staff, etc.

- I don't feel we can do the work in time to get it done by Friday.  And 
I believe will it be broken into 3 parts and will probably show them on 
three different nights and these other nights haven't been scheduled - 
they should happen in the period from Thursday Dec 13 through Wednesday 
Dec 19.


Elizabeth Swenson



Mendocino Coast Television
www.mendocoasttv.org <http://www.mendocoasttv.org>

elizabeth at mendocoasttv.org <mailto:elizabeth at mendocoasttv.org>
961-0422 (home office)
813-7046(cell)

248 East Laurel St., Fort Bragg CA  95437
707 961-1127

check us out on facebook: http://www.facebook.com/mendocoasttv






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121204/1ad8f60f/attachment.html 

From agnes at mcn.org  Tue Dec  4 16:18:09 2012
From: agnes at mcn.org (Agnes Woolsey)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 16:18:09 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fwd:  Fwd: Occupy show - part 1 at least
In-Reply-To: <50BE784E.8040601@mcn.org>
References: <50BE784E.8040601@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <50BE92C1.1060108@mcn.org>




-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	[Occupymendocino] Fwd: Occupy show - part 1 at least
Date: 	Tue, 04 Dec 2012 14:25:18 -0800
From: 	Agnes Woolsey <agnes at mcn.org>
Reply-To: 	rkarch at mcn.org
To: 	occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org <occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org>, CJ 
Holmes <cjholmes at cjholmes.com>, meg courtney <mcourtney1 at mcn.org>, 
dturner at fortbragg.com, dgjerde at fortbragg.com, 
dhammerstrom at fortbragg.com, sheriff at mendocinosheriff.com, Scott Deitz 
<sdeitz at scottdeitz.com>






-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Occupy show - part 1 at least
Date: 	Tue, 4 Dec 2012 11:38:54 -0800
From: 	Elizabeth Swenson <eswenson at mcn.org>
To: 	Agnes Woolsey <agnes at mcn.org>



Agnes,

I have had to put the Occupy Town Hall video on Foreclosures for Wed Dec 
12 at 7pm. I know you wanted it sooner, but we do not have the editing 
time available to be sure to get it done until next week as we have 
other work, small staff, etc.

- I don't feel we can do the work in time to get it done by Friday.  And 
I believe will it be broken into 3 parts and will probably show them on 
three different nights and these other nights haven't been scheduled - 
they should happen in the period from Thursday Dec 13 through Wednesday 
Dec 19.


Elizabeth Swenson



Mendocino Coast Television
www.mendocoasttv.org <http://www.mendocoasttv.org>

elizabeth at mendocoasttv.org <mailto:elizabeth at mendocoasttv.org>
961-0422 (home office)
813-7046(cell)

248 East Laurel St., Fort Bragg CA  95437
707 961-1127

check us out on facebook: http://www.facebook.com/mendocoasttv









-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121204/c6b749cd/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------

TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.

For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org


From agnes at mcn.org  Tue Dec  4 17:11:14 2012
From: agnes at mcn.org (Agnes Woolsey)
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 17:11:14 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] out of touch by email.
Message-ID: <50BE9F32.3040007@mcn.org>

I wont have a computer for a few days, ordering a MAC. 170 errors on my 
Dell laptop still under warranty.
Returning both printer and laptop. Anyone know of a good MAC buy, call me.
Agnes  Woolsey


From marksafron at att.net  Wed Dec  5 07:55:41 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 07:55:41 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Collective Action Against Wage Theft - NYTimes.com
Message-ID: <034151B3-B096-4EC0-B886-683CCFCF5B57@att.net>


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/05/opinion/collective-action-against-wage-theft.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121205

Collective Action Against Wage Theft

The Supreme Court heard argument Monday in a case about a nursing home in Philadelphia that docked each worker a half-hour of pay daily for meal breaks, whether the worker took breaks or was required to work through them. One worker, Laura Symczyk, sued Genesis HealthCare Corporation, the home?s operator, for violations of wage and hour rules under the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act. The act specifically gives a worker the right to bring a ?collective action? on behalf of other similarly situated workers who have the same grievance ? precisely the purpose of Ms. Symczyk?s suit.

But before she could notify other workers about her suit so that they could opt in to be plaintiffs, the corporation offered her $7,500 to cover all of her lost wages, plus attorney?s fees and other costs to settle the case.

When she did not respond to the offer, the company got a federal district judge in Philadelphia to throw out the suit on grounds that there was no longer a controversy for the court to resolve because she had been offered a full settlement for her individual claims. But the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, in a unanimous three-judge ruling, properly overturned the trial court ruling. It said that because Congress allowed collective actions an employer cannot ?frustrate? this right by offering one person a settlement in order to dismiss the entire suit.

Besides, as Justice Elena Kagan noted at the oral argument, ?Here, the plaintiff?s individual claims have not been fully satisfied. She walked away with nothing. She walked away with no judgment, and she walked away with no $7,500. And the question is: How can it possibly be that her individual claim was moot??

The corporation?s attempt to force Ms. Symczyk to take its offer is nothing more than a pre-emptive attempt to shut down the far more costly complaint against its overall practices. The justices should uphold the appeals court ruling. Without group claims in cases like this where individual stakes are too small to justify individual lawsuits, there would be no check on employers.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121205/3055febe/attachment.html 

From annxpress at live.com  Wed Dec  5 08:29:35 2012
From: annxpress at live.com (Ann Rennacker)
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 08:29:35 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Tell the BLM: Don't frack
	Californiaoccupymendocin0@lists.mcn.org; 
Message-ID: <SNT145-DS3253D054E3E692141CC2D0DD460@phx.gbl>

Dear Friend,

California still has zero regulation to protect our health and water from
dangerous fracking -- but that's not stopping the Bureau of Land
Management from auctioning off almost 18,000 acres of land for oil
drilling and fracking next week.

California's environmental regulators are still drafting fracking
regulations and fracking is exempt from many critical environmental laws
like the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act, so the BLM's
rush to auction off federal mineral rights puts Californians totally at
the mercy of the fracking industry.

Tell Bureau of Land Management California State Director James Kenna:
Don't frack California.
http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/blm_california_fracking/?r_by=51557-2412347-WUmGE4x&rc=mailto1
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121205/ac98db49/attachment.html 

From annxpress at live.com  Wed Dec  5 08:34:28 2012
From: annxpress at live.com (Ann Rennacker)
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 08:34:28 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] FW: Thanks for signing the petition to the BLM
In-Reply-To: <27.F2.26659.AB57FB05@outbound.int.credoaction.com>
References: <27.F2.26659.AB57FB05@outbound.int.credoaction.com>
Message-ID: <SNT145-W119A47589741C5493ECDDB8DD460@phx.gbl>



 



Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:23:34 -0600
Subject: Thanks for signing the petition to the BLM
To: annxpress at live.com
From: credo-help-2412347-fT0Dkgx at list.credoaction.com

Thanks for taking action. 

Here are some ways you can spread the word to make sure Bureau of Land Management California State Director James Kenna gets the message loud and clear. 

If you are on Facebook, click here to post the petition to your Wall. 

If you have a Twitter account, click here to automatically tweet:
Tell the @BLMca: Don't frack California! http://bit.ly/TEkTPd via @CREDOMobile 

You can also send the following e-mail to your friends and family. Spreading the word is critical, but please only pass this message along to those who know you -- spam hurts our campaign.

Thanks for all you do.

--The CREDO Action Team

Here's a sample message to send to your friends:


Subject: Tell the BLM: Don't frack CaliforniaDear Friend,

California still has zero regulation to protect our health and water from dangerous fracking -- but that's not stopping the Bureau of Land Management from auctioning off almost 18,000 acres of land for oil drilling and fracking next week.

California's environmental regulators are still drafting fracking regulations and fracking is exempt from many critical environmental laws like the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act, so the BLM's rush to auction off federal mineral rights puts Californians totally at the mercy of the fracking industry.

Tell Bureau of Land Management California State Director James Kenna: Don't frack California.
http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/blm_california_fracking/?r_by=51557-2412347-WUmGE4x&rc=confemail 



If you've received this email in error, please correct your campaign subscription information at:
http://act.credoaction.com/s?i=-2412347-DAmLnjx 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121205/a8aef1fc/attachment.html 

From jupiter at mcn.org  Thu Dec  6 07:11:22 2012
From: jupiter at mcn.org (Linda Jupiter)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 07:11:22 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fwd: ICELAND SHOWS THE WAY!
References: <3396A6BD-A456-45FC-ACAE-5587E597EAE9@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <57214989-22D5-4310-ABCE-883D5FA7023A@mcn.org>

>>
>> ICELAND SHOWS THE WAY . . . VIVA ICELAND!
>>
>> Subject: Iceland got over the recession fast?by jailing the  
>> banksters, and
>> bailing out the people
>>
>> From Jack Gordon:
>>
>> The current manufactured "financial crisis," which goes under
>> several names (e.g., "fiscal cliff") is nothing but wild
>> derivatives casino gambing by the elite, using your 401K, your
>> mortgage, and your pension, after they've slyly re-structured
>> financial "laws" so that they take all the winnings from the
>> casino gambling and you take their losses. Ergo, all the "debt" we
>> owe is phony.  Period. It's a beautiful system for the elite as
>> long as the people allow it.
>>
>> Well the people of Iceland reversed it.  Turned it around.  As the
>> article below says, Iceland made the "creditors of private banks
>> gone wild eat the losses."
>>
>> Gee. You'd think this would be huge news. Why aren't we hearing
>> anything about Iceland from our media?  Gee, take a guess why.
>>
>>
>> http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/08/top-economists-iceland-did-it-right-everyone-else-is-doing-it-wrong.html
>>
>> Top Economists: Iceland Did It Right ? And Everyone Else Is Doing  
>> It Wrong
>>
>> Posted on August 25, 2012 by WashingtonsBlog
>>
>> ICELAND SHOWS THE WAY
>>
>> Nobel prize winning economist Joe Stiglitz notes:
>>
>> What Iceland did was right. It would have been wrong to burden
>> future generations with the mistakes of the financial system.
>>
>> Nobel prize winning economist Paul Krugman writes:
>>
>> What [Iceland's recovery] demonstrated was the ? case for
>> letting creditors of private banks gone wild eat the losses.
>>
>> Krugman also says:
>>
>> A funny thing happened on the way to economic Armageddon:
>> Iceland?s very desperation made conventional behavior
>> impossible, freeing the nation to break the rules. Where
>> everyone else bailed out the bankers and made the public pay the
>> price, Iceland let the banks go bust and actually expanded its
>> social safety net. Where everyone else was fixated on trying to
>> placate international investors, Iceland imposed temporary
>> controls on the movement of capital to give itself room to
>> maneuver.
>>
>> Krugman is right.  Letting the banks go bust ? instead of
>> perpetually bailing them out ? is the right way to go.
>>
>> We?ve previously noted:
>>
>> Iceland told the banks to pound sand. And Iceland?s economy is
>> doing much better than virtually all of the countries which have
>> let the banks push them around.
>>
>> Bloomberg reports:
>>
>> Iceland holds some key lessons for nations trying to survive
>> bailouts after the island?s approach to its rescue led to a
>> ?surprisingly? strong recovery, the International Monetary
>> Fund?s mission chief to the country said.
>>
>> Iceland?s commitment to its program, a decision to push losses
>> on to bondholders instead of taxpayers and the safeguarding of a
>> welfare system that shielded the unemployed from penury helped
>> propel the nation from collapse toward recovery, according to
>> the Washington-based fund.
>>
>>          ***
>>
>> Iceland refused to protect creditors in its banks, which failed
>> in 2008 after their debts bloated to 10 times the size of the
>> economy.
>>
>> The IMF?s point about bondholders is an important one:  the
>> failure to force a haircut on the bondholders is dooming the U.S.
>> and Europe to economic doldrums.
>>
>> The IMF notes:
>>
>> [The] decision not to make taxpayers liable for bank losses was
>> right, economists say.
>>
>> In other words, as IMF put it:
>>
>> Key to Iceland?s recovery was [a] program [which] sought to
>> ensure that the restructuring of the banks would not require
>> Icelandic taxpayers to shoulder excessive private sector losses.
>>
>> Icenews points out:
>>
>> Experts continue to praise Iceland?s recovery success after the
>> country?s bank bailouts of 2008.
>>
>> Unlike the US and several countries in the eurozone, Iceland
>> allowed its banking system to fail in the global economic
>> downturn and put the burden on the industry?s creditors rather
>> than taxpayers.
>>
>>          ***
>>
>> The rebound continues to wow officials, including International
>> Monetary Fund chief Christine Lagarde, who recently referred to
>> the Icelandic recovery as ?impressive?. And experts continue to
>> reiterate that European officials should look to Iceland for
>> lessons regarding austerity measures and similar issues.
>>
>> Barry Ritholtz noted last year:
>>
>> Rather than bailout the banks ? Iceland could not have done so
>> even if they wanted to ? they guaranteed deposits (the way our
>> FDIC does), and let the normal capitalistic process of failure
>> run its course.
>>
>> They are now much much better for it than the countries like the
>> US and Ireland who did not.
>>
>> Bloomberg pointed out February 2011:
>>
>> Unlike other nations, including the U.S. and Ireland, which
>> injected billions of dollars of capital into their financial
>> institutions to keep them afloat, Iceland placed its biggest
>> lenders in receivership. It chose not to protect creditors of
>> the country?s banks, whose assets had ballooned to $209 billion,
>> 11 times gross domestic product.
>>
>>          ***
>>
>> ?Iceland did the right thing ? creditors, not the taxpayers,
>> shouldered the losses of banks,? says Nobel laureate Joseph
>> Stiglitz, an economics professor at Columbia University in New
>> York. ?Ireland?s done all the wrong things, on the other hand.
>> That?s probably the worst model.?
>>
>> Ireland guaranteed all the liabilities of its banks when they
>> ran into trouble and has been injecting capital ? 46 billion
>> euros ($64 billion) so far ? to prop them up. That brought the
>> country to the brink of ruin, forcing it to accept a rescue
>> package from the European Union in December.
>>
>>          ***
>>
>> Countries with larger banking systems can follow Iceland?s
>> example, says Adriaan van der Knaap, a managing director at UBS
>> AG.
>>
>> ?It wouldn?t upset the financial system,? says Van der Knaap,
>> who has advised Iceland?s bank resolution committees.
>>
>>          ***
>>
>> Arni Pall Arnason, 44, Iceland?s minister of economic affairs,
>> says the decision to make debt holders share the pain saved the
>> country?s future.
>>
>> ?If we?d guaranteed all the banks? liabilities, we?d be in the
>> same situation as Ireland,? says Arnason, whose Social
>> Democratic Alliance was a junior coalition partner in the Haarde
>> government.
>>
>>          ***
>> ?In the beginning, banks and other financial institutions in
>> Europe were telling us, ?Never again will we lend to you,??
>> Einarsdottir says. ?Then it was 10 years, then 5. Now they say
>> they might soon be ready to lend again.?
>>
>> And Iceland?s prosecution of white collar fraud played a big part
>> in its recovery:
>>
>> [The U.S. and Europe have thwarted white collar fraud
>> investigations ... let alone prosecutions.] On the other hand,
>> Iceland has prosecuted the fraudster bank heads (and here and
>> here) and their former prime minister, and their economy is
>> recovering nicely ? because trust is being restored in the
>> financial system.
>>
>
>
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/ae037f05/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/ae037f05/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/ae037f05/attachment-0002.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Mail Attachment.jpeg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 55955 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/ae037f05/attachment.jpeg 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/ae037f05/attachment-0003.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Mail Attachment.jpeg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 10813 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/ae037f05/attachment-0001.jpeg 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/ae037f05/attachment-0004.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Mail Attachment.jpeg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 65924 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/ae037f05/attachment-0002.jpeg 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/ae037f05/attachment-0005.html 

From marksafron at att.net  Thu Dec  6 09:49:00 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 09:49:00 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Feinstein amendment doubles down on NDAA's
	assault on constitutional rights
Message-ID: <02433568-BB53-4BD8-AFF8-15F33D2CBFA0@att.net>


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/05/feinstein-amendment-ndaa-assault-constitutional-rights

Feinstein amendment doubles down on NDAA's assault on constitutional rights


Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein with the press after an intelligence committee hearing on the Benghazi attack, 16 November, in Washington, DC. Her amendment to the NDAA has received far less media scrutiny. Photograph: Alex Wong/Getty Images
As I reported here, last spring a group of journalists and activists including Chris Hedges, Noam Chomsky and Tangerine Bolen, led by counsel Bruce Afran and others, sued President Obama to halt the implementation of Section 1021 in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which would have allowed for the indefinite detention of Americans without charge or trial. The vague definition of who could be detained included individuals who were seen to provide "substantial support" to al-Qaida's "associated forces" ? wording that provided no protection for journalists interviewing, for example, detainees in Guant?namo, or activists and advocates working with prisoners on their cases.

I was present in Judge Katharine Forrest's New York courtroom when she repeatedly asked Obama's lawyers if they could assure her that Section 1021 could not be used to detain people engaged in journalism or peaceful protest. The government's lawyers repeatedly refused to give her those assurances, or assurances that US citizens were not already being detained under the NDAA. Forrest ultimately blocked the implementation of the act.

But the US government appealed the ruling. In October, a court agreed to stay the implementation of Forrest's injunction and hear the appeal. Afran has read the government's new brief for the case, and pointed out that the lawyers now argue that the NDAA won't be used to militarily detain individuals considered "independent journalists" or "independent" public advocates without charges or trial.

Who is considered an "independent journalist"? Afran noted, for example, that journalists associated with an outlet ? like Bob Woodward ? would not be considered "independent journalists", but self-employed or unemployed journalists are (though, in journalism, contracts and associations are much more complicated than that). He also added that almost all advocates are not "independent", as they are part of a movement or group with a philosophy. So, in the government's brief, the lawyers have gone even further than they did before in corralling new types of individuals who can legally be detained indefinitely without a civil trial.

To make matters worse, a recent development sees the threat of the NDAA on US citizens increasing. Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein recently introduced an amendment to the 2013 NDAA, which, at first, seems to protect Americans' due process ? but, on closer examination, can be easily misinterpreted. Afran said that the Feinstein amendment "puts a gloss" on a very dangerous situation,

"First of all, the Feinstein amendment does not say that people in the US can't be put into military custody. It simply says they can't be taken into indefinite military custody without 'trial'. If they are taken into military custody, they have to be given a trial of some sort ? but not due process in a civil court. The [kind of] trial this refers to would be ? military tribunals. So the Feinstein amendment does virtually nothing for American citizens or people in the United States in terms of protection."

The original law at least left the issue of military detention somewhat ambiguous, but this amendment actually makes matters worse by explicitly allowing the military to take Americans into custody. The measure infringes on Americans' constitutional rights, asserts Afran, who explained that, since 1861, the US supreme court has written in at least four decisions that "people living in the US ? citizens or not ? cannot be taken into military custody and denied a trial in civil courts." Unforunately, should the NDAA go through, this becomes the law of the land:

"Our system says a law is in force unless a court says otherwise. The president is considering vetoing the bill. We don't know if it will be passed by the House, then signed by the president. If it is, we may have to go back to the trial court."

As for the amendment, major media ? like the Huffington Post ? are taking Feinstein's amendment at face value as a measure of preventing Americans from being indefinitely detained by the military. Even Michael McAuliff's HuffPo piece ran with an erroneous headline that read "Indefinite Detention: Senate Votes Down Military Imprisonment of Americans". The few other journalists who have actually been following this story closely agree with the activists, and the American Civil Liberties Union has also chimed in, saying that the amendment actually makes indefinite detention more likely.

Shahid Buttar of the Bill of Rights Defense agrees with critics of the Feinstein amendment. He also makes the point that it would legally open the door for domestic military deployment in America:

"While the Feinstein amendment may appear helpful by restoring due process for US citizens, it unfortunately creates a host of problems: it reinforced the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) in Afghanistan as a basis for domestic military detention; offered protections only to the people least likely to face domestic military detention; invited domestic military deployment in violation of posse comitatus; and endorses a regime of unequal rights for immigrants that could destabilize other rights over time."

Many questions press on this issue: why are there repeated efforts by Congress to affirm the power of military detention of Americans? Why are Obama's lawyers drafting language that yet more broadly targets journalists and activists who might be subjected to military detention?

And, just as importantly, why is this appalling and historic set of developments not front-page news in every newspaper in the land?


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/30fc697f/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Dianne-Feinstein-on-Capit-008.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 38321 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/30fc697f/attachment.jpg 

From marksafron at att.net  Thu Dec  6 10:17:55 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 10:17:55 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] NYPD Credits Occupy with the Drop in Crime After
	Sandy
Message-ID: <AFFB0EBF-481A-41B3-A952-73718BEA4293@att.net>



NYPD Credits Occupy with the Drop in Crime After Sandy

Reuters
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5QVIbNJLkRQ
ADAM CLARK ESTES2,757 ViewsDEC 5, 2012
Hold on to your riot gear, ladies and gentlemen, because police in New York City are saying that Occupy Wall Street activists deserve credit for helping keep the city safe after Hurricane Sandy. They're not saying that publicly, of course. That would just be too much.

In case you haven't been paying attention, Sandy recovery efforts are on-going in many parts of New York City. In areas like Coney Island and the Rockaways, crime has spiked, mostly from burglaries as the communities have struggled to get back on their feet, but things have been remarkably civil in Red Hook. The New York Post reported why on Wednesday night: "Police sources have credited the drop in crime to an unlikely coalition that included the NYPD, Occupy Wall Street activists, and local nonprofits working together to keep storm victims safe." Said one of these unnamed sources, "This crisis allowed us all to remove the politics and differences we had to do our job, and come to the aid of the people. We all rose to the occasion."

Occupy Sandy isn't just fighting crime. The group of activists that first assembled to fight corporate greed and income inequality has been on the ground providing relief to Sandy victims essentially since day one. They've done everything from collecting and distributing supplies like food, blankets and batteries to coordinating volunteers and rebuilding efforts from each of their six satellite offices across the city. The group has also committed to sticking around for 24 months, so that they can help not just with the clean up effort but also rebuilding, including generating jobs for those that need them.

So this means that the Occupiers and the coppers will play nice now, right? Well, we'll see on Thursday when Occupy will take over Times Square to support the right to organize.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/7c54f35f/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: wire-logo.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2779 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/7c54f35f/attachment.png 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: large.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 55185 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/7c54f35f/attachment.jpg 

From annxpress at live.com  Thu Dec  6 11:07:17 2012
From: annxpress at live.com (Ann Rennacker)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 11:07:17 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] FW: Don't frack California farms
In-Reply-To: <445D48ED-54F5-4001-B6BC-3740F79000BF@mcn.org>
References: <A0310E68-1553-4F85-B8B1-F0492BBC61E5@mcn.org>,
	<445D48ED-54F5-4001-B6BC-3740F79000BF@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <SNT145-W891A2201BAF3FB6A7477B7DD450@phx.gbl>



 



From: tw at mcn.org
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 08:55:36 -0800
Subject: Don't frack California farms
To: tw at mcn.org



Begin forwarded message from FB City Councillor Meg Courtney <mcourtney1 at mcn.org>
Please forward this. It's is really bad. I didn't know until now about the BLM auctioning off public lands for this environmentally devastating practice.

Meg



















































Clicking here will automatically add your name to this petition to Bureau of Land Management California State Director James Kenna:

"It is simply irresponsible to auction off oil and fracking rights in California when no regulations exist to protect us from this dangerous practice. Cancel the December 12 lease auction and stop selling leases to public land in California for fracking."


Automatically add your name:



Learn more about this campaign
Tell the Bureau of Land Management: Don't frack California.
Dear Meg,
California still has zero regulation to protect our health and water from dangerous fracking ? but that's not stopping the Bureau of Land Management from auctioning off almost 18,000 acres of land for oil drilling and fracking next week.1
Fracking contaminates precious water with toxic chemicals,2 generates cancer-causing air emissions,3and in California could pollute crucial agricultural water and lands in the Central Valley, as parts of Monterey, San Benito and Fresno counties are being auctioned off.
California's environmental regulators are still drafting fracking regulations and fracking is exempt from many critical environmental laws like the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act, so the BLM's rush to auction off federal mineral rights puts Californians totally at the mercy of the fracking industry and should not move forward.
Tell Bureau of Land Management California State Director James Kenna: Don't frack California. Click here to automatically sign the petition.
Each fracked oil well permanently contaminates millions of gallons of water with toxic chemicals that can leak into nearby water sources and wells. That puts California's farming communities, many of which sit on top of oil that would be extracted with fracking, at risk in cases of fracking spills, accidents or leaks.4 Worse, because many of the oil leases being sold by the BLM are underneath private land, farmers may not even have a right to say no to oil development on their land!5
We know what the result of California's rush to frack will be if we don't stop it now. In states like Pennsylvania, Texas and Colorado, fracking is making landowners sick, killing livestock, poisoning water, devastating rural land values, and even possibly introducing toxic chemicals into our food supply, all while making us more reliant on planet-warming fossil fuels.6
Many of these devastating effects are irreversible. That's why it's so important for the BLM to put its foot on the brake now, before selling off rights to oil companies to move ahead with totally unregulated fracking in California.
Tell Bureau of Land Management California State Director James Kenna: Don't frack California. Click here to automatically sign the petition.
Thank you for standing up to the fracking industry.
Zack Malitz, Campaign Manager 
CREDO Action from Working Assets

1. Stephanie M. Lee, "U.S. to auction state shale for drilling," San Francisco Chronicle, September 18, 2012
2. Carol Linnitt, "USGS Fracking Study Confirms Methane Contamination of Drinking Water in Pavillion, Wyoming," DeSmog Blog, October 1, 2012
3. "Study shows air emissions near fracking sites may pose health risk," University of Colorado Denver Newsroom, March 19, 2012
4. Erich Schwartzel and Andrew McGill, "With gas firms entering central California, vineyard owners unsure of fracking effects on land," Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, October 7, 2012
5. "Oil 'Fracking' May Come To Southern Monterey County," CBS San Francisco, October 26, 2012
6. Elizabeth Royte, "Fracking Our Food Supply," The Nation, November 28, 2012










Share on Facebook 
Post to your wall



Tweet this 
Post to Twitter















? 2012 CREDO. All rights reserved. 

To remove yourself (Meg Courtney) from this list, please visit our subscription management page at:http://act.credoaction.com/s?i=51557-2122507-vb_yyYx
To change your email address or update your contact info, please visit: http://act.credoaction.com/subscrip/coa.html?id=51557-2122507-vb_yyYx

 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/f077c0e6/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: spacer.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 43 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/f077c0e6/attachment.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rounded_top_e6e6e6_580px.jpg
Type: image/gif
Size: 879 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/f077c0e6/attachment-0001.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: spacer.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 43 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/f077c0e6/attachment-0002.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ban_fracking_CA_180.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 4064 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/f077c0e6/attachment-0003.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: btn2_sign_the_petition_180.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 2969 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/f077c0e6/attachment-0004.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: credo_action_header.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 4381 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/f077c0e6/attachment-0005.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: facebook_28.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1526 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/f077c0e6/attachment-0006.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: twitter_28.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1592 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/f077c0e6/attachment-0007.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: spacer.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 43 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/f077c0e6/attachment-0008.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rounded_bottom_e6e6e6_580px.jpg
Type: image/gif
Size: 885 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/f077c0e6/attachment-0009.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: spacer.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 43 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/f077c0e6/attachment-0010.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: spacer.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 43 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/f077c0e6/attachment-0011.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: o.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 43 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/f077c0e6/attachment-0012.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pixel.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 43 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/f077c0e6/attachment-0013.gif 

From marksafron at att.net  Thu Dec  6 16:23:09 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 16:23:09 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] No Warrant,
	No Problem: How The Government Can Still Get Your Digital Data
Message-ID: <7407FD18-E54F-484D-91B9-684D27D52DA1@att.net>

http://www.propublica.org/special/no-warrant-no-problem-how-the-government-can-still-get-your-digital-data

From sheila.dawn50 at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  6 17:13:28 2012
From: sheila.dawn50 at yahoo.com (Sheila Dawn)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 17:13:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Occupymendocino] MCTV airing Foreclosure Town Hall Meeting )Part 1)
Message-ID: <1354842808.48490.YahooMailNeo@web112301.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

?Hi all, 

?? I just checked my Email after being out of town for a couple of days & wanted everyone to know that the edited version of the town hall meeting many of us attended on Nov 16th will be aired at 7 P.M. on Wednes evening , Dec 12th. There is also a Senior Perspectives featuring? Miles Everett on this Friday at 7 P.M. & again on Sunday at 6:30P.M. To double check on times go to mendocoasttv.org
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Peace,
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Sheila Dawn
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/3e7354bb/attachment.html 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Thu Dec  6 21:23:58 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 21:23:58 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] CR Layoffs 12/4/12
Message-ID: <1F108152-B877-4DEB-941F-0617CD57892D@mcn.org>

http://www.times-standard.com/breakingnews/ci_22125351/cr-trustees-approve-layoffs-job-eliminations



CR trustees approve layoffs, job eliminations

The Times-Standard
Created:   12/04/2012 05:39:26 PM PST


The College of the Redwoods Board of Trustees voted this afternoon to layoff 16 employees and eliminate a total of 39 positions by June 30, 2013, CR spokesman Paul DeMark confirmed.
DeMark said the vote was unanimous, with Trustee Rick Bennett absent.
According to today's agenda, CR President Kathryn Lehner recommended the board approve the proposed reorganization after a budget and job duty review indicated insufficient funds to support the positions. By eliminating the positions -- 23 of which are already vacant or anticipated to be vacant -- the college expects to save $550,000 this year, and about $1.6 million each following year.
The college will be looking at the possibility of creating eight new positions to fill in the gaps left by the eliminated jobs. Laid-off employees will be given the first opportunity to apply for those new positions, according to the agenda.
The board also approved eliminating required furlough days for the managers who will be laid off at the end of January 2013.
The positions include:
* Director, Planning, Grants, and Institutional Effectiveness - 1.0 FTE (12 months/8 hours
per day),
* Director, Distance Education - 1.0 FTE (12 months/8 hours per day),
* Manager, Printing Services - 1.0 FTE (12 months/8 hours per day),
* Electronic Systems Specialist II - 1.0 FTE (12 months/8 hours per day),
* Purchasing Specialist - 1.0 FTE (12 months/8 hours per day),
(12 months/8 hours per day),
* Instructional Support Specialist I, CRMC - .236 FTE (41 weeks/12 hours per week),
* Maintenance Specialist II, CRMC - 1.0 FTE (12 months/8 hours per day),
* Administrative Office Assistant II, CRMC - 1.0 FTE (12 months/8 hours per day),
- Library Technician, CRMC - 1.0 FTE (12 months/8 hours per day),
* Instructional Support Specialist III, Lab Tech., CRMC - .723 FTE (43 weeks/35 hours per
week),


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121206/94cbe1d5/attachment.html 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Fri Dec  7 18:02:54 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 18:02:54 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] OCCUPY ACTIVISTS Socializing ALERT 10 AM Saturday
	at Senior Center
Message-ID: <30D991C7-A0CF-418E-8E8A-D2C94E920D8F@mcn.org>

OCCUPY ACTIVISTS Socializing ALERT

	At the last two General Assembly sessions it was expressed that it would be salutary for active Occupy folks to get together for a bit of socializing . . . and the idea emerged to gather on Saturday December 15 for breakfast at the Senior Center.  

	It so happens that there will be a  Crab Omelette Brunch from 8 to 10 a.m.   Other menu choices are:  Eggs any style and Sausage or Strawberry French Toast.The donation cost of  $12.00 includes Mimosas and/or Cafe Royale. Before during and after the Brunch will be  a silent auction.   The
 Attic Thrift Store will be open and holding a "1/2 off Everything Sale"  ( Does not include Consignments).

	10 am was selected as the time for Occupy to assemble, but come when    you wish.  It will be fun to just socialize without having to think 
about actions!
Reservations are not necessary but it would be nice to let the Center know so they can be sure to have enough food and the Occupy tables are saved for us!

				For OCCUPY General Assembly,

								Howard Ennes and Richard Karch, facilitators.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121207/67f0e855/attachment.html 

From jupiter at mcn.org  Fri Dec  7 19:49:53 2012
From: jupiter at mcn.org (Linda Jupiter)
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 19:49:53 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fwd: Monday: A National Day of Action. to Stop
	Cuts
References: <DB8CB71C-677A-4DCF-9558-B714DEC70CF1@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <2E66C3EE-8C3E-4601-BDA1-8B1C8B167088@mcn.org>

>
> This is for us all - old young middle age and your children and  
> grandchildren.  NOW IS THE TIME TO STAND UP FOR THE "WE" in  
> community. For those out of California, you can find your Senators  
> by googling their names.     thank you. Linda
>
> PLEASE SHARE WITH ALL YOUR LISTS.
>
>>
>>
>> Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 15:37:56 -0800
>> From: harry.brill at sbcglobal.net
>> Subject: Re: Monday: A National Day of Action. to Stop Cuts
>> To: harry.brill at sbcglobal.net
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Labor Unions and progressive organizations have declared this  
>> Monday a National Day of Action to persuade Congress to make  
>> absolutely no cuts in Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.  If  
>> any changes are to be made, these programs should be improved and  
>> expanded.  The money is all there if the super-rich were required  
>> to pay their fair share of taxes.  All of us must contact our  
>> elected leaders in both houses of Congress.
>>
>> For details, please download the attachment.
>>
>> In Community,
>> Harry
>>
>>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121207/7d198b42/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: dec10p.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 6849 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121207/7d198b42/attachment.pdf 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121207/7d198b42/attachment-0001.html 

From marksafron at att.net  Fri Dec  7 23:14:46 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 23:14:46 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] OCCUPY ACTIVISTS Socializing ALERT 10 AM
	Saturday at Senior Center
In-Reply-To: <30D991C7-A0CF-418E-8E8A-D2C94E920D8F@mcn.org>
References: <30D991C7-A0CF-418E-8E8A-D2C94E920D8F@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <92E6FAA5-5FCE-4454-8AFF-0BB8FC3E60AD@att.net>

I'll be there.
On Dec 7, 2012, at 6:02 PM, Richard Karch <rkarch at mcn.org> wrote:

OCCUPY ACTIVISTS Socializing ALERT

	At the last two General Assembly sessions it was expressed that it would be salutary for active Occupy folks to get together for a bit of socializing . . . and the idea emerged to gather on Saturday December 15 for breakfast at the Senior Center.  

	It so happens that there will be a  Crab Omelette Brunch from 8 to 10 a.m.   Other menu choices are:  Eggs any style and Sausage or Strawberry French Toast.The donation cost of  $12.00 includes Mimosas and/or Cafe Royale. Before during and after the Brunch will be  a silent auction.   The
 Attic Thrift Store will be open and holding a "1/2 off Everything Sale"  ( Does not include Consignments).

	10 am was selected as the time for Occupy to assemble, but come when    you wish.  It will be fun to just socialize without having to think 
about actions!
Reservations are not necessary but it would be nice to let the Center know so they can be sure to have enough food and the Occupy tables are saved for us!

				For OCCUPY General Assembly,

								Howard Ennes and Richard Karch, facilitators.


TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.

For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121207/4508982f/attachment.html 

From marksafron at att.net  Sat Dec  8 00:02:13 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2012 00:02:13 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Good article
Message-ID: <7B261FA3-1E6E-447E-9D6C-51D23DA1F452@att.net>


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/07/opinion/the-baby-boom-bump.html?nl=opinion&emc=edit_ty_20121207&_r=0

The Baby Boom Bump


CONVENTIONAL wisdom calls the 2012 presidential race the ?demographic election,? attributing President Obama?s victory in large part to his commanding advantage among rapidly growing groups like Latinos and millennials.

But if demographics is destiny in politics, it is even more true for policy. Far from the headlines, the debate over the budget deficit, taxes and unemployment is being driven by large-scale changes in the American population ? and in this case, it?s not the new demographics of the young that are important, but rather the old demographics of the baby boom.

For decades we have known that the retirement of the baby boomers would be a monumental event for the economy. But now that it?s happening, many fiscal policy makers are acting as if the boomers are eternal teenagers and are turning a blind eye to how the boomers? aging changes how we should approach economic policy. And this affects two of the central issues of the negotiations: how much the government should spend and how we can cut unemployment.

Consider the debate over spending. The Congressional Budget Office projects that if current policies continue, total federal spending will rise to 24 percent of gross domestic product in 2022. Republicans and Washington deficit hawks argue that this means spending is out of control, since over the past 40 years government spending has averaged 21 percent.

Their proposed solution is a cap on government spending as a percentage of the economy. Mitt Romney wanted to cap spending at 20 percent of G.D.P. Senator Bob Corker, Republican of Tennessee, has proposed a cap of 20.6 percent with Senator Claire McCaskill, a Democrat from Missouri. Just this week, Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, a 2016 Republican presidential aspirant, suggested an 18 percent cap.

These plans ignore the simple fact that you cannot repeal the aging of the boomers. The main reason expenditures are rising this decade is that spending on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid is increasing by a whopping 3.7 percent of G.D.P. as the baby boomers age and retire. This demographic fact also has been driving increases in disability insurance payments as more knees give way and backs give out.

These inexorable demographic changes mask the fact that over the past four years we have experienced historic levels of fiscal discipline. While there was a temporary and necessary spike in spending from the Recovery Act, annual appropriations actually declined by 1.4 percent a year between 2008 and 2012 in inflation-adjusted dollars ? after growing by 6.1 percent a year during the George W. Bush administration. Under the caps agreed to last year, discretionary spending is scheduled to reach its lowest level, as a share of the economy, since the Eisenhower administration.

This discipline, however, is being overwhelmed by demographic reality. We need to accept the fact that we simply cannot revert to historical norms in government spending and keep faith with commitments made to millions of aging workers.

But that is no excuse for inaction: in addition to the existing caps on discretionary spending, we need higher revenues along with slower spending growth in our social insurance programs.

Ignoring the economics of boomer retirement also distorts debates about the unemployment rate.

Despite the fact that the unemployment rate has dropped faster in the past year than at any time since 1995, Republicans say there has been no recovery in the job market, since the 150,000 jobs being added monthly are simply keeping up with population growth. They note that the employment-to-population rate has not recovered significantly and claim that the only reason the unemployment rate is going down is that people are giving up looking for work.

If this were the 1960s, they might have a case. But the children of the 1960s are now in their 60s, and are simply not as likely to want to be in the labor force as younger workers. The employment-to-population ratio is on a steady downward trend, regardless of the economy. The fact that the rate is flat is evidence that the labor market is recovering (though not fast enough).

With more than 200,000 boomers exiting the labor force each month through retirement, the rule of thumb that the economy needs to add 140,000 jobs per month to keep up with population growth no longer holds. The new normal is 100,000, which is why 150,000 new jobs a month has brought the unemployment rate from 9.5 percent to 7.9 percent over the last two years.

Getting this right matters. If policy makers believe that the labor market has not improved over the past three years, they will reject the stimulus approach that the president took in 2009 and oppose further efforts to boost aggregate demand ? just as John A. Boehner, the speaker of the House, did last week after the administration called for a $50 billion stimulus package.

Over the coming weeks, big fiscal policy choices will be made, and many will be looking backward for a guide on how to move forward. But just as the generation that once proclaimed ?don?t trust anyone over 30? has had to face the reality of gray hair and grandkids, the new economics of the baby boom dictate that we must deal with the country and economy we have today ? not the one in the history books.

Kenneth S. Baer, a managing director of the Harbour Group, was a senior adviser and associate director at the Office of Management and Budget from 2009 until July. Jeffrey B. Liebman, a professor of public policy at Harvard?s Kennedy School of Government, was acting deputy director and executive associate director at the O.M.B. from 2009 to 2010.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121208/68264ff7/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PastedGraphic-3.tiff
Type: image/tiff
Size: 2972 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121208/68264ff7/attachment.tiff 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 1207OPEDbavarsky-articleLarge.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 65473 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121208/68264ff7/attachment.jpg 

From marksafron at att.net  Sat Dec  8 08:54:10 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2012 08:54:10 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Reich: Today's Numbers Show Why Jobs Must Come
	First
Message-ID: <1892B9F4-8CD1-42CE-8CC9-39A3216CE0C6@att.net>


Today's Numbers Show Why Jobs Must Come First

By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog
07 December 12

 
Today's jobs report shows an economy that's still moving in the right direction but way too slowly, which is why Washington's continuing obsession with the federal budget deficit is insane. Jobs and growth must come first.

The cost of borrowing is so low - the yield on the ten-year Treasury is near historic lows - and the need for more jobs and better wages so high, and our infrastructure so neglected, that a reasonable government would borrow more to put more Americans to work rebuilding the nation.

Yes, unemployment is down slightly and 146,000 new jobs were created in November. That's some progress. But don't be overwhelmed by the hype coming out of Wall Street and the White House, both of which would like the public to believe things are going quite well.

The fact is some 350,000 more people stopped looking for jobs in November, and the percent of the working-age population currently employed continues to drop - now at 63.6%, almost the lowest in 30 years. Meanwhile, the average workweek is stuck at 34.4 hours.

The slowness of the jobs recovery isn't because of Hurricane Sandy, which it turns out had very little impact on November's job numbers (the hurricane's negative effects were more than offset by a Thanksgiving earlier than normal, and an early start to the Christmas buying season). And it's not because of any uncertainty over the looming "fiscal cliff." Most consumers in November remained oblivious about any pending cliff.

The reason the economy is still under-performing is overall demand is inadequate. Businesses won't create more jobs without enough customers. But consumers can't and won't spend because they don't have the money. Unless or until the private sector - businesses and consumers - are able to boost the economy, government must be the spender of last resort.

But the nation has bought into the Republican frame of thinking that we have to "get our fiscal house in order" before the economy can get back on track. Although Barack Obama was reelected and Democrats gained seats in the House and Senate, that frame is still dominating debate.

And even though we're near a fiscal cliff that illustrates how dangerous deficit reduction can be when so many people are still unemployed, the White House and the Democrats seem incapable of changing the frame of debate.

But remember: Jobs must come first. Job creation must be our first priority.

Robert B. Reich, Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley, was Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration. Time Magazine named him one of the ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the last century. He has written thirteen books, including the best sellers "Aftershock" and "The Work of Nations." His latest is an e-book, "Beyond Outrage." He is also a founding editor of the American Prospect magazine and chairman of Common Cause.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121208/c08cce76/attachment.html 

From marksafron at att.net  Sat Dec  8 09:13:30 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2012 09:13:30 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] We're Not Broke
Message-ID: <107C4AE7-1D96-44CE-A09A-F8A896F7EB92@att.net>


http://www.fpif.org/reports/not-broke-2012?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+FPIF+%28Foreign+Policy+In+Focus+%28All+News%29%29

We're Not Broke




An overhaul of U.S. spending priorities is both long overdue and necessary to curb deficit growth. Yet there is no reason to accept the demands from conservative leaders and corporate lobbyists for the ill-timed belt-tightening and reductions in earned benefits like Social Security and Medicare they say are required to remedy the current budgetary crisis.

This "fiscal cliff" hysteria could easily trigger a grand fiscal swindle. But it doesn't have to ? because we're not broke. The U.S. government can continue to fund and even expand programs that help people in need and rebuild our infrastructure while greening the economy, strengthening national security, and reducing the economic inequality that's eating away at our democracy. Plenty of smart ways to cut spending and increase revenue should be "on the table." Our report outlines 20 straightforward and creative options.

This is the second edition of an Institute for Policy Studies study that debunks the premise that the United States of America is broke. We released the first one a year ago, shortly before the supercommittee ? a congressional panel tasked with putting our nation on a sound fiscal path ? fizzled into obscurity.

This time around, the frenzied "Taxmaggedon" debate poses an unprecedented opportunity to harness our ample but misdirected resources in ways that will make the country more equitable, secure, and green. We have amassed a list of possible revenue-raisers and spending cuts to demonstrate that there are commonsense ways to shrink the deficit and get our country on a more sustainable path.

Our proposed reforms amount to $881 billion in potential new revenue and savings per year. These measures would eliminate most of the budget deficit, leave plenty of resources for jobs and for the nation's pressing human and environmental needs, and stave off those looming across-the-board cuts. We have not assembled an exhaustive list of rational budget-cutting alternatives. But we have demonstrated that there are sensible ways to achieve a more sustainable budget without shredding our already threadbare safety net. Together, these measures would generate more than enough savings to prevent a harmful shift toward austerity.

Read the full report (PDF)


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121208/e4e92f0f/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not-broke-2012-cover.png
Type: image/png
Size: 125775 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121208/e4e92f0f/attachment.png 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Sun Dec  9 02:06:12 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2012 02:06:12 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Smartmeter Hearing less than 10 days away
References: <A8041DC6-6926-4BFA-9E2A-AB58121D519C@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <8AC8191A-ABFE-4FC3-AF2C-B2EA048075A3@mcn.org>



Begin forwarded message:

> From: Norman de Vall <ndevall at mcn.org>
> Date: December 8, 2012 9:38:39 PM PST
> To: Richard Karch <rkarch at mcn.org>
> Cc: Bruce Anderson <ava at pacific.net>, News <news at kzyx.org>
> Subject: Smartmeter Hearing
> 
> Richard,
> PG&E has issued a hearing notice made to look like
> it's from the CPUC.  Please share with those who are
> and remain concerned about the CPUC policy re
> installation of Smartmeters and the cost of opting out:
> 
> 	http://www.pge.com/includes/docs/pdfs/myhome/customerservice/smartmeter/SmartMeterPPHpostcardV1.pdf
> 
> The hearing is now less than 10 days away.
> Norman


> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121209/ad00bfb4/attachment.html 

From marksafron at att.net  Sun Dec  9 13:15:50 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2012 13:15:50 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] =?windows-1252?q?Mortgages_=96_Upshot_of_the_Fo?=
 =?windows-1252?q?reclosure_Backlog_-_NYTimes=2Ecom?=
Message-ID: <E404802E-6090-4C7B-A10A-F87ACE10A042@att.net>


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/09/realestate/mortgages-upshot-of-the-foreclosure-backlog.html?src=rec&recp=1

Upshot of the Foreclosure Backlog


FORECLOSURES are taking significantly longer in states where lenders must go through the courts, and the delay may or may not be good for borrowers, depending on their circumstances. But some researchers say that dragging the process out hurts society at large.

About half of the 50 states have judicial foreclosure systems. The housing market crash so bogged down the systems in New York and New Jersey that foreclosures there have routinely dragged on for two or three years; their timelines are among the longest in the country. The national average, which factors in nonjudicial states, is about one year, according to RealtyTrac, which monitors foreclosures nationwide.

The sluggish process has caused a backlog of loans in foreclosure and is slowing the housing market recovery in judicial states, says Michael Fratantoni, the vice president for research and economics at the Mortgage Bankers Association. As of the end of the third quarter, according to the association, 6.6 percent of all loans were in foreclosure in judicial states, compared with 2.4 percent in nonjudicial states.

A study released last summer by researchers at the Federal Reserve Banks in Boston and Atlanta found that the longer properties languish in delinquency or under a bank?s ownership, the greater the negative effect on the value of surrounding properties.

?The best outcome is to prevent the foreclosure,? said Paul S. Willen, an economist and policy adviser at the Boston Fed. ?But if it?s clear that can?t be done, it?s in society?s interest to get the foreclosure done as soon as possible.?

In a separate study last year, Mr. Willen and his colleagues question the basis for giving borrowers more time to try to fix mortgage problems. The study found that avoiding foreclosure was no more likely for borrowers subject to either judicial foreclosure, or laws forcing lenders to wait 90 days before beginning foreclosure proceedings, than it was for other borrowers.

Consumer advocates agree that foreclosures are taking too long in some states. High concentrations of vacant properties have taken a heavy toll on certain neighborhoods, said Michael D. Calhoun, the president of the Center for Responsible Lending in Washington. ?We agree that borrowers should be considered quickly for loan modifications,? he said. ?They?re more successful if they?re done early on.?

But in his estimation, the delays aren?t a result of the protections provided to consumers under the judicial process, because the court process has worked fine in ?normal times.? The problem now, he said, lies with the mortgage servicers. ?We had a servicing system that was totally overwhelmed by the housing boom and even more so by the housing crash,? Mr. Calhoun said. ?The backlog is due to servicer errors and lack of capacity.?

Communication gaps are also a factor, says Mark S. Cherry, a lawyer who represents borrowers in the state-sponsored foreclosure mediation program in New Jersey. His clients must sometimes return to mediation sessions five or six times before finally getting a loan modification. ?Persistence breaks resistance,? he said.

Courts, too, have been overwhelmed. In New Jersey, a typical year brings about 24,000 residential foreclosure filings; in 2009 and 2010, annual filings surpassed 60,000.

The courts have since had time to adjust, especially because lenders have halted the processing of thousands of old cases while they work with federal regulators on improving their practices, said Kevin M. Wolfe, the assistant director of the Civil Practice Division of New Jersey?s Administrative Office of the Courts.

New foreclosure cases are moving much more quickly, and there is no backlog, Mr. Wolfe said. The average time for foreclosures filed this year is 6.4 months.

By the time lenders begin processing those old cases, the court should be far better prepared, he said, adding, ?We?re not going to be caught up short this time.?


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121209/d8a5188f/attachment.html 

From marksafron at att.net  Sun Dec  9 14:25:48 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2012 14:25:48 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Financiers Bet on Rental Housing - NYTimes.com
Message-ID: <025A5DCD-ECCC-4D9F-B36D-FEABB09D72E2@att.net>


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/09/business/financiers-bet-on-rental-housing.html?pagewanted=2&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121209&pagewanted=all

Big Money Bets on a Housing Rebound

DAVID N. MILLER, a master of bailouts, steps to the dais and coolly explains how the financial world went crazy.

It is February 2010. The anger behind Occupy Wall Street is building. Flicking through slides, Mr. Miller, a Treasury official working with the department?s $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, lays out what caused the housing bubble: easy credit, shoddy banking, feeble regulation, and on and on.

?History has demonstrated that the financial system over all ? not every piece of it, but over all ? is a force for good, even if it goes off track from time to time,? Mr. Miller tells a symposium at Columbia University in remarks posted on YouTube. ?As we?ve experienced, sometimes this system breaks down.?

But, it turns out, sometimes when the system breaks down, there is money to be made.

Mr. Miller, who arrived at the Treasury after working at Goldman Sachs, described himself as a ?recovering banker? in the video.

Today, he has slipped back through the revolving door between Washington and Wall Street. This time, he has gone the other way, in a new company, Silver Bay Realty, which is about to go public. He is back in the investment game and out to make money with a play that was at the center of the financial crisis: American housing.

As the foreclosure crisis grinds on, knowledgeable, cash-rich investors are doing something that still gives many ordinary Americans pause: they are leaping headlong into the housing market. And not just into tricky mortgage investments, collateralized this or securitized that, but actual houses.

A flurry of private-equity giants and hedge funds have spent billions of dollars to buy thousands of foreclosed single-family homes. They are purchasing them on the cheap through bank auctions, multiple listing services, short sales and bulk purchases from local investors in need of cash, with plans to fix up the properties, rent them out and watch their values soar as the industry rebounds. They have raised as much as $8 billion to invest, according to Jade Rahmani, an analyst at Keefe Bruyette & Woods.

The Blackstone Group, the New York private-equity firm run by Stephen A. Schwarzman, has spent more than $1 billion to buy 6,500 single-family homes so far this year. The Colony Capital Group, headed by the Los Angeles billionaire Thomas J. Barrack Jr., has bought 4,000.

Perhaps no investment company is staking more on this strategy, and asking stock-market investors to do the same, than the one Mr. Miller is involved with, Silver Bay Realty Trust of Minnetonka, Minn. Silver Bay is the brainchild of Two Harbors Investment, a publicly traded mortgage real estate investment trust that invests in securities backed by home mortgages.

In January, Two Harbors branched out into buying actual homes and placed them in a unit called Silver Bay. It offered few details at the time, leaving analysts guessing about where it was headed.

?They were not very forthcoming,? says Merrill Ross, an analyst at Wunderlich Securities. As of Dec. 4, Two Harbors had acquired 2,200 houses. Ms. Ross says she couldn?t find out how much Two Harbors paid or the rents it was charging. Two Harbors shares, which recently traded at $11.66, are up about 25 percent in 2012.       

Two Harbors now plans to spin off Silver Bay into a separately traded public REIT. The new company will combine Silver Bay?s portfolio with Provident Real Estate Advisors? 880-property portfolio. Silver Bay will focus on homes in Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina and Nevada, states where prices fell hard when the bottom dropped out.

In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission last week, Silver Bay said it planned to offer 13.25 million shares at an initial price of $18 to $20 a share. But it?s no slam dunk. While home prices nationwide have begun to recover ? they were up 6.3 percent in October, according to a report last week from CoreLogic, a data analysis firm ? prices could fall again if the economy falters anew. Millions of Americans are still struggling to hold onto their homes and avoid foreclosure.

?Recent turbulence in U.S. housing and mortgage markets has created a unique opportunity,? Silver Bay said in an S.E.C. filing. The company, which will be the first publicly traded REIT to invest solely in single-family rental homes, says its investment plan will help clear foreclosed homes from the market, spruce up neighborhoods and renovate vacant homes, presumably while enriching its new shareholders. Its portfolio will be managed by Pine River Capital Management, a hedge fund in Minnetonka that has reportedly been buying bonds backed by risky subprime mortgages. Mr. Miller is a managing director at Pine River and chief executive of Silver Bay.

Mr. Miller, through a spokesman, declined to comment for this article, citing the pending stock offering.

Some real estate experts question Silver Bay?s long-term prospects. And they wonder if the moment to plow into the housing market has already passed. The hedge fund manager Och-Ziff Capital, for example, is already starting to sell the single-family homes it bought since the recession began.

?This will be a workable business as a REIT for at least three to five years,? says Jay Leupp, a managing director at Lazard Asset Management. If the economy perks up and renters start buying, he said, ?it may make more sense to liquidate the portfolio and transition into another business or simply return the cash to shareholders.?

MR. BARRACK just bought a modest house in Inglewood, Calif. And another in Santa Clarita. And another in Sacramento. These are among thousands of foreclosed properties that his private investment company, Colony, has snapped up nationwide ? not for a quick flip, but to rent.

One property, a four-bedroom home bought in Sacramento for $167,500, was worth $436,000 before the recession. Such deals aren?t Mr. Barrack?s usual style. Colony?s financial appetite normally runs a bit more toward, say, Michael Jackson?s Neverland Valley Ranch, whose estimated value was about $47 million when Mr. Barrack bought it in 2008 at a discount as it was headed for foreclosure.

Investors like Mr. Barrack?s Colony are a rising force in the housing market. Even if their purchases slow, they are now sitting on thousands of homes and have positioned themselves as the new landlords of thousands of Americans.

Now Mr. Miller, 36, has arrived on the scene. At the Treasury, Mr. Miller helped oversee the federal bailouts of banks whose risky mortgage businesses helped send the economy and housing market into a tailspin. Now, as Silver Bay?s chief executive, he is trying to pick up family homes on the cheap.

James H. Lambright, who preceded Mr. Miller as the chief investment officer of TARP and who is the former chairman of the Export-Import Bank of the United States, says Mr. Miller did a great job at the Treasury.

He says he was impressed by Mr. Miller?s financial knowledge and his commitment to public service. Among other things, Mr. Miller helped place values on mortgage securities.

?This provided him an opportunity to develop a deep understanding of the housing finance markets,? says Mr. Lambright, 41, now the chief financial officer of Sapphire Energy, a renewable-energy company in San Diego that produces oil from algae.

Mr. Lambright recalls how Mr. Miller, shuttling between Washington and his home in the New York area, navigated complex questions, like how the government would guarantee many millions of dollars in assets held by Citigroup.

?I would find him on conference calls at 3 in the morning, dealing with lawyers, trying to untangle really complicated details,? Mr. Lambright recalls. No one on the TARP team had time for a social life. ?Socializing in late 2008 and early 2009 meant grabbing a cup of coffee in the Treasury cafeteria,? he says.

The crisis passed, but since September 2008, an estimated 3.9 million families have lost their homes to foreclosure. Nationwide, home prices have plunged by about a third from their peak in 2006. Some markets, like Las Vegas, are down more than 60 percent, according to Green Street Advisors, a real estate research firm in Newport Beach, Calif.

All of this is good news for someone with money looking to buy homes.

Demand for single-family home rentals has always been there: it represents 33 percent of home rentals, according to Green Street. Until now, though, most rentals were handled by small-time landlord-entrepreneurs who owned five or 10 houses, says Bob Curran, a managing director at Fitch Ratings.

INDUSTRY experts say the potential profits are enormous. They compare the current home market to the commercial real estate market after the savings and loan bust of the late 1980s and early 1990s. Back then, early investors realized double-digit ? and in some cases triple-digit ? returns. Still, some question how long ? and how far ? these big investors can ride the market this time.

Nevertheless, Colony, the private-equity firm Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and others have expressed interest in following Silver Bay?s lead in taking home investment entities public. The pros are offering mom and pop a slice of the action ? a development that has often been a sign that the big money has already been made.

Silver Bay?s financial future will ultimately depend on how much it pays for homes, repairs and maintenance, as well as its ability to lease those homes and for how much. Dealing with hundreds or thousands of individual homes across various states is different from dealing with, say, apartment buildings in one area. Valuations are tricky.

Colony, for example, recently sent 50 people to bid on foreclosed properties at auctions in eight counties in the Atlanta area to ensure that the homes were carefully assessed, recalls Justin Chang, acting chief executive of Colony American Homes, a division of Colony Capital. ?You can?t sit in your office underwriting on your computer ? you can?t dial it in,? he says. ?You need local men and women who really know those markets.?        

Investors who don?t do their homework may see the values of their investments plummet, much the way people lost big on mortgage investments in 2008. Maintenance expenses are one wild card. Another is whether people who rent single-family homes ? some of whom lost houses to foreclosure ? will be able to keep up the rent.

Most of all, the American dream of homeownership burns.

?People want to own, and when the opportunity comes back for people to be able to buy their own homes, they will,? says Richard Anderson, managing director at BMO Capital Markets. ?Let?s not forget ? the American dream is not to rent a home. It?s to own a home. And that?s not changing anytime soon.?



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121209/f849c3ba/attachment.html 

From agnes at mcn.org  Mon Dec 10 09:54:28 2012
From: agnes at mcn.org (agnes at mcn.org)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:54:28 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Public Banking and the Fort Bragg City
	Council-please attend
Message-ID: <0f3c03c215f285d07c25834cbf343562.squirrel@webmail.mcn.org>

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Public Banking and the Fort Bragg City Council
From:    agnes at mcn.org
Date:    Sun, December 9, 2012 10:08 pm
To:      jessie at mac.com
Cc:      jessielee at mac.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Good evening Fort Bragg City Council Members,

 Thank you for this opportunity to talk about what I've learned regarding
public banking.
I believe if you are interested in taking direct control of Fort Bragg's
foreclosure problem, it can be resolved by using banking laws along with
eminent domain. The City or county applies to its state banking regulatory
body for a state bank charter. (All states define the requirements for
charters and oversee the compliance) according to an article I read at
www.nationalcommonwealthclubgroup.net.  Much of the following  applies to
county as well as city public banks:See the website for the City of San
Francisco at the end of this letter for a CA precedent.

      Once a charter is granted, a bank can commence with normal banking
activities that conform to internationally accepted processes and
procedures. The above group advocates that a local public bank not
offer retail banking services to the general public. The fundamental
banking activity is the ability to create credit(money). As
explained on the Federal Reserve Banks, Bank of Dallas under a
section called "How Banks Create Money". Banks actually create money
when they lend it.

      When a bank creates credit for a borrower, it does not reach into a
pool of existing funds, but rather creates that credit simply with
an accounting entry.
(For example When it gives you a car loan of $30,000. it does so by
entering a liability on the bank's balance sheet to give you $30,000 and
is offset by an entry on the asset side of its balance sheet represented
by the loan document you signed. (The bank doesn't have to get the money
from depositors or anyone else,
but creates it out of thin air.)

  The only constraint on how much credit money banks can create is based
on the long standing convention that limits the amount to a multiple of
the bank's assets.  That varies by jurisdiction (ie.,conditions set by
local regulators) and the prevailing economic climate, but averages about 10
times, ie. for every $1 in assets owned by the bank, it is allowed to create
$10. in loans....

 So if . for example the county or city owned $100 million in net assets,
that county bank would have the credit generating capacity of up to $1
billion, that is, it can create up to $1 billion out of thin air, just
like any other bank, money that it can make available to its own citizens
because it and they own those assets.

  How can the county  use this credit creating ability to solve its
foreclosure
problem? It takes just two steps according to the Commonwealth Group:

   1. The County issues a moratorium on all foreclosures, requiring that all
mortgage holders deal with the county bank instead of instituting
foreclosure procedures against property owners.
 and
  2. It buys distressed real estate loans from existing lenders, just as the
Federal Reserve did by buying toxic assets from the Wall Street Banks. The
county bank acquires those loans by creating a credit account for the
current mortgage holder in the amount of the fair market purchase price
for each loan/property. This now puts the distressed mortgage in the hands
of the county.
     This benefits every one: the county or the city, the home owner and the
mortgage holder-especially if it is a local bank.

     Also note p.5,6 of the above website to see how Congress can help
regarding reasons for separating county banks from FDIC and forming a
separate  corporation, such as a holding company.
      This information can be crosschecked at
www.publicbankinginstitute.org,contact Mark Armstrong there.

As a precedent the City of  San  Francisco  explores a revolutionary new
model, visit
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/03/municipal-bank-sanfrancisco-n-1074600.html.)

The first of a 3 part series on the Foreclosure Town Hall Meeting
sponsored by Occupy Mendocino will be aired on MCTV Wednesday Dec.
12,2012.
Thank you  for your attention,
 Agnes Woolsey






From vjessielee at gmail.com  Mon Dec 10 10:51:30 2012
From: vjessielee at gmail.com (Jessie Lee VanSant)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:51:30 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Come to City Council FB tonight Monday 10 Dec. 6
	pm
Message-ID: <CA+MaVrCQ7bOpTF_CqPT1qCdYazzVQSmWCwNAJhUXXfCsZg3zqw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Folks,

Agnes asked me to send this out and invite all who can to come to Fort
Bragg City Council meeting tonight as she plans to read this letter and
present it to City Council.

Hope you can make it.

JL


********************************************************************


Good evening Fort Bragg City Council Members,


Thank you for this opportunity to talk about what I've learned regarding

public banking.

          I believe if you are interested in taking direct control of Fort
Bragg's foreclosure problem, it can be resolved by using existing banking
laws along with eminent domain. The City or county applies to its state
banking regulatory body for a state bank charter. All states define the
requirements for charters and oversee the compliance according to an
article I read at www.nationalcommonwealthclubgroup.net.  Much of the
following applies to county as well as city public banks:See the website
for the City of San Francisco at the end of this letter for a CA precedent.


     Once a charter is granted, a bank can commence with normal banking
activities that conform to internationally accepted processes and

procedures. The above group advocates that a local public bank not

offer retail banking services to the general public. The fundamental

banking activity is the ability to create credit(money). As explained on
the Federal Reserve Banks, Bank of Dallas under a section called "How Banks
Create Money". Banks actually create money when they lend it.


     When a bank creates credit for a borrower, it does not reach into a

pool of existing funds, but rather creates that credit simply with

an accounting entry. (For example When it gives you a car loan of $30,000.
it does so by entering a liability on the bank's balance sheet to give you
$30,000 and is offset by an entry on the asset side of its balance sheet
represented by the loan document you signed. (The bank doesn't have to get
the money from depositors or anyone else, but creates it out of thin air.)


 The only constraint on how much credit money banks can create is based on
the long standing convention that limits the amount available to a multiple
of the bank's assets.  That varies by jurisdiction (i.e. conditions set by
local regulators) and the prevailing economic climate, but averages about
10 times, ie. for every $1 in assets owned by the bank, it is allowed to
create $10 in loans....


So if, for example, the county or city owned $100 million in net assets,

that county bank would have the credit generating capacity of up to $1

billion, that is, it can create up to $1 billion out of thin air, just

like any other bank, money that it can make available to its own citizens

because the bank and the citizens own those assets.


 How can the county use this credit creating ability to solve its

foreclosure problem?  It takes just two steps according to the Commonwealth
Group:


  1. The County issues a moratorium on all foreclosures, requiring that all
mortgage holders deal with the county bank instead of instituting

foreclosure procedures against property owners.....and

 2. The county bank buys distressed real estate loans from existing
lenders, just as the Federal Reserve did by buying toxic assets from the
Wall Street Banks. The county bank acquires those loans by creating a
credit account for the current mortgage holder in the amount of the fair
market purchase price for each loan/property. This now puts the distressed
mortgage in the hands of the county.  This benefits every one: the county
or the city, the home owner and the mortgage holder-especially if it is a
local bank.


    Also note p.5 and 6 of the above website to see how Congress can help
regarding reasons for separating county banks from FDIC and forming a
separate corporation, such as a holding company.  This information can be
crosschecked at www.publicbankinginstitute.org, contact Mark Armstrong
there.  Occupy Mendocino hopes to host either Mark Armstrong and/or Susan
Harmon from the Public Banking Institute to speak to our community and to
you about the opportunities of creating a Public Bank.


As a precedent, read the City of San Francisco explores a revolutionary new
model.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/03/municipal-bank-sanfrancisco-n-1074600.html


MCTV  will air the first of a 3 part series on the Foreclosure Town Hall
Meeting (sponsored by Occupy Mendocino) on Wednesday Dec.

12, 2012.

Thank you for your attention,

Agnes Woolsey


-- 
OCCUPY MENDOCINO (the Mendocino Coast) and the Global OCCUPY Movement want
government of the *people*, by the *people*, and for the *people* - *not** *of
the *corporations*, by the *lobbyists*, and for the *richest 1%*.
We *stand* with those who have lost their homes, their jobs, their savings,
retirements, pensions, and health insurance.
We *stand* with those who struggle to put food on the table and who now
work MORE for MUCH LESS.
We *stand* with the elderly, vulnerable, veterans, laborers, working
people, students, teachers, unions, children and our planet.
                            *PLEASE JOIN US*
www.OccupyMendocino.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121210/24fe5be2/attachment.html 

From adross at mcn.org  Mon Dec 10 10:12:05 2012
From: adross at mcn.org (Ad Ross)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 11:12:05 -0700
Subject: [Occupymendocino] big banks getting their due?
Message-ID: <A08E460B-8ADE-41C5-8539-C38A588BF666@mcn.org>


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/10/business/banks-face-a-huge- 
reckoning-in-the-mortgage-mess.html

-------------------------------------------

Sent from my obsolete desktop.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121210/8a586637/attachment.html 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Mon Dec 10 13:43:31 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 13:43:31 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fwd: Come to City Council FB tonight Monday 10
	Dec. 6 pm
References: <CA+MaVrCQ7bOpTF_CqPT1qCdYazzVQSmWCwNAJhUXXfCsZg3zqw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <80C8C91E-9D69-4F5E-B44F-E4CDE231BBFA@mcn.org>

I'll be there!  This is very understandable. I wonder if the City had an idea of how
they make money from a city bank? And how much?  Will the mortgage payments give a profit for
the banks, for example.

Richard

> 
> 
> Hi Folks, 
> Agnes asked me to send this out and invite all who can to come to Fort Bragg City Council meeting tonight as she plans to read this letter and present it to City Council.
> Hope you can make it.
> JL
> 
> ********************************************************************
> 
> Good evening Fort Bragg City Council Members,
> 
> Thank you for this opportunity to talk about what I've learned regarding
> public banking.
>           I believe if you are interested in taking direct control of Fort Bragg's foreclosure problem, it can be resolved by using existing banking laws along with eminent domain. The City or county applies to its state banking regulatory body for a state bank charter. All states define the requirements for charters and oversee the compliance according to an article I read at www.nationalcommonwealthclubgroup.net.  Much of the following applies to county as well as city public banks:See the website for the City of San Francisco at the end of this letter for a CA precedent.
> 
>      Once a charter is granted, a bank can commence with normal banking activities that conform to internationally accepted processes and
> procedures. The above group advocates that a local public bank not
> offer retail banking services to the general public. The fundamental
> banking activity is the ability to create credit(money). As explained on the Federal Reserve Banks, Bank of Dallas under a section called "How Banks Create Money". Banks actually create money when they lend it.
> 
>      When a bank creates credit for a borrower, it does not reach into a
> pool of existing funds, but rather creates that credit simply with
> an accounting entry. (For example When it gives you a car loan of $30,000. it does so by entering a liability on the bank's balance sheet to give you $30,000 and is offset by an entry on the asset side of its balance sheet represented by the loan document you signed. (The bank doesn't have to get the money from depositors or anyone else, but creates it out of thin air.)
> 
>  The only constraint on how much credit money banks can create is based on the long standing convention that limits the amount available to a multiple of the bank's assets.  That varies by jurisdiction (i.e. conditions set by local regulators) and the prevailing economic climate, but averages about 10 times, ie. for every $1 in assets owned by the bank, it is allowed to create $10 in loans....
> 
> So if, for example, the county or city owned $100 million in net assets,
> that county bank would have the credit generating capacity of up to $1
> billion, that is, it can create up to $1 billion out of thin air, just
> like any other bank, money that it can make available to its own citizens
> because the bank and the citizens own those assets.
> 
>  How can the county use this credit creating ability to solve its
> foreclosure problem?  It takes just two steps according to the Commonwealth Group:
> 
>   1. The County issues a moratorium on all foreclosures, requiring that all mortgage holders deal with the county bank instead of instituting
> foreclosure procedures against property owners.....and
>  2. The county bank buys distressed real estate loans from existing lenders, just as the Federal Reserve did by buying toxic assets from the Wall Street Banks. The county bank acquires those loans by creating a credit account for the current mortgage holder in the amount of the fair market purchase price for each loan/property. This now puts the distressed mortgage in the hands of the county.  This benefits every one: the county or the city, the home owner and the mortgage holder-especially if it is a local bank.
> 
>     Also note p.5 and 6 of the above website to see how Congress can help regarding reasons for separating county banks from FDIC and forming a separate corporation, such as a holding company.  This information can be crosschecked at www.publicbankinginstitute.org, contact Mark Armstrong there.  Occupy Mendocino hopes to host either Mark Armstrong and/or Susan Harmon from the Public Banking Institute to speak to our community and to you about the opportunities of creating a Public Bank.
> 
> As a precedent, read the City of San Francisco explores a revolutionary new model. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/03/municipal-bank-sanfrancisco-n-1074600.html
> 
> MCTV  will air the first of a 3 part series on the Foreclosure Town Hall Meeting (sponsored by Occupy Mendocino) on Wednesday Dec.
> 12, 2012.
> Thank you for your attention,
> Agnes Woolsey
> 
> 
> -- 
> OCCUPY MENDOCINO (the Mendocino Coast) and the Global OCCUPY Movement want government of the people, by the people, and for the people - not of the corporations, by the lobbyists, and for the richest 1%.
> We stand with those who have lost their homes, their jobs, their savings, retirements, pensions, and health insurance.
> We stand with those who struggle to put food on the table and who now work MORE for MUCH LESS.
> We stand with the elderly, vulnerable, veterans, laborers, working people, students, teachers, unions, children and our planet.
>                             PLEASE JOIN US
> www.OccupyMendocino.net
> 
> 
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.
> 
> For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121210/129e1aed/attachment.html 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Mon Dec 10 16:02:00 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 16:02:00 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Martin Luther King Day
In-Reply-To: <0EF62BF4-ADE0-474A-A58B-4EFEE834586F@mcn.org>
References: <50C4F672.5060907@cypresshouse.com>
	<0EF62BF4-ADE0-474A-A58B-4EFEE834586F@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <7AFA5EC5-80B7-4837-A445-7F18E959E885@mcn.org>

I think this would be great for OM to do.  I am not a point person but will aid in anyway possible. Anyone else out there with experience on pulling this off? Maybe a typical schedule of events for a start.

Richard
On Dec 10, 2012, at 7:09 AM, Linda Jupiter wrote:

> Greetings, all,
> In the past, Zac, John, Linda, and a few others organized MLK Day, around January 19. Our group can't do it this year and we wonder if Occupy Mendocino would like to do so. It's a good way to raise money and get the word out about foreclosures and civil rights. There's some money in our treasury to jumpstart the event. Anyone interested? It's an important event for us all.
> Peace,
> Linda, John, Zac
> 



From nlnelson at mcn.org  Mon Dec 10 23:14:09 2012
From: nlnelson at mcn.org (Nancy Liela Wallace-Nelson)
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 23:14:09 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Martin Luther King Day
In-Reply-To: <7AFA5EC5-80B7-4837-A445-7F18E959E885@mcn.org>
References: <50C4F672.5060907@cypresshouse.com><0EF62BF4-ADE0-474A-A58B-4EFEE834586F@mcn.org>
	<7AFA5EC5-80B7-4837-A445-7F18E959E885@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <B6AC90306A734E638DBCB044070C19F8@NancyPC>

I am totally unable to be a "point person" - but will be a foot soldier!

Nancy Wallace-Nelson
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard Karch" <rkarch at mcn.org>
To: <occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org>
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 4:02 PM
Subject: Re: [Occupymendocino] Martin Luther King Day


>I think this would be great for OM to do.  I am not a point person but will 
>aid in anyway possible. Anyone else out there with experience on pulling 
>this off? Maybe a typical schedule of events for a start.
>
> Richard
> On Dec 10, 2012, at 7:09 AM, Linda Jupiter wrote:
>
>> Greetings, all,
>> In the past, Zac, John, Linda, and a few others organized MLK Day, around 
>> January 19. Our group can't do it this year and we wonder if Occupy 
>> Mendocino would like to do so. It's a good way to raise money and get the 
>> word out about foreclosures and civil rights. There's some money in our 
>> treasury to jumpstart the event. Anyone interested? It's an important 
>> event for us all.
>> Peace,
>> Linda, John, Zac
>>
>
>
>
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to 
> occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.
>
> For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org 



From agnes at mcn.org  Tue Dec 11 10:35:35 2012
From: agnes at mcn.org (agnes at mcn.org)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 10:35:35 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] [Fwd: mortgage article]
Message-ID: <e937ea5a3a1aef44c15811f0fa6bc7a0.squirrel@webmail.mcn.org>

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: mortgage article
From:    "Susan Harman" <susanharman1 at gmail.com>
Date:    Mon, December 10, 2012 6:36 pm
To:      foreclosurepreventionzones at googlegroups.com
         california-occupy-homes at googlegroups.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/10/business/banks-face-a-huge-reckoning-in-the-mortgage-mess.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&adxnnl=1&emc=edit_ee_20121210&adxnnlx=1355123858-hVrc7P/Oae2q%20Mkt3e3GIg&



From agnes at mcn.org  Tue Dec 11 11:03:10 2012
From: agnes at mcn.org (agnes at mcn.org)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 11:03:10 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] re Land Banks presentation to City and County
Message-ID: <47a2ae91d509673e595496fdd92137ab.squirrel@webmail.mcn.org>

Dear Friends,
       I want to thank those who showed support at the City Council
meeting Monday night at 6:00 pm : Mark,Richard,Sheila,Jessie and
Henrietta. Jessie gave a great delivery of the fighting Foreclosure
Committee letter on Public
Banking. I have a response from Susan Harmon of the Public Banking
Institute, she is willing to come speak to the C.C. members but thinks it
would be more useful to go before the Board of Supervisors.

There is a B.O. S. meeting Dec. 18th and Jessie and I are planning to go
and wondered how many of you would be willing to carpool to Ukiah at 7:00
am.
We would basically read the same letter and encourage anyone else to speak
at the public expression time promptly at 9:00 am.

See you at the 10:00am brunch Saturday at the Sr. Ctr. for your response.

Love you all,
Agnes





From marksafron at att.net  Tue Dec 11 11:06:25 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 11:06:25 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] THE ACTUAL COST OF WASHINGTON'S CLEVER DEBT DEAL
Message-ID: <27934E76-74B1-45EE-8ACE-1E8E846FC150@att.net>


TRENDING:CHARLIE'S DAILY READ FISCAL CLIFF MICHIGAN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY GUEST POSTSMitt's Funny Face and the
Best of the GobshitesThe Voices Missing From The Safety Net Debate
DEC 10, 2012
THE ACTUAL COST OF WASHINGTON'S CLEVER DEBT DEAL
By Charles P. Pierce
at 11:15am
Jonathan Chait and Ezra Klein have both been taking a terrible hiding for suggesting ? and, inChait's case, recommending ? that raising the eligibility age for Medicare might be the the key to breaking the impasse as we slouch toward the Gentle Fiscal Incline. I disagree with both of them, for reasons we'll get to in a minute, but I'm not inclined to crank up the Enola Gay on this issue. I would just gently point out that almost every part of the primary rationale for doing what they suggest ? that any deal is better than none, and that some Democratic blood-sacrifice on entitlements is required so that John Boehner is not cannibalized by his caucus ? is pure Beltway group-think in that it renders almost insignificant the human cost out in the country of the policy proposed to solve what is essentially a conundrum devised by unaccountable elites.

For example, let's talk for a moment about a particularly nasty dog I happen to have in this fight ? namely, Alzheimer's Disease.

We are on the brink of an epidemic of AD in this country. There are 5.4 million people with the disease right now, and there are estimated to be another 15 million people ? mostly, aging spouses and economically stressed children ? providing what amounts to $210 billion in unpaid care. (There are estimated to be 800,000 people with the disease who are living alone.) The disease already costs $140 billion to Medicare and Medicaid. By 2050, it is estimated, and assuming a cure is not found, the total cost of caring for Alzheimer's patients could soar past $1 trillion.

The current plan being bruited about in Washington would raise the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67 years of age. This is the low end of the Alzheimer's spectrum, but the increase in diagnosed cases is still significant, rising three percent per thousand people nationally just between 2000 and 2008. In John Boehner's Ohio, there are 13,000 people roughly within that window with the disease. There are 7,100 in Eric Cantor's Virginia, and 5700 in Paul Ryan's Wisconsin. All of these people represent not only the ravages of the disease, but the severe emotional and economic strain that it puts on their families. All of these people represent a considerable amount of pain that is not being factored into the shrewd political calculations that get you on the Sunday shows.

Make this deal, and what do all these people and their families do? Shop for private insurance for another two years? Does that sound remotely practical to anyone who are not: a) members of Congress enjoying the benefits of a government-run, single-payer health care system?, or b) well-remunerated pundits who can afford a Cadillac plan of their own. This is a great rock rolling down the hill in American health-care, and there simply is no "private-sector" solution to it that isn't laughable on its face. Raising the Medicare eligibility age will hurt people. It will hasten their deaths. It will bankrupt their families. These people will not appreciate how clever you all were.



Read more: Medicare Age Increase and Alzheimer's - The Actual Cost Of Washington's Clever Debt Deal - Esquire http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/medicare-age-increase-and-alzheimers-121012#ixzz2Eltst0As
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121211/4aa83c54/attachment.html 

From john at cypresshouse.com  Tue Dec 11 11:21:11 2012
From: john at cypresshouse.com (John Fremont)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 11:21:11 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] MLK
In-Reply-To: <ee34d0c7deb3fe99aa5ca54412256c6d.squirrel@webmail.mcn.org>
References: <ee34d0c7deb3fe99aa5ca54412256c6d.squirrel@webmail.mcn.org>
Message-ID: <50C787A7.7060208@cypresshouse.com>

Having helped organize more than a dozen Martin Luther King, Jr. 
celebrations, I'll be happy to facilitate a meeting with half a dozen or 
more Occupiers who would like to do this event. Please contact me 
directly or reply to the Occupy list.
Peace,
John



From jupiter at mcn.org  Tue Dec 11 11:35:48 2012
From: jupiter at mcn.org (Linda Jupiter)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 11:35:48 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] re Land Banks presentation to City and County
In-Reply-To: <47a2ae91d509673e595496fdd92137ab.squirrel@webmail.mcn.org>
References: <47a2ae91d509673e595496fdd92137ab.squirrel@webmail.mcn.org>
Message-ID: <145358E6-8120-48F2-AD86-943385D40C8F@mcn.org>

Dear Agnes,
Thanks for your great work; can't make the 18th.
Onward,
Linda

-----------
Linda Jupiter Productions
P.O. Box 2822
139-1/2 Jupiter Lane
Fort Bragg, CA 95437
phone 707-964-8985
www.lindajupiter.com




















On Dec 11, 2012, at 11:03 AM, agnes at mcn.org wrote:

> Dear Friends,
>       I want to thank those who showed support at the City Council
> meeting Monday night at 6:00 pm : Mark,Richard,Sheila,Jessie and
> Henrietta. Jessie gave a great delivery of the fighting Foreclosure
> Committee letter on Public
> Banking. I have a response from Susan Harmon of the Public Banking
> Institute, she is willing to come speak to the C.C. members but  
> thinks it
> would be more useful to go before the Board of Supervisors.
>
> There is a B.O. S. meeting Dec. 18th and Jessie and I are planning  
> to go
> and wondered how many of you would be willing to carpool to Ukiah at  
> 7:00
> am.
> We would basically read the same letter and encourage anyone else to  
> speak
> at the public expression time promptly at 9:00 am.
>
> See you at the 10:00am brunch Saturday at the Sr. Ctr. for your  
> response.
>
> Love you all,
> Agnes
>
>
>
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org 
>  put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.
>
> For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121211/8ceb5382/attachment.html 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Tue Dec 11 13:26:56 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 13:26:56 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Rolling Jubilee
Message-ID: <D0FC8D6F-872F-45FC-AEF5-E79B0ACCA726@mcn.org>

It is rolling.

http://pnhpcalifornia.org/2012/11/occupys-new-offshoot-set-to-cancel-millions-in-medical-debts/

From vjessielee at gmail.com  Tue Dec 11 13:55:39 2012
From: vjessielee at gmail.com (Jessie VanSant)
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 13:55:39 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fwd: Requests for Butte County Board of
	Supervisors
References: <80b6b172-fec8-4977-86d9-5534a812166e@googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <BAEAA5CC-38CF-413F-B151-BD7116CA834B@gmail.com>

something to study

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Dan <everhad at gmail.com>
> Subject: Requests for Butte County Board of Supervisors
> Date: December 11, 2012 11:22:45 AM PST
> To: california-occupy-homes at googlegroups.com
> Reply-To: everhad at gmail.com
> 
> 
> 
> Here are the requests we're making of our BoS
> 
> 1.      Form a County Task Force to discover illegalities in past and ongoing foreclosure processes, including auctions; to establish a procedure to address homeowners? grievances, and to bring illegalities to the attention of County officials. 
> 
> 2.      The Butte County Clerk-Recorder?s Office shall perform an audit of Butte County foreclosure documents in order to look for violations of the law and evidence of fraud.
> 
> 3.      Pass a resolution or ordinance that requires any person or entity initiating foreclosure to sign an Affidavit of Authority verifying that they have a clear and unambiguous right to foreclose on a property, and the Affidavit must be recorded in the Butte County Clerk-Recorder?s office. 
> 
> 4.      Pass a resolution or ordinance requiring all assignments and other documents related to a particular Butte County property be filed with the County Clerk-Recorder, thereby establishing a full, transparent property record for all to see. (This requirement would hold banks to the same standards of document filing that homeowners are being held to, and it would prevent confusion related to ?chain of title? issues.)
> 
> 5.      Raise the transfer tax rate in Butte County. 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121211/b68e8dbf/attachment.html 

From agnes at mcn.org  Wed Dec 12 09:33:20 2012
From: agnes at mcn.org (agnes at mcn.org)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 09:33:20 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fwd: Requests for Butte County Board of
 Supervisors
In-Reply-To: <BAEAA5CC-38CF-413F-B151-BD7116CA834B@gmail.com>
References: <80b6b172-fec8-4977-86d9-5534a812166e@googlegroups.com>
	<BAEAA5CC-38CF-413F-B151-BD7116CA834B@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0855989b58b1cc24ea107aefade13336.squirrel@webmail.mcn.org>

>Dear All Occupiers,
        This is a very useful list of requests to the B.O.S. I think this
would be a great opportunity for each of five people to stand up
and read one of these demands/requests. Who is willing to step up
and come with me and Jessie tuesday?
Agnes



 something to study
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: Dan <everhad at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Requests for Butte County Board of Supervisors
>> Date: December 11, 2012 11:22:45 AM PST
>> To: california-occupy-homes at googlegroups.com
>> Reply-To: everhad at gmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>> Here are the requests we're making of our BoS
>>
>> 1.      Form a County Task Force to discover illegalities in past and
>> ongoing foreclosure processes, including auctions; to establish a
>> procedure to address homeowners? grievances, and to bring illegalities
>> to the attention of County officials.
>>
>> 2.      The Butte County Clerk-Recorder?s Office shall perform an audit
>> of Butte County foreclosure documents in order to look for violations of
>> the law and evidence of fraud.
>>
>> 3.      Pass a resolution or ordinance that requires any person or
>> entity initiating foreclosure to sign an Affidavit of Authority
>> verifying that they have a clear and unambiguous right to foreclose on a
>> property, and the Affidavit must be recorded in the Butte County
>> Clerk-Recorder?s office.
>>
>> 4.      Pass a resolution or ordinance requiring all assignments and
>> other documents related to a particular Butte County property be filed
>> with the County Clerk-Recorder, thereby establishing a full, transparent
>> property record for all to see. (This requirement would hold banks to
>> the same standards of document filing that homeowners are being held to,
>> and it would prevent confusion related to ?chain of title? issues.)
>>
>> 5.      Raise the transfer tax rate in Butte County.
>>
>
>
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to
> occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.
>
> For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org
>




From marksafron at att.net  Wed Dec 12 11:56:09 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 11:56:09 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] WATCH OUT: Is Obama Playing a Shell Game on Tax
	Reform?
Message-ID: <51DD5902-F3B4-4DB8-B699-B7CE4F7520D2@att.net>


http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/14987-focus-is-obama-playing-a-shell-game-on-tax-reform

Is Obama Playing a Shell Game on Tax Reform?


By Steve Weissman, Reader Supported News

12 December 12

 
This is the report Steve Weissman's analysis below is based on: The CEO Campaign to 'Fix' the Debt.

eep your eye on the three shells. President Obama promises not to back down on his promise to raise personal income taxes on the rich. Several leading CEOs, including Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman-Sachs, say they will happily pay higher income taxes if government cuts spending and introduces personal and corporate tax reform. And the big business-backed Campaign to Fix the Debt, whose CEOs met with Obama, are pushing a tax reform proposal that would exempt American corporations from paying any tax at all on their overseas income. Under which shell will we find the big money?

"The CEO Campaign to 'Fix' the Debt: A Trojan Horse for Massive Corporate Tax Breaks" gives the shell game away. Published by the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), a left-leaning Washington think tank (whose founders I worked with politically in the 1960s), the report reveals just how much money the globe-trotting corporations stand to gain - and how much lost revenue ordinary taxpayers and small businesses will have to make up.

As the IPS report explains, the CEOs who back Fix the Debt personally saved $41 million last year from the Bush tax cuts. Consider that a rough estimate of what it might cost them if Obama fulfills his promise and does away with the tax cuts for those making over $250,000.

But that's small beer for the CEOs. "The 63 Fix the Debt companies that are publicly held stand to gain as much as $134 billion in windfalls" if Congress exempts them from paying taxes on overseas income by changing to what is called a territorial tax system. That is, companies would be liable to pay taxes only on income earned within the territory of the United States.

Corporate lobbies began pushing for this multi-billion dollar "reform" long before debts and deficits became their rallying cry. And, for good reason from their point of view.

Under our present system, they owe Uncle Sam the difference between the taxes they pay overseas and what they would have to pay under US tax rates. But they pay only if and when they bring the money back home. The result is that America corporations are now holding trillions of dollars overseas, which the proposed "reform" would allow them to bring back to the United States tax free. This is the immediate windfall they would receive if they have their way.

The CEOs claim they would then invest the money to create jobs in America. But that is pie in the sky. American multi-nationals already sit on huge piles of cash in the US and most are not using them to create jobs.

Their jobs argument also fell flat after 2004, when corporate lobbyists convinced Congress to pass the so-called American Jobs Creation Act. This allowed the multi-nationals to bring their overseas money back at a bargain basement tax rate of 5.25%. According to the IPS report, "Instead of creating jobs, the biggest beneficiaries downsized. Pfizer, for example, cut more than 10,000 US jobs in the six years after it repatriated $40 billion."

Tax reform is needed, to be sure. But not the kind "Fix the Debt" is pushing. One big target should be the accounting rules that allow American multi-nationals to write off their costs against American taxes while transferring their profits to shell corporations in low-rate tax havens. Stopping that would go a long way to bringing jobs home.

A veteran of the Berkeley Free Speech Movement and Ramparts magazine, Steve Weissman lives in France, where he is currently working on a book, "Big Money: How Global Banks, Corporations, and Speculators Rule and How To Break Their Hold."

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121212/576171dc/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rsn-K.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 665 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121212/576171dc/attachment.jpg 

From marksafron at att.net  Wed Dec 12 18:15:21 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 18:15:21 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Justice for the well connected means, "Just Us."
Message-ID: <0204AFC1-7FD3-48E6-B300-D4CB3DD4BF09@att.net>

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/12/hsbc-prosecution-fine-money-laundering

HSBC: New Poster Child for Two-Tiered Justice System

By Glenn Greenwald, Guardian UK

12 December 12

 
he US is the world's largest prison state, imprisoning more of its citizens than any nation on earth, both in absolute numbers and proportionally. It imprisons people for longer periods of time, more mercilessly, and for more trivial transgressions than any nation in the west. This sprawling penal state has been constructed over decades, by both political parties, and it punishes the poor and racial minorities at overwhelmingly disproportionate rates.

But not everyone is subjected to that system of penal harshness. It all changes radically when the nation's most powerful actors are caught breaking the law. With few exceptions, they are gifted not merely with leniency, but full-scale immunity from criminal punishment. Thus have the most egregious crimes of the last decade been fully shielded from prosecution when committed by those with the greatest political and economic power: the construction of a worldwide torture regime, spying on Americans' communications without the warrants required by criminal law by government agencies and the telecom industry, an aggressive war launched on false pretenses, and massive, systemic financial fraud in the banking and credit industry that triggered the 2008 financial crisis.

This two-tiered justice system was the subject of my last book, "With Liberty and Justice for Some", and what was most striking to me as I traced the recent history of this phenomenon is how explicit it has become. Obviously, those with money and power always enjoyed substantial advantages in the US justice system, but lip service was at least always paid to the core precept of the rule of law: that - regardless of power, position and prestige - all stand equal before the blindness of Lady Justice.

It really is the case that this principle is now not only routinely violated, as was always true, but explicitly repudiated, right out in the open. It is commonplace to hear US elites unblinkingly insisting that those who become sufficiently important and influential are - and should be - immunized from the system of criminal punishment to which everyone else is subjected.

Worse, we are constantly told that immunizing those with the greatest power is not for their good, but for our good, for our collective good: because it's better for all of us if society is free of the disruptions that come from trying to punish the most powerful, if we're free of the deprivations that we would collectively experience if we lose their extraordinary value and contributions by prosecuting them.

This rationale was popularized in 1974 when Gerald Ford explained why Richard Nixon - who built his career as a "law-and-order" politician demanding harsh punishments and unforgiving prosecutions for ordinary criminals - would never see the inside of a courtroom after being caught committing multiple felonies; his pardon was for the good not of Nixon, but of all of us. That was the same reasoning hauled out to justify immunity for officials of the National Security State who tortured and telecom giants who illegally spied on Americans (we need them to keep us safe and can't disrupt them with prosecutions), as well as the refusal to prosecute any Wall Street criminals for their fraud (prosecutions for these financial crimes would disrupt our collective economic recovery).

A new episode unveiled on Tuesday is one of the most vivid examples yet of this mentality. Over the last year, federal investigators found that one of the world's largest banks, HSBC, spent years committing serious crimes, involving money laundering for terrorists; "facilitat[ing] money laundering by Mexican drug cartels"; and "mov[ing] tainted money for Saudi banks tied to terrorist groups". Those investigations uncovered substantial evidence "that senior bank officials were complicit in the illegal activity." As but one example, "an HSBC executive at one point argued that the bank should continue working with the Saudi Al Rajhi bank, which has supported Al Qaeda."

Needless to say, these are the kinds of crimes for which ordinary and powerless people are prosecuted and imprisoned with the greatest aggression possible. If you're Muslim and your conduct gets anywhere near helping a terrorist group, even by accident, you're going to prison for a long, long time. In fact, powerless, obscure, low-level employees are routinely sentenced to long prison terms for engaging in relatively petty money laundering schemes, unrelated to terrorism, and on a scale that is a tiny fraction of what HSBC and its senior officials are alleged to have done.

But not HSBC. On Tuesday, not only did the US Justice Department announce that HSBC would not be criminally prosecuted, but outright claimed that the reason is that they are too important, too instrumental to subject them to such disruptions. In other words, shielding them from the system of criminal sanction to which the rest of us are subject is not for their good, but for our common good. We should not be angry, but grateful, for the extraordinary gift bestowed on the global banking giant:

"US authorities defended their decision not to prosecute HSBC for accepting the tainted money of rogue states and drug lords on Tuesday, insisting that a $1.9bn fine for a litany of offences was preferable to the 'collateral consequences' of taking the bank to court...

"Announcing the record fine at a press conference in New York, assistant attorney general Lanny Breuer said that despite HSBC"s 'blatant failure' to implement anti-money laundering controls and its wilful flouting of US sanctions, the consequences of a criminal prosecution would have been dire.

"Had the US authorities decided to press criminal charges, HSBC would almost certainly have lost its banking license in the US, the future of the institution would have been under threat and the entire banking system would have been destabilized. (Oh! The horror!)

"HSBC, Britain's biggest bank, said it was 'profoundly sorry' for what it called 'past mistakes' that allowed terrorists and narcotics traffickers to move billions around the financial system and circumvent US banking laws...

"As part of the deal, HSBC has undertaken a five-year agreement with the US department of justice under which it will install an independent monitor to assess reformed internal controls. The bank's top executives will defer part of their bonuses for the whole of the five-year period, while bonuses have been clawed back from a number of former and current executives, including those in the US directly involved at the time.

"John Coffee, a professor of law at Columbia Law School in New York, said the fine was consistent with how US regulators have been treating bank infractions in recent years. 'These days they rarely sue individuals in any meaningful way when the entity will settle. This is largely a function of resource constraints, but also risk aversion, and a willingness to take the course of least resistance,' he said."
DOJ officials touted the $1.9 billion fine HSBC would pay, the largest ever for such a case. As the Guardian's Nils Pratley noted, "the sum represents about four weeks' earnings given the bank's pre-tax profits of $21.9bn last year." Unsurprisingly, "the steady upward progress of HSBC's share price since the scandal exploded in July was unaffected on Tuesday morning."

The New York Times Editors this morning announced: "It is a dark day for the rule of law." There is, said the NYT editors, "no doubt that the wrongdoing at HSBC was serious and pervasive." But the bank is simply too big, too powerful, too important to prosecute.

That's not merely a dark day for the rule of law. It's a wholesale repudiation of it. The US government is expressly saying that banking giants reside outside of - above - the rule of law, that they will not be punished when they get caught red-handed committing criminal offenses for which ordinary people are imprisoned for decades. Aside from the grotesque injustice, the signal it sends is as clear as it is destructive: you are free to commit whatever crimes you want without fear of prosecution. And obviously, if the US government would not prosecute these banks on the ground that they're too big and important, it would - yet again, or rather still - never let them fail.

But this case is the opposite of an anomaly. That the most powerful actors should be immunized from the rule of law - not merely treated better, but fully immunized - is a constant, widely affirmed precept in US justice. It's applied to powerful political and private sector actors alike. Over the past four years, the CIA and NSA have received the same gift, as have top Executive Branch officials, as has the telecom industry, as has most of the banking industry. This is how I described it in "With Liberty and Justice for Some":

"To hear our politicians and our press tell it, the conclusion is inescapable: we're far better off when political and financial elites - and they alone - are shielded from criminal accountability.

"It has become a virtual consensus among the elites that their members are so indispensable to the running of American society that vesting them with immunity from prosecution - even for the most egregious crimes - is not only in their interest but in our interest, too. Prosecutions, courtrooms, and prisons, it's hinted - and sometimes even explicitly stated - are for the rabble, like the street-side drug peddlers we occasionally glimpse from our car windows, not for the political and financial leaders who manage our nation and fuel our prosperity.

"It is simply too disruptive, distracting, and unjust, we are told, to subject them to the burden of legal consequences."
That is precisely the rationale explicitly invoked by DOJ officials to justify their decision to protect HSBC from criminal accountability. These are the same officials who previously immunized Bush-era torturers and warrantless eavesdroppers, telecom giants, and Wall Street executives, even as they continue to persecute whistleblowers at record rates and prosecute ordinary citizens - particularly poor and minorities - with extreme harshness even for trivial offenses. The administration that now offers the excuse that HSBC is too big to prosecute is the same one that quite consciously refused to attempt to break up these banks in the aftermath of the "too-big-to-fail" crisis of 2008, as former TARP overseer Neil Barofsky, among others, has spent years arguing.

And, of course, these HSBC-protectors in the Obama DOJ are the same officials responsible for maintaining and expanding what NYT Editorial Page editor Andrew Rosenthal has accurately described as "essentially a separate justice system for Muslims," one in which "the principle of due process is twisted and selectively applied, if it is applied at all." What has been created is not so much a "two-tiered justice system" as a multi-tiered one, entirely dependent on the identity of the alleged offender rather than the crimes of which they are accused.

Having different "justice systems" for citizens based on their status, wealth, power and prestige is exactly what the US founders argued most strenuously had to be avoided (even as they themselves maintained exactly such a system). But here we have in undeniable clarity not merely proof of exactly how this system functions, but also the rotted and fundamentally corrupt precept on which it's based: that some actors are simply too important and too powerful to punish criminally. As the Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz warned in 2010, exempting the largest banks from criminal prosecution has meant that lawlessness and "venality" is now "at a higher level" in the US even than that which prevailed in the pervasively corrupt and lawless privatizing era in Russia.

Having the US government act specially to protect the most powerful factions, particularly banks, was a major impetus that sent people into the streets protesting both as part of the early Tea Party movement as well as the Occupy movement. As well as it should: it is truly difficult to imagine corruption and lawlessness more extreme than having the government explicitly place the most powerful factions above the rule of law even as it continues to subject everyone else to disgracefully harsh "justice". If this HSBC gift makes more manifest this radical corruption, then it will at least have achieved some good.

UPDATE

By coincidence, on the very same day that the DOJ announced that HSBC would not be indicted for its multiple money-laundering felonies, the New York Times published a story featuring the harrowing story of an African-American single mother of three who was sentenced to life imprisonment at the age of 27 for a minor drug offense:

"Stephanie George and Judge Roger Vinson had quite different opinions about the lockbox seized by the police from her home in Pensacola. She insisted she had no idea that a former boyfriend had hidden it in her attic. Judge Vinson considered the lockbox, containing a half-kilogram of cocaine, to be evidence of her guilt.

"But the defendant and the judge fully agreed about the fairness of the sentence he imposed in federal court.

"'Even though you have been involved in drugs and drug dealing,' Judge Vinson told Ms. George, 'your role has basically been as a girlfriend and bag holder and money holder but not actively involved in the drug dealing, so certainly in my judgment it does not warrant a life sentence.'

"Yet the judge had no other option on that morning 15 years ago. As her stunned family watched, Ms. George, then 27, who had never been accused of violence, was led from the courtroom to serve a sentence of life without parole.

"'I remember my mom crying out and asking the Lord why,' said Ms. George, now 42, in an interview at the Federal Correctional Institution in Tallahassee. 'Sometimes I still can't believe myself it could happen in America.'"
As the NYT notes - and read her whole story to get the full flavor of it - this is commonplace for the poor and for minorities in the US justice system. Contrast that deeply oppressive, merciless punishment system with the full-scale immunity bestowed on HSBC - along with virtually every powerful and rich lawbreaking faction in America over the last decade - and that is the living, breathing two-tiered US justice system. How this glaringly disparate, and explicitly status-based, treatment under the criminal law does not produce serious social unrest is mystifying.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121212/e2ef63f2/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rsn-T.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 512 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121212/e2ef63f2/attachment.jpg 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Thu Dec 13 05:31:01 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 05:31:01 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino]
	10-reasons-homeless-people-sleep-out-in-the-cold-and-die
Message-ID: <F1BC1E40-9EDA-4B3C-A626-6E3DF3A77D06@mcn.org>

Something to think about on these cold nights... rk

http://www.care2.com/causes/10-reasons-homeless-people-sleep-out-in-the-cold-and-die.html

From deejayliz at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 13 10:39:24 2012
From: deejayliz at yahoo.com (Liz Helenchild)
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 10:39:24 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Occupymendocino] A Eulogy for #Occupy
In-Reply-To: <CAH8HpW_irCasr-nW3wSCPuvpXkmDB4sJCqd0mRZB7xP3ZJJhdw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAH8HpW_irCasr-nW3wSCPuvpXkmDB4sJCqd0mRZB7xP3ZJJhdw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1355423964.37839.YahooMailNeo@web161201.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>





________________________________
 
 

Check out this article on Wired.com.
Great journalism by a woman who was there.

A Eulogy for #Occupy
http://www.wired.com/opinion/2012/12/a-eulogy-for-occupy/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121213/fac6eab1/attachment.html 

From john at cypresshouse.com  Thu Dec 13 18:02:56 2012
From: john at cypresshouse.com (John Fremont)
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 18:02:56 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Martin Luther King Day
In-Reply-To: <7AFA5EC5-80B7-4837-A445-7F18E959E885@mcn.org>
References: <50C4F672.5060907@cypresshouse.com>
	<0EF62BF4-ADE0-474A-A58B-4EFEE834586F@mcn.org>
	<7AFA5EC5-80B7-4837-A445-7F18E959E885@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <50CA88D0.7020400@cypresshouse.com>

If you're interested in helping plan the march and festivities for Dr. 
King's birthday, please come to the FB Library on Saturday from Noon to 
2 pm and take part in organizing the celebration.
Thank you,
John



From nsdusoir at mcn.org  Thu Dec 13 20:56:00 2012
From: nsdusoir at mcn.org (Howard Ennes)
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 20:56:00 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Occupy Foreclosures, Town Hall
Message-ID: <7A4856F5-17E4-41C2-BFCA-E3ADF8A3F1C5@mcn.org>

My dear ELIZABETH ??

	Sorry to add to your travails!  

	Yesterday I tried to watch the Occupy Foreclosures Town Hall session which I attended.  I was impressed with the quality of the visuals and pleased that you were able to so well record it.   This was an important event that deserves to be widely circulated.

	I was, however, quite distressed with the interruption and stalling that occurred.  And most distressing was the abrupt and unannounced ending that ran into community announcements, as fine as they were.  

	What happened to 'part 2' ?  Surely more understandable titles and closures can be provided.

	I appreciate that you have almost insurmountable staff problems, but all in all, it might be better to not present such pieces as this if they can't be properly introduced and ended with proper notices.   

	I assume this is a financial/staffing problem.  If so, it strikes me that a bit more dollars assigned to better organizing, labeling, and promoting such shows would increase the value and community utility of MCTV.

	My heartfelt sympathy and good wishes to you and all your hardworking staff!

											
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PastedGraphic-1.tiff
Type: image/tiff
Size: 29830 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121213/fd1ffe68/attachment.tiff 

From jupiter at mcn.org  Fri Dec 14 07:58:47 2012
From: jupiter at mcn.org (Linda Jupiter)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 07:58:47 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Bay Area folks say hands off our money video
References: <9B497D08-B4F3-4223-9F20-AC53EDC4694F@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <28763957-3DA9-4787-8E51-161B7A99F96A@mcn.org>

> Dear OMers,
The folks in the Bay Area got together for this entertaining and  
important video; it's inspiring.
They are trying make it go viral across the internet.
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: "Michael Lyon" <mlyon01 at comcast.net>
>> Date: December 12, 2012 8:57:08 AM PST
>>
>> Subject: FLASH: Final Version of Flash Mob Video is on-line
>>
>> The December 7th "Hands Off Social Security, Medicare, and  
>> Medicaid: Tax the 2%!" Flash Mob video is now on-line.
>>
>> It's at  http://youtu.be/i_kok6Y73_A
>>
>> Check it out, Click on "Like" to the left of the "download" button,  
>> and send this to your friends.
>>
>> Thank you all for coming and thanks to the California Alliance for  
>> Retired Americans (CARA) and Jobs with Justice (JwJ) for taking the  
>> lead on this.
>>
>>
>> If you'd like to embed the video on a web page, here is the embed  
>> code:
>>
>> <iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/i_kok6Y73_A 
>> " frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
>>
>> You can change the width and height numbers, but keep the  
>> proportions.  For example, seehttp://graypantherssf.igc.org/index.html
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121214/24a2a37e/attachment.html 

From sanutter at mcn.org  Fri Dec 14 12:52:10 2012
From: sanutter at mcn.org (susan nutter)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 12:52:10 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fw: Got an idea for a petition?
Message-ID: <1104CC59B6AF436B9A9AA1685F45B46C@nutter>


HERE IS A GOOD POSSIBILITY FOR OCCUPY EFFORTS!!


Dear MoveOn member,


A little over a year ago, MoveOn launched a website called SignOn.org that allows anyone to start their own online petition. And it's been a big success. MoveOn members across the country have started petitions taking on big banks, local city councils, tea party governors?and won.


But there are so many other important fights to take on, and we're counting on regular folks like you take the lead on the issues you care about most. 


So to give you an extra nudge to get started, we're offering a special deal: If you start a petition and get at least 20 people to sign it in the next 5 days, we'll email your petition to at least 1,000 other MoveOn members in your area. 


To qualify, your petition has to be consistent with MoveOn's progressive values, and you can't use profanity or anything else MoveOn members would find offensive. Give it a shot, and don't wait?this is a one-time opportunity!


Click here to start your own petition on SignOn.org right now.
Thanks for all you do.
?Steven, Elena, Stefanie, Bobby, and the rest of the team
Want to support our work? MoveOn Civic Action is entirely funded by our 7 million members?no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. Chip in here. 

This email was sent to Lillian Cartwright on December 14, 2012. To change your email address or update your contact info, click here. To remove yourself from this list, click here.  


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121214/b7009696/attachment.html 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Fri Dec 14 20:35:18 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 20:35:18 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] December 15 breakfast at Senior Center, 10 AM
In-Reply-To: <F176C8D1-97C3-4164-AC79-E6352D0F65E2@mcn.org>
References: <F176C8D1-97C3-4164-AC79-E6352D0F65E2@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <E11C3B28-01D1-4428-9705-7918CA8646DF@mcn.org>


    As most of you know, we decided to forego our General Assembly meeting for tomorrow and instead meet at the Senior Center for Breakfast. 
It is a benefit for the Senior Center. So, tomorrow, Dec. 15 at 10 AM those Occupy Mendocino members who wish to attend should come join the fun.
Info below about menu, price, thrift sale etc. 

Hope to see y'all!   
> 
> ============
> 
> OCCUPY ACTIVISTS Socializing ALERT
> 
> 	At the last two General Assembly sessions it was expressed that it would be salutary for active Occupy folks to get together for a bit of socializing . . . and the idea emerged to gather on Saturday December 15 for breakfast at the Senior Center.  
> 
> 	It so happens that there will be a  Crab Omelette Brunch from 8 to 10 a.m.   Other menu choices are:  Eggs any style and Sausage or Strawberry French Toast.The donation cost of  $12.00 includes Mimosas and/or Cafe Royale. Before during and after the Brunch will be  a silent auction.   The Attic Thrift Store will be open and holding a "1/2 off Everything Sale"  ( Does not include Consignments).
> 
> 	10 am was selected as the time for Occupy to assemble, but come when    you wish.  It will be fun to just socialize without having to think 
> about actions! Reservations are not necessary but it would be nice to let the Center know so       they can be sure to have enough food and the Occupy tables are saved for us!
> 
> 				For OCCUPY General Assembly,
> 
> 								Richard Karch,
> 
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121214/4753ba9c/attachment.html 

From agnes at mcn.org  Fri Dec 14 21:11:42 2012
From: agnes at mcn.org (agnes at mcn.org)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 21:11:42 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Please email a response re trip to Ukiah Tues.
	12/18
Message-ID: <b2c62ae17ac9dbed8b562da9950a3165.squirrel@webmail.mcn.org>

Dear Fighting foreclosures group,
      Richard and Danny expressed interest in Joining Jessie and me to
leave the coast at 7:00 am to get to the County offices of the
B.O.S. to present a
urge them to apply for a bank charter and set up a county based land bank
to facilitate the use of Eminent Domain.  This is an expansion of the
Foreclosure Town Hall meeting information we received from C.J.Holmes.

For your own information re banks making money out of thin air you may go
to www.webofdebt.com/articles/dollardeception.php. "How Banks Secretly
Create Money" by Ellen Brown,July3 2007.

We will be petitioning the county administrators to place a moratorium on
local foreclosure candidate properties for which no clear titleholder can
be established. That will require no new systems at the county level and
will go a long way to ending the devastation of foreclosure.

I will read the speech Jessie read at the F.B.City Council last Monday 
night.Please respond if you would like to carpool. Agnes and Richard will
be driving and can take a couple more passengers.
We are speaking promptly at 9:00 am before the B.O.S.
Urgently,
Agnes




From agnes at mcn.org  Fri Dec 14 21:15:21 2012
From: agnes at mcn.org (agnes at mcn.org)
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 21:15:21 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Please email a response re trip to Ukiah Tues.
	12/18
Message-ID: <1e230f843eac0d5bb6e09909652283d1.squirrel@webmail.mcn.org>

Dear Fighting foreclosures group,
      Richard and Danny expressed interest in Joining Jessie and me to
leave the coast at 7:00 am to get to the County offices of the
B.O.S.Tuesday 12/18/12, to urge them to apply for a bank charter and set
up a county based land bank to facilitate the use of Eminent Domain.  This
is an expansion of the Foreclosure Town Hall meeting information we
received from C.J.Holmes.

For your own information re banks making money out of thin air you may go
to www.webofdebt.com/articles/dollardeception.php. "How Banks Secretly
Create Money" by Ellen Brown,July3 2007.

We will be petitioning the county administrators to place a moratorium on
local foreclosure candidate properties for which no clear titleholder can
be established. That will require no new systems at the county level and
will go a long way to ending the devastation of foreclosure.

I will read the speech Jessie read at the F.B.City Council last Monday 
night.Please respond if you would like to carpool. Agnes and Richard will
be driving and can take a couple more passengers.
We are speaking promptly at 9:00 am before the B.O.S.
Urgently,
Agnes






From agnes at mcn.org  Sat Dec 15 16:58:20 2012
From: agnes at mcn.org (agnes at mcn.org)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2012 16:58:20 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] date change for presentation to B.O.S.
Message-ID: <5127c26b4efe5af14cd539b01aabb39f.squirrel@webmail.mcn.org>

Hi All,
        Norm de Vall contacted Richard K. that Dec. meetings at the B.O.S.
is involved with a full agenda, including retirement of personnel
and that January would be a better time to make our presentation
re Land Banks and Eminent Domain. We will get back to you when we
get dates of their meetings.

May you have good cheer this holiday season,
Agnes




From marksafron at att.net  Sat Dec 15 22:57:13 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2012 22:57:13 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Mr. President, Time to Lead - The Daily Beast
Message-ID: <8AF327A0-9837-4273-88DA-2D8FE2758CDC@att.net>

by Michael Tomasky Dec 15, 2012 6:56 AM EST
Gun control needs to become a voting issue for millions. Only one person can make that happen.


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/12/15/mr-president-time-to-lead.html

Mr. President, Time to Lead

When can stricter gun-control laws ever pass? We know exactly when: When 60 senators and 218 members of the House of Representatives are willing to vote for them, and not a moment before. The bleak truth is that we are a long, long, long way from that moment, or at least we were until Friday morning. If anything can change the politics of guns, surely this unspeakable event can. But Barack Obama is going to have to resolve to answer the demand that history has placed on him and spend some (maybe a lot) of his political capital on the issue.

We?re about to endure a wrenching week?the week before Christmas no less?reading about these children. Seeing pictures of their beautiful faces, watching their parents submit to those morbid interviews that television makes its business on these grim occasions; hearing what the children were waiting for Santa to bring them. Surely, this has to change things.

I would love to think so. But let?s not kid ourselves. In political terms, the odds against change are high, and the reason comes down to this. Right now, there are a few million people for whom gun rights are what is called a voting issue, which is just what it sounds like?an issue that people actively vote on, that is in their heads at the moment they pull the lever. These are the members of the National Rifle Association. The National Rampage Association, as Bob Shrum puts it elsewhere on this site. The National More Dead Children Association would be another way to put it today, because that is in effect what the organization supports.


President Obama teared up in his press conference about the Newtown shooting, saying that "our hearts are broken today."

For how many people is gun control a voting issue? For all intents and purposes, none. Oh, a few thousand; the people who work directly on the issue, and some parents who?ve lost their children. But that is about it. The scales are badly imbalanced, and until they?re closer to in balance, we won?t be able to get a law that, for example, permits police to come knock on the door of someone who buys 600 rounds of ammo online, as the Aurora, Colorado shooter did, and ask him about his plans and purposes.

So, how can that imbalance be changed? Only through the two traditional ways. The first is grassroots activism that has a lot of money behind it. Any rich people who care about gun violence out there? Now is the moment to write those checks to the Brady Campaign and other groups that work on this issue, to organize large-scale public-relations campaigns to frame the issue and get people angry and motivated. No change has ever happened in this country without a broad base of support out there, and no twitchy senator or member of Congress is going to vote against the NRA unless he thinks he can do so and survive the next election.

The second is that politicians have to lead, and that starts with Obama of course. He was right yesterday not to push a political agenda; yesterday was just a day to express the nation?s grief. But now is the time, starting next week.

He?s busy with a lot of other things. He needs to get his tax increase. He needs to win the debt-limit fight. He wants immigration reform, and the Latino groups that represent the voters who backed him so heavily won?t let him forget that or drop it.

But history has grabbed him by the lapels here. We?ve had 14 mass shootings in this country just since he became president. They?ve all been bad, but this is the one that demands that he stand up--the one that insists that if he does nothing, or does something cautious and half-hearted, he will be judged harshly by future historians for his failure to care about this.

He and he alone can help make this a voting issue for millions. He can do it in an almost nonpartisan way, which is in his comfort zone, talking about these children and the dozens of others whom our society right now regards an acceptable spoilage factor for ?freedom?; asking why it should be the case that any regular citizen needs automatic weapons with extended magazines and the aforementioned right to buy limitless ammo with no questions asked.

Did I say he and he alone? Not quite right. I amend that to: He, along with Mike Bloomberg. Bloomberg has the standing, the podium, and most crucially, the money to help make this a voting issue. The furious statement Bloomberg released yesterday is exactly right. The time for this fight is now. And only one person can lead it.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121215/e0bbbc19/attachment.html 

From marksafron at att.net  Sat Dec 15 23:12:10 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2012 23:12:10 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] For the Last Time,
	the Social Security Trust Fund Is Real
Message-ID: <5DB67D4B-E4D3-4092-9BA4-E3E18D8E6CCC@att.net>


http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/12/social-security-trust-fund-is-real

For the Last Time, the Social Security Trust Fund Is Real


Social Security Administration
Does Social Security contribute to the deficit? Is the Social Security trust fund a fiction? I've taken a crack at explaining both of these things before, but I've never really succeeded. The truth is that it's complicated. So today I'm going to try again. I figure I'm bound to hit on a formulation that makes sense eventually.

First things first: Social Security is funded via a payroll tax on all income up to $110,000. You pay 6.2 percent and your employer pays 6.2 percent. These numbers were set by the Social Security Reform Act of 1983, and for the next three decades payroll taxes provided more money than was needed to pay out benefits to retirees.

Now, suppose this surplus had been invested in corporate bonds. What exactly would that mean? It means that workers would be giving money to corporations, who would turn around and spend it. In return, the Social Security trust fund would receive bonds that represent promises to repay the money later out of the company's cash flow. In effect, it gives workers a claim on the cash flows of the company at a later date in time. When that time comes, the company would have to pay up, which would make it less profitable. If the company was already unprofitable, it would make their deficit even worse.

If that's what had happened, there would be no confusion about the trust fund. Everyone agrees that corporate bonds are real things, and that the corporations who sell them have an obligation to pay them back, even though it means less money for shareholder dividends.

Now let's change a few words in this story. What actually happened is that the Social Security surplus was invested in treasury bonds. What does that mean? It means that workers gave money to the federal government, which turned around and spent it. In return, the Social Security trust fund received bonds that represented promises to repay the money later out of the federal government's income tax receipts. In effect, it gave workers a claim on the income tax receipts of the government at a later date in time. When that time came, the federal government would have to pay up, which would make it less profitable. If the government was already running a deficit, it would make the deficit even worse.

These two stories are identical. Treasury bonds are real things: They are promises to repay money at a later date out of the government's cash flow. The federal government has an obligation to pay them back even if it has to raise income taxes to do it.

That's where we are today. Payroll taxes are no longer enough to cover payments to retirees, so Social Security is cashing in the treasury bonds in its trust fund to make up the difference. Those bonds, which were purchased with the payroll taxes of workers, represent a promise of repayment from the income taxpayers of America, and that promise is every bit as real as a promise from the board of directors of a corporation. But the money is real too, which means that paying it back makes the federal deficit even worse than it already is. To cover that deficit, our only options are to either (a) raise income taxes or (b) sell new bonds to outsiders, thus increasing the net public debt.

So: Does Social Security contribute to the deficit? Yes. Is the Social Security trust fund a fiction? No. Does everything make sense now?

UPDATE: Technically, it's not correct that Social Security is cashing in treasury bonds. Not yet, anyway. The trust fund earns interest on its existing stock of bonds, and right now it's taking part of its interest payments in cash (rather than more bonds) in order to make up the shortfall from payroll taxes. These interest payments are paid out of the general fund and thus affect the deficit. Within a few years, interest payments will no longer be enough to cover the shortfall and Social Security will start redeeming the treasury bonds in its trust fund.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121215/32e6cdd9/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ssecuritypostermaster2.1213.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 62767 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121215/32e6cdd9/attachment.jpg 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: blog_bush_social_security_bonds_caption.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 63604 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121215/32e6cdd9/attachment-0001.jpg 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Sun Dec 16 10:31:20 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2012 10:31:20 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Gutted Healthcare System
Message-ID: <FA805929-AFE0-49D1-A639-7F8BA0F8FEB2@mcn.org>

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/272-39/15054-americas-dangerously-gutted-mental-healthcare-system


America's Dangerously Gutted Mental Healthcare System
By Lynn Stuart Parramore, AlterNet
16 December 12
 
he scene has replayed itself over and over -- in Tucson, at Virginia Tech, at Columbine. On Friday in Connecticut, another unstable man has taken innocent lives in a burst of terrifying violence.

Inadequate gun control is only one half of the story. The other is the shameful job America does of treating the mentally ill. Today, 45 million American adults suffer from mental illness. Eleven million of those cases are considered serious. Most of these people are not dangerous, but if they can't get treatment, the odds of potential violence increase.

Yet the mentally ill are finding it increasingly difficult to get help. Mental health funding has been plummeting for decades. Since 2009, states have cut billions for mental health from their budgets. As Daniel Lippman has reported in the Huffington Post:

Across the country, states facing severe financial shortfalls have cut at least $4.35 billion in public mental health spending from 2009 to 2012, according to the National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors (NASMHPD). It's the largest reduction in funding since de-institutionalization in the 1960s and '70s. In fiscal year 2012 alone, 31 states that gave their numbers to the association reported cutting more than $840 million.

Thanks to the misguided austerity policies embraced by conservatives, more people are falling through the cracks. There are not enough psychiatric beds, treatment services or community support programs. Medication is expensive, and insurance companies routinely leave patients inadequately covered (the Affordable Care Act will hopefully address this problem by finally putting psychiatric illnesses on par with other health issues).

Mental healthcare workers have been laid off. Vulnerable people are neglected until their situation becomes acute ? often after it's too late. Many are incarcerated, often subjected to solitary confinement because prison officials don't know what to do with them. Others are homeless ? as many as 45 percent of the people living on the streets suffer from mental illness.

This situation is no accident, and it is not inevitable. Economics 101 tells you that when you have a massive economic crisis, the government must step in to fill the gap until the economy can recover. The United States government, unlike, say, a state or a country like Greece, does not have to balance its budget. The U.S. has its own currency and is well-equipped to provide stimulus money to states to make up for budget shortfalls. What gets in the way of meaninful action is political obstruction, not economics. Federal stimulus dollars and other grants have made up for some of the cuts to mental healthcare, but thanks to constant efforts to block adequate stimulus measures, not enough. And if conservatives have their way, budget cuts to programs like Medicaid will continue to ensure that high-risk people can't get help.

With proper treatment, people with severe mental illness are no more likely to commit crimes than others. But without treatment, the potential for tragedy is painfully evident.

The Right's program for public safety appears to be that everyone should have a gun and few should get adequate healthcare. That's a recipe for death and destruction. Killing sprees are on the rise. How many more people will have to die before mental healthcare becomes a national priority?


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121216/835a3d48/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rsn-T.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 512 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121216/835a3d48/attachment.jpg 

From vjessielee at gmail.com  Sun Dec 16 13:49:45 2012
From: vjessielee at gmail.com (Jessie VanSant)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2012 13:49:45 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Solstice song by Max Forster
Message-ID: <DBF0D57F-0F35-467D-B81E-4DEF51CFC4FD@gmail.com>

Just thought I'd share this with you.
JL


Solstice
It's the Winter Solstice Festival of Lights
When the shortest day meets the longest night 
Like the ancient Druid and the Celt
The prehistoric Scandinavian who felt
That the Sun would cease to burn
And the warmth would ne'er return
And the bitter Winter ice would never melt

When the days grew short, the nights were cold and long
They would try to bring the Sun back 
With a bonfire and a song!

Now at the darkest time of year
Somewhere deep we all share that ancient fear
So we make our houses warm and light
And sing our songs to break the gloom of night 
But we're not the first to do it
Our ancestors have been through it
And the names they called this day are long since gone
Yes, the names they called this day are long since gone
But the need to celebrate continues on?..

copyright1985 Max Forseter 

From elained at mcn.org  Sun Dec 16 14:45:26 2012
From: elained at mcn.org (Elaine and Ed)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2012 14:45:26 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Solstice song by Max Forster
In-Reply-To: <DBF0D57F-0F35-467D-B81E-4DEF51CFC4FD@gmail.com>
References: <DBF0D57F-0F35-467D-B81E-4DEF51CFC4FD@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4BAC51B5-6CD3-47D5-B26C-4A693A721909@mcn.org>

How true! Hence, Xmas lights!

On Dec 16, 2012, at 1:49 PM, Jessie VanSant wrote:

> Just thought I'd share this with you.
> JL
> 
> 
> Solstice
> It's the Winter Solstice Festival of Lights
> When the shortest day meets the longest night 
> Like the ancient Druid and the Celt
> The prehistoric Scandinavian who felt
> That the Sun would cease to burn
> And the warmth would ne'er return
> And the bitter Winter ice would never melt
> 
> When the days grew short, the nights were cold and long
> They would try to bring the Sun back 
> With a bonfire and a song!
> 
> Now at the darkest time of year
> Somewhere deep we all share that ancient fear
> So we make our houses warm and light
> And sing our songs to break the gloom of night 
> But we're not the first to do it
> Our ancestors have been through it
> And the names they called this day are long since gone
> Yes, the names they called this day are long since gone
> But the need to celebrate continues on?..
> 
> copyright1985 Max Forseter 
> 
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.
> 
> For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org



From agnes at mcn.org  Sun Dec 16 14:55:00 2012
From: agnes at mcn.org (agnes at mcn.org)
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2012 14:55:00 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] [Fwd: Iceland (more)]
Message-ID: <bfe0c54d8da0579cff666e19beedb0ac.squirrel@webmail.mcn.org>

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Iceland (more)
-------------------------------

Friends,

This is what the US corporate dictatorship doesn't want you to know about
Iceland.

Tom Cahill

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121216/e4cf9901/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 12128_310260582417681_1821941753_n.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 86266 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121216/e4cf9901/attachment.jpg 

From marksafron at att.net  Mon Dec 17 11:50:40 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 11:50:40 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] The Freedom of an Armed Society (?)
Message-ID: <38953333-31B9-45CF-A486-E4E58BFE98C3@att.net>

(There's some interesting philosophical points in this article. M.S.) 

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/the-freedom-of-an-armed-society/?nl=opinion&emc=edit_ty_20121217

The Freedom of an Armed Society

In the wake of the school massacre in Newtown, Conn., and the resulting renewed debate on gun control in the United States, The Stone will publish a series of essays this week that examine the ethical, social and humanitarian implications on the use, possession and regulation of weapons.

~~~

The night of the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., I was in the car with my wife and children, working out details for our eldest son?s 12th birthday the following Sunday ? convening a group of friends at a showing of the film  ?The Hobbit.? The memory of the Aurora movie theatre massacre was fresh in his mind, so he was concerned that it not be a late night showing. At that moment, like so many families, my wife and I were weighing whether to turn on the radio and expose our children to coverage of the school shootings in Connecticut. We did. The car was silent in the face of the flood of gory details. When the story was over, there was a long thoughtful pause in the back of the car. Then my eldest son asked if he could be homeschooled.

An armed society is the opposite of a civil society.

That incident brought home to me what I have always suspected, but found difficult to articulate: an armed society ? especially as we prosecute it at the moment in this country ? is the opposite of a civil society.

The Newtown shootings occurred at a peculiar time in gun rights history in this nation. On one hand, since the mid 1970s, fewer households each year on average have had a gun. Gun control advocates should be cheered by that news, but it is eclipsed by a flurry of contrary developments. As has been well publicized, gun sales have steadily risen over the past few years, and spiked with each of Obama?s election victories.

Furthermore, of the weapons that proliferate amongst the armed public, an increasing number are high caliber weapons (the weapon of choice in the goriest shootings in recent years). Then there is the legal landscape, which looks bleak for the gun control crowd.

Every state except for Illinois has a law allowing the carrying of concealed weapons ? and just last week, a federal court struck down Illinois? ban. States are now lining up to allow guns on college campuses. In September, Colorado joined four other states in such a move, and statehouses across the country are preparing similar legislation. And of course, there was Oklahoma?s ominous Open Carry Law approved by voters this election day ? the fifteenth of its kind, in fact ? which, as the name suggests, allows those with a special permit to carry weapons in the open, with a holster on their hip.

Individual gun ownership ? and gun violence ? has long been a distinctive feature of American society, setting us apart from the other industrialized democracies of the world. Recent legislative developments, however, are progressively bringing guns out of the private domain, with the ultimate aim of enshrining them in public life. Indeed, the N.R.A. strives for a day when the open carry of powerful weapons might be normal, a fixture even, of any visit to the coffee shop or grocery store ? or classroom.

As N.R.A. president Wayne LaPierre expressed in a recent statement on the organization?s Web site, more guns equal more safety, by their account. A favorite gun rights saying is ?an armed society is a polite society.? If we allow ever more people to be armed, at any time, in any place, this will provide a powerful deterrent to potential criminals. Or if more citizens were armed ? like principals and teachers in the classroom, for example ? they could halt senseless shootings ahead of time, or at least early on, and save society a lot of heartache and bloodshed.

As ever more people are armed in public, however ? even brandishing weapons on the street ? this is no longer recognizable as a civil society. Freedom is vanished at that point.

And yet, gun rights advocates famously maintain that individual gun ownership, even of high caliber weapons, is the defining mark of our freedom as such, and the ultimate guarantee of our enduring liberty. Deeper reflection on their argument exposes basic fallacies.

In her book ?The Human Condition,? the philosopher Hannah Arendt states that ?violence is mute.? According to Arendt, speech dominates and distinguishes the polis, the highest form of human association, which is devoted to the freedom and equality of its component members. Violence ? and the threat of it ? is a pre-political manner of communication and control, characteristic of undemocratic organizations and hierarchical relationships. For the ancient Athenians who practiced an incipient, albeit limited form of democracy (one that we surely aim to surpass), violence was characteristic of the master-slave relationship, not that of free citizens.

Liberty entails precisely the freedom to offend. A gun in every pocket would stifle that.


Arendt offers two points that are salient to our thinking about guns: for one, they insert a hierarchy of some kind, but fundamental nonetheless, and thereby undermine equality. But furthermore, guns pose a monumental challenge to freedom, and particular, the liberty that is the hallmark of any democracy worthy of the name ? that is, freedom of speech. Guns do communicate, after all, but in a way that is contrary to free speech aspirations: for, guns chasten speech.

This becomes clear if only you pry a little more deeply into the N.R.A.?s logic behind an armed society. An armed society is polite, by their thinking, precisely because guns would compel everyone to tamp down eccentric behavior, and refrain from actions that might seem threatening. The suggestion is that guns liberally interspersed throughout society would cause us all to walk gingerly ? not make any sudden, unexpected moves ? and watch what we say, how we act, whom we might offend.

As our Constitution provides, however, liberty entails precisely the freedom to be reckless, within limits, also the freedom to insult and offend as the case may be. The Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld our right to experiment in offensive language and ideas, and in some cases, offensive action and speech. Such experimentation is inherent to our freedom as such. But guns by their nature do not mix with this experiment ? they don?t mix with taking offense. They are combustible ingredients in assembly and speech.

I often think of the armed protestor who showed up to one of the famously raucous town hall hearings on Obamacare in the summer of 2009. The media was very worked up over this man, who bore a sign that invoked a famous quote of Thomas Jefferson, accusing the president of tyranny. But no one engaged him at the protest; no one dared approach him even, for discussion or debate ? though this was a town hall meeting, intended for just such purposes. Such is the effect of guns on speech ? and assembly. Like it or not, they transform the bearer, and end the conversation in some fundamental way. They announce that the conversation is not completely unbounded, unfettered and free; there is or can be a limit to negotiation and debate ? definitively.

The very power and possibility of free speech and assembly rests on their non-violence. The power of the Occupy Wall Street movement, as well as the Arab Spring protests, stemmed precisely from their non-violent nature. This power was made evident by the ferocity of government response to the Occupy movement. Occupy protestors across the country were increasingly confronted by police in military style garb and affect.

Imagine what this would have looked like had the protestors been armed: in the face of the New York Police Department assault on Zuccotti Park, there might have been armed insurrection in the streets. The non-violent nature of protest in this country ensures that it can occur.

Gun rights advocates also argue that guns provide the ultimate insurance of our freedom, in so far as they are the final deterrent against encroaching centralized government, and an executive branch run amok with power. Any suggestion of limiting guns rights is greeted by ominous warnings that this is a move of expansive, would-be despotic government. It has been the means by which gun rights advocates withstand even the most seemingly rational gun control measures. An assault weapons ban, smaller ammunition clips for guns, longer background checks on gun purchases ? these are all measures centralized government wants, they claim, in order to exert control over us, and ultimately impose its arbitrary will. I have often suspected, however, that contrary to holding centralized authority in check, broad individual gun ownership gives the powers-that-be exactly what they want.

After all, a population of privately armed citizens is one that is increasingly fragmented, and vulnerable as a result. Private gun ownership invites retreat into extreme individualism ? I heard numerous calls for homeschooling in the wake of the Newtown shootings ? and nourishes the illusion that I can be my own police, or military, as the case may be. The N.R.A. would have each of us steeled for impending government aggression, but it goes without saying that individually armed citizens are no match for government force. The N.R.A. argues against that interpretation of the Second Amendment that privileges armed militias over individuals, and yet it seems clear that armed militias, at least in theory, would provide a superior check on autocratic government.

As Michel Foucault pointed out in his detailed study of the mechanisms of power, nothing suits power so well as extreme individualism. In fact, he explains, political and corporate interests aim at nothing less than ?individualization,? since it is far easier to manipulate a collection of discrete and increasingly independent individuals than a community. Guns undermine just that ? community. Their pervasive, open presence would sow apprehension, suspicion, mistrust and fear, all emotions that are corrosive of community and civic cooperation. To that extent, then, guns give license to autocratic government.

Our gun culture promotes a fatal slide into extreme individualism. It fosters a society of atomistic individuals, isolated before power ? and one another ? and in the aftermath of shootings such as at Newtown, paralyzed with fear. That is not freedom, but quite its opposite. And as the Occupy movement makes clear, also the demonstrators that precipitated regime change in Egypt and Myanmar last year, assembled masses don?t require guns to exercise and secure their freedom, and wield world-changing political force. Arendt and Foucault reveal that power does not lie in armed individuals, but in assembly ? and everything conducive to that.

Firmin DeBrabander is an associate professor of philosophy at the Maryland Institute College of Art, Baltimore and the author of ?Spinoza and the Stoics.?


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121217/dc1fef68/attachment.html 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Mon Dec 17 12:03:46 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 12:03:46 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Michael Moore on Guns: i-am-truly-beside-myself
Message-ID: <0DEC8535-E1B1-4847-BE50-3C9A6206D4C7@mcn.org>

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/416-gun-control-/15074-i-am-truly-beside-myself


Activist and filmmaker Michael Moore speaks to the people of Occupy Oakland, 10/28/11. (photo: Reuters)

I Am Truly Beside Myself
By Michael Moore, Open Mike Blog
17 December 12
 
 am truly beside myself this time. I tried to ring a warning bell about this a decade ago. The disease has only gotten worse.

But...you feel something different in the air across America tonight, don't you? People have had it and the outrage is loud and visible. I'm convinced the majority of Americans will now back strong gun control laws. And a better mental health care system. And perhaps a few are willing...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121217/ddd3813f/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 6945-michael-moore-occupy-oakland-microphone-102811.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 29013 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121217/ddd3813f/attachment.jpg 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rsn_gotoarticle.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1494 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121217/ddd3813f/attachment-0001.jpg 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rsn-I.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 461 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121217/ddd3813f/attachment-0002.jpg 

From marksafron at att.net  Mon Dec 17 13:48:04 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 13:48:04 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Wells Fargo's new low
Message-ID: <DB08C12B-7A0B-42EE-9DE8-C2BF1D227F0A@att.net>

Friends,

Wells Fargo is trapping elderly widows in a horrific Catch-22 scenario in order to take their homes.

Imagine: Your husband passes away and you fall behind on your mortgage payments. Your income has been drastically reduced, so you seek to renegotiate with the bank. But the bank won?t renegotiate, because your husband?s name is on the mortgage note, and you can?t add your name to the note, because you are not current on your payments. You?re out of work, you?ve just lost your husband, and you?re about to lose your home.

This nightmare is all too real for elderly women across America. People over 50 are falling into foreclosure faster than any other group. For many widows, the combination of rising medical expenses and a sudden loss of income means losing the homes that they have spent a lifetime building.

Tell banks to stop this awful practice, and allow widows to renegotiate their mortages so they don?t get kicked out of their own homes.http://action.sumofus.org/a/widow-mortgages/85/?sub=taf

Thank you
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121217/cc1c72a1/attachment.html 

From agnes at mcn.org  Mon Dec 17 19:43:06 2012
From: agnes at mcn.org (agnes at mcn.org)
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 19:43:06 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fwd: Prop 37 recount begins today
Message-ID: <7eb4de39ef03e2cbe45e8c9ac11ef728.squirrel@webmail.mcn.org>

This will be a wonder to behold if we can beat Monsanto et al and will
give hope to
our struggling Democracy.

Check the link for the story behind the one person that requested the
recount, the
cost, and how it will evolve.

http://www.kcet.org/socal/food/prop-37/election-integrity-activist-calls-for-recount-on-prop-37-californias-gmo-labeling-measure.html


If you can contribute to fund this recount it will be forever appreciated.
 The cost
of the recount is borne by the person that requests it and her name is
Lori Grace,
Democracy and Election Integrity.

http://democracyandelectionintegrity.org
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: Bob Wilkinson <row1330 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Prop 37 recount begins today
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 19:00:42 -0800 (PST)
Size: 7691
Url: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121217/bacde60c/attachment.mht 

From agnes at mcn.org  Tue Dec 18 08:12:54 2012
From: agnes at mcn.org (agnes at mcn.org)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 08:12:54 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fighting Foreclosures Meeting 1/3/13
Message-ID: <7c212b58f3a040bdec67a6d8e34d22a3.squirrel@webmail.mcn.org>

Dear Occupy Members,

>        Kendall Smith finally called in answer to my phone message asking
> her how could we be effective at our public expression opportunity
> to  speak time.
>    She suggested we get out foreclosure group together and talk about
> steps that the B.O.S. could take before we go to the Jan. 8th Board
> Meeting.We need to  decide on key things to say . How the board could
> realize priorities.
  I suggest that anyone interested in carpooling to go to Ukiah at 7:00 am
and speak before the Board, come to a Fighting  Foreclosure meeting at
1:00 sharp on Jan. 3rd which is our general assembly date.

If you wish to have some solid background information go to
www.MCTV at mendocinocoasttv.org and listen to C.J. Holmes and take notes .
Click on Video On Demand Library, then click on Occupy Mendocino #5
Foreclosures Meeting Part 1. The 2nd part was aired Monday night and will
have more on Land Bank. The county could initiate create an income stream
for small loans using Eminent domain and a Land Bank as they have done in
Michigan, in every county.

We need at least 10 people from the coast as well as Occupy Ukiah to make
an impression on the B.O.S. about the need for the County Recorder to take
steps to stop fraudulent foreclosures and the county to begin applying for
a Charter from the state for a Land Bank.

If you ever wondered if there was  something effective you could do for
stopping these big banks from taking our homes-this is it.

Stay Well,
Agnes Woolsey and Jessie Van Sant
F.F.O.M.





From marksafron at att.net  Tue Dec 18 15:31:20 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 15:31:20 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Why there is no "Public Option."
Message-ID: <71F5E390-C902-4E93-AD14-E697C0B2E98B@att.net>


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/05/obamacare-fowler-lobbyist-industry1?INTCMP=SRCH

Obamacare architect leaves White House for pharmaceutical industry job

 Glenn Greenwald 

Former WellPoint VP Elizabeth Fowler sits behind her boss, Sen. Max Baucus, as he announces in 2009 that the health care bill will have no public option. Photograph: screen grab, Bill Moyers' Journal
When the legislation that became known as "Obamacare" was first drafted, the key legislator was the Democratic Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Max Baucus, whose committee took the lead in drafting the legislation. As Baucus himself repeatedly boasted, the architect of that legislation was Elizabeth Folwer, his chief health policy counsel; indeed, as Marcy Wheeler discovered, it was Fowler who actually drafted it. As Politico put it at the time: "If you drew an organizational chart of major players in the Senate health care negotiations, Fowler would be the chief operating officer."

What was most amazing about all of that was that, before joining Baucus' office as the point person for the health care bill, Fowler was the Vice President for Public Policy and External Affairs (i.e. informal lobbying) at WellPoint, the nation's largest health insurance provider (before going to WellPoint, as well as after, Fowler had worked as Baucus' top health care aide). And when that health care bill was drafted, the person whom Fowler replaced as chief health counsel in Baucus' office, Michelle Easton, was lobbying for WellPoint as a principal at Tarplin, Downs, and Young.

Whatever one's views on Obamacare were and are: the bill's mandate that everyone purchase the products of the private health insurance industry, unaccompanied by any public alternative, was a huge gift to that industry; as Wheeler wrote at the time: "to the extent that Liz Fowler is the author of this document, we might as well consider WellPoint its author as well." Watch the five-minute Bill Moyers report from 2009, embedded below, on the key role played in all of this by Liz Fowler and the "revolving door" between the health insurance/lobbying industry and government officials at the time this bill was written and passed.

More amazingly still, when the Obama White House needed someone to oversee implementation of Obamacare after the bill passed, it chose . . . Liz Fowler. That the White House would put a former health insurance industry executive in charge of implementation of its new massive health care law was roundly condemned by good government groups as at least a violation of the "spirit" of governing ethics rules and even "gross", but those objections were, of course, brushed aside by the White House. She then became Special Assistant to the President for Healthcare and Economic Policy at the National Economic Council.

Now, as Politico's "Influence" column briefly noted on Tuesday, Fowler is once again passing through the deeply corrupting revolving door as she leaves the Obama administration to return to the loving and lucrative arms of the private health care industry:


"Elizabeth Fowler is leaving the White House for a senior-level position leading 'global health policy' at Johnson & Johnson's government affairs and policy group."

The pharmaceutical giant that just hired Fowler actively supported the passage of Obamacare through its membership in the Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) lobby. Indeed, PhRMA was one of the most aggressive supporters - and most lavish beneficiaries - of the health care bill drafted by Fowler. Mother Jones' James Ridgeway proclaimed "Big Pharma" the "big winner" in the health care bill. And now, Fowler will receive ample rewards from that same industry as she peddles her influence in government and exploits her experience with its inner workings to work on that industry's behalf, all of which has been made perfectly legal by the same insular, Versailles-like Washington culture that so lavishly benefits from all of this.

It's difficult to find someone who embodies the sleazy, anti-democratic, corporatist revolving door that greases Washington as shamelessly and purely as Liz Fowler. One of the few competitors I can think of is Adm. Michael McConnell, who parlayed his military and intelligence career into a lucrative gig at Booz Allen, one of the nation's largest private intelligence contractors; then became George W Bush's Director of National Intelligence (where he spearheaded a huge gift to the telecom industry - retroactive immunity shielding it from all accountability for its participation in the illegal Bush NSA eavesdropping program - as well as continued his Booz Allen work of privatizing intelligence and surveillance functions); then returned to the loving arms of Booz Allen, where he now exploits his national security credentials on behalf of industry interests (by, for instance, spearheading the fear-mongering campaign about cyber-warfare in order to advocate for security programs that would amply enrich Booz Allen's clients).

This is precisely the behavior which, quite rationally, makes the citizenry so jaded about Washington. It's what ensures that the interests of the same permanent power factions are served regardless of election outcomes. It's what makes a complete mockery out of claims of democracy. And it's what demonstrates that corporatism and oligarchy are the dominant forms of government in the US:

Liz Fowler the Destroyer of the Public Option:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZ5tj4cN9Jk&feature=player_embedded
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121218/f38c15a0/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: fowler.png
Type: image/png
Size: 206678 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121218/f38c15a0/attachment.png 

From marksafron at att.net  Tue Dec 18 16:37:27 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 16:37:27 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] So You Think You Know the Second Amendment?
Message-ID: <2402E74A-726F-4734-BFC5-EF86108F2641@att.net>


http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2012/12/jeffrey-toobin-second-amendment.html

SO YOU THINK YOU KNOW THE SECOND AMENDMENT?


Does the Second Amendment prevent Congress from passing gun-control laws? The question, which is suddenly pressing, in light of the reaction to the school massacre in Newtown, is rooted in politics as much as law.

For more than a hundred years, the answer was clear, even if the words of the amendment itself were not. The text of the amendment is divided into two clauses and is, as a whole, ungrammatical: ?A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.? The courts had found that the first part, the ?militia clause,? trumped the second part, the ?bear arms? clause. In other words, according to the Supreme Court, and the lower courts as well, the amendment conferred on state militias a right to bear arms?but did not give individuals a right to own or carry a weapon.

Enter the modern National Rifle Association. Before the nineteen-seventies, the N.R.A. had been devoted mostly to non-political issues, like gun safety. But a coup d??tat at the group?s annual convention in 1977 brought a group of committed political conservatives to power?as part of the leading edge of the new, more rightward-leaning Republican Party. (Jill Lepore recounted this history in a recent piece for The New Yorker.) The new group pushed for a novel interpretation of the Second Amendment, one that gave individuals, not just militias, the right to bear arms. It was an uphill struggle. At first, their views were widely scorned. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, who was no liberal, mocked the individual-rights theory of the amendment as ?a fraud.?

But the N.R.A. kept pushing?and there?s a lesson here. Conservatives often embrace ?originalism,? the idea that the meaning of the Constitution was fixed when it was ratified, in 1787. They mock the so-called liberal idea of a ?living? constitution, whose meaning changes with the values of the country at large. But there is no better example of the living Constitution than the conservative re-casting of the Second Amendment in the last few decades of the twentieth century. (Reva Siegel, of Yale Law School, elaborates on this point in a brilliant article.)

The re-interpretation of the Second Amendment was an elaborate and brilliantly executed political operation, inside and outside of government. Ronald Reagan?s election in 1980 brought a gun-rights enthusiast to the White House. At the same time, Orrin Hatch, the Utah Republican, became chairman of an important subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and he commissioned a report that claimed to find ?clear?and long lost?proof that the second amendment to our Constitution was intended as an individual right of the American citizen to keep and carry arms in a peaceful manner, for protection of himself, his family, and his freedoms.? The N.R.A. began commissioning academic studies aimed at proving the same conclusion. An outr? constitutional theory, rejected even by the establishment of the Republican Party, evolved, through brute political force, into the conservative conventional wisdom.

And so, eventually, this theory became the law of the land. In District of Columbia v. Heller, decided in 2008, the Supreme Court embraced the individual-rights view of the Second Amendment. It was a triumph above all for Justice Antonin Scalia, the author of the opinion, but it required him to craft a thoroughly political compromise. In the eighteenth century, militias were proto-military operations, and their members had to obtain the best military hardware of the day. But Scalia could not create, in the twenty-first century, an individual right to contemporary military weapons?like tanks and Stinger missiles. In light of this, Scalia conjured a rule that said D.C. could not ban handguns because ?handguns are the most popular weapon chosen by Americans for self-defense in the home, and a complete prohibition of their use is invalid.?

So the government cannot ban handguns, but it can ban other weapons?like, say, an assault rifle?or so it appears. The full meaning of the court?s Heller opinion is still up for grabs. But it is clear that the scope of the Second Amendment will be determined as much by politics as by the law. The courts will respond to public pressure?as they did by moving to the right on gun control in the last thirty years. And if legislators, responding to their constituents, sense a mandate for new restrictions on guns, the courts will find a way to uphold them. The battle over gun control is not just one of individual votes in Congress, but of a continuing clash of ideas, backed by political power. In other words, the law of the Second Amendment is not settled; no law, not even the Constitution, ever is.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121218/7e78109d/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 158471704-465.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 46662 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121218/7e78109d/attachment.jpg 

From jupiter at mcn.org  Wed Dec 19 08:49:20 2012
From: jupiter at mcn.org (Linda Jupiter)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 08:49:20 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fwd: Print and post this tomorrow?
References: <84B7CC95-8A5C-4824-8A59-21B180A63E4B@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <86E71820-7522-4FB9-B937-0F0D8062CA8A@mcn.org>

> Check out these free posters, print one or two -- hang them in your  
> windows and put the pressure on the DC mob who are trying to cut our  
> benefits and keep the rich and the corporations in their nice no  
> taxes zone.   Let's go for it.
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: "Colin Holtz, Rebuild the Dream Innovation Fund" <info at rebuildthedream.com 
>> >
>> Date: December 18, 2012 7:18:43 PM PST
>> To: "Sheila" <sheinaleah at comcast.net>
>> Subject: Print and post this tomorrow?
>> Reply-To: info at rebuildthedream.com
>>
>> 	
>> Sheila, late yesterday news broke that a "fiscal bluff" deal could  
>> be worse than we feared, and include cuts to Social Security.
>>
>> Some of the works lined up for ARTSTRIKE tomorrow are really,  
>> really powerful. That's good news, because it's now more important  
>> than ever to show what's at stake and get new folks into the fight.
>>
>> Rebuilders everywhere will be sharing these pieces tomorrow. But  
>> since you committed to helping with our America is Being Robbed  
>> campaign, we're hoping you might do a little bit more:
>>
>> Imagine seeing these designs not just on your computer screen, but  
>> posted up in your window, around your community, at your job, all  
>> on one day of action tomorrow. Just think how many more people we  
>> could persuade or move to action.
>>
>> We turned some of our favorite designs into posters to make it easy  
>> to do just that. Will you print one out and post it up somewhere  
>> tomorrow morning?
>>
>> Check out the designs, download, and print a poster to put up  
>> tomorrow.
>>
>> After you print, take a picture of where you've posted it up or  
>> just of you holding it, and send it to ARTSTRIKEinaction at gmail.com.
>>
>> We'll stick these pictures up on our website and send to fellow  
>> Rebuilders to encourage them to do more, too.
>>
>> We need to shift the entire frame of the debate. We need to expose  
>> what's really happening -- how deficit fear-mongering is leading to  
>> bailouts for Wall Street banks and corporate tax dodgers, and pain  
>> for all of us.
>>
>> Put amazing work in front of enough people, and you can start to  
>> shift our culture. Shift our culture, and you change what's  
>> considered "acceptable" and "unacceptable" in policy debates.
>>
>> Check out these cool posters, download, print, share, and send in  
>> your pic!
>>
>> ARTSTRIKE is just the beginning. But with our leaders pushing a  
>> "fiscal bluff" that could hurt millions, we have to get started  
>> somewhere. And we need you.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Colin and the rest of the Rebuild the Dream Innovation Fund Team
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> This is a message from Rebuild the Dream, sent on behalf of Rebuild  
>> the Dream Innovation Fund.
>>
>> Rebuild the Dream is a platform for bottom-up, people-powered  
>> innovations to help fix the U.S. economy. You can follow us on  
>> Twitter, and like us on Facebook.
>>
>> Was this email forwarded to you? Click here to add yourself to  
>> Rebuild the Dream?s email list.
>>
>> If you don't want to receive emails from us anymore, you can remove  
>> yourself from our list by clicking here. We?re sorry to see you go,  
>> and we'll miss you!
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121219/734b337b/attachment.html 

From marksafron at att.net  Wed Dec 19 09:41:45 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 09:41:45 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Time Magazine Names Mitt Romney Man of the Year
	1912
Message-ID: <94BB0E55-1EEC-41CA-9094-191252BC2DE4@att.net>


TIME NAMES MITT ROMNEY MAN OF THE YEAR 1912


NEW YORK ?In an extraordinary gesture of recognition for a losing Presidential nominee, Time magazine today named former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney Man of the Year 1912.

In a press release explaining its decision, Time?s editorial board wrote, ?Even though his quest for the Presidency was unsuccessful, Mr. Romney?s ideas about foreign policy, taxation, wealth inequality, and women?s rights typified the year 1912 as no one else has.?

In giving Mr. Romney the nod, Time said that he beat out such other candidates for Man of the Year 1912 as Tsar Nicholas II of Russia, Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany, and Edward Smith, captain of the Titanic.

?It was very close between but Romney and the Titanic guy, but we gave it to Romney because it took him slightly longer to sink,? Time wrote.

Mr. Romney could not be reached for comment, a spokesman said, because he was travelling around the world visiting his money.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121219/4730b061/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: happy-romney-boro.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 74687 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121219/4730b061/attachment.jpg 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Wed Dec 19 17:26:58 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 17:26:58 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] guns-are-americas-other-original-sin
Message-ID: <FCA2BD77-3223-4B9B-993F-A6A07409D766@mcn.org>

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/416-gun-control-/15118-focus-guns-are-americas-other-original-sin

FOCUS: Guns Are America's Other Original Sin
By Frank Rich, New York Magazine
19 December 12
 
New York Magazine writer-at-large Frank Rich talks with editor-in-chief Adam Moss about the Newtown tragedy, its political fallout, and our centuries-long worship of the gun.
dam Lanza's mother, Nancy, was among the 45 percent (!) of Americans that have guns in their homes. So I'm not going to ask you about gun control here; obviously you're for much stricter regulation, as most of your readers are. I want to know your thoughts about the culture of guns in America, and particularly in the last decade, during which public support for gun control has tumbled even as the incidence of mass rampages like Newtown increases, and the American people just get more enamored of their guns. Please try to help me understand why. The first step ...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121219/87969e0c/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rsn-A.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 682 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121219/87969e0c/attachment.jpg 

From marksafron at att.net  Wed Dec 19 17:43:19 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 17:43:19 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Excellent article:  Gun 'Control' Is Not Enough
References: <1C34B0E7-7A19-42A5-A8F5-B8A04B995D6D@att.net>
Message-ID: <BDBCA919-7323-4C93-917E-DF5C64628493@att.net>


(I'm sure those that believe in the 2nd Amendment will have difficulty with this but, the arguments are logical. Perhaps there are too many guns in circulation for this to work but I believe the assumptions made are correct. M.S.) 

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/19/why-gun-control-is-not-enough/?nl=opinion&emc=edit_ty_20121219

Why Gun ?Control? Is Not Enough

In the wake of the school massacre in Newtown, Conn., and the resulting renewed debate on gun control in the United States, The Stone will publish a series of essays this week that examine the ethical, social and humanitarian implications of the use, possession and regulation of weapons. Other articles in the series can be found here.

~~~

Americans are finally beginning to have a serious discussion about guns. One argument we?re hearing is the central pillar of the case for private gun ownership: that we are all safer when more individuals have guns because armed citizens deter crime and can defend themselves and others against it when deterrence fails. Those who don?t have guns, it?s said, are free riders on those who do, as the criminally disposed are less likely to engage in crime the more likely it is that their victim will be armed.

When most citizens are armed, as they were in the Wild West, crime doesn?t cease. The criminals get better.

There?s some sense to this argument, for even criminals don?t like being shot. But the logic is faulty, and a close look at it leads to the conclusion that the United States should ban private gun ownership entirely, or almost entirely.

One would think that if widespread gun ownership had the robust deterrent effects that gun advocates claim it has, our country would be freer of crime than other developed societies.  But it?s not.  When most citizens are armed, as they were in the Wild West, crime doesn?t cease.  Instead, criminals work to be better armed, more efficient in their use of guns (?quicker on the draw?), and readier to use them.  When this happens, those who get guns may be safer than they would be without them, but those without them become progressively more vulnerable.

Gun advocates have a solution to this: the unarmed must arm themselves.  But when more citizens get guns, further problems arise: people who would once have got in a fistfight instead shoot the person who provoked them; people are shot by mistake or by accident.

And with guns so plentiful, any lunatic or criminally disposed person who has a sudden and perhaps only temporary urge to kill people can simply help himself to the contents of Mom?s gun cabinet.  Perhaps most important, the more people there are who have guns, the less effective the police become.  The power of the citizens and that of the police approach parity.  The police cease to have even a near-monopoly on the use of force.

To many devotees of the Second Amendment, this is precisely the point.  As former Congressman Jay Dickey, Republican of Arkansas, said in January 2011, ?We have a right to bear arms because of the threat of government taking over the freedoms we have.?  The more people there are with guns, the less able the government is to control them.  But if arming the citizenry limits the power of the government, it does so by limiting the power of its agents, such as the police. Domestic defense becomes more a matter of private self-help and vigilantism and less a matter of democratically-controlled, public law enforcement. Domestic security becomes increasingly ?privatized.?

There is, of course, a large element of fantasy in Dickey?s claim. Individuals with handguns are no match for a modern army.  It?s also a delusion to suppose that the government in a liberal democracy such as the United States could become so tyrannical that armed insurrection, rather than democratic procedures, would be the best means of constraining it.  This is not Syria; nor will it ever be.  Shortly after Dickey made his comment, people in Egypt rose against a government that had suppressed their freedom in ways far more serious than requiring them to pay for health care. Although a tiny minority of Egyptians do own guns, the protesters would not have succeeded if those guns had been brought to Tahrir Square. If the assembled citizens had been brandishing Glocks in accordance with the script favored by Second Amendment fantasists, the old regime would almost certainly still be in power and many Egyptians who?re now alive would be dead.

As more private individuals acquire guns, the power of the police declines, and personal security becomes a matter of self-help.

For the police to remain effective in a society in which most of those they must confront or arrest are armed, they must, like criminals, become better armed, more numerous, and readier to fire.  But if they do that, guns won?t have produced a net reduction in the power of the government but will only have generated enormous private and public expenditures, leaving the balance of power between armed citizens and the state as it was before, the unarmed conspicuously worse off, and everyone poorer except the gun industry.  The alternative to maintaining the balance of power is to allow it to shift in favor of the armed citizenry and away from the police, again making unarmed citizens ? including those who refuse on principle to contribute to the erosion of collective security by getting a gun ? the greatest losers overall.

The logic is inexorable: as more private individuals acquire guns, the power of the police declines, personal security becomes more a matter of self-help, and the unarmed have an increasing incentive to get guns, until everyone is armed. When most citizens then have the ability to kill anyone in their vicinity in an instant, everyone is less secure than they would be if no one had guns other than the members of a democratically accountable police force.

The logic of private gun possession is thus similar to that of the nuclear arms race.  When only one state gets nuclear weapons, it enhances its own security but reduces that of others, which have become more vulnerable.  The other states then have an incentive to get nuclear weapons to try to restore their security.  As more states get them, the incentives for others increase.  If eventually all get them, the potential for catastrophe ? whether through irrationality, misperception, or accident ? is great.  Each state?s security is then much lower than it would be if none had nuclear weapons.

Gun advocates and criminals are allies in demanding that guns remain in private hands.  They differ in how they want them distributed.  Criminals want guns for themselves but not for their potential victims.  Others want them for themselves but not for criminals.  But while gun control can do a little to restrict access to guns by potential criminals, it can?t do much when guns are to be found in every other household.  Either criminals and non-criminals will have them or neither will.  Gun advocates prefer for both rather than neither to have them.

But, as with nuclear weapons, we would all be safer if no one had guns ? or, rather, no one other than trained and legally constrained police officers. Domestic defense would then be conducted the way we conduct national defense.  We no longer accept, as the authors of the now obsolete Second Amendment did, that ?a well-regulated militia? is ?necessary to the security of a free state.?  Rather than leaving national defense to citizens? militias, we now, for a variety of compelling reasons, cede the right of national defense to certain state-authorized professional institutions: the Army, Navy, and so on.  We rightly trust these forces to protect us from external threats and not to become instruments of domestic repression.  We could have the same trust in a police force designed to protect us from domestic threats.

A prohibition of private ownership would not mean that no one could shoot guns. Guns for target shooting could be rented under security arrangements at the range. And there?s perhaps scope for debate about private possession of single chamber shotguns for hunting.

Gun advocates will object that a prohibition of private gun ownership is an impossibility in the United States.  But this is not an objection they can press in good faith, for the only reason that a legal prohibition could be impossible in a democratic state is that a majority oppose it.  If gun advocates ceased to oppose it, a prohibition would be possible.

They will next argue that even if there were a legal prohibition, it could not be enforced with anything approaching complete effectiveness.  This is true.  As long as some people somewhere have guns, some people here can get them.  Similarly, the legal prohibition of murder cannot eliminate murder.  But the prohibition of murder is more effective than a policy of ?murder control? would be.

Guns are not like alcohol and drugs, both of which we have tried unsuccessfully to prohibit. Many people have an intense desire for alcohol or drugs that is independent of what other people may do. But the need for a gun for self-defense depends on whether other people have them and how effective the protection and deterrence provided by the state are. Thus, in other Western countries in which there are fewer guns, there are correspondingly fewer instances in which people need guns for effective self-defense.

Gun advocates sometimes argue that a prohibition would violate individuals? rights of self-defense. Imposing a ban on guns, they argue, would be tantamount to taking a person?s gun from her just as someone is about to kill her. But this is a defective analogy. Although a prohibition would deprive people of one effective means of self-defense, it would also ensure that there would be far fewer occasions on which a gun would be necessary or even useful for self-defense. For guns would be forbidden not just to those who would use them for defense but also to those who would use them for aggression. Guns are only one means of self-defense and self-defense is only one means of achieving security against attack. It is the right to security against attack that is fundamental. A policy that unavoidably deprives a person of one means of self-defense but on balance substantially reduces her vulnerability to attack is therefore respectful of the more fundamental right from which the right of self-defense is derived.

In other Western countries, per capita homicide rates, as well as rates of violent crime involving guns, are a fraction of what they are in the United States. The possible explanations of this are limited. Gun advocates claim it has nothing to do with our permissive gun laws or our customs and practices involving guns. If they are right, should we conclude that Americans are simply inherently more violent, more disposed to mental derangement, and less moral than people in other Western countries? If you resist that conclusion, you have little choice but to accept that our easy access to all manner of firearms is a large part of the explanation of why we kill each at a much higher rate than our counterparts elsewhere. Gun advocates must search their consciences to determine whether they really want to share responsibility for the perpetuation of policies that make our country the homicide capitol of the developed world.

Jeff McMahan is a professor of philosophy at Rutgers University. He is the author of ?The Ethics of Killing: Problems at the Margins of Life? and ?Killing in War.? He has several books forthcoming, including ?The Values of Lives,? a collection of essays.




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121219/68f40e8e/attachment.html 

From marksafron at att.net  Wed Dec 19 18:19:08 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 18:19:08 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] It's never the right time.
Message-ID: <984E78F0-07AB-45C6-B837-39DC9946C025@att.net>

"We think it is poor form for a politician or a special interest group to try to push a legislative agenda on the back of any tragedy."
-- NRA, after 2008 Northern Illinois shootings

"Now is not the time to debate politics or discuss policy."
-- NRA, after 2009 Binghamptonmassacre

"At this time, anything other than prayers for the victims and their families would be inappropriate."
-- NRA, after 2011 shooting spree that wounded Gabrielle Giffords

"There will be an appropriate time down the road to engage in political and policy discussions."
-- NRA, after 2012 Aurora massacre

"NRA will not have any comment."
-- NRA, after 2012 Newtown massacre
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121219/4a5bcdda/attachment.html 

From marksafron at att.net  Wed Dec 19 18:22:22 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 18:22:22 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Priorities?
Message-ID: <A6CFFED3-C4A2-471C-86FC-EC7F96B278E5@att.net>

A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Screen_Shot_2012-12-17_at_10.22.03_AM.png
Type: image/png
Size: 230324 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121219/ea77e378/attachment.png 

From marksafron at att.net  Thu Dec 20 08:23:33 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 08:23:33 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Pierce: THE GRAND SELLOUT EMERGES    Esquire
Message-ID: <E9407935-822C-4067-960A-576161D4F57E@att.net>


http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/grand-bargain-sellout-121812

THE GRAND SELLOUT EMERGES

By Charles P. Pierce


Photo Illustration by DonkeyHotey via Flickr/Special to The Politics Blog

Our fearless Washington leaders approach the fiscal cliff.





















I generally believe Ezra Klein when he talks about how everyone who matters is coming together to make a deal, so may I just congratulate all the important people on both sides of the aisle who have come together in semi-good faith to ram it to the rest of us. Really, kids, if this isn't really just a trial balloon big enough for the Macy's parade, well done.

On the spending side, the Democrats' headline concession will be accepting chained-CPI, which is to say, accepting a cut to Social Security benefits. Beyond that, the negotiators will agree to targets for spending cuts. Expect the final number here, too, to be in the neighborhood of $1 trillion, but also expect it to lack many specifics. Whether the cuts come from Medicare or Medicaid, whether they include raising the Medicare age, and many of the other contentious issues in the talks will be left up to Congress.
So here's where we sit. The Democrats, led by the president, who never is going to need to depend on Social Security, are prepared to concede on an issue that has absolutely nothing to do with the deficit. They are going to make life harder for millions of seniors. Social Security is now squarely "on the table" in any future budget negotiation. (Hey, who unplugged the third rail?) The simplest solution ? raising the cap ? is beyond discussion, now and forever. The "chained-CPI," which is a terrible idea on its own merits, as well as a piece of noxious moral sleight-of-hand, seeing as how it cuts benefits while pretending not to do so, is being adopted whole hog without a corresponding mechanism to raise more Social Security revenue to make up for the loss. If the president maintains his faith in the great god SimpsonBowles, the old folks will get a bump for only two years after the deal takes effect. Swell.

There are a couple of lines of thought here. For example, Paul Krugman is more optimistic.

Those cuts are a very bad thing, although there will supposedly be some protection for low-income seniors. But the cuts are not nearly as bad as raising the Medicare age, for two reasons: the structure of the program remains intact, and unlike the Medicare age thing, they wouldn't be totally devastating for hundreds of thousands of people, just somewhat painful for a much larger group. Oh, and raising the Medicare age would kill people; this benefit cut, not so much.
"Not so much"? That's what we get for a deal in which the president is simultaneously not even getting everything that he wants as regards the expiration of the Bush tax cuts. Granny needs to lose some weight anyway.

Quite honestly, the president's willingness to tinker this way with Social Security marks his presidency in a way that nothing else ever will. There is no economic need to do this to Social Security at all. There is no need for the program even to come up in the discussions. This locks Social Security forever into being defined for all political purposes as an "entitlement," and we all know that "entitlements" need to be reformed because everybody this president considers his primary constituencies say they must. It sets the stage for more concessions down the line by any Democratic president who doesn't possess the political momentum that the current president seems hellbent on squandering. This is that most horrible of Beltway concoctions ? a deal for a deal's sake, a demonstration for the courtier press that Washington "works." (Chris Matthews last night said that he wanted a cliff-avoiding deal so that "Washington" could prove it can work again. He framed it around the events in Connecticut and gun control. These people think ... strangely.)  If John Boehner brings home this deal, his caucus should name him emperor. If that caucus turns him down, they all should be placed in a locked ward for the duration of the president's second term. Meanwhile, David Gregory just had an orgasm you could hear on Mars.

UPDATE -- And, apparently, at the moment, the emperor has no votes. I am particularly amused by one element of the GOP reaction.

In spite of statements to the contrary just a week ago, House Republicans on Tuesday seemed almost uniformly resigned to some sort of tax rate increases on the nation's highest earners, though they remained committed to keeping that group as small as possible. "The principle of trying to limit the increases is a good one," said Representative Jason Chaffetz of Utah. "But now we've got to see more spending cuts."  

Chaffetz, you may recall, was all over TV this weekend, using the "let's talk about mental health" dodge so that nobody talked about the country's lunatic infatuation with firearms. Not that Chaffetz will pay for it or anything. 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121220/d7b74de6/attachment.html 

From marksafron at att.net  Thu Dec 20 23:30:29 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 23:30:29 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Identify the Gun-Control Quote
Message-ID: <B8FEC091-4DB5-4689-8CF2-DB27DFA3F7C1@att.net>

Identify the Gun-Control Quote: Obama, Feinstein, or Reagan?
Firearm sales across the country are booming as America's liberal politicians plot how exactly to go about trampling on the Constitution in the wake of the Newtown massacre. Apparently, they don't understand that any new restrictions on gun use would be a direct attack on the Second Amendment ? nay, on freedom itself. In the following quiz, see if you can tell whether each pro-gun-control quote belongs to Dianne "Let's Ban the Most Deadly Guns" Feinstein or Barack "I Agree, Let's Ban Them" Obama. (We also threw Ronald Reagan in there as the third choice, just so the quiz wouldn't be too hard.)
Good luck.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2012/12/reagan-obama-feinstein-gun-quiz.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121220/4ae6ecba/attachment.html 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Fri Dec 21 00:16:27 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 00:16:27 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Single Payer Health Care Might be Coming
Message-ID: <B686B350-9686-4224-A7B5-BF0CC0AB6AAC@mcn.org>


The Wall Street Journal
December 18, 2012
Cleveland Clinic Diagnoses Health-Care Act
By Anna Wilde Mathews

Just over a year from now, the Affordable Care Act is set to unleash enormous change in the health-care sector, and Cleveland Clinic Chief Executive Delos "Toby" Cosgrove is preparing his institution by expanding its reach and striving to make caregivers more cost-conscious.

WSJ: Do you think employers will stop providing health insurance, even though they can pay a penalty under the health overhaul law?

Dr. Cosgrove: The first ones will be the small companies... Every CEO I've talked to knows how much he'd save between insuring his people and paying the federal penalty.

WSJ: What does that tell you?

Dr. Cosgrove: The first time some big player does that, it's going to fall like dominoes. What that does is drive everybody to the exchanges.

WSJ: What does that mean to you?

Dr. Cosgrove: It's going to be a faster move towards one payer. Increasingly, people think that in 10 years you're going to have 75% of the health-care costs paid by the federal government.

WSJ: You think we're moving toward a single-payer system?

Dr. Cosgrove: Well, the question is how long...I don't think in the next 10 years, but I think it probably is going to head in that direction.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324677204578187613286882532.html?mod=health_newsreel


Comment:  Cleveland Clinic President and CEO Delos "Toby" Cosgrove confirms what Physicians for a National Health Program has been saying all along. It's not whether we'll ever have single payer, it's how long.

It's our job to expedite it.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121221/0e0426c0/attachment.html 

From ananda at mcn.org  Fri Dec 21 09:17:27 2012
From: ananda at mcn.org (Cecile Cutler)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 09:17:27 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fwd: Highlights of Julian's Speech at Embassy
	12/19/12
References: <6882C68D-74A1-42DA-953A-DFA1D4DE2631@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <F09AC2E7-6AE5-423F-8882-9879EF582464@mcn.org>



Begin forwarded message:

> From: Holly Tannen <htannen at mcn.org>
> Date: December 20, 2012 11:18:26 PM PST
> To: discussion at lists.mcn.org
> Cc: "htannen at mcn.org" <htannen at mcn.org>
> Subject: Highlights of Julian's Speech at the Ecuadoran Embassy 12/19/12
> 
> 
> 
> Six months ago ? 185 days ago - I entered this building. It has become my home, my office and my refuge. Thanks to the principled stance of the Ecuadorian government and the support of its people I am safe in this Embassy and safe to speak from this Embassy.
> ... I came here in summer. It?s winter now...And every single day outside, people like you have watched over this embassy ? [in] rain, hail and shine... 
> 
> ...when our media is corrupt...when our academics are timid, when our history is filled with half truths and lies, our civilization will never be just....Our beliefs about the world and each other have been created by same system that has lied us into repeated wars...The quality of our discourse is the limit of our civilization.
> 
> Wikileaks already has well over a million documents to release [next year], documents that affect every country in this world.
> 
> And in Australia an unelected Senator will be replaced by one that is elected.
> 
> ...Washington power brokers [call] for economic sanctions against Ecuador, simply for defending my rights... President Correa...said, "Ecuador?s principles are not for sale." 
> 
> The power of people speaking up and resisting together terrifies corrupt undemocratic power. So much so that ordinary people in the West are now the enemy of governments...to be watched, controlled and impoverished.
> 
> For once we, the people, stop speaking out, and stop dissenting, once we are distracted or pacified, once we turn away from each other, we are no longer free. For true democracy is the sum of our resistance.
> 
> If you don?t speak up, if you give up what is uniquely yours as a human being, you surrender your consciousness; your independence, even your sense of what is right and wrong. In other words, perhaps without knowing it, you become passive and controlled, unable to defend yourself and those you love.
> 
> People often ask, "What can I do?" the answer is not so difficult.
> 
> Learn how the world works. Challenge the statements, actions and intentions of those who seek to control us behind the facades of democracy and monarchy...
> 
> Learn, challenge, act. Now.
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121221/8c618d82/attachment.html 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Thu Dec 20 10:05:28 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 10:05:28 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fwd:  Priorities?
References: <A6CFFED3-C4A2-471C-86FC-EC7F96B278E5@att.net>
Message-ID: <D4898A2E-E7C2-4B8F-9452-73A5C59BA0FD@mcn.org>

> Maybe we should make all NRA members and other shooters take off their shoes when carrying a weapon. For automatic high powered guns they should be totally naked.  This would at least give people a chance to run away in disgust.  rk 

> 
> 
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.
> 
> For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121220/2d7691be/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Screen_Shot_2012-12-17_at_10.22.03_AM.png
Type: image/png
Size: 230324 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121220/2d7691be/attachment.png 

From agnes at mcn.org  Fri Dec 21 11:51:24 2012
From: agnes at mcn.org (agnes at mcn.org)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 11:51:24 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] no cuts to Social Security-send a letter
Message-ID: <e5857e3066996ad3078cb42f275e67c5.squirrel@webmail.mcn.org>



[ http://other98.com/if-you-cut-social-security-i-will-primary-you/ ]



Dear All,

*It's come to this: your member of Congress, right now, has the power to
decide
whether Social Security lives on, or begins to die an agonizing death.*
And there's
only one thing keeping them from voting to end Social Security as we know it:

They're terrified that YOU, their constituents - Republicans, Independents,
Democrats, unaffiliated, third-party members, everyone - will throw them
out of
office if they vote to cut Social Security. And they're right to be
afraid: Social
Security is the most universally popular government program of the last
100 years,
and it cuts across party lines.

*NOW is the time to call and email your Member of Congress with a simple
promise:
Vote to cut Social Security, and I WILL support a primary challenge to
kick you out
of office. [
http://other98.com/if-you-cut-social-security-i-will-primary-you/ ]*





From rick at mcn.org  Fri Dec 21 13:02:13 2012
From: rick at mcn.org (Rick Childs)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:02:13 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Social Security reductions
Message-ID: <BF9523A1A73F4A95AC5EBA3B074E327C@rcdesktop>

    To my fellow OMers concerned about possible changes in the Social Security benefits.  Today's digest now included an on-line petition to Dem representatives that we'd put up candidates in primaries to oppose them for voting for any reduction in SS benefits.  I'm most uncomforable with this "SS is a sacred cow/red line in the sand" thing.  Telling good Dems that we'll vote against them if they modify SS benefits w/a primary fight (and all the rancor and divisiveness that creates) is just the self-destructive practice the Reps do.  Let's please not go there...
    Here's what I just sent to Norman Solomon who put out a similar clarion call this morning:

Hello Norman - perhaps you remember me....I was one of the leaders putting on the Occupy Mendocino Street Fair that you so graciously came to and spoke at.  We talked several times - including when you came to Jim Tarbell's Caspar event.

I write today about this "progressive" apoplexy about having Seniors take SS and Medicare cuts.  I'm a Sr. making $800/month in benefits - and am also on Medicare.  I'm Most Happy to give up a small percentage of this in the national interest.  
  
We DO have a very, Very serious budget deficit.  Seniors are better off in most ways than the rest of the population.  We shouldn't be sucking increasing-every-year money from the young, as we grow in numbers and live longer.   OK, put a floor under which seniors would keep their current benefits (take into account other retirement benefits and no reduction if total package is, say, $15 or $20K)...but the rest could easily afford a minor adjustment in benefits over that amount -- and help save the country future fiscal problems...freeing money for education, debt reduction, infrastructure, etc.  Too many Americans say Just Cut Others...no one wants to have to sacrifice - which is what we all need to do.  We old folks should be looking out for the future of the country, not worrying about a minor (and self-gratifying) $10/month income loss.  The minor modification in Cost of Living indices under discussion is negligible (and fair -- the current one overstates inflation)...let's be big and give it back to the young, the country, the future.

What happened to us liberals and our DNA of working for "the common good"...sharing sacrifices for the good of all??
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121221/f15241b7/attachment.html 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Fri Dec 21 13:43:22 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:43:22 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] the-presidents-unnecessary and unwise concessions.
Message-ID: <8968F907-C078-4F61-9888-C94D240032B2@mcn.org>

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/279-82/15133-the-presidents-unnecessary-and-unwise-concessions


The President's Unnecessary and Unwise Concessions

By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog

20 December 12

  
hy is the President back to making premature and unnecessary concessions to Republicans?

Two central issues in the 2012 presidential election were whether the Bush tax cuts should be ended for people earning over $250,000, and whether Social Security and Medicare should be protected from future budget cuts.

The President said yes to both. Republicans said no. Obama won.

But apparently the President is now offering to continue to Bush tax cuts for people earning between $250,000 and $400,000, and to cut Social Security by reducing annual cost-of-living adjustments.

These concessions aren't necessary. If the nation goes over the so-called "fiscal cliff" and tax rates return to what they were under Bill Clinton, Democrats can then introduce a tax cut for everyone earning under $250,000 and make it retroactive to the start of the year.

They can combine it with a spending bill that makes up for most of the cuts scheduled to go into effect in January. Republicans would be hard-pressed not to sign on.

Social Security should not be part of any such deal anyway. By law, it can't contribute to the budget deficit. It's only permitted to spend money from the Social Security trust fund.

Besides, the President's proposed reduction in annual Social Security cost-of-living adjustments would save only $122 billion over ten years. Yet it would significantly harm the elderly.

It defies logic and fairness to give more tax cuts to the wealthy while cutting benefits for the near-poor.

The median income of Americans over 65 is less than $20,000 a year. Nearly 70 percent of them depend on Social Security for more than half of this. The average Social Security benefit is less than $15,000 a year.

Even Social Security's current cost-of-living adjustment understates the true impact of inflation on elderly recipients, who spend far more on health care than anyone else - including annual increases in Medicare premiums.

Hands off Social Security. If the Republicans are willing to raise tax rates on high earners but demand more spending cuts in return, the President should offer larger cuts in defense spending and corporate welfare.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121221/c9e36d0c/attachment.html 

From jupiter at mcn.org  Fri Dec 21 14:09:04 2012
From: jupiter at mcn.org (Linda Jupiter)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 14:09:04 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Social Security reductions
In-Reply-To: <BF9523A1A73F4A95AC5EBA3B074E327C@rcdesktop>
References: <BF9523A1A73F4A95AC5EBA3B074E327C@rcdesktop>
Message-ID: <D6409C84-518A-41E1-8BFC-F656BCF15ACA@mcn.org>

Dear Rick,
I strongly disagree with you. If seniors are better off than most  
other folks, it's due to the SS and Medicare benefits we get.  
Obviously, if you're getting $800 in SS and don't need it all, then  
you have other income as well and your home is probably paid for. A  
lot of the rest of us don't have retirement funds and are living day  
to day. Many of us are caught in the middle; we make too much for low- 
income benefits and not enough to live on. Those of us who are poor or  
low income seniors find the waiting list for low-income housing is  
several years long. What do we do in the meantime? Those of us who are  
working class are still working way past "retirement age" and may not  
get to retire at all. Every penny counts. I will oppose any candidate  
that wants to reduce SS benefits or Medicare benefits.
I applaud your working for the "common good," but please don't assume  
your "common good" is the same as mine.
Peace,
Linda


On Dec 21, 2012, at 1:02 PM, Rick Childs wrote:

>     To my fellow OMers concerned about possible changes in the  
> Social Security benefits.  Today's digest now included an on-line  
> petition to Dem representatives that we'd put up candidates in  
> primaries to oppose them for voting for any reduction in SS  
> benefits.  I'm most uncomforable with this "SS is a sacred cow/red  
> line in the sand" thing.  Telling good Dems that we'll vote against  
> them if they modify SS benefits w/a primary fight (and all the  
> rancor and divisiveness that creates) is just the self-destructive  
> practice the Reps do.  Let's please not go there...
>     Here's what I just sent to Norman Solomon who put out a similar  
> clarion call this morning:
>
> Hello Norman - perhaps you remember me....I was one of the leaders  
> putting on the Occupy Mendocino Street Fair that you so graciously  
> came to and spoke at.  We talked several times - including when you  
> came to Jim Tarbell's Caspar event.
>
> I write today about this "progressive" apoplexy about having Seniors  
> take SS and Medicare cuts.  I'm a Sr. making $800/month in benefits  
> - and am also on Medicare.  I'm Most Happy to give up a small  
> percentage of this in the national interest.
>
> We DO have a very, Very serious budget deficit.  Seniors are better  
> off in most ways than the rest of the population.  We shouldn't be  
> sucking increasing-every-year money from the young, as we grow in  
> numbers and live longer.   OK, put a floor under which seniors would  
> keep their current benefits (take into account other retirement  
> benefits and no reduction if total package is, say, $15 or  
> $20K)...but the rest could easily afford a minor adjustment in  
> benefits over that amount -- and help save the country future fiscal  
> problems...freeing money for education, debt reduction,  
> infrastructure, etc.  Too many Americans say Just Cut Others...no  
> one wants to have to sacrifice - which is what we all need to do.   
> We old folks should be looking out for the future of the country,  
> not worrying about a minor (and self-gratifying) $10/month income  
> loss.  The minor modification in Cost of Living indices under  
> discussion is negligible (and fair -- the current one overstates  
> inflation)...let's be big and give it back to the young, the  
> country, the future.
>
> What happened to us liberals and our DNA of working for "the common  
> good"...sharing sacrifices for the good of all??
>
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org 
>  put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.
>
> For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121221/82e1f6eb/attachment.html 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Fri Dec 21 14:54:45 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 14:54:45 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Social Security reductions
In-Reply-To: <D6409C84-518A-41E1-8BFC-F656BCF15ACA@mcn.org>
References: <BF9523A1A73F4A95AC5EBA3B074E327C@rcdesktop>
	<D6409C84-518A-41E1-8BFC-F656BCF15ACA@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <4D16B1E7-F964-4828-AC74-B2D03E61AC99@mcn.org>

Dear Rick, What amazes me is that the group that has to sacrifice is always the poorest, most vulnerable
without the energy or clout to fight.  AARP might come through, but we can never depend on their political
stance.  Come on millionaires with money hiding all over the place, come through for the rest of the country,
the common good and for future generations. 


 Richard 
On Dec 21, 2012, at 2:09 PM, Linda Jupiter wrote:

> Dear Rick,
> I strongly disagree with you. If seniors are better off than most other folks, it's due to the SS and Medicare benefits we get. Obviously, if you're getting $800 in SS and don't need it all, then you have other income as well and your home is probably paid for. A lot of the rest of us don't have retirement funds and are living day to day. Many of us are caught in the middle; we make too much for low-income benefits and not enough to live on. Those of us who are poor or low income seniors find the waiting list for low-income housing is several years long. What do we do in the meantime? Those of us who are working class are still working way past "retirement age" and may not get to retire at all. Every penny counts. I will oppose any candidate that wants to reduce SS benefits or Medicare benefits. 
> I applaud your working for the "common good," but please don't assume your "common good" is the same as mine.
> Peace,
> Linda
> 
> 
> On Dec 21, 2012, at 1:02 PM, Rick Childs wrote:
> 
>>     To my fellow OMers concerned about possible changes in the Social Security benefits.  Today's digest now included an on-line petition to Dem representatives that we'd put up candidates in primaries to oppose them for voting for any reduction in SS benefits.  I'm most uncomforable with this "SS is a sacred cow/red line in the sand" thing.  Telling good Dems that we'll vote against them if they modify SS benefits w/a primary fight (and all the rancor and divisiveness that creates) is just the self-destructive practice the Reps do.  Let's please not go there...
>>     Here's what I just sent to Norman Solomon who put out a similar clarion call this morning:
>>  
>> Hello Norman - perhaps you remember me....I was one of the leaders putting on the Occupy Mendocino Street Fair that you so graciously came to and spoke at.  We talked several times - including when you came to Jim Tarbell's Caspar event.
>>  
>> I write today about this "progressive" apoplexy about having Seniors take SS and Medicare cuts.  I'm a Sr. making $800/month in benefits - and am also on Medicare.  I'm Most Happy to give up a small percentage of this in the national interest.  
>>  
>> We DO have a very, Very serious budget deficit.  Seniors are better off in most ways than the rest of the population.  We shouldn't be sucking increasing-every-year money from the young, as we grow in numbers and live longer.   OK, put a floor under which seniors would keep their current benefits (take into account other retirement benefits and no reduction if total package is, say, $15 or $20K)...but the rest could easily afford a minor adjustment in benefits over that amount -- and help save the country future fiscal problems...freeing money for education, debt reduction, infrastructure, etc.  Too many Americans say Just Cut Others...no one wants to have to sacrifice - which is what we all need to do.  We old folks should be looking out for the future of the country, not worrying about a minor (and self-gratifying) $10/month income loss.  The minor modification in Cost of Living indices under discussion is negligible (and fair -- the current one overstates inflation)...let's be big and give it back to the young, the country, the future.
>>  
>> What happened to us liberals and our DNA of working for "the common good"...sharing sacrifices for the good of all??
>> 
>> TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.
>> 
>> For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org
> 
> 
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.
> 
> For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121221/728d9db6/attachment.html 

From marksafron at att.net  Fri Dec 21 15:36:58 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 15:36:58 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Social Security reductions
In-Reply-To: <BF9523A1A73F4A95AC5EBA3B074E327C@rcdesktop>
References: <BF9523A1A73F4A95AC5EBA3B074E327C@rcdesktop>
Message-ID: <03A80623-DDBF-4E94-8BD9-5218B1CEAE15@att.net>

Dear Rick, 
I think you've been sipping Kool - Aid from the Republican punchbowl. Although you mean well in making a sacrifice for the good of the nation; there are people a lot less fortunate than you and, unless you know the circumstances of these people don't assume they can make the same sacrifices as you.

But should we make any sacrifice at all? 
Why not raise Social Security contributions beyond $108,000?
Why give tax breaks to oil companies, agribusiness, and Pharma? (see chart below)
What about the 32 TRILLION dollars stashed offshore by the wealthy because they don't want to pay taxes?
What about all the loopholes in the current tax law and; why should hedge fund mgrs. pay only 15% tax on the millions they make?

Why take any money from people struggling to pay rent or a mortgage when there's so much income inequality in this so-called "classless" society? $10.00 means more to me than $10,000 to the head of BofA or AIG.

Your letter reminds me of the complaints the timber companies used to make when we refused to let one old growth tree be cut. They asked why we wouldn't compromise. Compromise? THEY'D ALREADY CUT DOWN 97% OF ALL THE OLD GROWTH TIMBER!

Regards, Mark 

HERE'S A (PARTIAL) LIST OF CORPORATE WELFARE: 














On Dec 21, 2012, at 1:02 PM, Rick Childs <rick at mcn.org> wrote:

    To my fellow OMers concerned about possible changes in the Social Security benefits.  Today's digest now included an on-line petition to Dem representatives that we'd put up candidates in primaries to oppose them for voting for any reduction in SS benefits.  I'm most uncomforable with this "SS is a sacred cow/red line in the sand" thing.  Telling good Dems that we'll vote against them if they modify SS benefits w/a primary fight (and all the rancor and divisiveness that creates) is just the self-destructive practice the Reps do.  Let's please not go there...
    Here's what I just sent to Norman Solomon who put out a similar clarion call this morning:
 
Hello Norman - perhaps you remember me....I was one of the leaders putting on the Occupy Mendocino Street Fair that you so graciously came to and spoke at.  We talked several times - including when you came to Jim Tarbell's Caspar event.
 
I write today about this "progressive" apoplexy about having Seniors take SS and Medicare cuts.  I'm a Sr. making $800/month in benefits - and am also on Medicare.  I'm Most Happy to give up a small percentage of this in the national interest.  
 
We DO have a very, Very serious budget deficit.  Seniors are better off in most ways than the rest of the population.  We shouldn't be sucking increasing-every-year money from the young, as we grow in numbers and live longer.   OK, put a floor under which seniors would keep their current benefits (take into account other retirement benefits and no reduction if total package is, say, $15 or $20K)...but the rest could easily afford a minor adjustment in benefits over that amount -- and help save the country future fiscal problems...freeing money for education, debt reduction, infrastructure, etc.  Too many Americans say Just Cut Others...no one wants to have to sacrifice - which is what we all need to do.  We old folks should be looking out for the future of the country, not worrying about a minor (and self-gratifying) $10/month income loss.  The minor modification in Cost of Living indices under discussion is negligible (and fair -- the current one overstates inflation)...let's be big and give it back to the young, the country, the future.
 
What happened to us liberals and our DNA of working for "the common good"...sharing sacrifices for the good of all??

TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.

For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121221/73b0091a/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Screen shot 2012-10-29 at 12.54.52 AM.jpg
Type: image/jpg
Size: 390454 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121221/73b0091a/attachment.jpg 

From marksafron at att.net  Fri Dec 21 17:25:44 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 17:25:44 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Nancy Lanza Was an NRA Pawn
Message-ID: <3C6005F3-6587-4A72-8673-AAE8965DD97F@att.net>


http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/436-2nd-amendment-rights/15151-focus-nancy-lanza-was-an-nra-pawn

Nancy Lanza Was an NRA Pawn


By Marc Ash, Reader Supported News

21 December 12


Reader Supported News | Perspective
 
he NRA broke its silence after the murders in Newtown by saying, "The National Rifle Association of America is made up of four million moms and dads, sons and daughters ..." True, but they are the pawns.


Click to View Poster
Download to Print

The National Rifle Association (NRA) is not spending millions of dollars per year to protect gun rights as much as it is protecting gun sales. Arms dealing, that's where the money is. And that's what justifies the length the NRA lobbyists go to, both at the federal and state level. The NRA has helped protect the questionable right of Americans to own firearms, but they have also helped to transform the United States into the most lucrative personal arms market in the world.

Arms dealing in America only differs from drug dealing in three significant ways: it's more profitable, it's more lethal and it's legal. Guns, like crack cocaine, enter communities and have the same if not more destructive effect. Everyone has heard about the murders of 20 kindergarten children and 6 school administrators in Newtown, Connecticut. Who has heard about the year of death and pain in Chicago, or Oakland, California? Liz Goodwin reports for Yahoo, "Death by firearms are on track to surpass automobile related deaths by 2015 ... Every day, 85 Americans are shot dead ... 774 people were killed between 2006 and 2010 by a mass killer."

There was no good reason that Nancy Lanza needed military-grade firearms in her home. She was taken in by NRA hype. "Guns are your right, buy guns." "They are making laws that are too restrictive in terms of what kind of guns, clips and ammunition you can buy, be free, buy what they don't want you to buy." "They are coming to take your guns away, buy more." She - bought - into it, lock, stock and barrel. All of this, all of it, plays to the NRA's bottom line. Now, as in the aftermath of every mass killing, gun sales are soaring, profits spiking.

To the arms dealers the people who get hurt are an acceptable if unfortunate consequence. They react no differently than the tobacco industry, they regret but they don't stop. These are international arms dealers; it's a rough crowd. It's no different than Afghanistan or the Congo or Colombia to the flow of cash, money don't care. Move the weapons.

A visceral reaction to the horrific events in Newtown is driving this dialog, but it isn't just Newtown, it's Everytown across America. If Americans were limited to hunting rifles and revolvers they would survive ... literally. Profits would be down, but who cares about that?

Marc Ash was formerly the founder and Executive Director of Truthout, and is now founder and Editor of Reader Supported News.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121221/71c94629/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rsn-T.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 512 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121221/71c94629/attachment-0002.jpg 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 8595-rsn-cory-gun-art-122112-small.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 14076 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121221/71c94629/attachment-0003.jpg 

From elained at mcn.org  Fri Dec 21 18:26:36 2012
From: elained at mcn.org (Elaine and Ed)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 18:26:36 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Social Security reductions
In-Reply-To: <03A80623-DDBF-4E94-8BD9-5218B1CEAE15@att.net>
References: <BF9523A1A73F4A95AC5EBA3B074E327C@rcdesktop>
	<03A80623-DDBF-4E94-8BD9-5218B1CEAE15@att.net>
Message-ID: <CE2F9239-AED5-4401-AA02-BFA8F597AA0A@mcn.org>

I couldn't agree more Mark.

As far as I'm concerned, Rick Childs is a traitor to the 99 percent making a statement like he did below. But then what can you expect from religious self proclaimed leaders? The ones who don't want to make any sacrifices are the obscenely wealthy whose corporations' tax breaks and subsidies have filled their coffers for decades while they exported american jobs and didn't pay their fair share of taxes.

They are criminals of the highest order and if Solomon did put out a similar call then I couldn't be gladder that he lost.

Ed Oberweiser


On Dec 21, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Mark Safron wrote:

> Dear Rick, 
> I think you've been sipping Kool - Aid from the Republican punchbowl. Although you mean well in making a sacrifice for the good of the nation; there are people a lot less fortunate than you and, unless you know the circumstances of these people don't assume they can make the same sacrifices as you.
> 
> But should we make any sacrifice at all? 
> Why not raise Social Security contributions beyond $108,000?
> Why give tax breaks to oil companies, agribusiness, and Pharma? (see chart below)
> What about the 32 TRILLION dollars stashed offshore by the wealthy because they don't want to pay taxes?
> What about all the loopholes in the current tax law and; why should hedge fund mgrs. pay only 15% tax on the millions they make?
> 
> Why take any money from people struggling to pay rent or a mortgage when there's so much income inequality in this so-called "classless" society? $10.00 means more to me than $10,000 to the head of BofA or AIG.
> 
> Your letter reminds me of the complaints the timber companies used to make when we refused to let one old growth tree be cut. They asked why we wouldn't compromise. Compromise? THEY'D ALREADY CUT DOWN 97% OF ALL THE OLD GROWTH TIMBER!
> 
> Regards, Mark 
> 
> HERE'S A (PARTIAL) LIST OF CORPORATE WELFARE: 
> 
> <Screen shot 2012-10-29 at 12.54.52 AM.jpg>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Dec 21, 2012, at 1:02 PM, Rick Childs <rick at mcn.org> wrote:
> 
>     To my fellow OMers concerned about possible changes in the Social Security benefits.  Today's digest now included an on-line petition to Dem representatives that we'd put up candidates in primaries to oppose them for voting for any reduction in SS benefits.  I'm most uncomforable with this "SS is a sacred cow/red line in the sand" thing.  Telling good Dems that we'll vote against them if they modify SS benefits w/a primary fight (and all the rancor and divisiveness that creates) is just the self-destructive practice the Reps do.  Let's please not go there...
>     Here's what I just sent to Norman Solomon who put out a similar clarion call this morning:
>  
> Hello Norman - perhaps you remember me....I was one of the leaders putting on the Occupy Mendocino Street Fair that you so graciously came to and spoke at.  We talked several times - including when you came to Jim Tarbell's Caspar event.
>  
> I write today about this "progressive" apoplexy about having Seniors take SS and Medicare cuts.  I'm a Sr. making $800/month in benefits - and am also on Medicare.  I'm Most Happy to give up a small percentage of this in the national interest.  
>  
> We DO have a very, Very serious budget deficit.  Seniors are better off in most ways than the rest of the population.  We shouldn't be sucking increasing-every-year money from the young, as we grow in numbers and live longer.   OK, put a floor under which seniors would keep their current benefits (take into account other retirement benefits and no reduction if total package is, say, $15 or $20K)...but the rest could easily afford a minor adjustment in benefits over that amount -- and help save the country future fiscal problems...freeing money for education, debt reduction, infrastructure, etc.  Too many Americans say Just Cut Others...no one wants to have to sacrifice - which is what we all need to do.  We old folks should be looking out for the future of the country, not worrying about a minor (and self-gratifying) $10/month income loss.  The minor modification in Cost of Living indices under discussion is negligible (and fair -- the current one overstates inflation)...let's be big and give it back to the young, the country, the future.
>  
> What happened to us liberals and our DNA of working for "the common good"...sharing sacrifices for the good of all??
> 
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.
> 
> For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org
> 
> 
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.
> 
> For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121221/f06e4d5b/attachment.html 

From jupiter at mcn.org  Fri Dec 21 19:56:25 2012
From: jupiter at mcn.org (Linda Jupiter)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 19:56:25 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] MLK Day organizing meeting
Message-ID: <DFEFC0B3-C6EB-448D-84FF-3C2AE65AE8C1@mcn.org>

Greetings, all,
We're in the process of organizing for MLK Day on Sunday, January 20.  
Please join us.
Linda

12-19-12 meeting

MLK Organizing Group

Agnes, Ann, Carrie, John, Linda, Richard, Zac attended

Discussed a place to hold our January 20 MLK event. Prioritized them  
as 1. Masonic Hall, 2. Catholic Church (Michael Raj is priest there  
and a good speaker), and 3. Portuguese Hall. Other venues mentioned  
were Evergreen, Company Store, Lion?s Hall, and Rec Hall, all in Fort  
Bragg.

John mentioned Tony Coleman from Oakland as a possible speaker. He  
manages Bikes4Life in Oakland and is part of One Fam, a community  
outreach group. He?s been told he?s a dynamic speaker.

Carrie talked about being clear on the tone of our march. She?s been  
in touch with the police and everything should be okay as long as we  
stay on the sidewalks and obey traffic signals. She will begin work on  
a flyer to hand out as we march.

More work needs to be done on sign making; John to begin generating a  
flyer; we need to figure out food (once a venue is chosen) and the  
route of the march. Linda to contact Erik Larsen of SEIU.

Next meeting Saturday, December 22 at 1:30 p.m. at the Fort Bragg  
Library.















-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121221/665d99cb/attachment.html 

From deejayliz at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 21 20:00:21 2012
From: deejayliz at yahoo.com (Liz Helenchild)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 20:00:21 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Occupymendocino] OWS social security spit spat
Message-ID: <1356148821.96514.YahooMailNeo@web161205.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

Hey, OWch! 
Could we please agree to disagree without name calling, 
mud slinging, wild hyperbole, tar-&-feathering, & similar verbal
 retaliation? If we can't listen calmly to any expression out of 
lockstep with our own viewpoint, can we realistically hope for peace, 
justice, democracy, & all those progressive values we supposedly 
strive toward?
Respectfully,
Liz Helenchild
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121221/cb928ec7/attachment.html 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Sat Dec 22 10:29:37 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2012 10:29:37 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] how-occupy-wall-street-got-religion
Message-ID: <B1F46E45-ED7F-45CD-8846-E6EF9D2C4E31@mcn.org>

http://readersupportednews.org/off-site-opinion-section/442-occupy/15008-how-occupy-wall-street-got-religion


OCCUPY YEAR II
How Occupy Wall Street got religion

http://readersupportednews.org/off-site-opinion-section/442-occupy/15008-how-occupy-wall-street-got-religion
by Nathan Schneider | December 20, 2012


(The Indypendent/Lynne Foster)
A year later, even as a resilient few continue their 24-hour vigil on the sidewalk outside Trinity, churches and Occupiers are having a very different kind of Advent season together. Finding room in churches is no longer a problem for the movement.
A year ago around this time, Occupy Wall Street was celebrating Advent ? the season when Christians anticipate the birth of Jesus at Christmas. In front of Trinity Church, right at the top of Wall Street along Broadway, Occupiers set up a little model tent with the statuettes of a nativity scene inside: Mary, Joseph and the Christ child in a manger, surrounded by animals. In the back, an angel held a tiny cardboard sign with a verse from Luke?s Gospel: ?There was no room for them in the inn.? The reason for these activists? interest in the liturgical calendar, of course, was the movement?s ongoing effort to convince Trinity to start acting less like a real estate corporation and more like a church, and to let the movement use a vacant property that Trinity owns.

Article continues:        http://readersupportednews.org/off-site-opinion-section/442-occupy/15008-how-occupy-wall-street-got-religion
  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121222/d49534c7/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OWSreligionIndy.png
Type: image/png
Size: 115599 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121222/d49534c7/attachment.png 

From adross at mcn.org  Sat Dec 22 13:01:18 2012
From: adross at mcn.org (Ad Ross)
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2012 14:01:18 -0700
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Rick's proposal
Message-ID: <B66F97BB-AE34-4F97-8364-C909DE1C6C2A@mcn.org>


Those of us who are privileged enough to have excess money (!) would  
be pleased to "give up" some percentage of our benefits.  But there  
are many many more of us who are not privileged, and who scrape by  
every single month -- no, make that every single minute.  Means- 
testing is a good way to cut benefits!  But across-the-board cuts,  
like those the Republicans are pushing, make life terrible and much  
harder for Americans whose lives are already hard.  Where is the  
concern for the poor and those who simply cannot afford to give up a  
nickel in the national interest?  What do you think the national  
interest is?  I think it is to care for those who are disadvantaged.   
This is my view, and I do not speak for anyone else.


-------------------------------------------

Sent from my obsolete desktop.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121222/5b993c8f/attachment.html 

From marksafron at att.net  Sun Dec 23 13:09:36 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2012 13:09:36 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Reich: Are We Headed for Bedford Falls or
	Pottersville?
Message-ID: <EABA2677-D7D0-42F5-8ECE-CAD9F6BBEE80@att.net>

Are We Headed for Bedford Falls or Pottersville?

By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog
23 December 12

 
t's easy to feel discouraged about the bullying by right-wing Republicans and their patrons over everything from gun control to taxes and social safety nets to trade unions and jobs.

Every year about now I watch "It's a Wonderful Life" again to remind myself what Frank Capra understood about America -- its essential decency and common sense.

In many ways the nation is better than it was in 1946 when the movie first appeared. Women have gained economic power and reproductive rights; we enacted Civil Rights and Voting Rights and, through Medicare and Medicaid, dramatically reduced poverty among the elderly; we began to tackle environmental devastation; we stopped treating gays as criminals and have even started to recognize equal marriage rights. We elected and then re-elected the first black president of the United States. We have enacted the bare beginnings of universal healthcare.

But we are still in danger of the "Pottersville" Capra saw as the consequence of what happens when Americans fail to join together and forget the meaning of the public good.

If Lionel Barrymore's "Mr. Potter" were alive today he'd call himself a "job creator" and condemn George Bailey as a socialist. He'd be financing a fleet of lobbyists to get lower taxes on multi-millionaires like himself, overturn environmental laws, trample on workers' rights, and shred social safety nets. He'd fight any form of gun control. He'd want the citizens of Pottersville to be economically insecure ? living paycheck to paycheck and worried about losing their jobs ? so they'd be dependent on his good graces.

The Mr. Potters are still alive and well in America, threatening our democracy with their money and our common morality with their greed.

Call me naive or sentimental but I still believe the George Baileys will continue to win this contest. They know we're all in it together, and that if we succumb to the bullying selfishness of the Potters we lose America and relinquish the future.

Happy holidays.

Robert B. Reich, Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley, was Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration. Time Magazine named him one of the ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the last century. He has written thirteen books, including the best sellers "Aftershock" and "The Work of Nations." His latest is an e-book, "Beyond Outrage." He is also a founding editor of the American Prospect magazine and chairman of Common Cause.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121223/4cbd46fc/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rsn-I.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 461 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121223/4cbd46fc/attachment.jpg 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Sun Dec 23 14:15:29 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2012 14:15:29 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] NRA
Message-ID: <44A89192-72F9-4165-8D76-837EC05CFFDF@mcn.org>

My letter to the Press Democrat:

Dear Editor,  I was happy to finally see the NRA make a response to the recent school killings.  I think their idea to employ guards does have some merits, mainly to put more people to work.  I think the NRA should take it a step further, however.  This would be to fund bullet proof wardrobes for all school children. Think of the opportunities to put even more people to work.  Also an additional 10# - 20#  so added to each child's wardrobe would strengthen and thin their bodies down. I could see whole line of bullet proof iPods . ,iPads and hats coming out of this too. Maybe the fad would catch on to other age groups.

Richard Karch
Mendocino, CA
707-937-0334

From marksafron at att.net  Mon Dec 24 11:44:30 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 11:44:30 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Borowitz: A Holiday Letter from John Boehner
Message-ID: <2FDBBEDF-6033-41D1-80F6-D8B0A864E6AE@att.net>


A HOLIDAY LETTER FROM JOHN BOEHNER


WASHINGTON?Today, Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-Ohio) released the following holiday letter to the American people:

Dear American People:

It?s Speaker Boehner here, writing my first and last ever holiday letter to you. Why am I doing this after all of these years, you might ask? Well, I won?t mince words. I?ve started drinking a little early this Christmas.

Yes, I?m sitting here in my man-cave, panelled in mahogany the color of me, doing a rack of Canadian Club shooters and smoking my way through a carton of Lucky Strikes as if they were the last Twinkies in creation. If my chief of staff knew that I was writing to you while I was this polluted, he?d shit a phone book. But guess what? I don?t fucking care anymore.

You see, this will be my last Christmas as Speaker of the House, all because a cabal of Tea Party miscreants in the House of Representatives doesn?t think I?m a ginormous enough asshole for their taste. Who?s more to their liking? Virginia?s own Eric Cantor. As a waiter might say at an all-you-can-eat shit buffet, ?Excellent choice.? How odious is Eric Cantor? Let me put it this way: when we have to speak to the press, I actually prefer to stand next to Mitch McConnell.

What will life be like under Speaker of the House Eric Cantor? Well, he?s the guy who recommended cuts in disaster funding just hours after tornadoes hit Joplin, Missouri. Nice. And it was his ?never met a dick-measuring contest I didn?t like? pathology that helped create last year?s debt-ceiling crisis. You can?t put a price tag on a performance like that. Well, actually you can: it cost the country nineteen billion dollars. Starting to miss me already, aren?t you? Fuck you.

So have a very Eric Cantor Christmas, America, and as that smug four-eyed sociopath drives the entire nation off the cliff, don?t say I didn?t warn you. Now leave me alone, God damn you. Damn you all to hell.

Happy Holidays,

Speaker Boehner



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121224/a83b21b8/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: boehner-xmas.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 136772 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121224/a83b21b8/attachment.jpg 

From marksafron at att.net  Mon Dec 24 13:09:21 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 13:09:21 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Michael Tomasky: The GOP Brings Politics to a
	Crisis Point
Message-ID: <A8D4BFF7-07EB-4187-B0C5-AF07B9D80354@att.net>


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/12/23/michael-tomasky-the-gop-brings-politics-to-a-crisis-point.html

Michael Tomasky: The GOP Brings Politics to a Crisis Point

Really, what is to be done about this Republican Party? What force can change it?can stop Republicans from being ideological saboteurs and convert at least a workable minority of them into people interested in governing rather than sabotage? With the failed Plan B vote, we have reached the undeniable crisis point. Actually we?ve been at a crisis point for years, but this is really the all-upper-case Undeniable Crisis Point. They are a direct threat to the economy, which could slip back into recession next year if the government doesn?t, well, govern. They are an ongoing, at this point almost mundane, threat to democracy, subverting and preventing progress the American people clearly desire across a number of fronts. They have to be stopped, and the only people who can really stop them are corporate titans and Wall Streeters, who surely now are finally beginning to see that America?s problem is not Barack Obama and his alleged ?socialism,? but a political party that has become psychologically incapable of operating within the American political system.


On MSNBC?s ?The Cycle,? global business editor Daniel Gross says that ?House Republicans have to actually vote for something.+

We all know that the GOP has become much more extreme in the last few years, and, taking the longer historical view, the last 20 or 25 years. But when that gets said, it usually elides an important point?the important point. It?s usually meant to refer to the party?s policy positions. And the move to the hard right is obviously true along those lines.

But politics, and certainly political parties, aren?t only about policy positions. There?s also the question of what I?ll call process, which means simply how a party practices politics on a day-to-day, month-to-month, and year-to-year basis. This isn?t a question of the positions per se, but how the party attempts to advance and defend them.

And it?s on process far, far more than on policy that the Republican Party has gone nutso. You know this story, too, so I needn?t rehearse the details, except to describe the current end point, which is that to the GOP today, the Democrats must be denied any victory by any means necessary. The Republicans unwilling to vote for Plan B weren?t in the main loathe to give Boehner a win. The problem was that that particular Boehner win might have led to an Obama win. That was the issue that drove them.

In that sense, all these people saying they learned no lesson from the election are completely wrong. They learned a lesson, all right, but the lesson they took away is just the opposite of the kind of lesson normal small-d democrats would learn. Normal small-d democrats would learn that you?ve lost twice now, and while you should still stick to your principles of course, it was also time to play a little ball. But these Republicans learned that they have to be even more obstructionist. Their ideas are unpopular, their America is dying. But by God, they?re standing until the last man! They?re Paulus?s soldiers at Stalingrad, surrounded by an enemy that embodies evil?and is fated to outlast them. This is how they?ve been trained to think.

So they?ll give no ground. People are now saying that the only way to avoid going off the cliff is for Boehner to let the Senate bill come to the floor and let it be passed mostly by Democrats. But what reason is there to believe that even 20 or 25 Republicans would vote for a bill? And please, don?t tell me ?because a large majority of Americans would support it.? That doesn?t matter to them.

And next year, in January or February, when Joe Biden?s task force completes its work and we have new gun legislation? We have now rafts of new polling showing that clear majorities will support the kinds of proposals that are likely to be in any such legislation. But that won?t matter. They have the votes to block, and they will. And then perhaps Obama will attempt immigration reform, again with a solid majority of Americans behind him. They showed a few post-election signs of yielding here, so we?ll see. But as the issue heats up, the usual sources will start warning even the softer-hearted GOP legislators that a vote for immigration is a vote for Obama, you quisling, and if you waver on this you can certainly expect a primary challenge.

They didn?t come to Washington to govern. They came to sabotage. So our working assumption must be whatever the issue, sabotage is what they?re going to do.

And they can do it all they want. Our founders didn?t assume that a cadre of people of such immense bad faith and cynicism would ever come to control key levers of government; they built a system that would work, albeit slowly, in the hands of people of reasonably good will. It?s a system that people of bad will can subvert and stop from functioning.


Speaker of the House John Boehner, a Republican from Ohio, makes his way to his news conference to speak about the fiscal cliff and the failed Plan B while at the Capitol in Washington D.C. on Dec. 21, 2012. (Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call, via Getty)

Someone has to tell them enough. The only people I can think of with the power to do so are the high-profile figures of Wall Street and the corporate world. They?re the only people these Republicans might conceivably listen to. They should have done it?and some did?last year during the debt-limit hostage-taking. But then, most of corporate American was still wagering that the Republicans could beat Obama in 2012. Now that that hasn?t happened, now that we?re four years away from another election and Obama will be retiring anyway, and now that the Republicans have demonstrated that they are interested in no compromise at all in any way shape or form, maybe the business elite will finally show some responsibility.

Once upon a time, the statists?Roosevelt and his brains trusters?helped save capitalism from the Bolsheviks of the left. Today, the capitalists have to help save the state. This time the enemy is the Bolsheviks of the right, our current GOP. They?re taking us over the fiscal cliff, and they?ll do far worse without an intervention. 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121224/c249e386/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 1356231299440.cached.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 20313 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121224/c249e386/attachment.jpg 

From rick at mcn.org  Sun Dec 23 16:49:19 2012
From: rick at mcn.org (Rick Childs)
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2012 16:49:19 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Ruffled Feathers
Message-ID: <525DA932F6D04D3F8613480C231A4361@rcdesktop>

Dear OMers,

It seems my post a few days ago ruffled some feathers.  Lots of private and public responses back - some simply saying we shouldn't cut low-income seniors, but some nasty and personal attacks as well.  Came home last night.there a burning cross - with the letters AARP on it - on my lawn.*



And so, this, hoping to share my thoughts in more detail and smooth some of those feathers.

1)      Some seemed to think I was saying cut SS for low-income people (when the fat cats aren't paying their fair share); actually I clearly said:  Put a floor (say $15-20K) under which no reductions would occur.  

 

2)      Can and should seniors (as a demographic component) contribute to closing the Budget/Deficit problem?  I say yes.  What I think many don't realize is the incredible magnitude of the deficit.  It IS real.  The Fed govt is taking in $2.3 T - spending $3.6 T - a HUGE 33% !! shortfall.  

See:  http://www.usfederalbudget.us/ (it also shows the size of SS and Medicare).   Obviously this cannot continue....even liberal economists like Krugman say structural changes absolutely must take place.that no matter how much we raise taxes on the rich/raise corp. taxes and close loopholes/generate more revenue as we come out of the recession, we'll still have a growing, and critical-to-the-country, deficit problem.  Look at the minor dents against next year's $900 B deficit problem we'd get from closing all the oil co subsidies ($5 B), or raising the top 2% tax rates to even 50% (another $35  B) - w/Reps screaming about only a 39.6% rate. 

 

3)      As a country, we've been unfortunately living way, Way beyond our means for decades (borrowing to pay for it).  We've got major structural financial problems that exist beyond those easy fixes; cutbacks in our living standard Are coming.  The Bush tax cuts and the Medicare Part D are the underlying problems that exploded the deficit.  When the recession's over, most economists concede we'll need to raise taxes on almost everyone - probably something close to the Clinton-era rates.  That impacts everyone under 65.  And so...my belief in fairness and morality, why should seniors get a free ride and not contribute to fixing our deficit problem.  Again, no reductions for low-income Seniors -- but above, say $20K, ...should we keep our lifestyle while those under 65 don't? (and as we grow in numbers and longevity, exacerbating the problem?)   Extreme example:  why should Romney making $17 million even get a SS check?  

 

Again, I don't want any struggling seniors to lose benefits (I personally would like to see more Federal funding go to All low-income people.i.e. Headstart).   But there's no reason well-off seniors shouldn't have minor SS reductions.  Thus my plea to us all that we avoid simplistic "No Cuts to SS or Medicare Period" messages to Congress.  

 

Off to the 49ers game.and a Happy Holidays to All!

Rick Childs

 

* kidding.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121223/1ccf5a88/attachment.html 

From jupiter at mcn.org  Thu Dec 27 10:19:10 2012
From: jupiter at mcn.org (Linda Jupiter)
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 10:19:10 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fwd: More on Social Security
References: <6E4E37B0-1CFA-4537-9FA8-9135F3D87813@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <C8530E5B-69CF-4949-A68F-F9791EF6394B@mcn.org>

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Rachel  Binah <rachel at mcn.org>
> Date: December 27, 2012 9:31:46 AM PST
> To: Linda Jupiter <jupiter at mcn.org>
> Subject: More on Social Security
>
> Please send this to the Occupy list.  It continues the discussion.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Alan Simpson, the retired Senator from Wyoming calls senior citizens  
> the Greediest Generation as he compared "Social Security " to a Milk  
> Cow with 310 million teats.
> Here's a response in a letter from PATTY MYERS in Montana ... I  
> think she is a little ticked off! She also tells it like it is!
> "Hey Alan, let's get a few things straight!!!!!
> 1. As a career politician, you have been on the public dole (tit)  
> for FIFTY YEARS.
> 2. I have been paying Social Security taxes for 48 YEARS (since I  
> was 15 years old. I am now 63).
> 3. My Social Security payments, and those of millions of other  
> Americans, were safely tucked away in an interest bearing account  
> for decades until you political pukes decided to raid the account  
> and give OUR money to a bunch of zero losers in return for votes,  
> thus bankrupting the system and turning Social Security into a Ponzi  
> scheme that would make Bernie Madoff proud.
> 4. Recently, just like Lucy & Charlie Brown, you and "your ilk"  
> pulled the proverbial football away
> from millions of American seniors nearing retirement and moved the  
> goalposts for full retirement from age 65 to age, 67. NOW, you and  
> your "shill commission" are proposing to move the goalposts YET AGAIN.
> 5. I, and millions of other Americans, have been paying into  
> Medicare from Day One, and now "you morons" propose to change the  
> rules of the game. Why? Because "you idiots" mismanaged other parts  
> of the economy to such an extent that you need to steal our money  
> from Medicare to pay the bills.
> 6. I, and millions of other Americans, have been paying income taxes  
> our entire lives, and now you propose to increase our taxes yet  
> again. Why? Because you "incompetent bastards" spent our money so  
> profligately that you just kept on spending even after you ran out  
> of money. Now, you come to the American taxpayers and say you need  
> more to pay off YOUR debt.
> To add insult to injury, you label us "greedy" for calling  
> "bullshit" to your incompetence. Well, Captain Bullshit, I have a  
> few questions for YOU:
> 1. How much money have you earned from the American taxpayers during  
> your pathetic 50-year political career?
> 2. At what age did you retire from your pathetic political career,  
> and how much are you receiving in annual retirement benefits from  
> the American taxpayers?
> 3. How much do you pay for YOUR government provided health insurance?
> 4. What cuts in YOUR retirement and healthcare benefits are you  
> proposing in your disgusting deficit reduction proposal, or as  
> usual, have you exempted yourself and your political cronies?
> It is you, Captain Bullshit, and your political co-conspirators  
> called Congress who are the "greedy" ones. It is you and your fellow  
> nutcase thieves who have bankrupted America and stolen the American  
> dream from millions of loyal, patriotic taxpayers.
> And for what? Votes and your job and retirement security at our  
> expense, you lunk-headed, leech.
> That's right, sir. You and yours have bankrupted America for the  
> sole purpose of advancing your pathetic, political careers. You know  
> it, we know it, and you know that we know it.
> And you can take that to the bank, you miserable son of a bitch. NO,  
> I did not stutter.
>
>
> EVERYONE!!!
> If you like the way things are in America delete this.
> If you agree with what a Montana citizen, Patty Myers, says, please  
> PASS IT ON!!!!
>
>
> P.S. And stop calling Social Security benefits "entitlements". WHAT  
> AN INSULT!!!!
> I have been paying in to the SS system for 45 years of my money &  
> give it back to me the way the system was designed and stop patting  
> yourself on the back like you are being generous by doling out these  
> monthly checks!
>
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121227/e749b127/attachment.html 

From marksafron at att.net  Thu Dec 27 10:52:14 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 10:52:14 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] =?windows-1252?q?For_Wall_Street_It=92s_=93Peac?=
 =?windows-1252?q?e_On_Earth=2C_Goodwill_Toward_Remington=94?=
Message-ID: <5E0A409E-3D85-4023-98ED-70785647AFEE@att.net>


http://blog.ourfuture.org/20121225/for-wall-street-its-peace-on-earth-goodwill-toward-remington?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=for-wall-street-its-peace-on-earth-goodwill-toward-remington

For Wall Street It?s ?Peace On Earth, Goodwill Toward Remington?

By Richard Eskow | December 25, 2012

Despite an epidemic of gun deaths, the river of gun cash never stops flowing. If you follow that river upstream you?ll see that its source lies very close to Wall Street. And the river?s mouth speaks with the voice of politicians, whose campaign fundraising is undoubtedly taking place even on this supposedly holy day for most of them.

?Tis the season to be lobbied.

?More than 50 firearms-related companies have given at least $14.8 million? to the National Rifle Association, Bloomberg News reports - and that?s just the money we know about. The NRA spent nearly $25 million in the last election cycle alone. True to form, the NRA?s chief said this week that we need more guns in the schools to end the killing of our children.

That?s like spreading a flu virus to stop an epidemic.

But Wayne La Pierre did his job. Everybody?s talking about how crazy he is. Nobody?s talking about how crazy we are for tolerating this situation ? or how immoral our corporate class is for financing it.

Wall Street?s investments extend beyond the manufacturers themselves ? to the NRA, and to all the other groups supporting the NRA?s nihilistic objective: the total elimination of any and all controls on even the desdliest of weapons. That includes ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, which foments the ?Stand Your Ground? reign of terror that so effectively distracts millions of Americans from the true source of their anxiety and hardship.

It?s working. As we reported after another gun tragedy this year, ?Firearms and ammunition sales rose 45 percent between 2009 and 2010 alone.? And the tragedy of Newtown has been great for business all around the country. Just look a sampling of headlines we?ve seen in the last week: ?Tucson Gun Sales Surge After Newtown? (Arizona Daily Star). ?New Hampshire sets record on background checks for gun sales after Newtown shootings? (Nashua Telegraph). ?Local gun dealers see sales increase after Newtown tragedy? (Indianapolis local television).

Somebody?s making money from these tragedies. But who?

There?s hedge fund manager Steve Schwarzman, for one. His Blackstone Group advises the manufacturer of Colt handguns.  It was Schwarzman who likened the notion of ending his cushy tax breaks to ?the invasion of Poland by Hitler in 1939.?

Information?s limited,  but other top hedge funds invested in gun manufacturers include Steelhead Partners, Renaissance Technologies, Route One Investment Company, Columbia Partners, Bogle Investment Management, and Millennium Management. Our review of the Open Secrets campaign database shows that Steelhead?s executives have contributed more than $330,000 to political campaigns since 1990, almost exclusively to Republicans.

Cerberus Capital owns the company whose gun killed the most children in Newton, and Daniel Gross reports that its leadership team includes former Vice Presidential candidate Dan Quayle and former Bush cabinet member John Snow. Cerberus founder Stephen Feinberg contributed ?$100,000 in August to Friends of the Majority, a Republican super PAC; $9,800 to Rep. Ben Quayle (son of Dan); $30,800 to the Republican National Committee in October; $58,500 to the National Republican Senatorial Committee, and $7,500 to Mitt Romney.?

Feinberg and his associates cultivate a reputation for taking a very hands-on approach to their investment ? ?blocking and tackling? ? which emphasizes cost cutting and efficiency. That makes it all but certain that they were fully aware of their investment?s lethal implications, especially once they reviewed the company?s insurance policies and risk management profile.

?As a firm, we are investors, not statesmen or policy makers,? Cerberus statement said in a statement after the shootings. ?It is not our role to take positions, or attempt to shape or influence the gun control policy debate. That is the job of our federal and state legislators.?(!?!)

In other words, we were only following orders ? ?buy? orders, ?sell? orders ?

The Cerberus gun that did the most damage was an ?ACR,? or ?Adaptive Combat Rifle.? manufactured for civilian sales by subsidiary Bushmaster. Remington Arms, also liked to Freedom Group/Cerberus, manufactures the military version. ?One Rifle, Many Missions,? boasts a Remington flyer. (The deaths of kindergartners is presumably not listed among them.)

Cerberus was reaping millions in profits from the taxpayer from its Pentagon sales through Remington, while Bushmaster catered to the Lanza family demographic. And now we learn that William Spengler, named by police as the killer of two firefighters in upstate New York, used the same Bushmaster ACR ? a weapon he obtained despite his conviction for beating his grandmother to death with a hammer.

Tell me again: Why is it wrong to deny people like that the ?right to bear arms?? If we had, two firefighters ? including a 19 year old dispatcher ? might be alive today. On the other hand, Bushmaster might have lost a sale. And at a list price $2,685 (although it can be found for $1,500), who wants that?

Cerberus said it would sell its interests in Freedom Group to avoid being ?drawn into the national policy debate.? It was also likely to lose tens of millions of dollars in investor cash for its fund, including $50 million from the New York state retirement fund. That probably had a more immediate impact on its decision.

That?s how we make change ? not just with our votes, but with our wallets.

Michael Bloomberg has been a leading spokesperson for more than 700 mayors who?ve been pushing for sensible gun controls.   He rightly chastised the do-nothing attitude of Obama and the Democrats after July?s Colorado shooting, and mocked Mitt Romney for saying that the way to end gun violence is by ?changing the heart of the American people.?

How are we going to change our hearts when so much is invested in keeping them hardened?

Now the Death Lobby?s insisting that the problem ? the only problem ? is mental illness. But it?s odd: The ones blaming mental illness are usually the same people who block funds for the treatment of mental illness.

In Greek mythology Cerberus is the three-headed dog who guards the gate of Hades. One head stares into Hell to make sure nobody escapes, while another looks back at the world of the living and the third looks toward the future. It?s time to look away from the inferno, to escape from a hell in which kindergartners are target practice and firefighters are prey.

In this holiday season it?s worth remembering the words of Moses, a key prophetic figure in the three Abrahamic religions:

?I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live.? 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121227/17086c73/attachment.html 

From marksafron at att.net  Fri Dec 28 11:43:47 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 11:43:47 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Borowitz: Al Qaeda Defers to U.S. Congress
Message-ID: <E867153C-78C6-42F4-BB64-E5DE40D06FD5@att.net>



AL QAEDA DISBANDS; SAYS JOB OF DESTROYING U.S. ECONOMY NOW IN CONGRESS? HANDS


WASHINGTON ?The international terror group known as Al Qaeda announced its dissolution today, saying that, ?Our mission of destroying the American economy is now in the capable hands of the U.S. Congress.?

In an official statement published on the group?s website, the current leader of Al Qaeda said that Congress?s conduct during the so-called ?fiscal-cliff? showdown convinced the terrorists that they had been outdone.

?We?ve been working overtime trying to come up with ways to terrorize the American people and wreck their economy,? said the statement from Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri. ?But even we couldn?t come up with something like this.?

Mr. al-Zawhiri said that the idea of holding the entire nation hostage with a clock ticking down to the end of the year ?is completely insane and worthy of a Bond villain.?

?As terrorists, every now and then you have to step back and admire when someone else has beaten you at your own game,? he said. ?This is one of those times.?

The Al Qaeda leader was fulsome in his praise for congressional leaders, saying, ?We have made many scary videos in our time but none of them were as terrifying as Mitch McConnell.?

As for the future of Al Qaeda, the statement said that it would no longer be a terror network but would become ?more of a social network,? offering reviews of new music, movies and video games.

In its first movie review, Al Qaeda gave the film ?Zero Dark Thirty? two thumbs down.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121228/016820f2/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: fiscal-cliff-al-qaeda-465.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 64499 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121228/016820f2/attachment.jpg 

From agnes at mcn.org  Fri Dec 28 15:58:22 2012
From: agnes at mcn.org (agnes at mcn.org)
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 15:58:22 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fwd: NEED a dog like this!!!
Message-ID: <0a523641b3239392be126e605367b1d2.squirrel@webmail.mcn.org>

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Fwd: NEED a dog like this!!!
From:    agnes at mcn.org
Date:    Fri, December 28, 2012 3:53 pm
To:     occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


Happy New Year!
Agnes
Do you NEED a dog like this!!!

        http://www.youtube.com/embed/PztO-OvzRyg



From marksafron at att.net  Sat Dec 29 09:27:30 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 09:27:30 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] The Austerity Dance
Message-ID: <1BA03C4C-6F69-4051-B5A6-E3851B5D80F7@att.net>


http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/social-costs-austerity-agenda-122712

THE SOCIAL COSTS OF THE AUSTERITY AGENDA

By Charles P. Pierce

As we begin what appears to be the final long, slooooowwww roll down the Gentle Fiscal Incline, it is becoming clear that, among our governing elites, and among the courtier press that serves their interests, it is taken as a given that some sort of austerity agenda, which will not materially affect any of their lives, is going to be dropped on the rest of us, probably for our own good, as that good is defined from some tony little bistro in Georgetown, or from the parlor at Ben and Sally's.

It fails to account for what economists call upper-level substitution bias, and what my mother would call plain common sense: If the price rises for a certain commodity in the basket of goods used to measure inflation, consumers will choose a cheaper alternative. In my house, when the price of beef soars, we substitute chicken.  
I suspect the concept of "soaring" as it relates to food prices is rather different in the Marcus house than it is out in the United States Of Ongoing Recession, wherein, when the price of chicken "soars," they can substitute Meow Mix.

As a result, every commission that has examined the issue and endorsed the change has coupled it with additional benefits for the poorest recipients. Opponents of the switch - including AARP and, more convincingly, the National Women's Law Center - insist these protections are inadequate. The administration assures me that, under its approach toward the oldest seniors, the poorest would be shielded and perhaps even better off.
This is courtier reporting at its apogee. All the data and empirical evidence says my idea is bad, but the Very Important People Who Call Me Back say something else, and anonymously, too, so I believe them. Thus do social calendars remain full and lively.

The far left frontier of acceptable Democratic thought is the president's telling us that 'we" all have to make sacrifices, while the far Right frontier of acceptable Republican thought resides somewhere over the horizon, beyond the curve of the earth, and well past the plane of the ecliptic. It's a wonder that, one day, the American political spectrum doesn't keel over altogether to starboard and plunge to the bottom of the Laurentian Abyss. This time it's a bit surprising, though.

Not all that long ago, we had a national election in which the idea that we are all equal partners in the ongoing creative act self-government out of which comes a political commonwealth suited to the needs of the majority of the country was extensively litigated and, at the end of it, the question was decisively settled in the affirmative. Willard Romney's gaffe about the "47 percent" blew out two of the tires on the bandwagon, and then his selection of zombie-eyed granny-starver Paul Ryan blew out the other two, and that extravaganza of I-Got-Mine-Jack conservatism that went galumphing through Tampa finally cracked both axles. Then, of course, the whole show moved back to Washington, and became subjct to the gentle ministration of the political elites and the courtier press that serves them, and the definitive decision of the election quickly was forgotten in favor of the notion that some deal, any deal, was better than what lay beyond a completely artificial deadline that had been produced a year ago in response to a completely created crisis. There is no question that some people will get hurt if we roll all the way down the GFI, but, if the president and the Senate do their jobs, the pain will be temporary. The imposition of an austerity agenda as part of some bipartisan "deal" would be infinitely worse.

(And, as a point of relevant historical comparison, let us all pause now and join in a round of applause for the masterpiece of bipartisan Washington "compromise" that was Bill Clinton's welfare "reform" program and its ongoing success out in the country at large. Huzzah.)

The social costs of an austerity agenda ? and, certainly, all the available evidence from those European countries wherein one was imposed ? are profound. Whether you like it or not, there has been a general political consensus for the past eight odd decades that a social safety net is one of the legitimate products of that creative enterprise of self-government, that it is part of what we agree to when we form the political commonwealth. To have an austerity agenda imposed from above, and by a relatively unaccountable political elite, and because of the damage done to the nation's finances by an absolutely unaccountable financial elite, is to make an obvious mockery of that political commonwealth, and to do so hard upon an election in which the existence of that safety net was so directly and democratically validated, is to spit in the eye of a self-governing people. This, in turn, will engage all the worst popular instincts, including ill-directed and abandoned popular wrath.

There is a cautionary tale to be told here from the Motherland. An official of the Irish government named Shane McEntee recently killed himself. As with all suicides, there is no one answer to why he did it, but one of the proximate causes certainly was the abuse he'd taken online and elsewhere in the wake of his having made some intemperate remarks in relation to part of the austerity agenda that Ireland adopted in the wake of having most of their national wealth sluiced away a decade earlier through the Great Casino.

In relation to a controversial cut to the respite care grant in the Budget, Mr McEntee, in a newspaper interview said: "You could stay in a top hotel for ?700 a week," and added: "People just have to get on with it." As part of the general cut and thrust of national politics,Fianna Fail subsequently issued a statement calling on Mr McEntee to "immediately clarify his callous and crass comments". However, the issue was immediately seized upon by the mostly anonymous contributors to various online websites and forums, who posted a stream of abusive comments directed towards Mr McEntee. It is understood that some of his staff in Leinster House attempted without success to remove or have removed the more vile of the comments posted. Yesterday Mr Farrelly said that he had also briefly discussed the issue with Mr McEntee. "We didn't talk about it that much, other than [for him] to say that 'this respite thing, they are destroying me'," Mr Farrelly said.
That is what is unleashed in the pursuit of austerity, when people are required to have "skin in the game," but no legitimate involvement in the development of the rules of the game itself. (How much different in their lofty detachment are the remarks of the late Mr. McEntee about respite care from that casual toss-off from Ruth Marcus that people who can't afford beef should just buy chicken?) Despite voting against it, we are being fashioned into a nation of casual cruelty anyway. We are being consciously led in that direction. We are not going to like it very much when we arrive.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121229/47800cce/attachment.html 

From marksafron at att.net  Sat Dec 29 09:44:03 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 09:44:03 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] National Rifle Association moves to block UN
	treaty on gun control | Amy Goodman
Message-ID: <A6530F2A-D1DB-45A7-8CB7-EB3BADC2C72F@att.net>

(Is there any doubt that the NRA is a shill for arms manufacturers? M.S.) 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/28/nra-block-un-treaty-gun-control

National Rifle Association moves to block UN treaty on gun control 

by Amy Goodman


Medea Benjamin of Code Pink is removed by a security guard during a speech by Wayne LaPierre, the executive vice-president of the National Rifle Association during a news conference in Washington. Photograph: Joshua Roberts/Reuters
While the final funerals for the victims of the Newtown, Connecticut school massacre have been held, gun violence continues apace, most notably with the Christmas Eve murder of two volunteer firefighters in rural Webster, New York, at the hands of an ex-convict who was armed, as was the Newtown shooter Adam Lanza, with a Bushmaster .223 caliber AR-15 semiautomatic rifle. James Holmes, the alleged perpetrator of the massacre last July in Aurora, Colorado, stands accused of using, among other weapons, a Smith & Wesson AR-15 with a 100-round drum in place of a standard magazine clip.

Standing stalwartly against any regulation of these weapons and high-capacity magazines, the National Rifle Association continues to block any gun control laws whatsoever, and even trumpets its efforts to block the global arms trade treaty, slated for negotiations at the United Nations this March.

On Christmas Eve, the same day as the attack in Webster, the UN general assembly voted to move ahead with 10 days of negotiations on the arms trade treaty, to commence 18 March. Recall it was last July that the Obama administration said it "needed more time" to review the proposed treaty, effectively killing any hope of getting a treaty passed and sent back to member nations for ratification. This was just one week after the Aurora massacre, and in the heat of a close presidential election campaign.

The NRA succeeded in helping to scuttle the global arms trade treaty, delivering to President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton a letter opposing the treaty signed by 50 US senators, including eight Democrats, and 130 members of the House of Representatives.

The global treaty shouldn't be controversial. By signing on, governments agree not to export weapons to countries that are under an arms embargo, or to export weapons that would facilitate "the commission of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes" or other violations of international humanitarian law. Exports of arms are banned if they will facilitate "gender-based violence or violence against children" or be used for "transnational organized crime".

The treaty deals with international exports of weapons and ammunition, not any nation's internal, domestic laws that govern the sale or use of guns.

Amnesty International last week called on the NRA to "immediately drop its campaign of distortions and lies about the pending United Nations' global arms trade treaty." Amnesty USA's Michelle Ringuette elaborated:

"Every day, 1,500 people die in armed conflicts around the world ? one person every minute. These unregulated weapons are used to force tens of thousands of children into armed conflict and to rape women and girls in conflict zones. More than 26 million people around the globe are forced from their homes, and their livelihoods destroyed, by armed conflict.

"The NRA must immediately stand down on its campaign to block a global arms trade treaty."

NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre rolled out his public response to the Newtown massacre one week after it happened, blaming the violence on "monsters" and everything from video games to hurricanes, but not allowing that guns and their ready availability in the US might have something to do with it. At his press conference, LaPierre was twice dramatically interrupted by peace activists from the group Code Pink.

The first banner, held by Tighe Barry, read "NRA Killing Our Kids". Barry held the banner in front of the podium, silently, as LaPierre tried to continue his speech. Barry was then pulled out. After LaPierre resumed his speech, Medea Benjamin rose, holding a banner reading, "NRA: Blood on your hands", after which she was hauled away.

Two days later, on NBC's Meet the Press, LaPierre denied that regulating semiautomatic weapons or high-capacity magazines would help stem the epidemic of mass shootings in this country.

The NRA exerts enormous influence over state and federal gun regulation. Andrew Feinstein, who wrote the book The Shadow World: Inside the Global Arms Trade, told me:

"I have not seen anywhere else in the world a gun lobby that has the same level of influence on its own government as the NRA does in the United States ?

"The US buys and sells almost as much weaponry as the rest of the world combined. So what happens in the U.S. is going to have enormous impact on the rest of the world."

From the hallways of Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, to Afghanistan, to Somalia, the flood of US weapons and ammunition fuels violence, death and injury. President Obama and Congress need to take action, now.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121229/453d0a1f/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0dfa0358-4eb5-4bfa-99da-8d5e1230ee83-460.jpeg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 56713 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121229/453d0a1f/attachment.jpeg 

From agnes at mcn.org  Sat Dec 29 11:25:22 2012
From: agnes at mcn.org (agnes at mcn.org)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 11:25:22 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fwd: For a nuclear-free 2013--with corrected link
Message-ID: <b8688d28a03da4b8839c9e7ef5adc501.squirrel@webmail.mcn.org>

dear friends,
       At this site I sent 5 messages to my Congresspersons on this very
important issue. It's easy.
Hope you'll do the same.
Agnes
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: Nuclear Information and Resource Service <nirsnet at nirs.org>
Subject: For a nuclear-free 2013--with corrected link
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 17:37:23 -0500 (EST)
Size: 12466
Url: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121229/e0f281c3/attachment.mht 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Sat Dec 29 11:56:40 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 11:56:40 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Occupy
In-Reply-To: <D8F1B4CA-F9A5-4357-A71E-B1D3402CFC97@mcn.org>
References: <D8F1B4CA-F9A5-4357-A71E-B1D3402CFC97@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <DD866F90-9219-490B-BF9D-31B82AB25DD1@mcn.org>

Who is our treasurer? rk 

On Dec 29, 2012, at 10:12 AM, SYD BALOWS wrote:

> Hi Richard, 
> 
> I have been paying for the list serve on MCN for months without reimbursement.
> How should I handle this in the future? Would you mind taking on the List serve agreement with MCN?
> 
> 1363168	12/27/2012 to 1/27/2013 -- List Server	$10.00
> 1363168	--ListServ #269..occupymendocino
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Syd
> 
> Happy New Year

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121229/1f57e490/attachment.html 

From vjessielee at gmail.com  Sat Dec 29 15:07:54 2012
From: vjessielee at gmail.com (Jessie VanSant)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 15:07:54 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Occupy
In-Reply-To: <DD866F90-9219-490B-BF9D-31B82AB25DD1@mcn.org>
References: <D8F1B4CA-F9A5-4357-A71E-B1D3402CFC97@mcn.org>
	<DD866F90-9219-490B-BF9D-31B82AB25DD1@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <E791C070-64B5-437D-973B-05983FF24238@gmail.com>

I have the checks in my possession but do not consider myself 'the treasurer' partly cause I am not making it to each meeting.

JL
On Dec 29, 2012, at 11:56 AM, Richard Karch <rkarch at mcn.org> wrote:

> Who is our treasurer? rk 
> 
> On Dec 29, 2012, at 10:12 AM, SYD BALOWS wrote:
> 
>> Hi Richard, 
>> 
>> I have been paying for the list serve on MCN for months without reimbursement.
>> How should I handle this in the future? Would you mind taking on the List serve agreement with MCN?
>> 
>> 1363168	12/27/2012 to 1/27/2013 -- List Server	$10.00
>> 1363168	--ListServ #269..occupymendocino
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Syd
>> 
>> Happy New Year
> 
> 
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.
> 
> For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121229/184001c7/attachment.html 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Sat Dec 29 21:59:44 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 21:59:44 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Branding Occupy aTerrorist Threat
Message-ID: <A3309A60-36CC-4A3A-8B56-A12CBE369059@mcn.org>

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/441-occupy/15282-fbi-violated-constitution-by-branding-occupy-a-terrorist-threat


FBI Violated Constitution by Branding Occupy a Terrorist Threat
By Juan Cole, Informed Comment
29 December 12
 
econd Amendment fundamentalists push for open carrying of firearms in public, and armed gun nuts even attended one of President Obama's rallies in Arizona. That was apparently just all right with the FBI.

But the peaceful protest movement, Occupy Wall Street, was treated by the FBI as a terrorist threat.

Democracy Now! reports:  (Video:      http://www.democracynow.org/2012/12/27/the_fbi_vs_occupy_secret_docs )

         The PATRIOT Act and similar legislation and policies have increasingly put any challenge to the status quo into the category of 'terrorism.' You wonder if a Civil Rights movement (which involved civil disobedience, i.e. law-breaking) would even be possible today. Militarized police would be charging African-Americans with terrorism and sending them to Guantanamo for sitting at lunch counters in 'white' establishments.
 
We need a First Amendment fundamentalism as assertive as the 2nd amendment commitments of the Right. The status quo has attempted to limit freedom of peaceable assembly (which is *not* confined to presenting petitions to the Federal government). One easy way to do that is to privatize all public spaces and then to declare peacefully assembling a form of trespassing.

The Supreme Court ruled [in De Jonge v. Oregon, 299 U.S. 353, 364 , 365 (1937) ] that the right of peaceable assembly is:

"cognate to those of free speech and free press and is equally fundamental. . . . [It] is one that cannot be denied without violating those fundamental principles of liberty and justice which lie at the base of all civil and political institutions?principles which the Fourteenth Amendment embodies in the general terms of its due process clause. . . . The holding of meetings for peaceable political action cannot be proscribed. Those who assist in the conduct of such meetings cannot be branded as criminals on that score."
The court's tying of the First Amendment and peaceable assembly to the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause removed restrictions placed on the right by previous rulings.

The Supreme Court ruling forbade Federal authorities to brand Occupy Wall Street members 'as criminals" for the "holding of meetings for peaceable political action?"

Yet by involving counter-terrorism agents in their monitoring of OWS, that is precisely what the FBI did.

What amazes me is why Attorney-General Eric Holder is never held to account for this sort of thing.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121229/4c9cbd51/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rsn-S.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 695 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121229/4c9cbd51/attachment.jpg 

From jessie at mac.com  Sat Dec 29 15:04:59 2012
From: jessie at mac.com (Jessie Lee VanSant)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 15:04:59 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Fwd: Jail the Big Banks
References: <0000013be835f7d5-2007a109-7d56-444a-bb9e-e413a4f8a8c2-000000@email.amazonses.com>
Message-ID: <1071D260-4A60-43C2-A692-F671C2C423C4@mac.com>

others probably received this also

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Melanie Jones <info at watchdog.net>
> Subject: Jail the Big Banks
> Date: December 29, 2012 11:49:09 AM PST
> To: Jessie VanSant <jessie at mac.com>
> 
> The EU is considering finally putting bankers in jail -- now's our chance to make sure they do!
> 
> Sign the Petition!
> Share on Facebook!
> Dear Jessie VanSant,
> 
> You may have heard about the LIBOR scandal -- yet another example of the big banks committing fraud and thinking they can get away with it -- but now someone's proposing to actually do something about it. Europe's top bank regulator, Michael Barnier, has proposed actually putting bankers in jail for it.
> 
> Normal people go to jail for just stealing money from one person -- but the banks have been ripping off millions of people with virtual impunity! Naturally, they want to keep it this way and are pulling out all the stops to kill this proposal in its infancy. But if we spread the word over the Internet, we can create a massive outcry that force the world to join in and make sure these bankers get the punishment they deserve. Sign now!
> 
> 
> PETITION TO THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION: Reckless behavior by the big banks has ruined our economies and millions of lives. We need you to make sure tough sanctions, including criminal penalties, are in place for the banks that are guilty of financial crimes.
> 
> Click here to sign -- it just takes a second.
> 
> Thanks,
> -- The folks at Watchdog.net
> 
> P.S. If the other links aren't working for you, please go here to sign:http://act.watchdog.net/petitions/930?n=9128619.FHd9Fa
> 
> This email was sent by watchdog.net. To remove yourself from this list, click here.
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121229/d0a4b265/attachment.html 

From marksafron at att.net  Sun Dec 30 10:46:14 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2012 10:46:14 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] It Is Easier Than You Think | The Nader Page
Message-ID: <314883D8-6D04-496A-8BBF-1D78D3515E8D@att.net>


http://nader.org/2012/12/28/it-is-easier-than-you-think/

It Is Easier Than You Think

By Ralph Nader

It?s easier than you think.  That?s the way I start discussions and interviews about my new book titled, ?Seventeen Solutions.?

The ?solutions? were selected for their long-overdue practicality, fairness, efficiency, safety, employment potential and respect for future generations.  A majority of the people, sometimes a large majority, support such redirections. The effects of many of the ?solutions? start being seen immediately.

Don?t most Americans believe and want strong law enforcement against corporate crime and fraud and abuses against consumers, taxpayers, the environment and workers?  The first step is telling your member of Congress to toughen the weak laws and beef up the law enforcement budgets which will pay for themselves many, many times over in deterrence, damage prevention to innocent people, and fines.

It has been taken off the table by both Democrats and Republicans, but a majority of people (including physicians and nurses) want full Medicare for all with free choice of doctor and hospital.  Better outcomes, simpler to use, far less expensive per capita, timely diagnoses and treatment, and tens of thousands of American lives saved a year, are the fruits.

Who in your communities doesn?t want public facilities (public works) repaired and expanded to meet needs?  Ending the vast disrepair in our water and sewage systems, schools, clinics, libraries, public transit, highways and bridges creates well-paying jobs that cannot be exported to China.

Reducing the well-documented, bloated military budget, can release monies for repairing America.  Demilitarizing our foreign policy will save the horrendous costs and after costs of these boomeranging wars of aggressive choice.

Get Congress to have ?skin in the game,? such as no health and other benefits for them, unless all people have them.  There would be no taking our country into war without all able-bodied and age-qualified children of the Senators and Representatives being drafted into the armed forces. This duty will encourage Congress to attend to its deliberative, constitutional obligations and not heave them over to a lawless, out-of-control presidency.

Build family and community resistance and engage in alternatives to the commercial exploitation of children by non-stop big corporate marketers. These tricksters undermine and bypass parental authority to sell children junk food, violent programming and other things corrosive of their minds and bodies.  Want to poll parent?s reactions to those tricks among beleaguered parents who have lost much control of their children to corporatism?

Getting corporations off welfare, making them pay their fair share of taxes (GE is a profitable tax escapee that even gets checks from the Treasury Department due to the rigged tax code), taxing dividends and capital gains the same as ordinary income of working people, and imposing a tiny sales tax on massive Wall Street speculation are changes an overwhelming number of people support.

These advances, along with restoring our civil liberties, using regular government purchasing specifications for better goods and services to stimulate innovation and safety with our tax dollars, are easier than you think.  The engine for these changes is organizing Congressional watchdog groups in every Congressional District around these and other solutions.  Taking democratic control of the 535 members of Congress, with its ample constitutional authorities, is a lot easier than you think.

Moving our consumer dollars away from global corporations to local community banks, credit unions, farmer markets, renewable energy, and community health clinics, with emphasis on prevention, is a lot easier than you think.  Stronger local economies are more self-reliant, they won?t be shut down and shipped away or abroad by absentee owners making life-altering unaccountable decisions in their skyscrapers.

Local democracy is, like most ventures in life, a learning process of civic skills and experience.  Starting in elementary and high schools, youngsters can shed their apathy or despair by working on real problems in the communities as part of their school-to-community courses.  Look at all those high school physics, biology, and chemistry labs that, for example, can be testing air, water, soil samples and electromagnetic levels, and reporting the results to their community.

Studying books such as the newly released Slow Democracy (Chelsea Press, 2012) will give you many examples and tools to demonstrate that it?s easier than you think.

Last September, prominent Cornell Economics Professor, Robert Frank wrote a column for The New York Times with the headline ?Nation?s Choices Needn?t Be Painful.?  He wrote of infrastructure capital improvement programs, new tax policies, reducing highway congestion, curbing carbon emissions and other remedial actions that pay off.

Professor Frank, who told me he?s going to write ?a small book? on his assertions, says ?the endless hand-wringing about painful economic choices is misguided.  With a few simple policy changes, we could restore full employment, rebuild crumbling infrastructure and pay down the national debt without requiring real sacrifices from anyone.?

Making all this and more happen needs some three million Americans (the other one percent) organized and focused on Congress and state legislatures in ways that reflect the ?public sentiment.? We have to stop being so discouraged and solution-averse, especially since we have so many solutions already on the shelf, but not on the ground, because we?ve let the few make so many centralized, top-down decisions for us ? ?we the people.?

No one can stop us from taking these initiatives, except, that is, ourselves. To send us your ?solutions? and to order an autographed copy of Seventeen Solutions, visit: http://www.seventeensolutions.com/


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121230/e83612f7/attachment.html 

From lonnie at mcn.org  Sun Dec 30 11:20:24 2012
From: lonnie at mcn.org (Lonnie Mathieson)
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2012 11:20:24 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] unsubscribe me please
Message-ID: <9736ADF8-8880-4E5E-B56D-EA4A7A120525@mcn.org>



From agnes at mcn.org  Sun Dec 30 13:33:15 2012
From: agnes at mcn.org (agnes at mcn.org)
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2012 13:33:15 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] re LPublic Bank presentation to  County
Message-ID: <ff71eacc76d7404ffb0362ea5d2ded8e.squirrel@webmail.mcn.org>

Dear Occupy,
       This is a reminder,
1. please find time before the 1:00 pm Foreclosure subcommittee meeting
before the General Assembly Jan 3 at Sr.Ctr.2-4 pm.

2. Please watch the MCTV video on part 2 of C.J.s talk at Foreclosure Town
Hall Meeting so that we can cull from that what we want to emphasize to
the Supervisors on the  Ja. 8th Tues.meeting in Ukiah.

3. I have ordered copies at $15. per DVD as a member of MCTV.

4.Please go to www.mendocinocoasttv.org, click on Video On Demand Library,
Click on Occupy Mendocino. If you click on part 1 you will see small
windows where you can click the part 2 speech with CJ. It is worth
studying.

5. If I receive my copies in a week who would like to view them on my TV
screen and discus it before the 8th trip to Ukiah?

6. Please let me know if you have a commitment to go to Ukiah at 7:00 am
to stand with us-Jessie and me?

Cheers,
Agnes



From marksafron at att.net  Mon Dec 31 12:25:02 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 12:25:02 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] WTF is wrong with Americans?
Message-ID: <925DF086-8A02-4756-9FF5-2C511DAC8252@att.net>

A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: slihouettemanwonderswtf.jpeg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 208267 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121231/c9de5dcc/attachment.jpeg 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Mon Dec 31 13:33:54 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 13:33:54 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Foreclosure Town Hall Meetings
In-Reply-To: <354B95DA-7D2A-4173-A0EE-F8418A71E76D@mcn.org>
References: <ff71eacc76d7404ffb0362ea5d2ded8e.squirrel@webmail.mcn.org>
	<CAFGqSt70FCaAHNPG6YJGzdyUJf_QL63MiuX0v8J3v8DMGSj1TA@mail.gmail.com>
	<354B95DA-7D2A-4173-A0EE-F8418A71E76D@mcn.org>
Message-ID: <BE67F485-ED7B-4C3E-9B1F-90DA13C31406@mcn.org>

Agnes, 
> I noticed MCTV changed the original web address page:

> Try these for Foreclosure Information:  (They worked for me.)

> http://www.mendocoasttv.org/OccupyMendocinoForeclosurestownHallMeetingP1.html#featured
>   http://www.mendocoasttv.org/OccupyMendocinoForeclosuresTownHallMeeting111612P2.html#featured
> 
> Richard

> On Dec 30, 2012, at 10:10 PM, ELLEN ROSSER wrote:
> 
>> Dear Agnes,
>>    My browser can't open the link.  Are you sure it's correct?
>> See you at 1 pm.
>> before the GA meeting.
>>             Peace and blessings,  Ellen in Point Arena
>> 
>> On 12/30/12, agnes at mcn.org <agnes at mcn.org> wrote:
>>> Dear Occupy,
>>>      This is a reminder,
>>> 1. please find time before the 1:00 pm Foreclosure subcommittee meeting
>>> before the General Assembly Jan 3 at Sr.Ctr.2-4 pm.
>>> 
>>> 2. Please watch the MCTV video on part 2 of C.J.s talk at Foreclosure Town
>>> Hall Meeting so that we can cull from that what we want to emphasize to
>>> the Supervisors on the  Ja. 8th Tues.meeting in Ukiah.
>>> 
>>> 3. I have ordered copies at $15. per DVD as a member of MCTV.
>>> 
>>> 4.Please go to www.mendocinocoasttv.org, click on Video On Demand Library,
>>> Click on Occupy Mendocino. If you click on part 1 you will see small
>>> windows where you can click the part 2 speech with CJ. It is worth
>>> studying.
>>> 
>>> 5. If I receive my copies in a week who would like to view them on my TV
>>> screen and discus it before the 8th trip to Ukiah?
>>> 
>>> 6. Please let me know if you have a commitment to go to Ukiah at 7:00 am
>>> to stand with us-Jessie and me?
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Agnes
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list send an email to occupymendocino at lists.mcn.org
>>> put "Un-Subscribe me" in the Subject.
>>> 
>>> For listserv technical problems please contact: listmanager at mcn.org
>>> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121231/5e162b4e/attachment.html 

From rkarch at mcn.org  Mon Dec 31 13:37:48 2012
From: rkarch at mcn.org (Richard Karch)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 13:37:48 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Banks Prepare to Sign Off on Foreclosure Fraud
	Settlement
Message-ID: <23D09748-075E-47E7-9AAE-DC1FFDF56B26@mcn.org>

http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/320-80/15309-us-prepares-to-sign-off-on-foreclosure-fraud-settlement

US Prepares to Sign Off On Foreclosure Fraud Settlement
By Jessica Silver-Greenberg, The New York Times
31 December 12

anking regulators are close to a $10 billion settlement with 14 banks that would end the government's efforts to hold lenders responsible for foreclosure abuses like faulty paperwork and excessive fees that may have led to evictions, according to people with knowledge of the discussions.

Under the settlement, a significant amount of the money, $3.75 billion, would go to people who have already lost their homes, making it potentially more generous to former homeowners than a broad-reaching pact in February between state attorneys general and five large banks. That set aside $1.5 billion in cash relief for Americans.

Most of the relief in both agreements is meant for people who are struggling to stay in their homes and need the banks to reduce their payments or lower the amount of principal they owe.

The $10 billion pact would be the latest in a series of settlements that regulators and law enforcement officials have reached with banks to hold them accountable for their role in the 2008 financial crisis that sent the housing market into the deepest slump since the Great Depression. As of early 2012, four million Americans had been foreclosed upon since the beginning of 2007, and a huge amount of abandoned homes swamped many states, including California, Florida and Arizona...


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121231/b03284a7/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rsn-B.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 684 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121231/b03284a7/attachment.jpg 

From marksafron at att.net  Mon Dec 31 14:55:22 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 14:55:22 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] The Foreclosure Cliff
Message-ID: <5481ECA6-C227-43DA-A157-AE54A02B68BF@att.net>


http://www.nationalmemo.com/the-foreclosure-cliff/

The Foreclosure Cliff


We can thank Ben Bernanke for the phrase ?fiscal cliff? ? a phrase many observers have tried to soften by pointing out they think it?s more like falling down a slope, sliding down a curve, or even tripping over a curb. I can understand trying to find other metaphors to replace the nearly always fatal results of going off a cliff.

But maybe those observers missed one effect that Bernanke knows drives the economy more than any else: housing.

You?d think we?d know by now that America?s economy depends on housing more than any other industry. Certainly the fact that unemployment is still nearly 8% while corporate profits have roared to all-time highs is a clue. So is persistently low consumer confidence in spite of those stellar profits and a stock market that has nearly doubled over the past four years.

But housing is at least stabilizing nationwide, and even heading upwards in the regions hit hardest by the housing bust that started the ?Great Recession? in the first place.

But we?re not out of the woods quite yet, and one aspect of the impending spending cuts that begin January 1st is almost certain to change that progress on the housing front into a full blown retreat. And that retreat will start immediately, not gradually over the year, as do the other effects of the law passed in 2011 following the debt ceiling hostage crisis.

Starting this week, two million unemployed people now collecting extended federal unemployment benefits will get nothing. What if a million or more of them have mortgages? Will they be able to pay? Not bloody likely. People who have been out of work longer than six months generally don?t have much in the way of savings left.

That?s the reason extended unemployment benefits is such a huge winner when used as a stimulant for the economy. Unlike infrastructure spending, which takes months or years to begin to have a ?multiplier effect? in the economy, extended unemployment benefit money gets recycled into additional activity almost immediately. Most economic studies show that roughly $2 of increased GDP comes from each dollar of unemployment benefits.

Contrast that with deficit spending resulting from tax cuts. That kind of spending only gives pennies in GDP growth for each dollar borrowed to subsidize those cuts.

The reason Bernanke called the impending fiscal policies in the ?sequestration? a cliff was probably not because those who do have jobs will have more taxes taken from their pay, though they certainly won?t be spending more money and growing the economy with those smaller paychecks. That?s a small and gradual effect. The reason he called it a cliff is that the most destructive single thing you could do to our economy is to hurt, yet again, the largest asset of all but a few of us ? our homes.

So before we say that it doesn?t matter when they fix the gun-to-the-head spending cuts and tax hikes that begin this week as long as they fix it over the next few weeks or months, consider what will happen to the value of your house if your neighbor goes into foreclosure next month. Two million neighbors are already having a hard time making their payments for the basics like housing and food. Surely some of them will fail when their main source of income is suddenly shut off.

Howard Hill is a former investment banker who created a number of groundbreaking deal structures and analytic techniques on Wall Street, and later helped manage a $100 billion portfolio. He writes and blogs at mindonmoney.wordpress.com. Follow on Twitter: @hhill61



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121231/74c96084/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: foreclosure1.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 48744 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121231/74c96084/attachment.jpg 

From marksafron at att.net  Mon Dec 31 17:49:47 2012
From: marksafron at att.net (Mark Safron)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2012 17:49:47 -0800
Subject: [Occupymendocino] Borowitz: Congress Collapses from Exhaustion
	After Doing Job
Message-ID: <0F5B9B94-0E93-4EF1-AC43-14A3FDF97695@att.net>

CONGRESS COLLAPSES FROM EXHAUSTION AFTER DOING JOB


WASHINGTON ?The House of Representatives adjourned this evening after the legislative body collapsed from exhaustion brought on by hours of doing its job.

Hundreds of congressmen complained of headaches, dizzy spells, and extreme fatigue after putting in what sources called ?a six, maybe seven-hour day.?

With the nation headed over the fiscal cliff, there was no indication when Congress might reconvene, since many of its members had to be hospitalized after what was described as their near-total physical meltdown. 

According to Dr. Davis Logsdon of the University of Minnesota Medical School, ?Being forced to listen, compromise, and act like adults for minutes at a time was more punishing than these people could bear.?

Dr. Logsdon said that the gruelling ordeal of doing their jobs would likely keep members of Congress in the hospital for weeks.

?I don?t see these people getting back to work until February at the earliest,? he said. ?And that?s great news for this country. Happy New Year, America.?



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121231/36f404e9/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: boro-cliff-collapse.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 218220 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/occupymendocino/attachments/20121231/36f404e9/attachment-0001.jpg 

