Great Failures of the Obama Administration

As all things politic, there is never a perfect presidency. But Obama was the the first politician I gave money to (on the night of Sarah Palin's hockey mom speech at the convention)... and I gave the max, so my investment in his administration was higher than anyone else. I had hopes for more, but muted expectations, as I am a cynic.

Obama's Justice Department failed to pursue cases of white collar fraud against the perpetrators of the greatest banking scandal in history, a financial scandal so severe that a proper accounting of it's downstream effects would most certainly find thousands of deaths.

And yet not a single C-level executive, Vice President, Director, or any other title of substance went to jail, despite laughably obvious fraud across dozens of banks, regulatory bodies, lenders, and bond ratings agencies.

Obama's pretensions of idealism was betrayed at the start by this dearth of prosecutorial attention. Obama is a lawyer by trade and training, so he knows exactly what he was doing. This was a bought and paid for bribe by Wall Street to fund his presidency. Unlike what led up to the scandal and the recession, this was 100% attributable to the preference of Obama, and it will result in more fraud and abuse by this sociopathic element of our economy.

Obama ran on a platform of openness and transparency in government, a promised reversal of federal government's obsession with secrecy that expanded greatly under the Bush administration and the corruption that underlay the Iraq War.

Alas the opposite was true. It took Edward Snowden to reveal the full extent of the secrecy, spying, and modern totalitarian infrastructure that the US Government provided. FOIA, already a joke, became even more so. Principled leaks of unnecessarily classified information were aggressively prosecuted (and with all things like this, always remember what was NOT aggressively prosecuted).

As the information age progresses and governments have more tools to both hide their data and spy on the populace, it is important to establish boundaries of freedom to restrict the encroachment of the federal government, lest a less principled individual take the reins. Ruefully, that has come to fruition far too quickly.

For climate change, Obama was fine window dressing, but largely was a big pot of inaction, in the time we will very likely state was the breaking point of unavoidable changes. 400 ppm passed under his watch. The likelihood of any progress from an American president was very unlikely, given the nature of the venal and anti-intellectual American voting public and their love of SUVs.

However, under his watch solar and electric cars flourished, even under the collapse of oil prices, which paradoxically may be bad for the petroleum industry long-term, since it robs them of profitability and prevents funding of more complex petroleum extraction such as Alberta tar sands.

Finally, neoliberal economic management under Obama has been a failure. Wealth distribution continued turning us into a gilded nation, real costs rose for healthcare, housing, and education, real wages remained flat, real unemployment is high, trade deficits are high...

Keynesian deficit spending did well to get us out of a full blown depression, but the real recession lingers today 8 years later with a paper recovery. It may be that this was the best that could be done from a country hollowed out of manufacturing jobs by trade deals and a lack of investment in high tech automated manufacturing.

Obama's greatest failure was defining a progressive vision and defending it properly. A gifted orator, he disappeared and did not adopt a modern, constant, everpresent media campaign and network of thinkers to move progressive causes forward and expand them into general awareness, and challenge the lies of the right.

The Trump election has shown the mortal danger of the modern echo chamber, and Obama's failure to use his leadership to undermine this echo chamber has given us a neo-totalitarian.

Finally, some words for the "fake failures":

ISIS is a joke. It is a regional conflict that Obama has wisely avoided, although I would have backed the Kurds more staunchly as a regional ally in a region with no good choices. The right's paranoia of ISIS belies their lack of objectivity, racism, stupidity, and worldliness.

The ACA is not a failure, but it was also not a success, as it was politically poisoned by the Republicans and Joe Lieberman (may he burn in hell), but it was a necessary piece of legislation towards an eventual solution. It's basic ideas (exchanges) were created to appease Republicans, who only then turned on their own (and Mitt Romney's!) ideas.

The Iran deal is just diplomacy, and any right wing saber rattling and bemoaning of it was only due to the poisonous influence of petrodollars not wanting Iranian oil to flood onto a weak market.

Immigration was something that would always require bipartisan solutions, and really is a Republican problem, since that party is the one that talks out of both sides of it's mouth. Republican business owners love that immigration depresses wages and increases labor supply, but the "base" voters hate it for that reason. And remember, economic competition + racial divide = racism. 

End State of Democracy and the End State of Free Markets

If you've read any economics in the last several decades, the holy grail and god of the economist, both liberal and conservative is the "free market". (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market)

Free markets are where multiple actors compete among one another, using  skill, ability, art, practice, technology, luck, and desire to produce competitive advantage.

The net effect of a free market, in theory is to produce products and services at the cheapest price to satisfy demand. And anyone who know how our system works can't deny the power of approximations of free markets in this regard.

The old saw I have seen many a time is:

In theory there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice....

And this is very true of free markets in the real world. I could pedant at length over this.

But free markets are dynamic systems, that evolve over time. A market at one point in time with many different companies competing to produce goods cheaply and effectively is but one equilibrium. But if one of those companies could form a strategy to ruthlessly destroy their competitors...

And that is the monopoly, in its most regressive form, or the cartel in a lesser form. And this is natural. If one is strong, then the strong survive per the survival of the fittest (it was always ironic to me that Republicans held free markets in such holy regard when evolutionary competition was inherent to their design), and it will stamp out or absorb all others.

And with sufficient size and strength, can then either absorb or destroy any smaller new entries to maintain its hegemony. Or it results in two or three players of sufficient size to fend off any attack from others, while also destroying or absorbing new players (the cartel).

Really, I would argue that any well functioning free market will destabilize into a cartel or monopoly state. It's merely a matter or iterations (in chaos/dynamic systems speak) or time (in the real world).

We can see this in another arena of dynamism and competition: politics.

Democracies are free markets where votes are allocated to ideas. Eventually those ideas align together in groups. Thus political parties emerge.

In America, we have the Democrat / Republican cartel. Two entities controlling 90%+ of the market, battling over a couple percentage points of dominance every few years. You can see the same dynamic at work in health insurance, car manufacturing, mobile telecommunications, etc etc etc.

Cartels are "markedly" (small pun) better than monopolies however. Cartels still possess a base motivation of competition out of defense, because the cartel players still need to stay healthy enough so that they do not become weak enough to be absorbed.

Monopolies are much worse. They can descend into corruption, but since they are the sole provider of a service, will be paid. And certainly can squash any challengers at will, by destruction or buyout.

And the same is what we have today. Democrats and Republicans in a cartel, but were we to fall into a monopoly... an authoritarian, things would be much much much worse...

Free markets descending into cartels is noisome in most matters. Mattel vs Matchbox for toy cars? Tolerable. Verizon vs T-Mobile for cellular service? A fair bit more annoying, but tolerable.

But government rule? Hitler? Mussolini? Stalin? Very dangerous.

In markets, society recognized the problem in the robber baron / gilded age era... Antitrust laws, regulation, (supported by Republican Teddy Roosevelt!), etc.

I believe the same solution should be applied to democracy. It already functions as a cornerstone of the POTUS / Presidency: term limits.

I propose that the senate and house must have four parties at all times represented, and that no party can have more than 40% of any body. This would enforce coalitions, cooperation, and diversity of political power.

Of course I'm in favor of term limits for senators and congressmen as well.

ONE NEAT TRICK used by Trump

There is one SECRET TRICK that Trump used to get elected. You'll NEVER GUESS what it was.

Sorry, I'll break out of clickbait hypnosis. But there is one massive advantage that Trump had over Clinton:

He was profitable to big media.

Do you remember the ad buys for the first Republican debate? It was like the Super Bowl. Unprecedented as far as I'm aware.

Did you know the NFL ratings dropped almost 20% during the election? (http://www.forbes.com/sites/bobcook/2016/11/28/youth-football-participation-trends-signal-whether-nfls-ratings-slip-will-be-long-term/#2f9fb01d3b45) The NFL is more recession proof than cigarettes and tobacco. Know where what they were doing? Watching CNN and FoxNews.

Think about that, Trump had people watching news channels rather than the national gladiator bloodlust sport of America, football.

We sit here now bemoaning the role of the bankrupt fourth estate in the election of the orangutan totalitarian. It is undeniable that corruption, malaise, and incompetence has overtaken whatever valuable public service the institution of a free press used to provide to the great land.

But remember, we have seen now two decades of anticompetitive cartel consolidation of mass media:

Disney, AOL, Time Warner

Six companies own 90% of media (http://www.morriscreative.com/6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america/),

Donald Trump was making these companies billions of dollars in eyeballs. Across all properties, from news to websites to radio to television. Cheap, easy programming. At all levels, producers could play Trump, get ratings, go home early. It was that easy.

These media conglomerates run on profits, BIIIIIG profits. If there is a big profit out there, it would take a massive hammer to get a 90 billion dollar company to say no. It's why no real news in general makes it to the screen or front page: it doesn't sell. There is no profit-second, truth-first major media outlet anymore. They all are corrupted by being consolidated into large companies, and your little corner of that company only continues to exist if it shows revenue.

I have to emphasize the profits here. ESPN, perhaps Disney's #1 property, has been subjected to reams of cuts and salary squeezes and layoffs to keep the overall company (and their executive goldmine options) profits up. Profits are everything, and not easy to reliably get. When a bonanza like Trump comes along, truth will take a backseat to profits, just like it does with oil and global warming.

Hillary did not bring a profit. Q-ratings were low. Didn't say anything interesting. Bad screen presence. Negative baggage. No soundbites. Avoided and distrusted media.

Well, there was one way to make a profit off of Hillary: bash her, ride existing resentment and propaganda from the Clinton years. Or republish whatever Trump said about her that brought in ratings.

Not good.

Fake news definitely played a role in this election, but it's role is minor compared to the essential role mainstream media had in getting Trump elected. Fake news is the current fall guy, who big media will point to if the specter of regulation or *gasp* return to principles is demanded.

Above all, in four years Trump will need to be faced with someone who can win this game. It might take a George Clooney or other famous name to play the role of a politician. Who has media relationships, experience with publicity, and can go toe-to-toe in social media. We may truly be in a post-substance figurehead election process first hinted at when John F Kennedy beat Nixon who looked like a weasel on TV.  It's the logical end state.

Typical news coverage of a famous person or story follows the fast rise and great fall arc. I was waiting for the "great fall", where the media builds someone up, only to tear them down, to happen to Trump. The "great fall" occurs when building you up doesn't make the media a profit anymore, so tearing you down is what they do to squeeze the last dollars.

Trump never stopped making money.

Wartime Rationing

Anyone who knows me knows I'm not much for consumerism. But the all-encompassing market blitz finds something you like. Consumers have to eat, be sheltered, get transportation.

But since the election, things have been sucked out. Sports are virtually meaningless to me. If not a guilty pleasure, at least a guilty distraction, their vacuous jingoistic patriotic displays once per quarter tolerated as a cost of admission. Now they are darkly ominous, even moreso that when in the depths of the Iraq War and it's mendacious justifications. Sports have always been propaganda, but they were just crude propaganda for a more or less functioning democracy.

Sports are no longer that. They are fascist propaganda, as long as the troll is in office. The national anthem is now an anthem of hate. The flag is a symbol of hate. Professional sports are gladitorial distractions from the construction of a fascist regime. The dumb day-to-day soap opera drama of sports isn't just totally overshadowed by the exigent threat, it is a part of the ignorance machine that feeds the disease. I don't know how I could be on a sports team now and not kneel at the anthem. Trump is a permanent stain on our escutcheon.

Facebook implores me with distractions: clickbait, which sometimes would find something, somehow to get me to look at in boredom, now is just a glaring example of the totality of the downfall of the fourth estate. Marketing campaigns for fall fashion or cars... just empty consumerism that will feed the fascist system. I'd rather it starved.

Maybe this is what wartime rationing is. I know I have to prepare for bad times. Luxuries are weakness and a distraction. All those paranoid white separatists holing up in their farms with guns and survival gear because Federal Obama was going to Communist their Rectums With Obamacare... well now it's real. Should I get the biggest assault rifle that I can fit through the gun show loopholes? Reverse engineer a homemade TOW missile? Figure out some way to counter modern air power with pocket lasers or drones? Learn how to be a sniper?

I think mostly I want to make the NFL feel the pain. It already has suffered a massive drop in ratings. It will probably go back up with the election being over, but it would be amazing if people felt the same emptiness I do about such trivial blather now. The NFL is the true religion of white conservative america. It's even the classic boondoggle: governments are forced to shell out money to these people's religion rather than clothe or educate the poor. And it's usually urban, local money that gets used, so the rurals and suburbanites can drive it, drink and piss and scream, and then leave. It's the lifeblood of modern television for the stupids. It moralizes might versus right, not giving a shit about other people except your own, win at any cost so you can high five your bros, social darwinism, etc.

Hack the Electoral College - Cities become States

The Electoral College, a slave-owning ugly compromise from the ugly history of the North/South divide, has now denied the will of the people twice. And now on the precipice of confirming the election of the most noxious candidate in our history, it's only supposed purpose: preventing a madman from attaining the office of the President of the Unites States, it is clear the Electoral College will not do that.

There are multiple suggestions, such as Maryland's which will award its electors to the winner of the popular vote, should enough other states also adopt this.

But that still leaves the geographic bias of the electoral college. But that isn't based on territory, it's just on if you're a state.

So... let's add more (urban) states. Almost every red state city knows how this works. The city is vibrant economically, progressive, diverse, energetic, cultural, fun, and the rural politics drag it down. Embarrass it nationally. Steal its population.

Well, let's just create new states for the cities. Talk to people in Austin and Houston Texas about what it's like being in Texas. Miami is drowning by climate change and it's state legislature outlawed the concept, think they don't want to be their own state? Detroit, Michigan... Northern Indiana... Cleveland, Cincinnati, Columbus in Ohio? New Orleans, Louisiana? The Research Triangle in NC?

The city limits can declare themselves a state, and then surrounding counties can vote to be members of them or not.

And each new "city-state" gets its own 2 bonus electoral votes. And two senators. And the proper congressmen.

It doesn't even have to happen in a massive change. We just need one city to establish the precedent, and then it can happen organically.

Alternatively, electoral college voters can be apportioned by counties, as already is in Maine, and, I believe, Nebraska. But this system doesn't give the cities their senators and bonus electoral votes.

One intarwebber wrote:

The Constitution doesn't forbid making a state out of already existing territory, it's just more difficult. The constitution simply says that you need the consent of both Congress and the State Legislature of the state involved. States can't be combined or split "without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress" is how the constitution puts it.

So it will require Congressional control. Which won't happen for a while, but it could be the greatest redistricting play ever.

Microadvertising and Totalitarian Purges

The Trump election is the second rudest awakening I have experienced politically in my lifetime. The danger of the election of this man and his body of declarations and intents is all the more magnified by the most startling realization: The Snowden Leak.

I had heard of "Carnivore" and several other full spectrum surveillance and data collection programs in the late 90s, and remember them being discussed on arstechnica.com. Almost all people dismissed those people talking about them as Unabomber crackpots, declaring that there was no way democratic governments would be doing such things, or they were being blown out of proportion. Even the more shadowy aspects of the Patriot Act and the "War on Terror" such as declaring Americans "enemy combatants" (Jose Padilla) seemed dangerous, but still nominally checked and restrained.

Oh were we wrong.

The Snowden leaks showed the massive scale of cross-governmental worldwide internet surveillance and monitoring. It also showed low-level abuses in female stalking by employees, which can be viewed as relatively innocuous, until you realize that means that it can be fully abused without the FISA courts. And the FISA courts, set up to allegedly oversee the use of these programs, was shown to be a rubber stamp machine that had no idea what was going on and was viewed as window dressing.

But how were these programs getting and associating the data?

We did it for them.

With the rise of Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Amazon, Gmail, smartphones, Skype, and many other messaging platforms, the US Government knows everything about us. How do we know they do so utterly and completely? Because the corporations do as well.

How?

All those sites are "free". In that they record and analyze everything you click, navigate, read, post, search, download, and upload. From that they know what you like, eat, watch, drink, think, love, hate... who your best friends are, who you associate with, who you go out with. Your phone listens through its microphone, reports your movements and location, can be activated remotely. Your photos are geotagged, and your friends are auto-recognized.

The sites make money with ads. But not by spraying ads and hoping they are relevant, like television does. No... they know your: Likes, Dislilkes, Friends, Searches, Websites Visited, Age, Job, Education, Places Lives, etc. You entered it for them, tagged it, liked it, commented on it.

Ask an advertiser what they can sell to someone if you know all that: As an example, Target can guess when you're having a baby before you've told anyone.

Now, ask someone from the CIA what they can do with that information if they needed to, uh, "influence" you.

This consumer information is in dozens of firms' databases, shared and bought and repurchased. It's everywhere. It can't be removed, rolled back, purged, or hidden.

And if these massive consumer information databases have that information... so does the government. While some of those databases may have some of your information, the government has ALL OF IT.

Now, this is all somewhat innocuous in a civic, functional democracy. But should a man with no respect for the system, with ambitions and desires and hatred and contempt and demagoguery take power of that apparatus....

Imagine Stalin being able to identify how intelligent you are, how much money you have, what party you vote for, where you live, who your friends are that agree with you.

Imagine Hitler knowing who is a Jew when he came to power with a simple database search.

Imagine Hitler could identify Aryan children through image crawling, and take those children for indoctrination and training.

Imagine Hitler being able to use software to identify what ethnic group you belong to (doesn't have to be that accurate, dictators aren't that picky about tossing the baby with the bathwater).

For a secret police or totalitarian states, it is then a tragically simple task to identify and purge political opposition. You know where they live, what they do, what they drive, where you would hide. They have drones, cameras, automatic facial recognition software, credit monitoring, ability to freeze accounts, satellites, and all can be done with little legal opposition, all within normal law enforcement procedures.

Here's the thing. Think shutting up now will matter? Nope. The NSA has 10-20 years of internet activity on you already. Full spectrum knowledge of you already.

They don't have to kill or jail you. They know who you find dear, who you care about. They can threaten and control you in any number of ways. Family, friends, lovers, idols.

I've spent 20 years enjoying the internet as a free, vibrant source of information. I've learned more from it than all my schooling. It was once my friend... but overnight it has become my enemy.

Oh, you think the freedom and flow of information on the Internet will raise awareness?

Have you not been paying attention? The internet is no longer the tool of the Information Age. It is now the tool of the Propaganda Age. Where targeted propaganda can be tailored to your prejudices, fears, hatreds, distrust, and party. Boogeymen and outrage created through repetition, photoshopping, memes, outtakes, and a whole lot of screaming. It can be slapped on porn star breasts, delivered on the news with beautiful breast-implanted blondes, and ruggedly handsome men on steroids and testosterone, scroll by subliminally.

You think the advertising industry is as big and prolific as it is? That they haven't learned something in the 60-70 years they've been at it? You didn't see Mad Men, which was the infancy of advertising?

The internet now has personalized echo chambers, and custom filters to keep the unprocessed truth out. What is truth anyway? What is good? What is evil? Who are the bad guys? You think this hasn't been done before?

If Trump turns totalitarian, I am effectively dead. Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide. Or maybe I'll be locked in a virtual world, and not even know the difference. Put me in a jail cell with an XBox.

Might be better than reality anyway.

The Machiavellian guide to democrats surviving the Trump presidency

A battle plan must be formulated in this new landscape. Tactics. And Strategy. Short term tactically:

First is to recognize that Trump is not popular with Republican leadership. His platform (term limits, etc) contains multiple divisive positions that should be useful to sow discontent, disagreement, and split the party inside Congress. Democrats will need to maintain a united voting bloc and pick off Republicans to form the necessary plurality.

Second, we need to employ their weapons against them. Obstruction and blaming the party in power has shown itself to be wildly effective to getting back into power. Obstruction will be the name of the game. And given the fascist platform, it is the moral duty of the party of responsibility.

In the short term tactically, this voting bloc needs to be organized and enforced. Understanding of the historical importance of discipline in the face of the election of a neo-fascist is paramount.

Strategically:

Strategically, it is necessary to shore up the defenses and recognize lost battles. The democrats own minorities, youth, and urban centers. The rurals are lost. Like 80% to 20% lost. Sure, pick up an expedient victory if convenient, but this election has shown these people have no rationality and have been permanently poisoned with racist propaganda. They cannot be saved. Most importantly, there is no amount of progressive idealism or reason they will respond too. They are lost to wallowing in racism, and even an economic turnaround would just economically empower those racist desires.

Let me underline this: a century of progressive policy has coddled rural america, fought tooth and nail by Republicans/conservatives. The rural population has rewarded this idealistic caretaking with racist opportunistic voting and cognitive dissonance. Progressives need to stop caring about rural and exurban whites and concentrate on the coming Majority Minority.

So strategically speaking, this 100 year policy of rural progressive programs, from transportation infrastructure, communications, education, electrification, power, welfare, medical care, food, crop insurance, subsidies that benefits the rural white population needs to be reassessed. All of that needs to be abandoned from strategic policy. Sure, lip service is fine, just like the Republican propaganda. In the Age of Internet Propaganda, such things will be necessary.

Here are the programs on the chopping block in pure conservative thinking: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, fair access regulations, and most progressive programs. They desire victories in cuts to entitlements and budget expenditures and regulatory oversight.

THE KEY: Offer them the faustian bargain that they can cut those programs, but only against the rural beneficiaries. Oh sure they will try to negotiate around that, but if they want true cuts to entitlements and progressive programs, and their billionaire masters will make them take those cuts anyway they can, make sure the blowback is on the rural and red states.

Let me emphasize that this is no time for idealism, or to care about the rural communities. They have selected their lot with the Republicans time and time and time again, and given no credit to progressive ideals and programs. Let them feel the love of their masters. Let the Republicans impose their libertarian dreams upon a people that subsist off of the wealth generated by our cities.

Trump has stated that he will remove two regulations for each new one enacted. Oh really? Well, let’s offer up regulations to the chopping block that have benefited rural america, from power regulation, road and bridge maintenance, rural industries, etc.

Education? Cut schools and funding to rural locations, let them do the homeschooling they so deserve.

Farm Subsidies? Emphasize the regulation and government largesse involved, make the Republicans defend it.

Medicare/Medicaid? Just remove those programs from rural hospitals. Very simple. If they want to travel to cities, fine. This is the abortion strategy of republicans: if they can’t ban it, they just make the poor women travel. So fine, apply the same weapon against republicans.

Social Security? Just close the social security offices and stop sending checks. Make them come to urban centers to get them. Same strategy

To emphasize the entitlement cuts: Republican masters have been so desirous of cutting entitlements that they will take any bargain to cut them. All that needs to be stated in response is that the Democrats are compromising with Republicans and this was the only way to do it.

This will be a bitter pill for Democrat idealists to swallow, but the world has changed. Entitlement cuts will cause utter rancor in the rural republican ranks. They may demonize Democrats, but who cares. THEY VOTED 80% AGAINST DEMOCRATS.

This is just another weapon the Republicans have used against minorities for centuries. Since they can’t support them politically, the republicans systematically deny them funding and resources. This is just the same weapon used against them.

Trading regulations or budgets that fit republican ethos but target the rurals (who the Republicans also do not care about as a party) is the critical survival mechanism for successful Democratic survival in this situation.

Suburbia is the big challenge. The literal border between the forsaken and the core demographic. This will take another Republican weapon: The Wedge Issue. I’m not skilled enough to think of these dastardly policy bombs, but they exist, virtually proven by political science.

Rurals are insulated in an echo chamber since they experience none of the benefits of urban lifestyle. Suburbanites however are constantly exposed to the benefits of culture and employment they offer. And they are also among the foremost challenges to solve in democratic ethos.