In answer to the question “what if you threw a party and nobody showed?” the FOX News sponsored Tea Bag parties managed to garnish 618,000 protestors in about 800 American locales. That’s two tenths of 1% of the U.S. population, an average of 78 people per location (some sites had about ten people while others numbered in the thousands).

Put in perspective, Elton John, Simon and Garfunkel and Diana Ross each drew crowds of 500,000 in Central Park, New York, a city that drew 12,500 tea bag protestors (in Miss Ross’ case she drew the same crowd twice due to late rain out). New York is comprised of 8.36 million citizens, and borders Connecticut, New Jersey and Up State which can draw an additional 2 million from each area.

Sean Hannity of Fox News, who broadcasted from the Georgia party site of 25 to 30,000, often maligns the Million Man March hosted by Farrakhan claiming they only drew 400,000 people (the police department reported 800,000). Yet he claims the Tea Bag party to be a ground swell movement!

Where is this so called anger and uprising we were told to expect? Most viewers expecting to see the equivalent to an Abortion Rights or Pro Life march on Washington, or remember Anti War or Anti Nuke rallies, or the ground swell of the Civil Rights marches were severely disappointed.

Adding to the confusion is the mixed messages being delivered. While some were protesting taxes (although none have been raised yet and we are still under the Bush tax plan), others were against government bailouts of anybody. One sign read “Reverse NAFTA now” definitely not a conservative Republican theme, while many simply voiced their displeasure with Obama in not so polite terms.

The protestors were not the wealthy elite (they brainwash others do their dirty work) but average Americans who either retained their job due to a bailout, received unemployment benefit extensions and COBRA provisions, had their homes secured through new mortgage re-writes, and had their 401K’s further secured by TARP funding to banks. The result is we avoided a wave of bank liquidations and corporate failures along with 25% to 30% unemployment.

Not helping this “Day of Outrage” was recent polls that showed while 44% don’t want any bailouts, 39% did want some form of government intervention and 12% didn’t mind intervention at all. Add to this Obama is still polling in the low 60% favorability, and we have a new “silent majority” amused at the lost message and circus atmosphere of the Tea Bag Parties.

Of course Democrats can’t leave well enough alone. Jeanine Garofalo damned all protestors as racist, she who demands open mindedness as part of the radical liberal sect, and Pelosi belittles people who did show up as “Astroturf,” in case we needed to be reminded of what a foot in one’s mouth sounds like.

The Tea Bag turnout was laughable and reiterated most Americans are behind President Obama and the need to do what is necessary to correct the economy and economic injustice. Democrats, radical or otherwise, should have more self confidence, shut up and let the facts speak for themselves.

David DiBello

The mentality of narcissistic greed was created during our first supply side debacle during the Reagan Revolution, which created Yuppies, Junk Bonds, and Mergers and Acquisitions which ended in the market crash of October 1987.

We are now suffering from another crash and burn supply side voodoo economics created by Bush Jr., the new "Uber rich" because rich wasn't good enough, and a fraudulent real estate market that provided that mirage of 55 months of consecutive GDP growth - we thought.

We should have always taxed those who make more in one year than a person makes in a lifetime at the 50% level. That would have provided a balanced budget, not the mess Bush Jr. left us.

Then we should raise the minimum wage which is ludicrously below the poverty level (as sane as war time tax cuts) and adjust the working class salaries, the ones who ultimately bear the brunt of this disaster.

We’ll never hear a capitalist talk about that inequitable wage distribution, and now it has come back to bite them wear it can really hurt. Americans are screaming for wage EQUITY and not falling for the "have's" argument of redistribution; As Lincoln said, one can only make a fool of people for so long.

 If wages were fair we wouldn't be in this mess today, and wouldn't be resorting to living on credit while our wages stagnate, yet health premiums, tuition and rent have all doubled in a decade thanks to NAFTA and our competition with third world economies.

I feel sorry for Timothy Geitner who was first demonized for failing to pay taxes amounting to 1% of his overall tax burden, an oversight at worst, and then making the mistake of thinking “the have’s” wouldn't have the audacity to want a bonus after their company failed.

That’s the new America. While 1% of our nation endures the military sacrifice, the rest wear flag lapels and scream "Me, Me, Me!"

David DiBello

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNJ1qTmWHHI

George Weber was a good decent person, who easily became a fabric of news radio and thus NYC. He was without pretense, having a few brews with the gang at the Blarney Stone after work, not a place to go if you claim to have "airs" about you.

He was also most likely a homosexual, given the circumstances surrounding his death; a murder by someone he knew in his apartment late at night. He lived on Henry Street, which is Brooklyn's version of Greenwich Village.

That’s all irrelevant because what will remain is that he was a good and decent person, not his sexual preference, or the fact that he came to a demise that no one deserves, and no one, no matter whom they are, are immune. He was the kind of person that made you think of what it was like to be a New Yorker, and what a gift it is to live in NY - nothing else. He was a normal gentleman, the kind one would have to be told of his sexual proclivity because that was not how he was defined. He was a regular guy.

Of course we all want the same thing from life, most importantly - to love and be loved. Unfortunately in the depths of our despair or loneliness, we are vulnerable to people who prey on such desires. George probably hoisted a few with the boys after work Friday night, shared a few laughs and headed home to Brooklyn, and apparently later that night met up with the wrong person.

It does give us pause to know that a moments bad decision can lead to our demise, but no one - no one - should pay with their life because they opened up their heart prematurely.

And no one can steal what this man, George Weber, meant to so many New Yorkers. That he was a good and decent man who loved New York and New Yorkers loved him in kind.

Upon reading A.I.G.’s Jake DeSantis’ resignation letter one is almost moved to feel sympathy for a man who felt “duped” by company management, and anger towards a firm that did not fulfill its “commitment.”

As sympathy fades, one focuses on the fatal flaws with Mr. DeSantis’ logic, along with his isolation from a corporate world most of us live. Yes, Mr. DeSantis worked for a portion of A.I.G. that was profitable, but management views the whole in financial terms, not fragmented or decompartmentalized parts. This is why it is important for employees to consider themselves part of the whole, and concerned if a segment of their company is not performing well. As the saying goes, “we are as strong as our weakest link.”

In short, an employee is an agent of the entire company, and much like King Solomon’s test, cannot be cut in half. In dire situations, a company files bankruptcy not on a segment of their firm, but on the company as whole. As an executive Vice President, Mr. DeSantis should know he worked not for A.I.G. Northeast, or A.I.G. Southwest, but A.I.G. period; one Federal Tax ID number, one company.

It is understandable Mr. DeSantis’ pride is irked, but perhaps a few months’ reflection will set in on where he made his errors. First, being that he was able to work for $1.00 a year, unlike 98% of America, means he was well compensated in years past and has the luxury to be part of an ivory tower culture of waiting for the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Has he any gratitude for A.I.G.’s past compensation, or is it all about “what have you done for me lately?” The fact Jake is in a position to “give back” his “bonus” attests to A.I.G.’s past benevolence.

As for A.I.G.’s “lying,” welcome to corporate America, the kind us working class have experienced for many years. However, in this age of enlightenment and spirituality, this could be construed as A.I.G. engaging in the power of positive thinking; management gave a rosy scenario because negative ones insure failure. Perhaps they felt past year’s extravagant remuneration deserved a level of loyalty, if not pay back?

If there is a lesson for DeSantis, he will learn, in financial terms, to reduce his exposure by joining us mere mortals, accepting a salary each and every week, forgoing the variability of a pay out in the end. Join workers who experience rainbows in black and white, if we enjoy them at all. As the clichés goes, “a bird in the hand is worth more than two in the bush.” Mr. DeSantis wants the best of both worlds: paid like an Executive, but when things go wrong, employing the rules of the working class?

However the most affronting assertion in Mr. Desantis’ resignation rant where he loses any popular support is he was due a “bonus” from a firm that was bankrupt; in short, he wanted his bonus to come from OPM; other people’s money, an ethic strongly adopted and utilized by the Wall Street elite (the reason we are where we are). This smacks of sheer arrogance bolstered by outright naiveté, and blind ego.

Or is this a measure of Jake’s one way commitment, and part of his lie?

David DiBello

How dare our new President tell the American public we are in a crisis? Doesn’t he know that the best tool any salesperson possesses is the power of positive thinking, to always look at the glass as half full and to put a positive outlook i.e. spin, on anything being sold?

Do capitalists and Wall Street, stuck in their Ivory Tower, think Americans don’t know things are bad, even after the layoffs, stagnating wages, crumbling home values and reeling stock portfolios. Has President Obama just shocked us like some naïve spouse who unveils the evidence of her/his cheating mate?

Haven’t we endured enough in 2008 of Wall Street analysts seeing through rose colored glasses telling us time and again that rebound is around the corner and we have just bottomed out, or that the fall is bound to pick up any day? Are we to listen to the Larry Kudlow’s of the world telling us not to panic on the “stimulating news” commodities haven’t fallen as much as in the past as reason to rejoice?

Perhaps we should adhere to the mind numbing positive self talk theory that’s allows us to walk around believing everything is wonderful because we want it to be so as we sit down for another dinner of Styrofoam we envision as filet mignon.
Here’s an idea: acknowledge the truth and identify the problem. Only then can we know what needs to be corrected and work on the solution.

However after eight years of a supply side economy that doubled the federal debt, outsourced American jobs for more favorable returns, and favored one class while forgetting about the rest, Republicans and Capitalist rather one didn’t look to hard at the root cause of the problem, choosing to continue playing upon the magical belief of keeping a stiff upper chin.

They want to stay the course and not upset the applecart that has benefited them, rather than facing the reality of what will need to be done – raising taxes, wage equity and treating Americans as if we are all created equal, one nation under God.

We’ve had enough of that; sometimes the fat lady has to stop singing and look in the mirror.

I am delighted with the Madoff case and have absoultely no sympathy for people who invested with this man because their greed clouded their judgment to put all their eggs in one basket.

Never did they question why they were getting 10% dividend and interest income when everyone else in America received less than 5%. This is a saga of the "have's" thinking they know better, are smarter and have better connections because they are above us all.

As the old saying goes, "birds of a feather flock together," and "like kinds attract." Bernie Madoff was the perfect medicine to people who thought they were better than the rest.

HE KNEW HE COULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THEM BECAUSE HE COULD PLAY UPON THEIR GREED, A PREREQUISITE FOR ANY CON ARTIST.

May they stew in it, and may Bernie get pardoned, because in factual situations murder and rape are far worse crimes, but in this capitalistic society we are indoctrinated to think other wise. Tell that to someone who lost a loved one recently, or from survivors of the holocaust who saw their loved ones starve and get slaughtered.

Enjoy the stew; everyone got what they deserved!

It was pathetically hysterical to watch Rick Santelli poll the floor of the Stock Exchange, home of all those "year end" bonuses, creators of derivative shenanigans and ironically beneficiaries of government bailout of the industries with which they trade.

Perhaps Mr Santelli would be more convincing had he walked down Main Street and polled those people. The only point made by Santelli's impromptu unscientific poll is the division in economic classes in our country, and how what is good for the goose ain't necessarily good for others in Wall Street's Ivory Tower.

Wall Street and Pure Capitalists, like Larry Kudlow, keep up the canard of "attracting and keeping" executives. This is a scam theory not backed by facts.

Under the law of supply and demand, the very theorems Capitalists aspire, the market is flooded with talented people competing against one another, and Investment Houses, thanks to CEO's fine (greedy) efforts are disappearing or already gone.

Reggie Jackson was replaced. If all the CEO's on Wall Street perished on 9/11, the economy wouldn't have come to a grinding halt. The threat that they will be attracted or “lured away” by other entities is a fallacy. These are not the best of times, thanks to their failed strategies of high risk investments with no regard and reckless abandon.

If the Working Class negotiates with one's boss, the salary ceiling would be the amount that a boss would no longer pay because he can get cheaper workers elsewhere.

This is the way all companies should act regardless of federal funds, but fairness smacks in the face of capitalism.

And still, we have grown men and women putting in a hard week’s work, some back breaking, for minimum wage. What a National Disgrace that has now come back to harm our economy since "disposable income" makes the economic wheel go round.

David DiBello

Sorry to have taken so long to respond to your article but I wanted enough quiet time to digest it in peace. I am one of the 11.1 million and growing, out of work, and have been working temp accounting jobs for past two years, which is no picnic due to the constant unknown, and the starts and stops.

First I want to congratulate you on not only a well written piece, but well researched one. If you google “historical unemployment rates” you will find a site that will give you month to month rates from about 1940, if not slightly before. I remember all too well Reagan’s drastic tax cuts which first put the economy into a tailspin and raised unemployment rates to 10.8%. If you viewed American Experience: The Reagan Revolution, there was a time when Reagan considered not running again, and when asked by the White House Chief of Staff what he should do, he responded, “I could try to get shot again,” making light of his increased poll numbers after that event.

Don’t get me wrong everyone hated stagflation and Carter’s inflation, too many dollars cashing too few goods, but inflation in itself is better than not having any dollars with which to chase. I was a Runner for Reagan then, and find Carter to be quite naive. I see though Obama much more astute.

I admire your writing style in that it reminds me of my own, but we digress on certain issues. I wish you had the opportunity to watch Shepherd Smith’s interview today with an economist (I believe, sorry I didn’t catch his name) who predicted  3 million jobs lost this year, and he quoted another economist (sounded like Nearulli Levini, sorry again) who actually quoted 9 million jobs lost, which at 500,000 a month currently, is approachable.

Some observations and my point of view on your assertions in your article:

First I have to disagree with your assessment that we are not, or would not have been in a Depression. The only reason we are not is that the Bush administration, who bow at the altar of capitalism and the free marketplace, bailed out institutions that if they failed would not have resulted in a depression but a financial collapse. AIG comes to mind as the biggest of those bailed out entities. Imagine if other brokerage houses and banks went the way of Lehman Brothers. Lost jobs, investments, et al. I believe only in years to come, much like an assessment of Bush, history will reveal exactly how close we just came to financial ruin. Pray Paulsen is alive so we could subpoena him.

Second, a depression now as opposed to then must be compared proportionately, meaning in the 30’s and 40’s our standard of living was an apartment to live in, food on the table and clothes for your back. That’s it; simpler times. I could never attract a woman these days saying “I pay my rent, eat and there are no holes in my clothes.”

Today a Depression would look like high unemployment where no one affords to pay their auto lease or mortgage. Bills for computers, on line access, cable TV, cell phones will go unpaid. These are costs that are no longer seen as luxuries but necessities, and again would not be seen as bragging rights for any potential paramour, but just standard fare.

Since our overhead is so high even at bare bones expenses, it will no longer take a 25% unemployment rate to create a depression. That number could be dumbed down to 15 to 18%. It sounds like it will not look like before, men selling apples on the street, but it will still be a depression, just a different kind. Leased cars abandoned on the side of a road, foreclosures sky rocket, carts full of computers and electronics.

I find it amusing that many capitalists scoff at Roosevelt saying our economy would have prevailed sooner without his bailouts and public programs. That’s only if you wait long enough for the economy to hit absolute bottom, then go up. How many more months, nay years, would that have been, and how many lost lives, given pure capitalists object to any gov’t intervention including unemployment, would that have cost? Roosevelt was worried about avoiding a 50% unemployment rate.

Capitalism is logical on paper, but not realistic in reality. Not to say it is bad, or I am one of those left wing radical socialists, but that no economy is perfect, and we need to find a compromise that is practical and realistic in terms of human existence.

Third, in the past we took men, unemployed or employed and drafted them into service, with those remaining to take the jobs of those shipped overseas. That immediately reduced the unemployment. These are the times of Rosie the Riveter, where we didn’t even have enough men behind that we enlisted women, who previously didn’t work, into the workforce. That is not the case today with a paid for “volunteer” army, although as more men enlist today because jobs are scarce, I wonder if the term “volunteer” is appropriate.

We do still benefit economically, but not to the same degree as in the past, with the military industrial buildup, but why then didn’t we mass produce those bomb resistant Hummers?

Why? Because we just had a discount war, one fought with not enough men, and savings in armament since the President wanted tax cuts during war time – absurd! What kind of sacrifice is that?

I am not against tax cuts, but we can’t go to that well all the time, it has a finite bottom as we see with the Fed rate, there is nothing left to cut. We need to start producing, but of course, thanks to globalization, we manufacture or purchase from overseas and outsource American jobs.

I supported Reagan since I was 16 in his first Presidential run. What I find illogical is this sudden hit to the economy, a massive shock to the system, where we drastically cut taxes with no respect to our federal deficit, which ultimately causes a devaluation of the dollar. That, not the sub primes, was the first sign of trouble this time around. Reagan cutting taxes from an absurd 70% rate to 28% was too much at once. I would have been happy to see a one-time hit of 15%, and 5% every year as long as we don’t destroy the national checking account, or at least pay for these cuts. I will hear the same diatribe that spending went up, but it only went up due to inflation. The loss of tax revenue created by tax cuts are what sent our dollar spiraling downward.

And for every dollar cut, we would have to produce $4 in revenue so to break even at the 28% tax rate. If we did do that, we would never have had deficits. That didn’t come to fruition in the 80’s and didn’t now. Unlike the 80’s, thanks to globalization that stagnated American wages, nothing, not even the most trivial in benefits, trickled down to the working class, those people who spend in volume to keep the financial engines running.

The sub primes are just a result of long fought deregulation by Phil Gramm and Republicans, but I will agree Democrats certainly joined the party too, under the guise of supporting low income people in their quest to fulfill Bush’s ownership society.

What I object to is the President, who stands at the desk where the buck stops, had to have known about these illegitimate loans but laid low because this industry bulked up GDP numbers, making his economy look good. Again, our economy is based on financials, not manufacturing; the buying and selling of paper, or trading of other’s assets, rather than pure manufacturing.

In the end it was everyone’s fault due to greed, brokers, buyers, investors. If I am getting money I am not going to question its origin i.e. CMO’s, and these are superficial shallow values that come back to bite people.

And so, Bush’s supply side economics, like Reagan before him, resulted in four good years and then crash and burn. And we are worse off after the fact.

As for the war itself, I am upset at the way it was run. I am not one of those crazy liberals: Saddam’s violation of UN resolution 1443 was enough justification, but I know the administration knew a rules violation wasn’t enough to convince Americans If one disagrees with the war in Iraq, that means we have to re install Saddam, and trust me, like any Godfather or Mob Boss, one will never find the money trail, oratory or writings that show that if Saddam wasn’t a co conspirator of 9/11, he was complicit. Good riddance. But I will tell you is that the reason other countries despise us is because when they were in need (the Kurds) we didn’t intercede unless there is a national interest, and that smacks to them of selfishness.

But it’s a hard choice; how do you tell a mother and father their son is going to war or died because of a conflict in another part of the world between peoples hell bent on each other’s annihilation.

My only last concern along with not sending in 500,000 troops like his father did in the Gulf War (father wasn’t consumed with tax cuts – far more reasonable man) was why not the Hills of Pakistan? Why not insert our influence, we pay them enough? We had Saddam contained.

Again wonderfully written article and I admire the research you put into it. I love to listen to Sean, but he is becoming unbearable lately, and he often quotes the 10% unemployment of the Carter administration (it was as high as 7.3% I believe for a few months) while never mentioning the 10.8% unemployment during Reaganomics. I know it’s a show, but the diatribe and rhetoric is overwhelming at times. We disagree economically, but I’m there for every Freedom Concert. I don’t care why or how one got into military service, it is the price they pay which I don’t that needs to be honored, and I am awed at their service and sacrifice. I only wish that more than 1% of our population shared the sacrifice rather than worrying about weekend plans or swilling imported wines.

Thank you. While I am sure we will agree to disagree, it is good to have intellectual discourse. Perhaps if we all did that as Americans, instead of being torn apart by a 24/7 news media that keeps the wounds fresh, we would be in better shape today, or interact more effectively. The price of innovation!

David DiBello,

Logical Party