existentialistmumbojumbo:

There’s no love lost between Washington and the American public, it seems, five days after Congress for the first time in years managed to handle a budget-related issue without reaching the brink of crisis.

Protesters have descended on Pennsylvania Avenue outside the White House this week, enraged at a potentially health-hazardous provision they allege lawmakers inserted surreptitiously into a continuing resolution (CR) that will fund the government through the remainder of the fiscal year. The bill sailed through the Capitol on Friday; President Obama signed it into law on Tuesday.

Opponents have termed the language in question the “Monsanto Protection Act,” a nod to the major agricultural biotech corporation and other like firms geared at producing genetically modified organisms (GMO) and genetically engineered (GE) seeds and crops. The provision protects genetically modified seeds from litigation suits over health risks posed by the crops’ consumption.

Personally I think GMOs should be judged on a case by case basis. GM corn that allows for more pesticides to be used? Probably a bad idea. GM cassava that can help solve nutritional problems in Africa? Fuck yeah!

Even worse, Rather referred to Chávez as “the dictator” – a term that few, if any, political scientists familiar with the country would countenance.

Here is what Jimmy Carter said about Venezuela’s “dictatorship” a few weeks ago: “As a matter of fact, of the 92 elections that we’ve monitored, I would say that the election process in Venezuela is the best in the world.”

Carter won a Nobel prize for his work through the election-monitoring Carter Center, which has observed and certified past Venezuelan elections. But because Washington has sought for more than a decade to delegitimise Venezuela’s government, his viewpoint is only rarely reported. His latest comments went unreported in almost all of the US media…

…the living standards of the majority of Venezuelans have dramatically improved under Chávez. Since 2004, when the government gained control over the oil industry and the economy had recovered from the devastating, extra-legal attempts to overthrow it (including the 2002 US-backed military coup and oil strike of 2002-2003), poverty has been cut in half and extreme poverty by 70%. And this measures only cash income. Millions have access to healthcare for the first time, and college enrolment has doubled, with free tuition for many students. Inequality has also been considerably reduced. By contrast, the two decades that preceded Chávez amount to one of the worst economic failures in Latin America, with real income per person actually falling by 14% between 1980 and 1998.

…So it is not just Venezuela that regularly comes under fire from the Washington establishment: all of the left and newly independent governments of South America, including Argentina, Ecuador, and Bolivia are in the crosshairs (although Brazil is considered too big to get the same treatment except from the right). The state department tries to keep its eyes on the prize: Venezuela is sitting on 500bn barrels of oil, and doesn’t respect Washington’s foreign policy. That is what makes it public enemy number one, and gets it the worst media coverage.

…South America’s support is Venezuela’s best guarantee against continuing attempts by Washington – which is still spending millions of dollars within the country in addition to unknown covert funds – to undermine, delegitimise, and destabilise democracy in Venezuela.

Looking through that last linked report it actually claims that we are sending aid to Venezuela

The FY 2012 Economic Support Fund (ESF) request of $5,968.7 million advances U.S. interests by helping countries meet short- and long-term political, economic, and security needs. These needs are addressed through a range of activities, from countering terrorism and extremist ideology

Venezuela ($5 million): These funds will help strengthen and support a Venezuelan civil society that will protect democratic space and seek to serve the interests and needs of the Venezuelan people. Funding will enhance citizens’ access to objective information, facilitate peaceful debate on key issues, provide support to democratic institutions and processes, promote citizen participation, and encourage democratic leadership.

Siiigh guess I gotta do more research now to find out who’s bullshitting.

In principle the presidential debates seem like a big waste of energy. In the past they’ve simply been platforms for each side’s buzzwords and catch phrases and nothing like a real moderated debate. But last night seemed to signify something important. It’s pretty clear that Romney won but what did it cost him?

On issues from taxes to Medicare to financial regulations, the former Massachusetts governor steered a more moderate course than he did while wooing conservatives during the Republican primaries this year, even embracing parts of Obama’s record that have been targets for conservative Republicans.

At one point, Romney suggested that he would not change the amount of taxes paid for by high-income Americans. That contrasts with the plan Romney has touted for months - which would cut all Americans’ tax rates by 20 percent - and is more in line with Obama’s plan to give tax cuts only to those with annual incomes of less than $250,000.

Romney also stepped onto more moderate ground after Obama questioned why big, highly profitable oil companies should get massive tax breaks. Romney said he would consider cutting tax subsidies for oil companies.

He cast himself as a defender of Medicare, the government health insurance program for the elderly and disabled, by saying he would restore $716 billion in spending to it - a move that analysts say would require dramatic cuts to other federal programs.

Romney - a wealthy former private equity executive who has touted his record in business - also said he liked parts of the Dodd-Frank bill, a 2010 law that increases the government’s oversight of the U.S. financial sector, and which Romney has vowed to repeal.

He is trying to win by shaking off his image as a rich evil plutocrat. Ladies and gentlemen after more than a decade of right-wing dominated politics I believe the Overton Window has finally begun shifting back to the middle.

In short, the study found that top tax rates don’t appear to determine the size of the economic pie but they can affect how the pie is sliced, especially for the richest households.

Nooooo shit. It’s like they don’t even notice all this new technology that keeps popping up and making everything fluctuate