Rall writes: "Forget 9/11 - everything changed on 9/14/08, when Lehman Brothers hit the skids. Millions lost their jobs. Millions more lost their jobs. And the government refused to help them. The government's masters, the bankers, wouldn't let them. They wanted all that taxpayer money for themselves."

Newt Gingrich speaks in New Hampshire, days before the state's primary, 01/08/12. (photo: Getty Images)

Rise of the Republican Socialists

By Ted Rall, RallBlog

11 January 12

ewt Gingrich made a name for himself as the right-wing ideologue who led the 1994 "Republican Revolution."

What a difference the wholesale collapse of international capitalism makes.

Forget 9/11 - everything changed on 9/14/08, when Lehman Brothers hit the skids. Millions lost their jobs. Millions more lost their jobs. And the government refused to help them.

The government's masters, the bankers, wouldn't let them. They wanted all that taxpayer money for themselves.

The system was finally exposed as the corrupt, inefficient, cruel pseudodemocracy that we on the Left had always known it was. More than three years have passed yet neither the political class nor its corporate bosses have found the wherewithal to sate the anger of America's roiling masses with the traditional bundle of social programs. To the contrary, the powers that be are calling for austerity, for gutting what's left of the safety net.

They're stealing the rope with which we will hang them.

Political disintegration is disruptive and painful. But it sure is entertaining.

The rise of the Republican primary season's Anti-Capitalist Brigades is the center ring of this circus of death. At the head of the anti-Romney cadres is one of Newt's well-heeled supporters, who is dropping a cool $3 million on an ad blitz that denounces Mitt Romney for engaging in slash-and-burn capitalism. (Is there another kind?)

"There's a company in The Wall Street Journal today that Bain [Capital, Romney's company] put $30 million into, took $180 million out of and the company went bankrupt," Newt Gingrich said on January 10th. "And you have to ask yourself: Was a six-to-one return really necessary? What if they only take $120 million out? Will the company still be there? Will 1,700 families still have a job?"

Good questions all. But the heartless beasts who populate Wall Street venture capital firms don't worry about the blood and tears they leave in their wake. Like all vampires they feast and flee. Their pet Republicans don't care either. Not usually.

"I think there's a real difference between people who believe in the free market and people who go around, take financial advantage, loot companies, leave behind broken families, broken towns, people on unemployment," the former speaker continued.

Not much difference. Not when you think about it. Still, this is a serious slap-the-forehead moment.

Bear in mind, Gingrich is still a man of the Right. A few weeks ago his proposal for forced child labor of impoverished waifs marked the Dickensianest moment of the 2011 Christmas shopping season.

Newt isn't the only Republican presidential candidate attacking capitalism's sacred right to loot and pillage. Texas governor Rick Perry, whose brain freezes and loutish yucks over his role as the nation's top executioner of lower-class misérables (and at least one innocent man) make his predecessor George W. Bush look like Adlai Stevenson, calls buyout specialists like Romney "vultures" who "swoop in…eat the carcass, and…leave the skeleton" of companies they target. Romney, he said, is a "buyout tycoon who executed takeovers, bankrupted businesses, and sent jobs overseas while killing American jobs."

"Governor Romney enjoys firing people - I enjoy creating jobs," added Jon Huntsman.

These are Republicans?

What's up?

"For all the talk about this being a center-right nation, there's a realization that Americans are uncomfortable with excessive greed and the kind of ruthless, screw-the-workers style of capitalism Romney used to get rich," Steve Benen writes in Washington Monthly.

Greg Sargent of The Washington Post chimes in: "The leading GOP candidates are on record arguing that Romney's practice of [capitalism] - which he regularly cites as proof of his ability to create jobs, as a generally constructive force and even as synonymous with the American way - is not really capitalism at all, but a destructive, profit-driven perversion of it. Thanks to them, this is no longer a left-wing argument."

(Actually, destruction and profit-taking are the essential cores of capitalism. But why quibble? Everyone agrees that capitalism sucks. Yay!)

Times are changin'. According to polls, communism is more popular than Congress. So why isn't the party of the left jumping on the Wall Street-bashing bandwagon?

Throughout the 2008 campaign and his presidency Barack Obama has taken pains to reassure the 1 percent that if he's not exactly one of them he'll look out for their bank accounts. Certainly he has enacted policies that have increased the gap between rich and poor while sucking the life out of the dry husk of the middle class.

Meanwhile, revolution looms.

Why don't the Democrats see it? Don't they understand that capitalism is discredited? Newt Gingrich does. So do most Republicans.

It comes down to a simple explanation: Everything has changed, but not the Democrats. They've always been slower than the GOP to recognize the shifting winds of American politics, slower to respond, inept when they try.

We used to be a center-right country. Now we're left-right. Soon we'll be left-left. Both the Dems and the Reps will be left behind. In the meantime, watch the dying Republicans make the most of an agenda that ought to belong to the dying Democrats: bashing the rich and greedy.

If nothing else, it'll be entertaining.

Comments

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

+71 # squawcraw 2012-01-11 16:29

"They're stealing the rope with which we will hang them."
+++++++++++++++ ++++++++
What a GREAT way to put it! Keep up the good work Mr. Boehner, Mr. Cantor, Mr, McConnell, Mr. Norquist, Governors Walker, Scott, Haley, Mr. Rove, Mr. Gingrich/Romney/Paul/Perry/Santorum. At the rate you guys are going it's Obama in a landslide next fall!

-22 # disgusted American 2012-01-11 21:51

I hope it's not Obama next fall b/c you'll get more of the same of what he's done to us. Did you miss the line in the article above where it says: ". . .Barack Obama has taken pains to reassure the 1 percent that if he's not exactly one of them he'll look out for their bank accounts. Certainly he has enacted policies that have increased the gap between rich and poor while sucking the life out of the dry husk of the middle class."

Wake up!

don't vote for r's or d's. vote 3rd party or else you are against the 99 percent.

+42 # pbbrodie 2012-01-12 06:30

Yeah, let's vote for a third party candidate and assure that we get stuck with President Mitt Romney. I'll vote third party all day long for candidates for Congress but until a viable third party candidate appears running for President who has some real chance, I'm not going to even think about risking putting ANY Republican in the White House. As bad as Obama is, he is incredibly better than any Republican alternative. The worst possible thing that could happen to our country would be to have a Republican putting more right wing lunatics on the Supreme Court!!!

+32 # maddave 2012-01-12 08:13

Bravo! Well said.

ANY VOTE NOT CAST FOR OBAMA is one vote in favor of shifting the Supreme Court farther to the right and for uncounted right wing lifetime appointments to lower-but-still-powerful judicial positions.

ALSO! Any straight thinking progressive/liberal American who does not vote is, in fact, casting half-a-vote for the opposition!

VOTE . . , BUT NOT FOR A REPUBLICAN OR A HOPELESS THIRD PARTY DREAMER.

-11 # Merschrod 2012-01-12 13:20

Dear PB and MAD, you'd better start psyching up for Mitt the Prez. Obama won by a slight margin, he abandonded the youth and the left, and the center also is fed up with his endless wars, endless bail outs and he never went after the off-shoring and tax breaks. So there goes any margin for a win. Mitt is a moderate (as far as Repubs go) candidate and will carry the ball for finance and the war industry. Curtains for this round.

So vote for progressive congress folks to try to recover the house and balance the presidency. Then vote for Rocky Anderson with a clear conscience.

-1 # disgusted American 2012-01-13 23:57

to pbbrodie and maddave,

I don't vote for a specific person b/c someone else might win. There's no way I could put a check next to Obama's name after all he has done against us and all he has not done that he said he'd do. He has taken up where Bush left off including continuing the fake war on terror.

How could either of you vote for a man who just signed the detenetion of Americans law and turned this country into a full-fledged police state? Have you no self-respect?

Sure, Romney is a pewk, but he's really no different than Obama b/c they both work for the 1 percent, they both lie, they both are for making our lives worse, they are both war mongers (war is profit - American is building empire) and so on ad nauseum.

So won't matter which one of any of the R's or Obama wins b/c we have a one-party system.

So I'll vote what my heart tells me or I won't vote b/c the elections are fixed anyways.

You are both pragmatists. Pragmatism is prostition. Or one can also say that by voting for Obama, you support what he is doing which is not in the best interest of this nation or we the people.

+72 # Rick Levy 2012-01-11 18:31

Oh, these breast beating Republicans. All of a sudden they feel our pain. Yeah, right. The Republican candidates are nothing but a clown car of assholes.

+23 # pernsey 2012-01-11 22:16

Quoting

Oh, these breast beating Republicans. All of a sudden they feel our pain. Yeah, right. The Republican candidates are nothing but a clown car of assholes.

They dont feel anything but greed and selfishness. I agree with you Rick, they are nothing but a bunch of A-holes and idiots on parade!!

-22 # RLF 2012-01-12 05:52

Problem is with the 1700 morons that lost their jobs...they go out and vote Republican. Idiots in this country deserve what their lazy asses ask for...and I'm all for letting it get bad enough that they learn their error. I won't vote Obama and not hold the Dem. party accountable for acting Republican...screw this country!

+26 # John Locke 2012-01-12 07:37

RLF: "Screw this Country" you sound like a die hard republican, this article was very much in tone with what is going on in America, and how close we are to a violent revolution, its not time to "screw this Country" its time to take it back...

+7 # unclewags 2012-01-12 15:31

Quoting

RLF: "Screw this Country" you sound like a die hard republican, this article was very much in tone with what is going on in America, and how close we are to a violent revolution, its not time to "screw this Country" its time to take it back...

It's time to take OUR country back from the "Money Changers in the Temple", including those who use their anti-gay vehemance to muster votes favoring the gestating fascist state looming before our very eyes ... via the treasure of the abominably rich and powerful Koch bothers ... and their ilk ... History is about to repeat its' the hand it played in Nazi Germany in the 1930's.

+2 # rhgreen 2012-01-13 07:11

Except for Jon Huntsman and a schizophrenic part of Ron Paul, but they hasn't got a chance.

+2 # MidwestTom 2012-01-11 21:09

Prior to leaving the gold standard, there was little inflation, almost every family was living off of the mans wages, and one could save dollars for retirement earning 1 or 2 percent and be assured of a decent retirement with SS paying $3000 per year and ones savings. There was no need to invest in the stock market, with no inflation prices changed very little. The the Fed, owned by NYC bankers convinced the government to leave the Gold standard. This allowed the Fed to print money at will. This extra money de valued the dollar at a much faster pace making just saving money a bad plan for retirement. One now needed to invest to try and keep up with inflation, and for the vast majority the only place available to invest was the NY Stock Exchange with the same bankers who destroyed the idea of just saving dollars for retirement. Until we can stop the Fed from printing money, we are doomed to be their slaves.

+2 # facebook_programmer 2012-01-13 10:47

I agree. However, I watched a really good documentary recently called "The Secret of Oz" that changed my view on this. They show how after the public is awoken to the fiat currence bubble, that we always go back to demanding a gold standard (or at least something to tie money to). But it's a trick. While the corrupt NYC bankers are screwing us as hard as they can by inflating their phoney fiat currency and going thru bubble after bubble, they, behind the scenes are actively pursuing ownership of all the gold so that WHEN the day finally comes that the masses awake and demand to be back on the gold standard, the very same criminals that ran the fiat system will pose as our saviours and say NO PROBLEMO :)

Rinse and repeat.

+27 # BobbyLip 2012-01-11 21:23

Yeah, Ted, give us a call when one of the Republican candidates actually proposes laws or regulations to curb capitalist excess rather than just using Bain to beat Willard over the head with. Are you kidding?
Do you think Perry really mourns the demise of Glass-Steagel? Yeah, me too.

-9 # susienoodle 2012-01-11 21:33

author of this article has called for Obama's resignation so be careful re anything he says. He's subversive IMHO.

+1 # disgusted American 2012-01-14 00:00

susienoodle,

Why is someone who has called for Obama's resignation a subversive? Kindly explain.

If someone had called for the resignation of Bush, would you have named that person a subversive as well?

Or is subversiveness selective for you?

+14 # swidler@temple.edu 2012-01-11 21:40

It is not helpful to demonize "capitalism" by using a badly distorted "definition."
Clearly an intelligent understanding as Adam Smith portrayed it does not include a self-destructive greed at is core. Think of the enlightened self-interest of Henry Ford in deliberately paying his employees a "living wage" so they could afford to buy the cars they were building. Leonard Swidler

+11 # PGreen 2012-01-12 10:02

Henry Ford was an early admirer of Hitler and Mussolini, beginning in 1922. He may even have been involved with-- or at least sympathetic to-- the "Economic Royalists" who plotted to overthrow FDR (until General Smedley Butler refused to go along and exposed the plot)-- reports about who specifically was involved are a bit sketchy, but his name is mentioned. Henry Ford was a capitalist with a certain amount of practicality, and perhaps an admirable an industrial ethic, but that doesn't mean that he wasn't ruthless as well, and a questionable supporter of democracy at best. I believe it is more practical to talk about aspects of our current incarnation of capitalism that need reform, rather than to praise the ideology unconditionally . These include, in my mind, the elimination of corporate personhood, and the prohibition of corporate money in politics. Reformers may even wish to look at certain liabilities for executives and major shareholders for the actions of their companies, as existed in the pre-civil war era. It might encourage them to make sure that their companies don't become involved in illegal activities-- an all too common occurrence.

+5 # unclewags 2012-01-12 16:11

And furthermore, the CEOs and BODs should not be permitted to have such controlling voting interest in any corporation that deprives the broader mass of shareholders from having any effective voice in social matters brought at stockholders' annual meetings.

+3 # John Locke 2012-01-13 14:58

PGreen: I am glad to read your post, nice to see some one who is enlightened...lets provide a bit more about Henry Ford, He along with ITT and GM developed the industry in Germany where Opal made the Nazi tanks, and was a board member of IG Farben, the chemical conglomorate that made the gas used in the consentration camps...The Bush family provided the money for Hitler, and Rockefeller provided the technology to make fuel out of coal...the wealth of these families should have been confiscated by the US Government as it was multiplied by supplying an aenemy...and Yes, JP Morgan and Dupont had planned a revolution to take physical control of the US Government and corporatize it, which they eventually did almost 80 years later...

+4 # unclewags 2012-01-12 16:04

Good point out of Temple Univesity.
That same sort of "enlightened self-interest" would serve the economy well if encouraged regarding protection of the Social Security and Medicare Benefits Programs. The aged recipients of those "Earned Benefits" put their optional disposable monies into the circulating economy; nourishing cash flow locally and supporting free enterprise shop keepers. We express our allegiance to American free enterprise by denying elective office to those evil doers bent on "privatizing" SS and Medicare for personal gain ... spelled "GREED. Imagine the dibilitating affect the Wall Street "vultures" would have dealt to the peoples retirement funds if WS had had control of those funds under "privatization" in recent years. Many of us lost tens of thousands of dollars in our 401 K nest eggs totally because of WS shenanighans. If it weren't for SS and MediCare, untold millions of genuinely work devoted Americans would be pauperized today and unable to contribute to the health of the economy.

+19 # maddave 2012-01-11 21:43

Quote: "The leading GOP candidates are on record arguing that Romney's practice of [capitalism] . . . is not really capitalism at all, but a destructive, profit-driven perversion of it. Unquote

Capitalism?
Judging from the numbers of people & fortunes that these so-called capitalists are gobbling up, wouldn't it be more accurate to call them cannibalists? .

+3 # unclewags 2012-01-12 16:15

Indeed ... "Vulture Cannibalists" ; Not ordinary risk taking venture capitalists

+5 # spercepolnes 2012-01-11 21:49

"The Republican candidates are nothing but a clown car of assholes."

...with the Democrat candidates about to join them shortly?

+20 # X Dane 2012-01-11 22:32

What the heck is Ted Rall talking about??
democrats, dying??? I DON'T THINK SO.
Democrats don't get it?? This is an absurd article.

Democrats sure DO get it. We are furious at Wall Street and the banks destroying the lives of people by just forclosing on homes instead helping people find a way to save their homes and lives.

They are also ruining it for people, still in their own homes, living on streets with several empty homes, that may be taken over by drug dealers. THEIR PROPERTY is now falling in value. Oh we get that too.

And we get that big corporation, which COULD start new manufactoring...are just sitting on the money, probably asked to by repugs, to make Obama look bad

We get that the repugs won the "house" because they said they "were going to create jobs????"... WHAT A CROCK,.... They have created nothing but misery, chaos and anger over a bunch of people, WHO SHOULD WORK FOR US, BUT CAN ONLY SAY NO, NO, NO.

And we get, that in spite of terrible times,... and high unemployment....Obama may still stay in the White House

BECAUSE THE REPUGS HAVE DONE NOTHING BUT OBSTRUCT and have put up the most inept
bumbling bunch of clowns and greedy guys to run for the presidency. At least half the party DON'T even want the front runner!!
And I have a sneaking suspicion the rest of the country don't want him either.

OH YEAH....WE GET IT TED.

+10 # John Locke 2012-01-12 07:42

X Dane: I think he was referring to those in Congress, and I agree they don't get it, when Obama had both houses he couldn't get any positive legislation passed, Palosi and Reid were his biggest nightmares...they were afraid of offending the then minority republicans and thats why they lost control in 2010...the Republicans are much more aggressive, and the democrats in congress are weak, very weak, think about what he said, communism rates higher than congress!

+5 # X Dane 2012-01-12 10:49

You are right. No doubt John Locke, but he made all democrats look stupid and weak. We constantly see and read, that this or that person is in the pocket of....?They ALL ARE, because of our corrupt system. They CAN'T run without money.
Still it is...to me..clear, that THE ONLY INTERESTS THE REPUGS SERVE IS BIG MONEY.
The better democrats DO TRY to help regular Americans. Did the repugs EVER??? My turn. NO,NO, NO. They will kill all social programs, given a chance.
It is not big enough, but there IS a difference

+1 # X Dane 2012-01-12 10:51

btw. the democratic majority was only a short time.

+11 # Lolanne 2012-01-12 08:07

THANK YOU, X Dane. I real this article with a growing sense of unreality, like I'd fallen down yet another rabbit hole. Kept waiting for Ralls to figure out that the newt, perry, and the rest are just spouting off anything they can think of that might knock willard off his first-place throne. Which does NOT mean they have suddenly developed socialist leanings, or found their conscience or any empathy for the folks who have been screwed by the kind of capitalism willard practices. God help us all if one of these slimy bastards manages to steal the election and make it to the White House.

NEVER VOTE REPUBLICAN! And don't vote 3rd party this year, either. The only chance we've got is to kick the repigs out of DC, put the dems back in in full strength, and then hold their feet to the fire!

+6 # chomper2 2012-01-12 11:26

Yes, and for sure HOLD THEIR FEET TO THE FIRE!

-1 # John Locke 2012-01-12 15:46

chomper2: how would we do that? what power do we have to hold their feet to the fire, could we get them out of office, I suspect not...

-1 # John Locke 2012-01-12 15:45

Lolanne: I Understand and hear what you said, BUT... I just don't see obama doing the right thing, so what is the real answer, another 4 more years of the same thing, maybe taking away more of our rights...then what? we are again voting for the lesser of the evils, but is he really the lesser? so far he has done everything the Republicans wanted, ...

0 # disgusted American 2012-01-14 00:08

Glad someone here gets it except for you last sentence which I've addressed at the end of my comment.

Obama is not the lesser of two evils. Anyone who could sign into law a bill that calls for the detention of Americans willy-nilly is no better than any other fascist dictator.

Not that a Repuke wouldn't have done the same, but it's Obama who did this and who also has done everything for the 1 percent and against the people who elected him. He's not going to change if he wins another term on the throne.

He hasn't done everything the Republicans wanted. That's just his excuse. He's getting exactly what he wants.

+1 # Lolanne 2012-01-14 08:49

[quote name="John Locke"]Lolanne: I Understand and hear what you said, BUT... I just don't see obama doing the right thing, so what is the real answer, . . .//

If we put the dems (REAL dems, not blue dogs!) in power in the White House AND in Congress, I do not believe it will be 4 more years of the same thing. The whole dynamic in the country has changed, and I believe will continue to change, with the advent of OWS. I think OWS will continue to grow in strength and numbers, and I believe that when Obama has the power of an awakened people behind him, holding his feet to the fire, things WILL begin to change in government.

I do not understand some of Obama's decisions, very true, and I'm extremely unhappy about some of them, but I also don't know what kind of pressure he was under when he made them. And don't forget, during his first couple of years in office he had not only the repigs to contend with but the blue dog dems.

0 # John Locke 2012-01-14 10:12

LoLanne: Obama "OWNS" his decisions no matter how or why he made them... My suspecion is he is under orders by his handlers...Please tell me how with all that is against us we can overcome Obama politics, which is to promise us change that he had NO intent or interest to actually make...! Pleasse always remember Obama signed the Homeland Defense bill...and he authorized Homeland Security to help put down OWS, and he allowed Hillary Clinton to interfere with negotiations with Iran over their alleged neuclear interest a Bomb!and moreover, he put SS, Medicare and medicade on the auction block...

No Obama is a part of the problem, Clinton did not over step. she had to discuss with Obama what was his strategy and obtain his approval. Who can we count on to counter this "overthrough" of the US Constitution by those we elect or could elect...Who among us have the means or resources to even run a campaign, and better yet to stay alive during it...

0 # Lolanne 2012-01-14 12:18

Quoting

... My suspecion is he is under orders by his handlers...

And this is the one point on which I agree with you -- as far as it goes. But be aware that WE do not know what kind of threats those orders may have included. I am not offering a wholesale defense of Obama; I suspect I dislike the same decisions you do. But I do not believe ANYBODY can do any better under our present system.

The system HAS to change, and that is where I look to OWS. Remember, there are many millions more of the 99% than the 1%, no matter how much money they have. I have no crystal ball to tell me what is going to happen, but I believe in the power of the people, and I believe the people are finally awakening from the nightmare of the last 10 yrs, especially, but actually going back farther than that.

+3 # Doubter 2012-01-12 13:02

OK, YOU get it; and I suppose the Dems in power MUST know what's going on.
What I want to see is them ACTING FORCEFULLY and doing everything they can to correct the situation instead of acquiescing to the destruction of the U.S.

+1 # disgusted American 2012-01-14 00:09

Don't hold your breath. It's a one-party system disguised as two.

0 # LstNailinDaKoffin 2012-01-12 16:41

Oh you're "furious" are you? Ha!
I'll bet you aren't furious enough to do anything other than vote for obama and then wonder why yet again NOTHING changed.

But whatever it's alllllllll the repugs fault, right? Yeah that noise is getting old to me. How about this? It's YOUR fault. It's MY fault. It's all OUR fault. We truly are the fools doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past because we refuse to learn the lessons of history.

We will continue to vote for even the most corporate and corrupt democrats like obama rather than a 3rd party candidate because we are brainwashed by the Lesser of 2 Evils and Bandwagon propaganda.

Well no more for me. I'm voting for the Green Party. I'm going to start acting towards the change I want to see manifested. If the democrats want my vote again they'll have to show me the primary challenger to obama and the rest of the corporate robots in their party.

Anyone that feels compelled to respond to me by telling me how terrrrrrible it'll be if a repug is in the white house can just save it for someone else. In my view obama IS a repug in all but name. Given his recent signing of the NDAA I'd even go so far as to call him a neocon-in-a-liberal's-clothing. So the Lesser of 2 Evils propaganda wont work on me because I recognize it for what it is which is blatant propaganda.

0 # disgusted American 2012-01-14 00:19

Aye, aye.

It is the fault of the people who just keep thinking inside the box and who are terrified of their own shadows.

OMG, a Republican might win! So? Won't make any difference. Has no one noticed that Demcorats in D.C. just keep whining as they continue to work for their money masters?

The only difference between the 2 parties is that Republicans are up front about hating you.

Be the change you want to have in all facets of your life including in the voting booth. Otherwise, you have no right to complain b/c you will get what you deserve if you vote for a Repuke or Obama. His signing of the NDAA after his dog-and-pony show about vetoing it should be a large red alert if you weren't already leery of him.

+8 # brotherdb 2012-01-11 23:26

Thanks WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama said Wednesday he wants to reward companies that invest in America and eliminate tax breaks for companies that don't, and he's planning new tax proposals to do it.
Speaking alongside a group of business executives in the East Room, Obama said that rising American productivity and increasingly competitive costs add up to "a unique moment, an inflection point" for businesses to invest in the U.S. and bring jobs back home. And he argued there's a moral case for it, too, and that business leaders have a responsibility to their country.
"So my message to business leaders today is simple: ask yourselves what you can do to bring jobs back to the country that made our success possible — and I'm going to do

+2 # X Dane 2012-01-12 10:22

Brotherdb, please finish what you were saying. It loks like stopped in mid sentence

+1 # disgusted American 2012-01-14 00:23

X Dane,

Brotherdb has quoted the AP story as a form of sarcasm. He didn't stop in mid sentence. He stopped quoting the story at the perfect place place (Obama hasn't done anything he said he would do in the story or otherwise).

0 # Merschrod 2012-01-12 12:56

Hey Brother,

That promise is four years old! Brother Barrack told us that and not a wimper in that direction.
He had his chance - try voting for Rocky Anderson - At least you will be able to say that you voted for the best and not the less worse of the worst choices.

Hang in there

-2 # John Locke 2012-01-12 15:51

Obama talks a good talk, its sad he always goes in the wrong direction you think its just an accident? or is he's a puppet on a string that is controlled by New York bankers.

+7 # cloonan 2012-01-11 23:38

Pretty obvious that both parties are controlled by the same moneyed interests--who are intent on destroying the social safety net--republicans more rapidly than democrats---the pain caused by the financial sector speculation and greed across the globe in ireland,greece and iceland will continue to manifest itself in the rustbelt and beyond because the donations to the political show of the next 10 months come from the same kettle of ringmasters---intent on maximizing profit and shareholder value---tax the rich

+4 # uglysexy 2012-01-12 00:06

it's going to get alot worse before it gets better. in fact it may not get better. no one will remember this sparring between the republicans after the iran war starts....the mother of all wars in recent memory...maybe the III. depends on what the russians and chinese do. major contractions lead to larger powers wanting to redraw market lines and to want to wipe out debt and give the spoils to the victor. but this has never been attempted in a fully nuclearized world. it may now

+5 # uglysexy 2012-01-12 00:07

Romney may still win because the whites want the black person out of the plantation house....haven't you ever read "The Great God Brown"?

+1 # uglysexy 2012-01-12 00:10

sorry ....I meant "the emperor jones".....got my o'neill confused...been a long time

+13 # RMDC 2012-01-12 00:18

Of course this coming from Newt will not last very long or have much impact. Newt is like a wounded rhino who is looking to gore anything close to him. He'll say anything that might have a chance of sticking to Romney. Newt is angry about the thrashing he got in Iowa and he wants revenge. He does not want american to understand that Marx was right -- capitalism is theft. Newt knows where his money comes from. He's a paid blowhard of the ruling elite. In a week or so he'll be back signing the praises of vulture capitalism and he'll completely forget the lesson he should have learned from Bain Capital.

+8 # John Locke 2012-01-12 07:51

RMDC: Marx was very astute about capitalism, he also had the right but very basic ideas about society, I ask what is wrong with socialism, (NOT COMMUNISM) Socialism, providing for those in need, as they need, medical, housing and food, I don't agree with an equal distribution of wealth and the lack of a right to own, and opportunity to succede, but i do feel some obligation toward those who can't help themselves through no fault of their own...example, the disabled... America is a mix, a socialist democracy and that is as it should be...but that has now changed because it is under fire by greedy capitalists who want it all at the expense of those who can not provide for themselves or even find work, for reasons of capitalism's failure.

+4 # David Starr 2012-01-12 15:39

"America is a mix, a socialist democracy..." I'm sorry to disagree but the U.S. is an empire comprised of a "holy trinity": Capitalist rule, ultranationalis m & an ebb & flow of religious fanaticism; even despite whatever degree of democracy that's left & FDR's New Deal social programs. Regarding Communism, humankind hasn't really had direct experience w/ it because it hasn't really existed, despite its use in Cold War propaganda. And tragically, there's been the unfortunate association of socialism/communism w/ the barbaric legacy of Stalinism, the latter of which was more a Tsarist/feudal-like regression than anything else. Communism isn't possible, at least right now. For it to realistically work, humankind would eventually have to evolve & mature to such a level where it could handle it. Marx & Engels gave vague clues, e.g., An Association of Free Producers, A Society Where the Free Development of Each is the Free Development of all & the more well-known, From Each According to Their Ability to Each According to Their Need. There's also the idea that the state would wither away, i.e., no government. Would it be a utopia? No, because that implies perfection & humankind will probably remain imperfect. Would it be an improvement? If it means a truimph/prioritization of humanitarian values over predatory/parasitical behavior, definately yes. But it's always healthy to try & maintain a reasonable degree of skepticism & sober idealism.

+1 # John Locke 2012-01-12 17:00

David Starr: I agree the true ideology of Communism has never existed, because communism as practiced is China and Russia, was not Marx or Ingles model, the rulers in those countries lived like capitalists, in luxury with multiple homes and automobiles, and maids and servants, they were an upper class ...in an allegedly classless society... and everyone else was led to believe they were the joint owners of the companies they worked for...true communism is really an ideology which also will not work because of the human need to excell, ergo capitalism again... humans are not inclined to consider themselves as equals to all others, that is the human ego which can not be overcome ... however perhaps another model of capitalism may be more workable, its called "state capitalism" where the state is the capitalists and takes greed out of the equasion...

+1 # PGreen 2012-01-13 13:11

"State capitalism" may be defined in several ways. One is government management of the economy for the benefit of international business. This is the philosophy of the neoliberals, Reagan, George 1, Clinton, and Obama. Another model frequently held up is described by Wiki as "state management of the productive forces in a capitalist manner," and often applied to China. Personally, I find both examples seriously deficient, though you could argue it is poor implementation. In the short term, I'm inclined to favor democratic socialist European models, which contain elements of capitalism. (This is Bernie Sanders' preference as well.) I guess the emphasis should be on democratic, though: Equal access to the legislative process on principle. Not something that currently exists in this country, given money in politics.

0 # David Starr 2012-01-16 13:15

This post is way late but what the hell; I'll try to brief (yeah right). If Communism never existed than it wasn't practiced in the PRC & USSR, although, like Marx & Engels at times did, the term was at times used interchangably w/ Socialism, e.g., rhetoric & slogans promoting the idea of building for a future Communist society. Using the term "true communism" temptingly leads to thinking that communism is too-good-to-be-true. I refer to my initial post for my brief take on a future communist scenario. Humans have excelled in previous history w/o the capitalist system/ideology dominating. It doesn't have a monopoly on excelling; or ego for that matter. Ego has usually been associated w/ selfishness & arrogance but it's not THE dominant trait in Human nature. But it's not entirely negative, e.g., a healthy outlook of selfperception, i.e., feeling good about oneself, respecting oneself. But just as prevelant in human nature has been/is a yearning for justice & equality. I'll say a prioritization of the positive over the negative w/in human nature. "A better world is possible",; I refer again to my brief scenario of a future communist society, but to reiterate, it won't be a too-good-too-be-true utopia.

+2 # David Starr 2012-01-12 15:14

I do agree that Marx was essentially right about capitalism, its very nature promoting systematic & overt theft based on an inherent need to feed off inequality in the worship of profits. It's like having a one-track mind.

I truly wish that Ted Rall didn't refer to Repubs as Socialists in the title of his article, or at least putting the word in quotes, as Repubs are anything but. Other than that, very good article.

-3 # John Locke 2012-01-12 17:02

David I agree the title was incorrect... and our current system is a socialist democracy...but now a socialist/facism

0 # David Starr 2012-01-16 13:29

Again I'm way late but again what the hell. I have no idea where you get the idea that the U.S. is a "socialist democracy." It's obvious that the U.S. gov has been/is capitalist-ruled w/ "two" capitalist parties heavily bankrolled by a capitalist-practicing corporate bureacracy, now w/ "legal personhood", & w/ the same or similar relations of production being practiced w/in the economy that's part of capitalism's nature, i.e., the unequal relationship between capital & labor. "Socialist/fascism"? Well, no, more like capitalist rule w/a protofascist strain & in turn threatened &/or declining social programs.

+6 # Vince 2012-01-12 00:51

Mr. Rall, you are, forgive the cheap rhyme, very much on the ball. Why no one else has pointed out how the Republicans are deconstructing themselves is a bit of a mystery, but I suspect after this article gets around, more will follow.

+4 # isafakir 2012-01-12 03:51

the idea that this discredits capitalism is absurd. what is being discussed is the immoral unjust often illegal
unregulated abuse of capitalism.

like everything else, capitalism is not self regulating as alan greenspan tearfully acknowledged. it takes a lot of effort to keep a market free. unregulated, markets become monopolies, which are by definition not free.

+4 # John Locke 2012-01-12 17:11

isafakir: Capitalism always seeks corporate control and thats the reason Facism creeps into power...and that is our main issue today, we no longer have a democracy, the right wing think tanks promote corporate control of government it's subtle, and often misdirects the reader, but the observer fully understands where the power struggle lies...The supreme Court in Citizens United gave us a look down the rabbit hole and its very deep...we saw this practically world wide during the early 20th century, even the US was headed toward fascism, our news media were promoting it as well as promoting Hitler think of the Bush Family and Hearst Newspapers...and of course JP Morgan and Dupont, who were about to finance a revolution to take control of the US Government...

+13 # seeuingoa 2012-01-12 04:05

"it´s Obama in a landslide next fall"

Just a pity that he doesn´t deserve it.

+8 # Ninure 2012-01-12 04:34

These are the same people that say the unemployed are unemployed because they are lazy, now they admit that capitalists are greedy.

I wonder how long that's gonna last?

+2 # John Locke 2012-01-12 17:17

Ninure: People want to work they want jobs,they want to be productive, what we need is a man in the white house who is serious about creating jobs in America. I fear neither Romney nor Obama have that agenda, it will be more of the same...it always has been...

To Create jobs they have to create demand for products, that means money in the hands of Mr. and Mrs. America not wall street, This depression did not have to happen...Obama could have provided the aid to the banks for a principle amount reduction on our mortgages... The banks needed the money so badly they would have grabbed it under those terms, and guess what No foreclosure epidemic...

+2 # X Dane 2012-01-12 22:16

John Locke, you seem especially negative today. As we have all established, Obama is much less than perfect, but the thought of having Robert Bork choose several judges, besides the one or two supremes, is horrible.
I am sorry, but sometimes, the less than perfect is the best we can do.

In regard to jobs, the infrastructure jobs Obama has been trying to get started would certainly help both people and the economy.

Romney will do the standard republican fix,..... tax cut for the wealthy... His tax program is doing just that. I heard it will penalize the middle class and give great breaks to high income earners.

0 # John Locke 2012-01-13 07:41

X Dane: I am not especially negative today, my views have been consistant, as has been my comments about Obama, I am just tired of having the same issue before me every election, (Since after Kennedy JFK)its always been the lessor of two evils, well the lesser of two evils in my mind is still evil...Obama's jobs bill is not enough, we need about 25 million jobs and we need someone who is serious about creating FULL EMPLOYMENT ... not accepting a % of us to be unemployed... every person not being productive to his ability is a wasted life. And I am tired of seeing people being thrown out of their homes by the banks while more than 18 million homes are VACANT and 3.5 million people are homeless...Obama could stop this and so could congress...a real president would!

+12 # walt 2012-01-12 05:03

Perhaps, as Michael Moore stated, capitalism as we once knew it is dead!

And why not? We witnessed a total raping and pillaging of the entire economy by a ruthless Wall Street crowd that appears to have avoided any form of prosecution for their crimes.

For those of us old enough to remember the days of the Cold War and the "communist threat," it's amazing to see how the capitalism condemned by the old Soviets has failed us.

Communism isn't the answer, but the kind of Romney capitalism described here isn't either.

And when was the last time we ever heard someone refer to our great supplier as "Communist China?" That term seems to have disappeared quite nicely.

It's amazing how big money talks!

+13 # tuandon 2012-01-12 05:41

Capitalism's day in the sun has past. We need European-style socialism to put this country back together again, and neither major party is willing to embrace the idea publicly. But I still can't help feeling happy thinking that those morons on the Right are going to go down to defeat. Maybe, just maybe, the Dems will finally wake up and return to their origins as the party of the Working Man. Well, a man can dream, can't he?

+8 # dfvboulder 2012-01-12 07:01

Rall thinks the Dems are slow to get it, because otherwise they'd be all over the populist bandwagon.

He's seems to still hold onto the quaint assumption that ideas and people run the show.

No, it's MONEY.

Follow the money, Ted. Show me the money.

+11 # fredboy 2012-01-12 07:04

Republican types have always been socialists in the worst abuse of that term. They are parasites, feeding on the work and belongings of other humans, draining systems and environments of life, gorging on all within reach. Locusts.

+10 # Hanalea 2012-01-12 08:34

Unfortunately the run-amok, uncontrolled capitalism that we have been witnessing is far from dead. It is indeed vampirical and ravening, as many have said here. Overturning Citizens United is critical if the people are to wrest power from the corporate monolith.
True, the GOP have presented us with a clown car full of almost unimaginably dangerous idiots---- to vote third party will may well doom us to a Republican presidency as it did when Nader ran. Deceitful man; he said he'd drop out of the race if it looked close and then did not. As angry and ignorant as so much of the American populace is, they'll vote for the GOP candidate because they blame Obama for the disasters he inherited from Bush. Obama has certainly made some mistakes but he has had the shamelss, ossified Party of No to contend with.
My hope is that as a second term president, he will push through the social and environmental programs that he talked about in his campaign, that we will see a president who more closely resembles FDR and LBJ, a president who will not negotiate the overall well being of the people and the nation. FDR and Johnson were certainly not saints but they ensured that many programs were legislated which helped millions of people and improved the quality of life in this country. I hope that Obama will demonstrate some of that strength of will in a second term.
I cannot imagine without horror a Republican at the helm in the days to come.

+5 # tedcloak 2012-01-12 14:27

You apparently assume that Pres. Obama will have a Democratic Congress that he can rely on if he breaks loose from his Wall Street orientation. Electing progressive Dems to Congress is absolutely essential.

+3 # bobby t. 2012-01-12 13:41

landslide? did i hear landslide? how about 50.5 to 49.5 if obama is lucky. the ignorance and apathy out there is enormous. i am a retired teacher and i know what the real public is like. the negative ads will act as a way to keep people from voting. madison ave earns their money, and there is going to be hundreds of millions spent on the next election. so people will say, as some do above, a pox on both their houses, and vote third party or not vote at all. there are more democrats than republicans although there are more conservatives than liberals at a two to one ratio. however, there are more moderates and centrists that are democrats. however, too many do not register and do not vote. dirty politics has put them to sleep, and when they wake up, they may face a nightmare of Nazi like proportions. i have tried to wake up my friends and relatives. they only wake up when someone loses their job. my best friend was a republican years ago. he lost his job in a corporate takeover and now he sees the light. and so it goes.

+5 # ericlipps 2012-01-12 14:39

I've always found it screwy to hear America described as a "center-right nation"--that is, as a nation in which the center is right of center.

What we are is an ideologically diverse, if not incoherent, nation ruled by a coalition of corporate socialists and loony fundamentalists who bought their way into power and are willing to shoot to stay there.

-4 # unclewags 2012-01-12 14:39

" Obama has taken pains to assure the 1% that while he is not one of them, he'll look out for their bank accounts." Note, too, that even when the Democrats controlled both Houses of Congress, this president was politically impotent. The Viagra of "the voices of the people" cannot bring this eunich to "attention".
Obama has screwed the people with his "flacidity". Stand up erect to this WS pimp, people.

0 # Don Thomann 2012-01-13 07:57

Take Capitalist principles and apply as traffic laws on the highway; what do you get?
"Voila!"

+2 # GravityWave 2012-01-14 09:16

I think there is a lot of naiveté and emotional non-thinking on display here today. I don't think a lot of you realize just what Obama is up against with the powerful "have mores" as Bush put it. The Republicans created a machine that sucked up money and power like none of us have ever witnessed. They literally control everything that people read and think. But TARP, the Bush tax cuts, and Citizens United, the very penultimate consequences of the Bush-created monster, got our attention.

Even our Supreme Court is corrupted. Now these pudenda heads are sitting on $billions and like vowing not to put a cent into the economy unless they get their way.Guided only by their bottom line and with no loyalty or character, they are not going to give up easily. We need progressives in Congress and a Prez who at least is smart enough to understand our situation. Obama. Sometimes a holding pattern is all that we can get. Between Obama and Harry Reid, a lot of sheer guano gets weeded out of bills. And some times we win a battle quietly. A Romney white house would ignore the right-wing guano and let it be encoded into our laws. What a place to live that would create.

DON’T SPLIT THE VOTE!!! That is how Dems. defeat themselves. Lump it and vote for Obama and, yes, AGAINST everyone else.We don't need a dummy or a novice. Obama is smarter than anyone on the block.

DON'T SPLIT THE VOTE!!!

0 # shortonfaith 2012-01-14 15:37

The Change, It Had To Come
We Knew It All Along
We Were Liberated From The Fold, That's All
And The World Looks Just The Same
And History Ain't Changed
'Cause The Banners, They Are Flown In The Next War

There's Nothing In The Streets
Looks Any Different To Me
And The Slogans Are Replaced, By-The-Bye
And The Parting On The Left
Are Now Parting On The Right
And The Beards Have All Grown Longer Overnight

Then I'll Get On My Knees And Pray
We Don't Get Fooled Again
Don't Get Fooled Again

Meet The New Boss
Same As The Old Boss

Refresh comments list
RSS feed for comments to this post.

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.