A few weeks ago, it was reported that some right-wing rich guys’ club had pledged $100 million to defeat President Obama. The Koch Brothers led the way, pledging $60 mil. Which is pocket change, when your net worth is $50,000,000,000.00.
Leaving aside the obvious issue – the estate tax – I’m puzzled as to why all those right-wing rich folks feel that way. The foundation of their wealth – the stock market – has performed vastly better when Democrats have been in charge.
In 2008, the New York Times reported that since 1929, $10,000 invested in the stock market under Democratic Presidents (over 40 years) had become $300,671. Meanwhile, $10,000 invested in the stock market under Republican Presidents (over 35 years) had become only $11,733.
Well, at least the affluent caste didn’t lose money during Republican regimes, right? Wrong. The value of the dollar dropped by 92% during that period. So in real value, $10,000 invested in the stock market under Republican Presidents actually became just $955. And forty-six cents. In economic terms, roughly the same effect as some foreign enemy blowing up 90% of our factories, warehouses, farms, malls, office buildings, apartment buildings, and every other productive asset.
Poor rich people. All the money gone. Those darned Republicans.
And under President Obama, the difference actually has increased, dramatically. On the day that President Obama was sworn into office, the S&P 500 index closed at 805. Today, it’s at 1,321. Under President Obama, the stock market is up 64%, in less than four years.
That brings the Democratic average annual stock market performance up to 10%. The Republican figure is 0.4%. No wonder Republicans hate government – they’re so bad at it. Particularly when it comes preserving national wealth.
And despite the incessant whining of the corporate rich, by no stretch of the imagination are they suffering under the Obama Administration. Just today, it was reported that pay for CEOs has reached an all-time high, just short of $10 million a year. Or roughly $5,000 an hour. Good work, if you can get it.
So why are all these right-wing deep pockets going after Obama and the Democrats? Even if you’re some selfish rich guy, that’s just dumb. That’s cutting your wallet to spite your pants. Maybe the rich need to develop a little class consciousness.
Honestly, when you look at the facts, these robber barons spending huge wads of cash to get rid of the Democrats are like lemmings. They’re all jumping off the money cliff, and they’re taking everyone else with them.
Most of us have heard the question, “If you’re so smart, why aren’t you rich?” But a better question would be, “If you’re so rich, why aren’t you smart?”
Courage,
Alan Grayson



51 Comments

And President Obama raised $15 million in one evening at George Clooney’s shindig. What is Obama going to do for Hollywood?
According to the Campaign Finance Institute $56.7 million of Obama’s 2011 donations were from small donors, under $200. That has got to bite a lot deeper for ordinary folks than for m/billionairs. What is Obama going to do for them? Probably not healthcare, he’s already screwed that. Reduction in military spending? Bring troops home? Stop killing people in 8 countries? Not likely. Wait, maybe reduced Internet surveillance for donors? or a 60 minute warning if he is going to target them for assassination? Well, at least they can take comfort in the rising Dow Jones, even if they own no stocks, have had their pensions disappear, have no jobs, will never be able to pay for college, will be criminals for not buying health insurance, and have underwater mortgages.
Sorry, I forgot — what was your point?
Unfortunately, Mr. “I approve the murder of peaceful American citizens in international waters by Israeli soldiers” Grayson, the Democratic Party of Roosevelt has gone the way of the Republican Party of Lincoln.
Dumb Rich People?
You mean like those dumb poor people who thought that Alan Grayson would actually hold out and not vote for a faux HCR bill without a public option?
Those kind of dumb people?
Trying to figure out what could be more ironic (or distasteful) than sellout Alan Grayson signing off a post with “courage”. So far I’m stumped.
How about a “progressive” blog promoting his distasteful drive-bys?
Speaking of dumb rich people, didn’t Grayson lose most of his fortune to a financial scam?
“Promote” has a definite meaning in the kossesque style of diary blogs — it means the diary is promoted by the editors to the front page… an occurence which, for some reason, doesn’t happen to Grayson’s driveling nowadays.
What Grayson does have at this moment is a diary on the rec list… which is an automated list on the sidebar of the front page.
And all it takes for Grayson to get on that list is a few obots recommending the dairy.
Or, more precisely, one or more of Grayson’s staff has a diary on the rec list… the disconnect from reality is tangible.
I got no problem with this being recced. Can’t do it myself. Conscience and what not. That and it’s pure shite.
I think this stuff should be shared widely because these people should share their “wisdom” and all should see their “wisdom”.
The other option is they will scurry back under their rocks where they will work behind the scenes to make their masters more money.
… what?… you mean
a staffer’sGrayson’s profound expositions on topics such as the proper way to conduct budget warfare in small Mideastern countries and why the rich are so much better of under Obama wouldn’t be popular in their own right?I mean, slaughtering brown people on the cheap and exalting the ascendancy of the elites… what’s not to like?
7-10 days ago a grayson diary was promoted to the left side of the my.firedoglake main page. Not sure if it was on the firedoglake main page or not, but his drivel was promoted to more prominent placement by my.firedoglake editors.
You’ll notice that grayson never responds or converses, only has a staffer doing these drivebys, which are against fdl policy.
Anthony weiner used to do the same thing here. grayson and weiner were both firewhateverdogs winners, and given fdl raised funds. I can understand the urge to hold them to a different standard, and even want to believe that grayson and weiner types are still on the side of the 99%, but…
Guess I’m lucky to be able to vent here.
It is odd, really. I don’t know why Grayson’s people keep dropping this drivel into our lake. At least Kucinich isn’t doing it. And the rest of the faux progressives seem to keep their distance. What’s up with Grayson’s minions?
I guess “courage” is contagious.
I understand now…
… in fact the Grayson drivel is currently right under another of RHRealityCheck’s attempts at Obama apologia…
So the question would seem to be this: does the articles on the My FDL page reflect solely the rec list automation?
Or do myfdl editors actually promote myfdl diaries to the myfdl page?
If that is the case, if diaries are put on the My FDL page by editors as well as by automation, then that would seem to open a can of worms… in that how would the random reader dropping by be able to tell the difference between the dembot promoted drivel and the editor-promoted dairies?
… wow… what a mess of non-agreeing tenses… I really do miss the edit function…
Discussion of the topic would be less boring in comments.
?
A staffer’sGrayson’s drive-bys aren’t the topic?It is a matter of opinion, Zapkitty.
It is Ruth’s opinion, whether it is her personal opinion or her “official” opinion, as a member of the FDL “crew”, or a combination of both … is of little matter.
Apparently, the opinions of others, regarding Grayson and his celebrity “drive-bys”, let us be frank, his “official Democratic Party drive-bys”, are NOT the proper or appropriate “target” which these diaries are supposed to elicit. Talk about what is IN the diaries, please, and ignore anything and everything else. Context is anathema, perspective is dangerous, and the truth annoying.
So, be respectful and either hang on every word of wisdom, say nothing, even if you find the Grayson Celebrity Diaries to be insipid, irrelevant, self-serving, lauding of pathetic money-oriented or wealthy Democrats and the spineless or complicit Democratic Party , as a whole, or … feel free to share your personal opinion(s) about these other things, as you and others on this thread have done, even including Ruth Calvo, and thereby assume and embrace the risk of the very real possibility of raising umbrage, admonition, or disapproval from those who support, officially or un-officially, a certain political party and a certain political “perspective” …
Remember, it is all, always, in good, clean fun, zapkitty.
Enjoy.
;~DW
‘the truth annoying’
Facts are not annoying, but we were talking about opinions, and mine is that the topic is interesting, the perpetual critics of other posters are not. A post on what they wanted to discuss – from the critics – might attract those who want to discuss their topic, rather than those drawn to read what was posted being inundated with other topics than those they came for. imho
Well, my own opinion is that the purpose of the post is deceptive propaganda.
Discussing the dichotomy between GOP economic fantasies and what actually happens when they get into office is a fine subject for discussion…
… but the purpose of the post here is not discussion.
The stafferGrayson is not here to discuss anything.The post is an opportunistic PR piece, a freebie political advertisement for someone who has no interest in actually interacting with FDL readers.
The purpose of this post and all the other drive-bys is to give a politician a false veneer of progressive cover using the name of a known progressive blog.
That is deceptive, and that deception is in itself a topic for discussion.
Especially when the politician responsible for the post has proven that he has no interest in actually pursuing progressive policies in any meaningful way once he’s in office.
It is quite possible that a post on the topic you wish to discuss would attract others who also want to discuss it. Eight comments on some one else’s post, however, give the impression that you’re there to cavil over some one else’s effort rather than make one yourself, at least to me.
” … what they came for”?
Ruth, perhaps we come to FDL for many reasons?
And, yes, it would appear that you DO find other’s opinions AND the fact of that truth, the divergence of opinion, to be annoying.
The question for you, AND for certain other FDL “crew” members, is this; Is it your personal opinion which you share with the rest of us, or is it “policy”?
Perhaps you agree with the New York state legislators who wish to do away with anonymity on the internet because the comments of anonymous posters doesn’t “… add anything to the discussion”? Presumably, these politicians are speaking of the political “discussion”? If so, then the political class seems to want everyone to be held to account and made “responsible” except for themselves …
I intend to take your comments as simply reflecting YOUR personal opinion … until such time as I have reason to think otherwise.
MY opinion IS that Celebrity Posters, who most often do NOT have the courtesy to even come “back” to reply to commenters, will simply have to endure the response of others, many of whom are understandably disgusted with the notion that things exist in isolated splendor, one from another, and take what I consider to be reasonable issue with the notion that Alan Grayson is somehow in a position to tell us what’s what, what to think … and whom we should vote for.
Did you have anything to do with this diary being promoted?
Perhaps more transparency around the issue of HOW certain diaries get promoted might just be something you SHOULD care to address in more than superficial generalities? No?
Given the nature of the actual comments that actual people took the time to type out and “publish”, not just the “recommends”, it would seem that Grayson’s diary might be a “springboard” for you or some other FDL crew member to elaborate … just a wee bit.
What do you think?
The question of WHO is “IN” and makes the decides is NOT going to go away, indeed, it might become a much more controversial issue, especially as we head into an election season where a clear majority of Americans do not think that EITHER candidate for the Presidency will do what is necessary to improve the economic reality for that majority, an election season that has morphed well beyond twisted farce into dire catastrophe in the making … and bearing in mind the attitudes of some, even here, that any who question re-electing Obama and continuing to support the Democrats should simply leave FDL and go away, and they are quite vocal and unpleasant in their advice, ought to give at least some of FDL’s crew, a bit of concern and even a bit of caution … for, Ruth, trust, that most important and precious of “things” between people, is at stake.
I say these things not to disparage or insult, not to create bad feelings or create meaningless division, but in the hopes, however forlorn, that FDL might continue to provide best example as well as serve as a MOST NECESSARY change agent.
My consideration is that we need massive systemic changes, others believe a bit of “tweaking” is all that is needed.
However, TRUST and honesty must be considered by all of us to be central to those changes … if you catch my wee “drift” as a mere “outsider”?
DW
If FDL IS, essentially, a “progressive political blog” which supports Democrats, right or wrong, and sees NO option but supporting Democrats and the current President, then
Agreed.
There a several things which this diary of Grayson’s just happens to hit upon, or give rise to, zapkitty, and your point about promulgating the propaganda is definitely one of them.
DW
Well, you know, that’s funny. When the Klown Kar arrives every morning, the subject sure seems to stray from the topic at hand, which is, admittedly, boring in itself. I don’t think it’s a bad thing per se. Talking about what’s going on in one’s personal life is important to some. But why is it that what’s good for the goose is not good for the gander?
Grayson’s “topic” is nothing more than “those stupid Republicans don’t know how good they got it under Obama.” Of course, they know. Their kabuki is as transparent as, say, Obama pretending to be angry at the 1%.
If you find the conversation boring, why not stay silent? That would be the courteous thing to do, in my opinion.
May I rec your comment, DW, and add that I was feeling forlorn that my Book Sale in aid of TarheelDem enabling him to replace the items illegally confiscated by the Chicago police wasn’t left-page, or even front-paged on the Mothership. I did ask Dakine at his watercooler, but received no answer. (He may have shut down for the night by then).
But my question stands: isn’t this one way we could actually be an activist site, and support our comrade who dared go to protest NATO on behalf of all of us who couldn’t go?
Your opinions and my opinions should weigh the same, no problem – and you will note that it’s not what any of the commenters opined that I talked about originally, but that it’s just not as interesting as discussion of a topic. Grayson presented facts I was quite glad to see brought up, and when I got to comments I found nothing but bitching about Grayson’s posting history. Maybe that’s interesting to you. Why not post about it, and then some one who does go to the comment section will be some one who came to discuss Grayson posting history? Instead you want to bitch at me about my possible role in FDL politics, all of it imaginary. By suspecting me of all sorts of suspected activities you would not like if they were happening, we have a new topic, just as uninteresting to me as the previous comments’ idea of the topic desired. If I seem to avoid answering your queries, it’s because I am not here to discuss FDL practices, possible displeasing of you or any of your associates, or ‘celebrity’ posts. When there is a post on that topic, if anyone wants to discuss it, then they will choose to come over to do that. I am not among any such number.
So you wish that we find value and good in Grayson or else go write our own diary?
Ruth, that seems a bit constrained, a bit haughty, frankly, a bit out of touch.
What of critical assessment, what of feed-back, what of honest discussion of what real people think actually matters rather than what a politician wants us to think?
Perhaps Ruth you are “promoting” the wrong thing?
And, do you reasonably expect the rest of us to either agree with or heed your perspective of decorum?
What difference, very specifically does it make to you how any of us respond to the diaries we encounter?
Your admonishment makes no sense … so why are YOU, personally so bothered to the point of making a comment, UNLESS you expect the rest of us to do as you wish? Which, apparently, is to make nice noises on Alan Grayson diary threads …
You side-step the issues of celebrity posting, the question of HOW and by WHOM diaries are promoted, and zapkitty’s very real concern with the promulgation of what amounts to political propaganda … a concern with which I completely agree. Why is that?
You only suggestion is simply that we all go write our own diaries, if we don’t like this one, implying that it is unfair or unreasonable to do otherwise. Do you really consider, counselor, that to be sound advice … do you not see that it immediately, AND reasonably, raises further issues?
We are NOT taking about making “polite” here, we are talking about the realities, current and oppressive, in our nation and world, about what may, reasonably and necessarily, be done about those things … and saying in effect, “If you can’t say something nice, then don’t say is most definitely NOT what our world and time demand of each and every one of us.
DW
Amen Sister!
Not sure of Klown Kar arriving every morning, last I knew that referred to the candidates for a Republican nomination, and do not know where they arrive every morning, so am not at all sure where you go to find them and I don’t. I find the topic interesting, and did say that it would be less boring, but courtesy to the poster as host/hostess is usually my practice, something that had not been observed in the comments I found here. If my comment offends those trying to exercise courtesy to the poster by their criticisms, it would not be the worst thing to happen, imho.
Ruth, I suspect you of nothing … I am merely asking what I consider to be reasonable and necessary questions.
I am not the only one who has such questions, btw, and this thread is as good a place as any for the discussion of those questions.
If nothing else, it will give Grayson what might be the largest number of comments that any of his Celebrity Diaries has ever garnered.
DW
Your continuing to discuss the suspected misdoings of FDL in not giving you say over Grayson’s posting does not really inspire me to want to go to your desired length of rebutting or confirming your suspicions of my imagine role in those suspected ill deeds. Not going to linger here entertaining your comments’ suppositions which are not what brought me to the post at all, and are not interesting to me. I do not see why, if you want a discussion of something, you are unwilling just honestly to post about it and see what results, rather than using some one else’s post on a different subject to try attracting parties that you can then accost. Honesty would be refreshing, and your post on the subject you wish to discuss much more honest than using some one else’s audience to sell your talking points.
Courtesy to the poster?
It goes both ways.
Courtesy would be responding to those who comment.
To my knowledge, not once has Alan Grayson responded to anyone’s comments at FDL.
Frankly, bringing up the diversion of being “nice”, especial;ly as regards the political class is a hoot and a half.
Nice?
How long has it been since the political class has treated “the people” nicely, or really in a courteous fashion … not so much with their words but with their actions and behavior.
I seek best example, not some fairy tale divorced from actual reality, in which certain people are accorded respected while the many are not.
The political class, including Alan Grayson, do not deserve either the glib benefit of the doubt, these days, nor the assumption that their motives are pure and devoid of self-interest … quite the contrary, in fact.
When we have a President who claims the power to kill anyone, anywhere, at anytime, citizen or not, due process be damned … when Alan Grayson speaks to that issue, then, I assure you, I shall be all ears. Until that time, polemical partisan plaints will be treated, by little ole me, in precisely the fashion which I consider they richly deserve.
And that includes calling politicians out and discussing and supporting alternative ideas, possibilities, and candidates.
Which FDL ought well itself seriously consider the need of doing … else it will lose the respect and trust it has properly earned.
Now, Ruth, you might not like my saying these things, you might even not like me for saying them … however, the truth, as we each see it is ALWAYS important and even on topic … if it is shared in respectful and thoughtful fashion … just as everyone who has commented here, today, yourself included, of course, has done.
I think nothing has been lost or belittled, in fact, things have been gained and, hopefully, appreciation has been enhanced.
What do you think?
DW
Actually, after perusing Grayson’s (staffer’s) post, I don’t really see anything to complain about. In this case, he’s not defending Obama, he is just pointing out that the rich don’t have a beef with Obama because their lives have been good under his watch. I don’t really think that’s such a good thing, but Grayson’s point is why are they dumb enough to bitch when they’re having such a nice time?
And yeah, Grayson’s staffer posts here, as do others, and they don’t engage commenters. As Ruth says, if you want to bitch about that, write a diary about it.
cant help herself(ive been on the receiving end of it too)
msmolly ,will run interferance for one of the pecking order hens…its a real turnoff
Hi Wendy dear,conventional wisdom,almost always wins the day at thelake,sigh…how are ya doin?
im just waiting for the comments to be disapeared,as they dont fall in line
“… someone else’s audience”?
Ruth, that is patently absurd.
And you know it.
Those who comment do NOT belong to the person who wrote the post and your implication that FDL perceives things in such a fashion is more than faintly ridiculous.
Ruth, would you, personally, rather that I didn’t comment or share my concerns?
I ask because I care.
Is it possible that you might understand that?
Rather than a knee-jerk response, consider that mayhaps there ARE legitimate reasons for concern and that your behavior and accusations, as you have demonstrated them, here today, are part of that concern?
You attack and seek to belittle me, simply for openly asking some questions which have arisen over time and raising reasonable concerns about how things “work”.
Why?
Ruth, where is YOUR courtesy, today?
DW
!!!
(One hopes … not ever, sadlyyes …)
;~DW
has happened to me on the book salon,and dear RC,has slandered me on a issue,she knows zero about,but her opinions are precious…ha
here need a chuckle today,gotta go feed the burro !
Vatican confirms pope’s butler arrested in scandal
6 hrs ago – VATICAN CITY (AP) — The Vatican confirmed Saturday that the pope’s butler had been arrested in its embarrassing leaks scandal, adding a Hollywood twist to an already remarkable tale of power struggles, intrigue and corruption in the highest levels
I honestly don’t know what you’re all bristly about, and I don’t understand “pecking order hens.” I only pointed out that Grayson’s post itself is not a defense of Obama, it’s a whack at the rich who are whining. Seems a pretty innocuous statement to me.
And RC is a man, by the way.
If this is going to be another “whack FDL, whack other commenters” thread, then I’ve got better things to do with my afternoon. Have a nice holiday, everyone.
Gonna go right out on the twiggy end of the limb and address Grayson’s apparent theme here.
Which is, “dumb rich people.”
I submit, rich people are not dumb. They are very, very smart. They know what they are about. What they are about is (and here again I disagree with Grayson absolutely) distorting the dialogue. And, as is evident in this diary post, distorting the dialogue is also what Grayson is about. He’s perfectly happy with equating success in a presidency with catering TO the rich. And yes, Obama has been very successful at this. So, don’t the rich know this? Aren’t they aware they are biting the very hand that feeds them?
Oh, dear sir, (pat on the head), believe me, they know.
Do you remember what happened when the big banks were bailed out? Plenty of Democrats buzzing around Congress in them days. Who didn’t want them to be bailed out (besides those in the American public who had a bit of foresight)? It was the Republicans!
Why? That was the start of the kabuki good cop bad cop scenario. They knew they had no creds, so they smeared – very deliberately smeared – the issue of no bailouts. They voted against in order to blacken the concept with their blackened reputations. And they succeeded. Goody goody dems voted to bail out the big, big banks, so that was a win-win for those ‘dumb’ rich guys.
We all, or most of us, know these facts. Please, whoever is posting this drivel and whoever (she shall be nameless) is recommending it, take a good look at the facts. It is not the greatest thing in the world, when the sky IS falling, to want to hear from folk who are pulling down the columns in order for rich people to jetset round the world in high style whilst the less fortunate sink. Didn’t think this site was dedicated to those at the top, though I will agree riches in moderation aid a healthy economy. That’s not what we have at present, however, and it isn’t where Obama’s head is at.
The value of this diary is that it shows who Grayson really is.
Hey, leave the murdering son of a bitch alooooone! He’s not talking about his admiration for murderers in this post, now is he?
Oh please, spare me.
A great piece! (I didn’t click “recommend”!) I find this article fascinating. Not because of the Diary, but because of the Comments, especially yours (and others).
Well, you know what happened or didn’t happen to me when I stopped in an fdl morning News post to make a comment. It seemed like I was called an inappropriate name for expressing my opinion. Maybe not.
I did happen to see what I believe was Alan Grayson’s first Diary here. I don’t know who wrote it. Some commenters were speaking glowingly about Mr. Grayson. I pointed out that Grayson wasn’t very good on Palestinian rights, and cited something I’d heard him say in a TV interview as basis for my opinion.
Instead of addressing my stated assumption that he wasn’t into Palestinian rights, he insisted that I had misquoted him. He went on for days with that. He [or his staffer] made lots of comments to me, maybe four or five. None of his comments addressed rights, only my misstating what he had said.
He would not even talk about equal rights for the Palestinians of East Jerusalem, he said, because Israel will never budge in negotiations.
Finally, I found the interview and quoted it for him exactly. I asked him about Palestinians in occupied East Jerusalem. No answer.
After all is said and done, HotFlash, you nailed it. We should have left it to you, bravo.
ya see,i cant even recount what happened to me,so i give up,no use protesting.i will continue my animal rescue,for every penny,and ounce of energy goes to a really good cause,them furry wunerful critters!
I’m quite sure I am not the RC under discussion. Ruth Calvo sould also be RC.
Um, would this comment thread be deemed “divisive”? It’s funny, nobody wants to talk about the internal FDL issues that won’t go away without being talked about.
Hey, maybe somebody should write a post about the internal FDL issues that obviously have many upset . . . oh, wait, I did that, and it gathered 334 comments. And I got a lot of criticism for that post, mostly from the perceived insiders/Front Pagers. I’m just sayin’ . . .