Ted Rall, Author at Ted Rall's Rallblog

March 21, 2008•

Shoutout: Ted Rall Needs a Website Redesign

The person I had in mind to redo this website is totally swamped with other projects and can’t do it. Therefore, I am sending this out into the world.

I need someone who can update the 1995-vintage rall.com site to something cool and modern without losing its simplicity or functionality.

I can’t afford much, but this is a paying job. So this would be a good gig for someone who likes to work with a lot of creative freedom and could use a relatively high-profile reference in his or her online portfolio.

If you or someone you know is interested, please email me at chet@rall.com.

SYNDICATED COLUMN: Obama/Dukakis 2008

March 17, 2008•

Ted Rall

Dem Wimp Throws His Truth-Telling Preacher Under the Bus

If Americans were represented by an animal, it wouldn’t be an eagle. It would be a tiny shrew, nervous and paranoid and living in constant terror of being attacked by predators.

Our national prey mentality doesn’t have much basis in reality. The last attack on U.S. soil took place two-thirds of a century ago; Hawaii wasn’t even a state at the time. Before that, you have to go back to 1846–and we provoked that one. Whatever the historical basis–or lack thereof–for this innate fearfulness, U.S. voters look to their president as a Father Protector figure–someone who, if threatened, will ferociously defend what is now called, stupidly and horribly, das Homeland.

Republican candidates win elections in years when national security is a top concern. In 2004, it didn’t matter that John Kerry volunteered for, fought in, and returned with medals from Vietnam. What mattered was that he turned the other cheek to the Swift Boat ads. He held his fire in the debates. If Kerry wasn’t willing to stand up for himself, voters reasoned, how would he protect them? Bush may have been a coward during Vietnam, but his “dead or alive” cowboy movie bravado, not to mention starting a couple of wars from scratch, conveyed a comforting, if imbecilic bellicosity. The monosyllabic tough-guy act soothed a savage, terrorized electorate.

Hillary Clinton has figured this out. Her policy actions–voting for war twice, the Patriot Act, keeping silent about torture and Guantánamo–have been engineered to project Republicanesque hawkishness. She dresses butch and talks like a female prick–i.e., bitch. You don’t like her. She doesn’t want you to. She wants you to think that she’s macho enough to deal with Them the next time They pick a fight at three in the morning.

Barack Obama, on the other hand, has already given away a store he doesn’t yet own. He’s the new century’s version of Dukakis.

“I would explicitly reach out to disaffected Republicans and remind them of some of their traditions,” Obama told U.S. News & World Report. “Very rarely do you hear me talking about my opponents without giving them some credit for having good intentions and being decent people.” “I think I can reach out to Republicans and independents more effectively than any other candidate,” he said on “Meet the Press,” citing his “ability to focus on getting the job done, as opposed to getting embroiled in ideological arguments.” No wonder Republican pundits love him! Not only will he be easier to beat in November–if McCain loses, they’ll get the same love from President Obama.

Obama’s attempt to transform himself into the living embodiment of girly-man wimpiness led him to throw his own priest under the bus. This latest display of X-Treme wussosity came in response to demands by Rush Limbaugh, The Wall Street Journal and other braying hounds of the right who feigned offense at quotes pulled from his pastor’s old sermons. Jeremiah Wright, long-time leader of the Trinity United Church of Christ of Chicago, officiated at Obama’s wedding and inspired the title of his book “The Audacity of Hope.”

“I reject outright the statements by Reverend Wright that are at issue,” Obama said in a statement.

First rule of politics: never apologize. It won’t satisfy your critics, and it makes you look weak. If Eliot Spitzer had followed that dictate, he’d still be governor of New York.

First rule of presidential politics: fight for those near and dear to you. Michael Dukakis lost points when he was asked what he’d do if his wife got raped. (Correct answer: “I would kill the rapist.”) If a man won’t stand up for his own wife–or his own pastor–how can we trust him to fight the terrorists?

Obama’s Sister Souljah act may erode his base of support: African-Americans and younger whites, many of whom agree with Reverend Wright’s “controversial” homilies.

“Racism is how this country was founded and how it is still run,” Wright said. Well, duh. The Journal‘s editorial page, which still thinks Iraq was the best idea ever, is particularly agitated about…this…this obvious fact. Who could say, with a straight face, that racism wasn’t a founding principle of a nation with legalized slavery? Who could argue, after reading countless newspaper headlines announcing the acquittal of white cops for shooting unarmed black men, or while driving through urban slums, that we’ve put racism behind us?

Murdoch’s right-wing rag, noted The New York Times, also criticized Wright for “accusing the United States of importing drugs, exporting guns and training murderers.” These things are all true (please reference “Iran-Contra,” “U.S. as top arms exporter,” and “School of the Americas”). If Obama can’t bring himself to speak the truth, he could at least support those who do.

Most damning of all, say Limbaugh et al., was Wright’s post-9/11 sermon urging his flock not to yield to the urge “to pay back and kill” or act “holier than thou.” His advice proved prescient–wars against Afghanistan and Iraq killed a million innocents, yet none of the criminals of 9/11. It also happened to be quintessentially Christian. “We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians [true] and black South Africans [true], and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is brought back to our own front yards,” he continued. “America’s chickens are coming home to roost.”

Chalmers Johnson wrote a bestselling book in 2000 about this phenomenon. It’s called “Blowback,” named after CIA jargon for foreign policies that result in unexpected, negative effects. Johnson wrote that blowback “is a metaphor for the unintended consequences of the U.S. government’s international activities that have been kept secret from the American people.”

It is well-established that the radical Islamists who launched the 9/11 attacks were motivated by their contempt for American policy in the Muslim world and their desire to bring the war, as they saw it, to the U.S. Everyone knows that Al Qaeda has its roots in the anti-Soviet jihad in Afghanistan, which the Reagan Administration funded and armed. Calling 9/11 a case of “chickens coming home to roost” isn’t offensive. It’s painfully, boringly obvious.

Obama found it necessary to state that “the violence of 9/11 was inexcusable and without justification.”

Wright never said otherwise. Most of the victims of September 11th were office workers. They weren’t responsible for U.S. policy in the Middle East. Many were opposed to it. As Johnson wrote: “Terrorism by definition strikes at the innocent in order to draw attention to the sins of the invulnerable.”

People who deny that U.S. foreign policy mishaps provoke long-term consequences are liars. People like them–people like Barack Obama–are laying the foundation for the next 9/11.

March 17, 2008•

Ted Rall

Bye, Bye, Bear

I’m walking on sunshine at today’s demise of Bear, Stearns & Co. I know, I know—it’ll be rough on the economy. And it could be the beginning of the end of other major firms. But it couldn’t have happened to a more deserving bunch of sons of bitches.

I was a hired as a trader/trainee at Bear, Stearns in 1985. I earned the princely sum of $10,000 a year. After taxes, I received $315.02 every two weeks. (My rent was $425, for half of a sixth-floor two-bedroom on a crack-infested street in the Barrio of Manhattan’s Manhattan Valley neighborhood. I survived by driving a taxi at night.) Three factoids:

First, if I’d earned $20 less per week, I would have qualified for food stamps. I requested a pay cut from my boss. He said no.

Second, the CEO of Bear Stearns at the time, “Ace” Greenberg (he gave himself the nickname), “earned” $40 million per annum.

Third, when the opening of the New York Stock Exchange moved from 10 am to 9:30, we were told to come to work a half-hour earlier, at 8:30. Did we get a raise? Nope.

I was working there when Bear Stearns went public. Each employee received shares, which opened at, as I recall, about $24 each. Because our allotment was based on our salaries (shouldn’t it have been inversely proportional?), I received eight shares. What a joke! I quit shortly thereafter. My next job paid $17,500, which seemed huge by comparison.

I ended up at a Japanese bank with a far more egalitarian payscale. The president earned about $125,000; the lowest paid worker in the fax room got about $20,000. Morale was excellent, the president knew everybody’s names, raises of 15% were standard.

Bear Stearns’ stock, trading at $170 one year ago, is now worth $2. The company won’t be missed, at least not by those of who contributed to its bottom line without receiving fair pay for a day’s work.

March 17, 2008•

Ted Rall

Overheard Hilarity

On the bus on Saturday: a 20-ish blonde talking to her father. “I don’t understand what the big deal is,” she said, “about Iraq costing a trillion dollars. So what? That’s less than the cost of our house!”

The father: “What do you mean?”

Woman, audibly rolling her eyes: “Duh—a trillion. That’s a third of a million. Seems like a bargain to me!”

Finally: the silence of the American public explained.

March 15, 2008•

Ted Rall

Eliot Spitzer (cont.)
posted by Susan Stark

When I wrote my previous blog about prostitution and Eliot Spitzer (Prostitution Should Be Legalized), I wasn’t fully aware of everything that Spitzer did wrong, such as the money laundering, etc., because the full revelations of his activities hadn’t come out yet. I do not approve of these kinds of activities.

But, still, when it’s all said and done, Bush and his gang are guilty of high crimes against humanity (invasion of a country without legitimate cause), and approximately 1 million people have died as a result. And they have squandered more money than we can comprehend. The cost of Bush’s war will be estimated to a high of 3 trillion dollars, and I’m sorry, but, that is way too much money to spend so that conservatives can achieve their nebulous feelings of “safety”.

The Bush gang gets off the hook, while Eliot goes down for much pettier crimes.

Still, my position that Spitzer should be able to solicit prostitution if he wishes still stands, and that Kristen/Ashley should have to right to provide those services. Period. They are both consenting adults. The only kinds of prostitution that should be illegal are the ones that involve under-age persons, or persons being forced to work against their own will. The former is child molestation, and the latter is slavery.

This is the position that most sex-workers advocate, and it is certainly healthier than the positions taken by neurotic soccer-moms posing as “reformers” and “experts”. And that includes the male soccer-moms.

SYNDICATED COLUMN: Eco-Terrorism: There’s No Such Thing

March 11, 2008•

Ted Rall

Property Rights Extremists Equate McMansions to 9/11 Victims

The United States should not build housing. Whole neighborhoods in places like Chicago and Dayton and Oakland and Newark and Memphis are dominated by abandoned houses and apartment buildings. Ten percent of our national housing stock–more than 13 million homes, enough to put roofs over the homeless three times over–are vacant year-round. So why do we let developers bulldoze fields and forests to put up soulless monstrosities?

Several “model houses” at a development bearing the typically atrocious name of “Quinn’s Crossing at Yarrowbay Communities” at the edge of Seattle’s creeping suburban sprawl went up in flames, apparently torched by radical environmentalists. I had two reactions. First, I was reminded of my wonder that such things happen so infrequently.

Then I laughed. I wasn’t alone. Time magazine bemoaned “a notable lack of sympathy for the fate of the homes” among residents of Washington state.

Quinn’s Crossing, says its website, was “dedicated to the ethos of putting the earth first.” In this case, putting Mother Earth “first” led the developers to construct “energy efficient” 4,500-square-feet McMansions. “The houses are out in the middle of nowhere, on land that used to be occupied by beaver dams and environmentally sensitive wetlands; the site sits at the headwaters of Bear Creek, where endangered chinook salmon spawn,” reported Erica C. Barnett for the Seattle weekly newspaper The Stranger. “The houses, and their polluting septic systems, also sit atop an aquifer, which provides drinking water for the area’s Cross Valley Water District.”

4,500 square feet? My last Manhattan apartment had 725. Visitors (New Yorkers, most of whom live in even tighter quarters) cooed over how big it was. The house in which I grew up had 1,000; it was designed for a nuclear family of four.

What galled ELF was the developers’ attempt to pass off self-indulgent, gargantuan McMansions as ecologically friendly. “The builders heavily promoted the ‘built green’ concept and pointed out that the homes were smaller than the 10,000-square-foot houses on previous Street of Dreams tours,” reported The Los Angeles Times.

Barnett’s story asked: “Were the Terrorists Right?” She noted: “An energy-efficient mansion will never use less energy than even a large urban apartment.”

Right or wrong, they’re not terrorists.

The feds say they are. They call Earth Liberation Front, the loose-knit “group” that took responsibility for the blazes in unincorporated Snohomish County, the biggest threat to mom, freedom, apple pie and three-minute pop songs since the Soviet Union closed shop. Six months before 9/11, shortly before the famous “Bin Laden Wants to Kick Our Ass Six Ways to Sunday” memo, the FBI went so far as to list the ELF as a federally designated terrorist organization. Like Al Qaeda.

Terrorism–you can look it up–involves killing people. Hijacking a plane and flying it into a building is terrorism. Destroying property–property that, for the most part, made the world a worse place–is not.

ELF’s goal of “inflict[ing] maximum economic damage on those profiting from the destruction and exploitation of the natural environment” has inspired people to set fire to SUVs at a New Mexico car dealership, Hummers in California, and a Vail ski lodge whose construction threatened the lynx, an endangered species. Damage to the Colorado ski project amounted to $12 million.

ELF members are vandals. They’re arsonists. But they aren’t terrorists.

ELF demands that its adherents “take all necessary precautions against harming any animal–human and non-human.” Although it could happen someday, no one has ever been killed or hurt in an ELF action. Equating the burning of a Hummer to blowing up a child exposes our society’s grotesque overemphasis on the “right” of property owners to do whatever they want. The word “eco-terrorism” is an insult to the human victims of real terrorism, including those of 9/11.

The closest ELF’s critics come to landing a punch is pointing out that fires send crud into the atmosphere. “This is releasing more carbon into the air than they ever would have by building the houses,” the listing agent for one of the destroyed “rural cluster development” houses told The New York Times. Newsweek asked: “If their cause is to save the environment, how does burning houses, and thereby releasing carbon and toxins into the atmosphere, help achieve that goal?”

Eye-roll alert: A house fire releases air pollution once. A family living in a house does it day after day for decades. Anyway, why are builders making houses out of toxins?

Property rights extremists raised the same point after ELF set fire to 20 Hummer H2s at a California car dealership in 2004. “There’s a lot more pollutants from the fire than the vehicles would pollute during their lifetime,” said the West Covina fire marshal. Even if that were true, he forgot where those gas guzzlers would have eventually ended up: in landfills, their nasty chemicals seeping into the ground.

“Think of all the resources those fires wasted,” moaned Seattle Times columnist Jerry Large. He explained that lawful means–petitions, politely worded letters to the editor, speaking at public hearings–are the proper way to take a stand against the destruction of the environment. “The development where this latest arson took place, situated atop the area’s water supply, has been challenged by other groups, using negotiation and the law,” he says approvingly. That’s true. The local zoning board heard from hundreds of opponents of Quinn’s Crossing before voting, 4 to 1, in favor.

Challenged, yes. But not successfully.

(Ted Rall is the author of the book “Silk Road to Ruin: Is Central Asia the New Middle East?,” an in-depth prose and graphic novel analysis of America’s next big foreign policy challenge.)

March 10, 2008•

Ted Rall

Prostitution Should Be Legalized
posted by Susan Stark

You can lie the American people into a war, you can spend billions of dollars of taxpayers money on that war, you can kidnap people off the street and ship them to an Air Force base on foreign soil, and get away with it.

But God help you if you pay money for a little booty.

New York governor Eliot Spitzer, I am told, is in hot water over an escort he paid for for $4300.

And my response is: Is that all? The Iraq War costs $275 million a day, and Eliot paid $4300 for three hours.

You do the math.

In New York City, the escorting business, along with gentlemen’s clubs and massage parlors, brings in billions of dollars a year. That’s alot more than George Bush ever gave to this city.

And if Eliot Spitzer wishes to come to this city and contribute $4300, he should be able to do so without it costing his job. He is a consenting adult, and escort that he paid was a consenting adult. And if that $4300 was taxpayer money, so what? At least he put it into the local economy instead of flushing billions down the toilet in Iraq.

And if anybody else wishes to come to this city (or anywhere else) and pay for an escort, a stripper, or a masseuse, they should be able to do so legally. And anyone who wishes to provide such services should be legally allowed to do so, as long as they’re an adult.

We need to get rid of this hypocrisy surrounding prostitution, especially when we live in a world where dropping a cluster bomb on innocent civilians is considered “regrettable”.

March 10, 2008•

Ted Rall

THIS WEEK’S SYNDICATED COLUMN: ECO-TERRORISM? THERE’S NO SUCH THING

Property Rights Extremists Equate McMansions to 9/11 Victims