The White House One Percenter Dinner

Veteran TV newsman Tom Brokaw, who seems to be the only one currently able to tell his ass from from a hole in the ground and see what the celebrity excess at the White House One Percenter Dinner White House Correspondent’s Dinner  is all about told Politico that he quit going to the WHCD because he did not care to be part of the tasteless page six tabloid event that it had morphed into. “There was more dignity at my daughter’s junior prom than there is what I’m seeing on CSPAN here. [...] For me, the breaking point was Lindsay Lohan. She became the big star at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. Give me a break.[...] What we’re doing with that dinner is saying “we’re Versailles. Let the rest of you eat cake.” 

Indeed. This country is going through a crisis in confidence in public service and public policy while millions are working hard and struggling in this stagnant and downward economy that other 1% ers created and our leaders and the President and the rest of the 1% are having a swell time celebrating life and each other and their fortunes.

While they are all slurping champagne and nibbling on fancy hors’ d’oeuvres parading the red carpet in 1%er attire, with billionaires like Donald Trump and train wreck bimbos like Lindsay Blohan  as their guests of honor, the people that voted these clowns into office are losing their homes, declaring bankruptcy or going to bed hungry because they haven’t had a job in three years. Others who do have a job are living with the dire consequences of  furloughs and other cuts because of the draconian sequester spending cuts proposed and drafted by our very own One Percenter in Chief Barack Obama  - all while the rest of the nation is quietly suffocating in the recession that has not affected one single person at that party.

The sad thing is that everyone is clapping for them and cheering the event on without a trace of irony about the fact that the only thing missing is, indeed, a speech by Obama and the First Lady elegantly suggesting that the rest of the nation may eat cake now before moving on to the next laugh with [fill in the celebrity name].

It’s breads and circuses all over again where instead of gaining public approval through exemplary and excellent public service or public policy, approval is gained  through diversion; distraction; the mere satisfaction of the immediate, shallow requirements of a populace, as an offered “palliative.” It is nothing but a simplistic motivation of common people.

You know something is deeply off when even Sarah Palin gets it.

So when Obama “jokes” that he is not “the strapping young Muslim socialist [he] used to be,” all I have to say is that yes, because you are part of the 1% now.

Obama, Romney, the One Percent. What’s the Difference Anyway?

Do you think if I sent Obama an invitation to come over to my house for dinner he would? Like he did with Sarah Jessica Parker, George Clooney, Steven Spielberg and the countless other 1%ers?

Amidst all the discussions about what a terrible person Mitt Romney is (which he is) who is out of touch with how most human beings on this planet live their lives and the challenges they face and amidst all the talks about how Obama is not such a person  - since he clearly is the “man of the people” – a self made man and community organizer who did not grow up with a silver spoon in his mouth – I noted that while that may have been true about Obama a long time ago, that person no longer is.

The tragedy is that Obama and co are claiming to fight the good fight: “For hard working Americans” while Mitt Romney is seen as that greedy asshole who could not care less about such hard working people. Yet, in essence, Obama is not all that different from Mitt Romney when it comes to the  privileges they enjoy.

Michelle Obama in Vogue trying to inspire Americans since clearly this is exactly how most Americans look like at home

Having a spread in Vogue magazine depicting a lavish 1% er setting and stating how the Obamas inspire America – shortly after the sequester, no less, where millions of people – most of whom are poor and vulnerable – have seen the kind of cuts that make the difference between employed or not/roof over your head or not/food on your table or not/able to afford medication or not etc – also doesn’t help and make you a man of the people.

When Clooney threw a fundraising soiree for Obama last year, it cost $40,000 a plate to attend. In other words, these Hollywood high rollers at Clooney’s house were paying more for two hours with the president than they pay their nannies, housekeepers and gardeners in a year.  Just like Romney. And they call themselves the good guys. The ones working for you and I instead of the lifestyle of the rich and famous.

Let us backtrack.

Scott Prouty, the man who shot the infamous 47% video of Mitt Romney where he is seen talking, in horrid yet very detached detail, about the slave labor conditions in Chinese factories and trashing everyone in this country who isn’t a member of the social register, sat down for an interview with MSNBC’s Ed Schultz a couple of weeks ago to not only reveal his identity but to mainly talk about the video and what inspired his decision to release the footage.

I highly recommend watching the video (a transcript to follow later) as it – more than anything else – is a shining example of how a man, a seemingly ordinary citizen who remained invisible to Romney even as he was serving him his $50,000 plate of food,  made the courageous decision to record and release a video of a candidate running on the platform of patriotism and love for all of America, when in reality the only people he was going to represent were the kind of people he was having that $50,000 a plate dinner with.

Prouty explained that one should not pay $50,000 to hear what a candidate has to say – as if that kind of fundraising was confined to Romney and his kind only. The evidence above with respect to Obama and his late night soirees with Hollywood -listers shows that paying tens of thousands of dollars to hear a candidate speak is not something solely confined to Romney.

Income Gain Disparity 1966 to 2011

Syracuse University professor and Pulitzer Prize winner David Cay Johnston analyzed the disparity between the gains in incomes of the average taxpayers and those in the top 10 percent and the results are shocking but not surprising.

Incomes for the bottom 90 percent of Americans only grew by $59 on average between 1966 and 2011 (adjusted for inflation), according to Johnston’s analysis. During the same period, the average income for the top 10 percent of Americans rose by $116,071, Johnston found.

Income Growth, 1966 to 2011

To put that into perspective: if you say the $59 boost is equivalent to one inch, then the incomes of the top 10 percent of Americans rose by 168 feet, Johnston explained to Alternet last week.

Incomes for the bottom fifth of Americans, for instance, grew about 20 percent between 1979 and 2007, according to a 2011 study from the Congressional Budget Office. During the same period, members of the top 1 percent saw their incomes grow by 275 percent.

Another way to illustrate the huge disparity: the six heirs to the Walmart fortune had a net worth equivalent to the bottom 41.5 percent of Americans combined in 2010, according to an analysis from Josh Bivens at the Economic Policy Institute.

While income inequality may be great for those reaping the big bucks at the top, it’s likely hurting Americans overall. Greater income equality is correlated with stronger economic growth, according to a 2011 IMF report and in fact one of the hallmarks of poor, developing nations is the income gap: the poorer and more economically unstable a nation is, the bigger the income gap – with a lot of poor people (one of the hallmarks of poor nations) and a few very wealthy people and no one in between.

The American Dream hard at work

We, sadly, live in a culture of get-rich-or-die-trying. Where average, middle class (I am not even talking about the poor) is considered a one way ticket to loser-town; a failure of some sort. As John Steinbeck once said “socialism never took root in America, because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”

Everybody is being manipulated in one way or another to want be a millionaire. People watch the movies and TV shows, ads and magazine spreads depicting the high life and they want be part of it too. After all, why be a community organizer when you can take group pictures clenching money between your teeth.

Obama Just Another 1%er

Even our President is part of the one percent now. Make no mistake about it.

Hanging out at lavish dinner parties and soirees in the homes of celebs and fellow 1%ers, such as Sarah Jessica Parker, George Clooney and Will Smith.  Going to fundraisers at $40,000 a plate with other Hollywood hot shots.

In fact, last year Clooney himself held such a lavish soiree for Obama, inviting 150 of Hollywood’s richest for $40,000 a head to raise a meager $15 million dollars (compared to SuperPac monies, $15 million is drop in the bucket). This party was held in Los Angeles, a city plagued by chronic lack of funding where school libraries are being shut down, teachers laid off firehouses shut down. And VIPs were paying $40,000 for a Wolfgang Puck hors d’oeuvre and a silly photo with a president who only now has come to think it might be OK for gay people to have the same rights as straight people.

Democracy hard at work. As Steve Lopez wrote in the L.A. Times “Yeah, sure, Obama’s got to raise all he can to fend off Mitt Romney and hold on to his seat. But is that a race to the top or a race to the bottom? If money buys victory and access, what about the masses who can’t afford a $40 fundraiser, let alone a $40,000 party? When do they get the president’s ear?”

Do you think if I sent Obama an invitation to come over to my house for dinner he would? Like he did with SJP and George Clooney? The tragedy is that Obama and Co are claiming to fight the good fight: “For hard working Americans” while Mitt Romney is seen is that greedy asshole who could not care less about such hard working people. Yet these high rollers at Clooney’s house were paying more for two hours with the president than they pay their nannies, housekeepers and gardeners in a year. Just like Romney.

Scott Prouty. 47% videographer

As Scott Prouty said in his interview with Ed Schulz about the Romney speech and fundraiser and thus his motive for taking the video ”You shouldn’t have to be able to afford $50,000 to hear what the candidate actually thinks“, as if that was something solely confined to Mitt Romney and rich, greedy Republicans while Democrats and the wealthy liberals who support them would clearly not ever do such a thing.

The above evidence begs to differ.

$40,000 a Plate Fundraiser for Obama = $50,000 a Plate Fundraiser for Romney

I am sure people like Clooney and co are acting in good faith, hoping to do something so the worst man in the world in the form of Mitt Romney does not get to run this country.  But if they’re so desperate to celebrate their wonderful ways and important causes, why not a Hollywood fundraising party to save the libraries, schools, rec centers or parks? Why not start paying the people who clean your house and tend to the garden and take care of your privileged kids decent salary and health coverage?

I tell you why: because George Clooney, much like Obama, much like Steven Spielberg, much like Nancy Pelosi, much like Mitt Romney are part of the 1% and throwing soirees for the President is much more about the soirees and meeting the president than about giving a damn about the 99% and hard working Americans you claim to fight for.

Whether Obama earned it or not, he is up there now, living the good life. Sequester or not, he won’t have to worry about whether he can send his kids to college, if he will one day be without health care or lose his house and retirement and be destitute and all the other myriad of things 99% of the people in this country have to worry about. In fact, none of the policies coming from D.C. and our legislators will ever actually affect them personally. And that is a huge deal, namely that those making the laws are not affected by them. There is a reason half of Congress are millionaires.

And the thing with being part of the 1% ultimately is that more often than not it gives you amnesia. You forget. Obama had no problem letting the payroll tax-break expire, thus making almost everyone making $ 113,000 or less pay more each month, but he did increase the 3% tax increase income threshold from $250,000 to $400,000 because god knows people making 250k a year need consideration and a break. How so 99% of him.

No Soirees for the 99%

When was the last time any representative of the middle class had a candidate throw dinners and soirees for them? And not just a candidate but the President.

When was the last time the White House threw a dinner or a black and white ball for employees of NGOs, charities, volunteers and other public service jobs?

When was the last time the White House threw a dinner in honor of hard working folks, inviting them over for a night filled with Jimmy Kimmels and hanging out with the President and celebs? Sure, you can win a dinner with the President and first lady at Sarah Jessica Parker’s 10 million Borwnstone in Manhattan’s Upper East Side, if you donate money and are automatically entered into a pool, much like a lottery, with thousands of others. But when was the last time, or ever, anyone of these people have actually done something in that regard for us hard working middle or working class – heck even unemployed and poor – folks who aren’t members of the social register? Even the White House Correspondents’ Dinners that are supposed to be about journalists, have become just another 1%er event for celebrities transplanted from Hollywood to DC – but only A-listers mind you since most regular actors and SAG members are not part of the 1%  - which seems to be the only requirement to attend the Dinner.

So when I heard Prouty say that one should not have to be able to pay $50,000 a plate to hear what a candidate has to say it made me wonder if Obama is any better. Of course, Obama hanging out at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner and mingling with other rich people is not the same thing as Romney’s 47% speech where he is exposed as an insincere hypocrite and the fact that he thought he could and should talk like this behind closed curtains.

But there is a broader canvas here to consider because Romney or Obama – the common theme here is that those with big bucks are being invited to the discussion table and getting parties thrown for them while most people – i.e. those who make up the majority of the voter base and also carry the economic burden of the nation – since rich people clearly aren’t – never see any of that.

The fact that those with money and the power that comes with it run the world is nothing new. However, if you are a country (or claim to be a country) that was founded on principles diametrically opposed to such a paradigm, then that is a problem. Yes, we could be just like any other third-country oppressive shithole with an income gap the size of Mount Everest, but this is not what this country is about or should be about. Back in the day, only landowners were allowed to vote and thus have their voice heard. How is that different from today where the wealthy asset holders get invited to the table and private meetings with the President and this are made part of the debate, while you and I are lucky if the White House ever returns any of our letters on a pre-written template designed for concerned citizens?

How Can You Inspire People, Barry

As to the Obamas: How can you inspire people? You inspire people by being one of them. Not by living the kind of lifestyle you just criticized your opponents for five minutes ago and which almost none of the people you are addressing can ever afford.

Yes they worked hard but what use is all that hard work and social upward mobility and thus power that comes with wealth if you are just going to behave like any other wealthy, 1%er? You have to be the change you want to see and when you say you stand for the causes of the 99% while living the life of a 1%er, that makes you not only a hypocrite but also a large part of the problem.

I understand that he is the POTUS ans as such he has a standard of living. But I am not talking about his salary. That isn’t, after all, the source of his wealth. It’s his privilege that detaches him and just makes him part of the problem.

The gross inequalities described above with respect to stagnant income growth for most Americans go far deeper than people like Boehner, Romney or the robber barons of Wall Street. Half of Congress, i.e. our lawmakers, are millionaires and in fact D.C. is the one city where one is more likely to run into a millionaire than anywhere else.

And these are law makers and legislators. The people that run this country but who are clearly beholden to the interests of the 1% – mainly because they themselves are one of them – while trying to appeal to the 99% on the surface to get their votes. And who knows, with all the voter suppression efforts by Republicans soon they may be able to even skip that and just directly work for the 1%.

The Futility of Politely Asking the 1% To Come to the Aide of the 99% 

It is quite ironic and futile that we are looking to them – the 1% – to please change things in favor of the 99%. What incentive do any of these people have to change the status quo in our favor? Congress just got a pay raise – signed by our man of the people, Obama. It was no coincident that there was no student loan bailouts. Students don’t have lobbyists stationed in DC 24/7 – unlike Wall Street and thus the members of the one percent.

Yes President Obama, I appreciate your tough upbringing and that you can somehow vaguely apparently remember what it is like to “have a rough time”  as you once told a crowd of supporters.  The only difference between you and everyone else, however, is that you are a millionaire who wines and dines with celebrities and goes to $40,000 a plate soirees – money than can be used right here and then to help out someone rather than falling into this bottomless pit of your campaign fund that just sucks up money and produces little results for the people you claim to stand for; your children don’t have to worry about racking up student loan debt at high interest rates to get an education, because you have the money to pay for it.

In fact, you are part of the 1% and as such you are not only part of the problem, you are just another out-of-touch wealthy rich puke condescending and making casual life and death decisions (and yes, these are life and death decisions you are making, believe it or not) because they won’t affect your family. Your multi million dollar retirement is secure, your pension is fat, much like you assets.

As far as I am concerned you, Mr. President, are about only “better” than Romney in so far as Romney is truly nothing but a wolf in sheep’s clothing with a horrifying track record and agenda for America. But don’t come here insulting mine and the intelligence of your supporters struggling every day at the hands of your bipartisan, failed policies  - not the least of which is the gamble you took with the Sequester, purposely making it draconian, hoping that it would deter Republicans even though your gazillion years of experience working with them and common sense, if nothing at all, should have told you that these are not the kind of people who mind draconian cuts – by claiming that you are on our side and are fighting on our behalf. if you actually do come to my house for dinner one day, maybe I believe you. Until then, you are just another rich asshole fighting to make sure you and your kind remain where you at: at the top of the food chain. 

Michelle Obama Looks Like A Plastic Doll on the Cover of Vogue Magazine

“We are all for middle class wage earners and root for hard working Americans, except when we dress, pose and look like something from Vogue magazine promoting a lifestyle that most of the middle class people we are working so hard for, cannot ever afford.”

Here is a brilliant idea:

Let us take a couple of $10,000 pictures by some high end photographer of the first couple in an opulent, 1%er setting.  Make them wear ridiculous outfits you know – and they know – they would never wear on a Sunday  - or ever for that matter – at home with the kids.  Photoshop them to death so they look like shiny, plastic aliens from the latest J.J. Abrams version of Star Dreck and then pose the question “How can these two inspire america?” (read the 99%).

Well, I don’t know, maybe if they didn’t walk around looking, dressing and behaving like shiny, life-like plastic dolls from Versailles and maybe if the first lady looked like a normal human being instead of the black version of June Cleaver getting ready for afternoon tea in a taffeta mermaid gown that cost a Wal-mart employee’s half a year salary, then maybe – just maybe – those Americans who are struggling thinking that if they are not part of the 1% then they are worth nothing, would be inspired to want to be something else beside rich or dying trying.

I still find it amazing we are looking at the 1% (Obama, Congress, politicians, fuck even to Hollywood) to make it so that things improve for the 99% at the cost of taking something away from the 1%.

If they were any shinier and faker, they would start melting

This is exactly how most Americans look like at home

Today in Democracy At Its Best: After Watering Down Financial Reform, Ex-Senator Scott Brown Joins Goldman Sachs’ Lobbying Firm

The face of patriotism: Scott Brown

It’s a good thing that corruption only exists in places like India and Mexico and not in this wonderful, democratic and free country where everyone – rich or poor, powerful or not, is held to the same standards and where the rule of law applies to all of us. A country where our officials are held to the highest ethical standards with respect to stocks they can own in which companies as well as their employment options post government service – and I used the term service as it pertains to our government officials quite loosely as the only service they are engaging in is that of enriching their own pockets.

It is no coincidence that nearly half of Congress are millionares.

Case in point: Senator Scott Brown from Massachusetts. During his nearly three years in the U.S. Senate, Brown, much like most of his colleagues, frequently came to the aid of the financial sector — watering down the Dodd-Frank bill and working to weaken it after its passage — and accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign cash from the industry. Now, the man Forbes Magazine called one of “Wall Street’s Favorite Congressmen” will use those connections as counsel for Nixon Peabody, an international law and lobbying firm.

The Boston Globe noted Monday that while Brown himself will not be a lobbyist — Senators may not lobby their former colleagues for the first two years after leaving office, under the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 (HA!!! Hahahahahahahahahah — speak of your token legislation) “he will be leaning heavily on his Washington contacts to drum up business for the firm.” The position will also allow him “to begin cashing in on his contacts with the financial services industry, which he helped oversee in the Senate.”

Oversee the Senate. I am so glad that the honest leadership and open government act of 2007 has been put in place so that now former Senators can take on new jobs where they use their connections to oversee the Senate – like it was a private equity firm and not one of the governing bodies of this oh so democratic nation.  It is especially reassuring that they have to wait a whopping two years to do so.

Among the lobbying clients represented by Nixon Peabody is Goldman Sachs, the Wall Street behemoth that skirted the Dodd-Frank rules . Brown received $10,000 in PAC contributions from Goldman and more than $100,000 in contributions from its employees.

Transparency, accountability and integrity have never looked so profitable and patriotic.

Wave the flag everyone. The American Dream is at works here.

India, China and all those other corrupt countries with corrupt leaders who enrich their pockets at the expense of the people who elected them and entrusted them with representing their interests as opposed to that of banks and corporations have a huge lesson to learn from how we do things in this country. Now with the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 in place and the fact that a Senator has to wait a whole two years to go work for the people he helped while he was in office – killing the time by going on long, expensive vacations, remodeling one of their mansions, building a bowling alley or recreational room possibly and attending soirees thrown by the likes of Lloyd Blankfein.   - we are in doubly good hands and all set.

Imagine the hardship and the test of endurance this requires of one.  Two whole years of doing nothing but spending the money you amassed being the representative of Wall Street and at the backs of those who entrusted you with their vote - vacationing  partying, spending, remodeling. It’s a hard knock life. I know.

I am also very glad that someone like Bradley Manning, who exposed crimes committed by this government, is considered a traitor who will spend the rest of his life in prison, while folks like Scott Brown are considered upright patriots who get to enjoy all the freedom they can get to spend all the money they amassed at the back of this country and its citizens.

I am glad it is clear whose actions are treasonous and whose patriotic.

The American Dream never looked so good. So come to our shores…

Brendan Fraser Can’t Live on $205,000 a Month

Have you ever felt that you had so much money, you didn’t know whether you should wipe your ass with it or use it to plaster your walls? Well, Brendan Fraser is one of those people who wants to be able to do both but, sadly so, cannot as he is currently struggling on both fronts trying to survive on a meager $205,000 a month or around $2.5 million a year.

In court documents filed in Connecticut recently as part of an ongoing battle with his ex-wife to lower his alimony payments, which amount to some ridiculous $75,000 a month, Brendan laid out his monthly finances like this:

Professional expenses (agents, lawyers, publicists etc.):
$112,803.250
Investments: $25,800.28
Alimony: $50,000
Mortgages:  $5,000+
Property tax: $6,000+
Income tax: $34,132.52
Child support: $25,000
Gardening: $5,200
Various insurances: $5,000+
Family support and gifts: $5,000+
Staffing: $3,000
Pet care: $7.77
And the list goes on.

Overall he also owns assets around $25 million.

First of all, I need to get me a gardening gig in Hollywood.

Second, who the fuck owns less for mortgage than the gardener? Is gardening now the new real estate?

$5,000 a month in gifts/bribes? He is actually counting those into his budget? Is that even a legitimate expense for anyone? Or is it an insider thing, like when you are a celebrity big shot you should count on spending craploads of money a month for gifts to…whom exactly?

Fuck this dude, and fuck his ex for asking for that much money and fuck his children who’ll grow up thinking they are entitled to privilege. What an ungrateful, entitled, out of touch asshole. The wealthy seriously live on a sphere of their own  - detached in a bubble of out-of-touchness.