Pages: << 1 ... 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 ... 1261 >>
Trumpcare on Life Support
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
The House version barely passed, heavy pressure enabling passage after initially failing.
As of Monday, four GOP senators joined all 48 undemocratic Democrats, rejecting the misnamed Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017 (BCRA).
Republicans need 50 Senate votes plus Vice President Pence’s tie-breaker for passage. With four GOP defectors, they lack it. Trumpcare isn’t dead. It’s on life support close to it. Earlier, GOP Senators Rand Paul and Susan Collins expressed opposition to the Senate version - for different reasons.
POLL: Americans’ Massive Disapproval of Both Parties
Eric Zuesse
The “Monthly Harvard-Harris Poll: June 2017” is the latest poll in that series, and it scientifically sampled 2,258 U.S. registered voters, of whom (as shown on page 30) 35% were “Democrat,” 29% were “Republican,” and 30% were “independent”). It indicates (page 24) that 37% “approve” and 63% “disapprove” of “the way the Republican Party is handling its job.” It also indicates (page 25) that 38% “approve,” and 62% “disapprove,” of “the way the Democratic Party is handling its job.” So: despite there being 6% more self-described “Democrat”s than “Republican”s, there was only 1% more disapproval of the Republican Party than of the Democratic Party; and, this indicates that there was a substantial disapproval of “the Democratic Party” by Democratic voters (more disaffection by them for ‘their’ Party, than by Republicans for theirs).
The answers to other questions in the poll also help to answer why this is so, and why the voting public don’t hold either Party in high regard — why America’s supposedly ‘democratic’ (small-“D”) politics is currently a contest between uglies, with neither Party offering anything like what the U.S. voting public want their government to do (i.e., it fits what this scientific study — linked there — found actually to control U.S. politics):
US Intends New Illegal Sanctions on China
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
Longstanding US hostility toward North Korea is unrelenting, outreach and diplomacy to resolve differences rejected.
Beijing, Moscow and Seoul want instability and belligerence on the Korean peninsula avoided. They oppose strangling the DPRK economically and financially.
The Trump administration has other ideas. New Treasury Department sanctions are being prepared, targeting Chinese banks and companies doing business with Pyongyang.
The White House intends trying to cut off cash flow to North Korea, including by targeting offshore US dollar accounts associated with companies linked to Chinese national Chi Yungpeng.
A US draft Security Council resolution intended to make the DPRK’s economy scream was prepared to be voted on in the coming days, the measure unacceptable to China and Russia.
Reckless US Policy Toward North Korea
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
Decades of US hostility toward the DPRK created heightened tensions, threatening possible conflict on the Korean peninsula - an unthinkable prospect pitting two nuclear powers against each other if launched.
Pyongyang, China, Russia, and South Korea want issues resolved diplomatically. Washington needs enemies to justify its unjustifiable imperial agenda, North Korea a longstanding one - because of its sovereign independence, not for any threat it poses. It never attacked another country throughout its entire post-WW II history. It threatens none now, except in retaliation if attacked, its right under international law.
China is displeased with Trump administration pressure to ally with its unacceptable strategy - economic and financial strangulation to bring the DPRK to its knees, a lunatic scheme Beijing rejects, an unworkable one if implemented.
The only way to resolve Korean peninsula issues is the diplomatic road Washington won’t take. That’s the key issue, no other.
Ripoff Trumpcare and Tax Cut Schemes
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
Both Trump plans are schemes to transfer enormous amounts of wealth from ordinary Americans to business and high-net-worth households.
That’s what they’re all about. His health plan has nothing to do with providing affordable coverage for all Americans - just the opposite, nothing to curb spiraling out-of-control costs, nothing providing “great healthcare…in a much simplified form…much less expensive and much better,” as he promised. On July 12, the Tax Policy Center (TPC) headlined “A Tax Plan Consistent With Trump’s April Outline Could Cut Revenue By Up To $7.8 Trillion.”
Including tax increases candidate Trump suggested, $3.5 trillion over 10 years would be lost. Tax cuts he proposes are “highly regressive,” said the TPC.
Business and high-net-worth households would benefit hugely. One in five household would pay higher taxes than currently - “if a half-dozen tax hikes are included in a revenue package.”
Lula’s Conviction Aimed at Preventing His 2018 Presidential Run
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva served as Brazil’s president from 2003 - 2010. He’s led in opinion polls to win another term in office next year.
If it stands, his near ten-year sentence on corruption charges would bar him from seeking reelection in 2018. He’s a far cry from extremists now running things in Brazil.
Last year, Washington conspired with them to impeach and remove democratically elected President Dilma Rousseff from office on bogus charges.
Tyranny replaced democracy. A wish list for markets and investors was implemented - neoliberal harshness eliminating social justice, powerful privileged interests served at the expense of most others.
Lula is no paragon of progressive governance. James Petras earlier explained he “embrace(d) free trade, sign(ed) military agreements with Washington, (was) acclaimed ‘Statesman of the Year’ by the billionaire’s club at Davos in 2010, and has enriched bankers from Wall Street to the city of London…”
Cholera Ravages Yemen
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
Multiple plagues of Job ravage millions of Yemenis, including devastating US-planned and orchestrated war, famine, and untreated diseases, out-of-control cholera epidemic alone taking a devastating toll.
Known outbreaks exceeded 300,000 as of June 30, according to the World Health Organization (WHO). The UN currently reported over 320,000 outbreaks in all governorates except one.
The ICRC said the epidemic “continues to spiral out of control,” known deaths more than 1,700, according to its spokeswoman Iolanda Jaquemet. Its regional director Robert Mardini said about 7,000 new cases are known daily in Sanaa and three other areas alone.
Yemen’s collapsed infrastructure, including minimal or lack of medical treatment for millions, created a “perfect storm for cholera,” the WHO explained.
The Destructiveness of America’s Alliances
Eric Zuesse
Alliances between nations are military. Without being military, they would be nothing. Trade agreements don’t require any alliances at all. World War I wouldn’t have occurred if there had not been alliances — it was built upon alliances. It was not built on trade agreements. It wasn't even built on trading-blocs.
—
In fact, as the WTO (World Trade Organization) has said:
In the two decades prior to World War I, a number of tariff wars broke out, usually provoked by the establishment of a new, more protectionist tariff, or in the course of renegotiation of bilateral treaties.17 After the expiry of a treaty, tariffs were often raised temporarily as a means of improving negotiating leverage. … Despite the widespread increase of protectionist measures before World War I in continental Europe, the United States19, Argentina and other countries, world trade continued to expand rapidly.20
It goes on to observe: "Even though the contention that trade and peace dovetail is still very present today,119 it is not uncontested on theoretical and empirical grounds. Empirical evidence appears to generally support the idea that increasing bilateral trade reduces the risk of bilateral conflicts.122 But studies can be found that support either side of the argument, predicting both a negative and positive relationship between trade and war.123"
Putin and Trump Meet at G20
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
It took nearly six months after Trump’s ascension to power for both leaders to meet face-to-face for the first time.
Will a full-fledged summit follow in a mutually agreed on location? Having one won’t improve bilateral relations as long as neocons make policy in Washington, but at least it might foster a spirit of good will, hopefully to build on at a later time.
If past is prologue, odds against it are long, yet without trying, improved bilateral relations will remain unattainable. Putin and Trump met on the sidelines of the Hamburg, Germany G20 summit. Sergey Lavrov and Rex Tillerson participated in the talks. No one else was involved except translators for both leaders.
US to Act Alone on North Korea
Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)
Decades of US hostility toward Pyongyang could be resolved by America saying let’s talk, followed by officials of both countries meeting face-to-face for good faith discussions - something neocons infesting Washington reject.
Instead, the Trump administration intends instituting tougher anti-DPRK measures than already - stiffer sanctions and whatever else it has in mind.
Trump officials signaled policies coming to try strangling Pyongyang economically and financially, including more sanctions on China for failure to observe Washington rules.
The tougher US policies get, the more determined the DPRK becomes to strengthen its nuclear and ballistic missile deterrents, its best defense against possible US aggression.
<< 1 ... 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 ... 1261 >>
