The Culture Of Compromise... And Looking Ahead To 2022

On Monday morning, the Washington Post published an increasingly rare solo-piece-- rather than team effort-- this one by Annie Linskey: Biden's Flexibility Could Mean Bloody Fights. So! Someone has noticed! "He remains vague on policy." You think? Linskey started her piece by going right to the heart of why there is so much mistrust of the Biden campaign on the left and why even some of the most fervent Trump detractors are reluctant to commit to the hold-you-nose electoral strategy. "When Joe Biden released economic recommendations two months ago," she wrote, "they included a few ideas that worried some powerful bankers: allowing banking at the post office, for example, and having the Federal Reserve guarantee all Americans a bank account. But in private calls with Wall Street leaders, the Biden campaign made it clear those proposals would not be central to Biden’s agenda. 'They basically said, Listen, this is just an exercise to keep the Warren people happy, and don’t read too much into it,' said one investment banker, referring to liberal supporters of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA). The banker, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private talks, said that message was conveyed on multiple calls... The Biden campaign said the economic recommendations were produced jointly by supporters of Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), and were never intended as official policy."

This reluctance to be pinned down on policy details is central to Biden’s campaign, which has focused on a pledge to “restore the soul of the nation” rather than any particular legislative holy grail. While Biden has issued a raft of proposals, he’s often taken an all-things-to-all-people approach, sometimes making strong public declarations while relying on aides to soothe critics behind the scenes.

That strategy, reflecting a decades-long career in which Biden has seen himself more as mediator than ideologue, has helped him unify the party’s liberal and moderate wings behind the shared goal of defeating President Trump. But it also is laying the groundwork for bitter internal battles, should Biden win the presidency, on topics from race to climate to trade, while Wall Street leaders plan to have their way with a president many expect to be unusually susceptible to outside pressure.

...“We knew we weren’t going to get Medicare-for-all,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA). “The question then for me was: How do we get some foundational pieces of Medicare-for-all, even if the words ‘Medicare-for-all’ aren’t there?”

Biden’s team agreed, for example, that low-income Americans would be automatically enrolled in Biden’s public option and that Medicare, not a private company, would run it-- significant concessions that nonetheless fell under Biden’s original framing.

“A good tell about how Biden would operate is there’s room for him to run as long as he doesn’t feel like he’s overturning his brand of moderation,” said one liberal who negotiated with Biden’s team.

Sounds like a bloody 4 years are coming up-- with a 2022 catastrophe in the making, when voters-- furious that the Biden administration, along with a Democratic-controlled Senate and House, are unable to deliver on anything of importance to working families. The 2010 midterm disaster will look like paradise compared to the Republican resurgence in 2022. The Biden campaign is about two things: a wrecked old man who wants it to say he was president on his tombstone and a coalition of conservatives and wary normal people who want to get rid of Trump. Policy-wise, there is no there there and 2021 is not going to be pretty as disparate groups fight for a piece of the pie.

Last week, reviewing John Nichols' book, The Fight For The Soul Of The Democratic Party, for Jacobin, Paul Heideman, asserted that this predicament is nothing new since The Soul of the Democratic Party Has Always Belonged to Capital. When did the Democratic Party go bad. Many say it was "with Bill Clinton and the Third Way in the 1990s" while other say it was "with Carter’s embrace of austerity" while other "more conspiratorially inclined parts of the left have argued, when JFK was assassinated? Or has the party never been anything more than 'history’s second-most enthusiastic capitalist party?' Where you draw the line says a good deal about your politics." Nichols, he wrote, "draws the line very early indeed, with the removal of Vice President Henry Wallace from the ticket in 1944. The book is written explicitly as an intervention into current debates over the future of the party, and its argument that for most of the twentieth century, the Democratic Party was degenerating, is reflective of the radicalism of one pole of that debate. For Nichols, Wallace represents the real soul of the New Deal Democratic Party. A proud progressive, dedicated anti-racist, and passionate anti-fascist, Wallace attempted to continue Franklin D. Roosevelt’s legacy, only to be stymied by more conservative forces inside the party. This narrative occupies the book’s first half, while the second half covers the history of the party in the seven decades following Wallace’s defeat in 1944. The result is a readable introduction to both Henry Wallace, one of the most interesting American politicians, and the Democratic Party’s long history of betraying progressive ideals."

Did someone mention "the Democratic Party’s long history of betraying progressive ideals?" There is no better emblematic case of that than Joe Biden, you know... the guy all your progressive friends are telling you have to vote for in November (as part of the existential fight against fascism). In the same issue of Jacobin, Luke Savage is as pessimistic about a Biden presidency as I am. Does no one else see the disaster on the horizon. I explained it to one of my favorite Members of Congress the other day. She didn't say she disagreed with my prediction of a 2010 midterm-redux in 2022, only "Let's get there first," meaning electing Biden and a huge load of conservative Democrats to Congress first. Thanks, but no thanks. She wanted me to help her raise money for Blue Dogs and New Dems running for the House. I love her but... give me a break. Blue America works to defeat conservatives, whether Republicans or fake Dems from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. Savage takes issue with the idea that Biden, like Ed Markey, is a flawed liberal who could-- again, like Markey-- embrace the Sunrise Movement and everything would be hunky-dory. Markey-- who hold the #1 lifetime position at Progressive Punch-- may be a flawed liberal, but Biden isn't and never was a liberal. He's a conservative-- a really, really bad conservative-- as bad as his hair plugs and fake teeth. As imperfect as the results show ProgressivePunch's system is, it's the best measurement Ive found and, as you see, Markey's record is significantly better than either Elizabeth Warren's or Bernie's.

The 10 best Dems in the Senate

No, I don't believe for one second that Markey's more progressive than either, just that he's at #1-- which says something-- where as the senators more ideologically aligned with Biden-- both now and when he was amnestying atrocious senator himself-- are in a whole different category of Democrats:

The 10 worst Dems in the Senate

Chuck Schumer plucked Kyrsten Sinema-- then head of the Blue Dogs and sporting the single worst voting record of any House Dem-- out of the House and gave her the Democratic Senate nomination in a year when a Democrat was going to win in Arizona. He just did the same thing with another Arizonan likely to prove as far right as Sinema, Mark Kelly. And it doesn't stop there. Schumer has guaranteed the most conservative Democratic-controlled Senate in anyone's lifetime: Hickenlooper (CO), Cunningham (NC), Harrison (SC), Bollier (KS), Ossoff (GA), Heger (TX), McGrath (KY), Gideon (ME), Gross (AK), Greenfield (IA)... And Cheri Bustos is doing a similarly horrible job in the House. The Red-to-Blue program is nearly identical with the list of New Dem and Blue Dog endorsements. It will be a Biden Congress.

Markey did, after all, vote to authorize the invasion of Iraq and support NAFTA. He even backed the USA PATRIOT Act back in 2001 (though voted against its reauthorization in 2005, 2010, and 2011). That he nonetheless won the respect of so many young left-wing voters therefore does yield an important lesson for other Democratic candidates and elected officials.

As former Sanders organizer Claire Sandberg put it earlier this week: “Corporate Democrats want to make the Left out to be purity-obsessed and unwilling to compromise, but the Left rallied around a longtime politician with a mixed record because he actively courted their support and became a champion of one of their major legislative priorities.”

Where I differ from [Michelle] Goldberg is in thinking that this is the kind of lesson a politician like Joe Biden either wants to or could conceivably learn. Near the end of her piece, Goldberg writes: “I hope Joe Biden listens. Young voters favor him over Trump by large margins, but their lack of enthusiasm could dampen turnout.” She quotes Sunrise’s Executive Director Varshini Prakash: “The best thing that Joe Biden could do would be to speak in clear, exciting visionary terms about exactly what he plans to do to tackle the climate crisis, racial inequality, and economic inequality.”

It’s a capital suggestion-- and one Biden is certain to ignore. That’s because, whatever officially appears in the Democratic platform (Goldberg, for example, cites the recommendations of the Sanders/Biden joint task force) is entirely secondary to the political coalition Biden is trying to build, and the one he built to win the Democratic nomination.

Much like Hillary Clinton did in 2016, Biden is aiming to win the presidency by motivating conservative-leaning suburban voters and some Republicans-- with more traditional (and liberal- and progressive-minded) Democratic constituencies turning out in sufficient numbers where it counts. The former group was largely the target audience for this year’s DNC, which  pandered endlessly to the sensibilities of anti-Trump Republicans and rich suburbanites. The latter, meanwhile, gets lectures about how they need to be more enthusiastic while young voters get virtual Biden/Harris lawn signs in Animal Crossing instead of Medicare For All.

Centrist Democrats do want the support of young and left wing voters, of course. But they uniformly want it on their own centrist terms.

All this may be a strategic choice on Biden’s part, but it’s also a feature endemic to the faction that controls the Democratic Party as a whole. Biden’s nomination, which party power brokers ultimately did everything they could to ensure, represented a very conscious repudiation of the alternative course offered by Bernie Sanders-- one which was decidedly less interested in the votes of suburban conservatives and, perhaps more importantly, which pledged to reject the dictates of the donor class that Democratic elites have long embraced.

As such, there is simply no incentive structure in place to shift Biden from his current course.

In Massachusetts, a hitherto quite conventional liberal politician recognized that it would be in his interest to harness the energy and power of young activists. He embraced their agenda and saved his career in the process. Whether Markey’s shift represented a sincere change of heart or pure political self-interest is a secondary matter: he faced an existential challenge and pivoted towards the only constituency he believed could save him from defeat. The young left, which Biden’s candidacy has always been about marginalizing and repudiating, enjoys no such leverage with Biden.

Goldberg is absolutely right to argue that the Markey campaign yielded real lessons for centrist Democrats. The problem is assuming those are lessons that centrist Democrats are under any real pressure to learn.

Fanfare For The Common Man

-by Valley Girl

I have watched the ad (above) that Randy Bryce ran during the SOTU address many times. And suddenly, something about it rang a strange bell with me.

I wrote to Howie:

Some bit of music, just a tiny bit, in the ad Randy Bryce put up for the SOTU address reminded me of the Vangelis theme music for Chariots of Fire. Coincidence? Purposeful? I can't guess.

Randy is a Chariot of Fire. I am reminded of his first ad, when he was welding iron and the fire sparks were flying.

This the music video for Chariots of Fire. Pay attention to the music, and visuals of the runners, running to win. Forget the sappy stuff.



Randy is running to win. And he will.

The title for the movie comes from a verse in the hymn Jerusalem. 

Bring me my bow of burning gold:
Bring me my arrows of desire:
Bring me my spear: O clouds unfold!
Bring me my chariot of fire!

But, after I wrote to Howie, I thought of another piece of music, and wanted to see if the slight bit that I heard might bear some resemblance to that: Copland’s Fanfare for the Common Man. After all, this would suit Randy perfectly.



No, that wasn’t the little bit of  music I was thinking of. But I couldn’t resist doing some research on the history of Coplin’s Fanfare for the Common Man. And, along the way I discovered an often forgotten political figure. 

Fanfare for the Common Man is a musical work by the American composer Aaron Copland. The piece was written in 1942 for the Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra under conductor Eugene Goossens. It was inspired in part by a famous speech made earlier in the same year; in that speech, the vice president of the United States of America, Henry A. Wallace, proclaimed the dawning of the "Century of the Common Man."

Next:

Copland, in his autobiography, wrote of the request: "Eugene Goossens, conductor of the Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra, had written to me at the end of August about an idea he wanted to put into action for the 1942-43 concert season. During World War I he had asked British composers for a fanfare to begin each orchestral concert. It had been so successful that he thought to repeat the procedure in World War II with American composers." A total of 18 fanfares were written at Goossens' behest, but Copland's is the only one which remains in the standard repertoire.

It was written in response to the US entry into World War II and was inspired in part by a famous 1942 speech where vice president Henry A. Wallace proclaimed the dawning of the Century of the Common Man.

...Goossens had suggested titles such as Fanfare for Soldiers, or sailors or airmen, and he wrote that "[i]t is my idea to make these fanfares stirring and significant contributions to the war effort..." Copland considered several titles including Fanfare for a Solemn Ceremony and Fanfare for Four Freedoms; to Goossens' surprise, however, Copland titled the piece "Fanfare for the Common Man." Goossens wrote "Its title is as original as its music, and I think it is so telling that it deserves a special occasion for its performance. If it is agreeable to you, we will premiere it 12 March 1943 at income tax time." Copland's reply was "I [am] all for honoring the common man at income tax time."

The forgotten political figure:  Henry A. Wallace:

Henry Agard Wallace (October 7, 1888 – November 18, 1965) was the 33rd Vice President of the United States (1941–1945), the 11th Secretary of Agriculture (1933–1940), and the 10th Secretary of Commerce (1945–1946). He founded the Progressive Party and served as its presidential nominee in the 1948 presidential election. He was a strong supporter of New Deal liberalism and sought conciliation with the Soviet Union.

...After Roosevelt dumped John Nance Garner from the ticket in 1940, he selected Wallace as his running mate in his bid for an unprecedented third term. The selection of the liberal Wallace upset many Democratic delegates, and Wallace was only nominated by the 1940 Democratic National Convention after Roosevelt threatened to decline the presidential nomination. The ticket of Roosevelt and Wallace defeated the Republican ticket in the 1940 election, and Wallace was sworn in as vice president in 1941. As Wallace remained unpopular with many Democratic leaders, the 1944 Democratic National Convention denied Wallace re-nomination and instead selected Harry S. Truman as Roosevelt's running mate in the 1944 presidential election. Roosevelt appointed Wallace to the position of Secretary of Commerce in March 1945 and Wallace continued to serve under President Truman after Roosevelt died in April 1945.

Truman dismissed Wallace in September 1946 after Wallace made several controversial comments. Wallace became the editor of the New Republic and emerged as a prominent critic of Truman's foreign policies. In 1948, he undertook a third party bid for president, calling for universal government health insurance, an end to the incipient Cold War, and the abolition of segregation.

Why would Randy Bryce, an iron worker from Caldonia, Wisconsin, bring Vangelis, Copeland and, most of all, Henry A. Wallace to mind? That's easy enough. And we get reminded everyday. Today Randy responded to Ryan's latest plan to screw over "the common man." In an email to supporters, #IronStache said, "Speaker Ryan rebranded his plan to destroy Medicaid as a way of 'helping people,' today, showing he couldn't be more out of touch with how to actually help Americans struggling to get by. We aren't lazy individuals who need to be motivated to work. We are working harder than ever and getting less and less in return. What we need is for Paul Ryan to stop giving tax breaks to the Kochs and stop trying to repeal basic healthcare protections, and to start increasing wages and pass Medicare for All."

Alan Grayson A Champion From The Franklin And Eleanor Roosevelt Wing Of The Democratic Party

Alan Grayson doesn't get to vote in the lame duck session. So the ruse of dragging the failed Austerity Agenda across the Atlantic and inserting on these shores-- what DC political elites call the "Fiscal Cliff"-- isn't something he has to go on the record about. But if you think the congressman from central Florida's new 9th CD is just going to sit back and watch something this important go forward without getting involved... then you don't know Alan Grayson. This week he was on Cenk Uygar's Young Turks show and the first question Cenk asked him was whether he supports the Grand Bargain as it's currently structured.

ALAN: I'm entirely against it. Look, Naomi Klein wrote a whole book about this, called The Shock Doctrine. This is an artificial shock. It's being induced in order to be able to justify policies you could not possibly justify on their merits, and I think that people are getting very frustrated about this. The polls clearly show that over three quarters of the population doesn't want any cuts in benefits in Social Security, or any cuts in benefits for Medicare, in order to be able to reduce the deficit. What they want, a majority, want cuts in the defense budget, and they want an end to the war in Afghanistan to reduce the deficit. And instead what we are seeing is this artificial creation [of a crisis], right after we saw a real crisis. We saw a real crisis in Hurricane Sandy, and that's what a real crisis looks like. An artificial crisis is being instituted to steal from us, to steal from the Middle Class, and to steal from people in need.

CENK: It's so refreshing to hear a Democratic Congressman actually say that. So now, unfortunately, not only do you have the Republicans against you, it appears that you've got the Administration against you. They can't wait to do this Grand Bargain. So how in the world do progressive Democrats fight back to make sure it doesn't happen?

ALAN: Well, first we have to make sure people understand there is a third choice. We can't have the Republican Party saying, "We want to strip away your Medicare and your Social Security," like they do in the Ryan Budget, which they all voted for and which passed the House, and then have the Democratic Party say, "Have half." That doesn't work. There's got to be a third alternative. Somebody has to say, "No, that's just not the way we are going to do this. We're not going to strip money from the people in need. We're not going to throw Grandma from the train. We're just not going to do it."

What you're going to see is that this will become a litmus test. This will become a litmus test in the Democratic Party, in the same way that favoring tax cuts for the rich has become a litmus test for the Republican Party. Anybody who votes for cuts in Social Security and cuts in Medicare can expect a primary in the year 2014.

CENK: That would be terrific. Now, as you go into this Congress, and unfortunately you are going to get there after the lame duck session, where they might cut this Grand Bargain. How much of a fighting squad do you have with you? How many progressives can stand up and actually say that? Is it a large enough block to actually throw a roadblock into what's happening?

ALAN: Yes, but it shouldn't come to that. The Democratic Party should be united. We are the Party that created Social Security. We are the Party that created Medicare. We should stand behind it. We should protect it. It's amazingly popular among the voters. Why should we shoot ourselves in the head by saying we're going to end these programs, we're going to cut back these programs, when we created them and the voters love them?

Grayson's chat with Cenk reminded me that I wanted to share something with you that Michael Moore dug up-- one of the more sordid episodes from Democratic Party history.

When President Franklin D. Roosevelt made plans to run for a third term in 1940 he decided to drop conservative Vice President John Nance Garner from the ticket, both because Garner disapproved of Roosevelt running again and Garner's opposition to much of the New Deal. Instead Roosevelt chose Secretary of Agriculture Henry Wallace.

However, many of Garner's fellow conservative Democrats, including the party's reactionary wing based in the South, despised Wallace for his liberalism and attempted to block his nomination at the convention before Roosevelt's arrival. The book American Dreamer: A Life of Henry A. Wallace describes what happened next:

At the White House, Franklin Roosevelt sat in the Oval Room playing solitaire, listening to the proceedings with growing disgust…It was a hot, humid evening in Washington, and Roosevelt was out of patience. Suddenly he reached for a pad and began to scribble. Shortly he handed his notes to [federal judge and confidant] Sam Rosenman and told him to "clean it up" because he might have to "deliver it quickly."

Below is the letter which Roosevelt drafted, in which he vowed not to run if his fellow Democrats blocked his choice of Wallace. (In the end the letter was never sent, as a speech by Eleanor Roosevelt turned the tide for Wallace at the convention.) Roosevelt's letter, with its powerful critique of the Democratic Party, was published almost nowhere and was essentially unknown before it appeared in Oliver Stone's new Showtime documentary series Untold History of the United States:

Franklin D. Roosevelt Letter to the Democratic Convention

July 18, 1940

Members of the Convention:

In the century in which we live, the Democratic Party has received the support of the electorate only when the party, with absolute clarity, has been the champion of progressive and liberal policies and principles of government.

The party has failed consistently when through political trading and chicanery it has fallen into the control of those interests, personal and financial, which think in terms of dollars instead of in terms of human values.

The Republican Party has made its nominations this year at the dictation of those who, we all know, always place money ahead of human progress.

The Democratic Convention, as appears clear from the events of today, is divided on this fundamental issue. Until the Democratic Party through this convention makes overwhelmingly clear its stand in favor of social progress and liberalism, and shakes off all the shackles of control fastened upon it by the forces of conservatism, reaction, and appeasement, it will not continue its march of victory.

It is without question that certain political influences pledged to reaction in domestic affairs and to appeasement in foreign affairs have been busily engaged behind the scenes in the promotion of discord since this Convention convened.

Under these circumstances, I cannot, in all honor, and will not, merely for political expediency, go along with the cheap bargaining and political maneuvering which have brought about party dissension in this convention.

It is best not to straddle ideals.

In these days of danger when democracy must be more than vigilant, there can be no connivance with the kind of politics which has internally weakened nations abroad before the enemy has struck from without.

It is best for America to have the fight out here and now.

I wish to give the Democratic Party the opportunity to make its historic decision clearly and without equivocation. The party must go wholly one way or wholly the other. It cannot face in both directions at the same time.

By declining the honor of the nomination for the presidency, I can restore that opportunity to the convention. I so do.

Another Tragic Consequence Of 8 Years Of Conservative Governance Unfolds In West Virginia

Don Blankenship-- Corporate murderer?

Massey Energy Co.'s sprawling Upper Big Branch mine, which is operated by serial bad faith players Performance Coal (a Massey front company history of violations for not properly ventilating highly combustible methane gas) is half an hour south of Charleston, West Virginia. Yesterday afternoon a massive explosion of the kind Performance has never been properly punished for, killed at least two dozen workers in the mine.

Following 8 years of lax enforcement of safety rules from the Bush administration-- if you can equate no enforcement with "lax"-- Massey has been fined $382,000 for repeated serious violations at Upper Big Branch as Labor Secretary Hilda Solis worked to fix the concerted damage corrupt conservatives have done to mine safety. The company's CEO, Don Blankenship, has neither committed hari kari nor been lynched-- or even arrested. He did offer some p.r. hack's crafted condolences though: "Tonight we mourn the deaths of our members at Massey Energy."

Am I saying billionaire Blankenship should be executed for murder? Well... he should get a fair trial. There's nothing inherently criminal about him funding the teabagger astroturf movement, even if he is contributing mightily to the ruin of our country, But the tragedy in West Virginia puts the spotlight, once again, on greed-driven mining executives, who have done all they could-- with the connivance of conservative legislators in their pockets-- to stifle regulations.

Resistance from mining companies in Kentucky and other states against tougher safety sanctions has created a backlog of cases, clogged the appeals process and-- in some instances-- allowed operators to delay paying hefty fines.

Members of the House Education and Labor Committee took the mining industry to task Tuesday for contributing to a backlog of mine-safety cases amid concerns that such practices put the nation's miners at risk... Mine owners, many of them in Kentucky and other Appalachian states, are litigating 67 percent of all penalties, according to the House committee. The backlog of cases due for review has jumped from 2,100 in 2006 to approximately 16,000 today.

"Blanket and indiscriminate appeals to the review commission allow irresponsible mine operators to avoid these stiffer penalties," the [House Education and Labor C]ommittee's chairman, Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., told the panel.

In Kentucky, mine operators appeal 80 percent of the fines for serious safety violations, according to the federal Mine Safety and Health Administration. The index of the 16,000 backlogged cases is 616 pages long and contains at least $195 million in potential fines, according to the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission.

Mine safety advocates say the backlog of cases will undermine the 2006 Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response Act, which is largely credited for improved safety provisions and a reduction of the number of miners who die on the job. In 2007, a collapse at Crandall Canyon in Utah killed nine miners. In 2006, an underground explosion at the Darby Mine in Harlan County, Ky., killed five people, and an explosion at the Sago Mine in West Virginia killed 12 miners.

Few people outside the coal industry, right-wing political inner circles, and outside West Virginia knew who Blankenship was until January when Rolling Stone's Tim Dickinson did an expose on him as part of a major story on Climate Change deniers. What emerged was not a pretty picture but Blankenship was not removed from his positions as a grave danger to his employees and to society.

In an age when most CEOs are canny enough to at least pay lip service to the realities of climate change, Blankenship stands apart as corporate America's most unabashed denier. Global warming, he insists, is nothing but "a hoax and a Ponzi scheme." His fortune depends on such lies: Massey Energy, the nation's fourth-largest coal-mining operation, unearths more than 40 million tons of the fossil fuel each year-- often by blowing the tops off of Appalachian mountains.

The country's highest-paid coal executive, Blankenship is a villain ripped straight from the comic books: a jowly, mustache-sporting, union-busting coal baron who uses his fortune to bend politics to his will. He recently financed a $3.5 million campaign to oust a state Supreme Court justice who frequently ruled against his company, and he hung out on the French Riviera with another judge who was weighing an appeal by Massey. "Don Blankenship would actually be less powerful if he were in elected office," Rep. Nick Rahall of West Virginia once observed. "He would be twice as accountable and half as feared."

On the national level, Blankenship enjoys a position of influence on the board of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which has led the fight to kill climate legislation. He enjoys inveighing against the "greeniacs"-- including Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Al Gore — who are "taking over the world." And he has even taken to tweeting about climate change: "We must demand that more coal be burned to save the Earth from global cooling."

In more unguarded moments, however, Blankenship confesses that his over-the-top rhetoric is strategic. "If it weren't for guys like me," he says, "the middle would be further to the left." He also admits that his efforts to block climate legislation are ultimately self-serving: "It would probably cut our business in half."

And I'm serious when I say that criminals like Blankenship deserve fair trials before punishment. On April 9, 1944, Sunday's NY Times Magazine featured an article by Vice President Henry Wallace on the danger of American fascism, pointing out that "it pollutes public opinion, encourages intolerance and presents a challenge to our democratic way of life." There are few better examples of current American fascism than Don Blankenship. The dictionary defines fascism as "A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism." Thom Hartmann reminds us that "its core governing concept was that the business elite of a nation was far more qualified to run the country than were 'the people.'" With European fascism collapsing, Wallace gave Times readers this perspective:

If we define an American Fascist as one who in case of conflict puts money and power ahead of human beings, then there are undoutably several million fascists in the United States. There are probably several hundred thousand if we narrow the definition to include only those who in their search for money and power are ruthless and deceitful."

This could be inscribed on Blankenship's headstone; but it won't be.



Have you ever seen an OpenSecrets.org page? You'll need to click on it to make it big enough to read: