The neoconservative and neoliberal Democrats corrupting NY's political left

"Both parties are fueled by rich people’s money."

The big money machine backing the Democratic Party wants Hillary Clinton to become the party's nominee for president, so that Hillary's big money supporters can keep control over her politics, as has been the case for decades. But she's not alone amongst the Democratic Party's dynastic marionettes, whose strings roll up into the hands of some of the same big money and corporate puppet masters that guide Republican politics. Parallels between Gov. Cuomo's cover-up of the Moreland Commission scandal and former President Nixon's cover-up of his Watergate scandal Government reform activists in post-Occupy New York City are energized at the prospect of a Wall Street puppet Democrat, Gov. Andrew Cuomo, joining former New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn by being removed from office. Gov. Cuomo faces an escalating federal investigation into actions by the governor's office over the closure of a corruption-fighting investigation panel known as the Moreland Commission. Last year, former Speaker Quinn was voted out of office in the Democratic primary in the race for New York City mayor. Differentiating between the two, Gov. Cuomo faces a Watergate-like corruption investigation that could lead to the governor to negotiate a non-prosecution agreement, which will allow him to resign before the end of his term, some activists speculate, whereas the defeat of former Speaker Quinn's mayoral campaign was aided by a controversial Super PAC with reported close ties to Mayor de Blasio and his supporters, itself the target of a possible federal investigation. As federal prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney's Office from New York's southern district delve deeper into the Cuomo administration's political machinations that were responsible for political corruption across New York State government, advocates for overhauling the broken political system wonder why is it so hard to muster public outrage for the lack of corruption prosecution on the local and state levels when local and state prosecutors seem to be inundated with the enforcement of minor infractions, like selling loose, untaxed cigarettes or dancing in the New York City's subways. While very low-level infractions and misdemeanors are met with over-policing, the law enforcement in the city and state levels overlook each of the apparent pay-to-play machinations in the Gov. Cuomo's massive fundraising operations that accepts donations from real estate developers seeking the governor's approval on multi-million tax breaks and the conflicts of interests in Mayor Bill de Blasio's fundraising for his nonprofit political arm from sources seeking to do business with New York City. The answer for the dichotomy comes from the fact that local and state prosecutors, Democrats in the cases of Attorney General Schneiderman and Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, avoid prosecuting political corruption cases, many good government reform activists believe, because cases consisting of violations of local or state law that involve the prosecution of elected officials or their political operatives pose special problems for local and state prosecutors, a fact known to federal prosecutors, because this complication actually falls under the discretion of federal prosecutors considering racketeering charges against corrupt political organizations, according to the federal criminal RICO prosecutors' manual. The special problems facing local and state prosecutors stems from the political reality that prosecutors, who run for public office, must do so with the consent and support of county Democratic Party chairs. The required approval of the Democratic Party machine acts as a backdoor deterrent on the prosecution of government corruption cases, because local and state prosecutors have to be mindful not to investigate corrupt officials, political operatives, and lobbyists, who are loyal to the county chairs, whose support are needed by prosecutors. Besides DA Vance, the deterrent of investigating government and campaign corruption has also been documented in the office of Erie County District Attorney Frank Sedita. Complicating matters is that prosecutors running for public office must fundraise from the same Wall Street and real estate donor base that wants to have a say in government policy, especially when it applies to the prosecution of business or government corruption. The state attorney general, for example, raises huge amounts of money from a real estate developer, who is represented in the leadership of the controversial real estate lobbying group, the Real Estate Board of New York, which became embroiled in the Moreland Commission scandal. In spite of federal prosecutorial discretion, local and state political corruption backed by big business donors has generally gone unchecked, whilst low-level misdemeanors and infractions by low-income people and people of color are over-policed and subject to police brutality. The death of Eric Garner has brought to the fore a fundamental contradiction in Mayor de Blasio's progressive façade : the Broken Windows theory of policing has, at its roots, a neoconservative aim to oppress the poor and people of color. The governor allows real estate developers to make large campaign contributions, which then therefore sets property tax rates for billion-dollar luxury condominium towers. This is no different than how the mayor allows real estate developers to insist on a "Broken Windows" approach to policing, which unfairly targets the poor and people of color. Lowering property taxes for the rich and over-policing low-income and minority communities to drive mass displacement and gentrification are the goals of wealthy real esate developers. These are Republican values. As the apparent big business corruption runs rampant across New York State, it's the little people, who pay with their lives. Former First Lady Mrs. Clinton, Gov. Cuomo, and Mayor de Blasio go on serving their big business donors, whilst police brutality, and even the imposition of a death sentence before apparently a suspect's Miranda rights can be read, are leading many government reform activists to question the priorities of New York's Democratic leaders. Are they just Republicans in Democrats' clothing ? Why are leaders of the Democratic Party silent about the miscarriage of justice that is readily apparent to voters ? And why do voters accept the failure of the Democratic Party to fully address the broken judicial system ? From unfounded screeds written by Maggie Haberman, voters are left to read between the lines or to triangulate back to other journalism, to see for themselves how the ethic of public service has nothing to do with how the Democratic Party approaches government. Left unexamined is whether the political organizing now taking place in anticipation of Gov. Cuomo's resignation will yield to installation of another politician from the corporate-owned two-party system, or whether government reform activists are going to push back against the co-opting political machinations that led to backroom Super PAC's, corrupt lobbyists, and astroturf groups from driving this year's election outcome for governor, as was the case in last year's election of the mayor. Which begs the age-old question : why do activists from the political left still organize with the Democratic Party ?

RELATED Is Hillary Clinton the true heir of Ronald Reagan ? (Salon) A lesson of Watergate, 40 years on, for Andrew Cuomo (The Times Union) The Neoconservative Roots of the Broken Windows Theory (The Gotham Gazette)

Ed Koch and the AIDS Crisis - A Historical Fact Checking Duel Between NYT and YouTube Videos

In response to the biased "praises" and instant beatification of Ed Koch, I made a YouTube video set to music by Dalida, to help visualise former Mayor Ed Koch's complete failure on the AIDS crisis.

My video was made in response to the video promoted by The New York Times, which whitewashes any responsibility or culpability of the AIDS crisis away from former Mayor Ed Koch :

I'd love to hear what folks think ?

Ed Koch, the Closet, Neoliberalism, and AIDS

From The Nation

The instant beatification of former New York City Mayor Ed Koch has a lot of folks itching to do some grave dancing. Leftists will denounce Koch because he was one of the original neoliberal mayors, ushering in a regime of gentrification and finance-driven inequality that defines the city to this day. Minorities regard him with suspicion because he marginalized the city’s black and Hispanic leadership and inflamed racial fault lines to corner the white vote, presaging the Sister Souljah moments that would come to afflict the national Democratic Party. And yet even there, among the new Democrats, Koch was never a stalwart, breaking with the party to endorse George W. Bush for president in 2004 and flirting with the neocons over Israel late in his life.

All that said, there is a special place reserved for Koch in gay hell—because he was mayor during the onset of the AIDS epidemic, which he is widely seen as failing to do enough about, and because it’s commonly assumed that Koch was a closeted gay man. “I hope he’s burning next to Roy Cohn”—or sentiments quite like it—have appeared frequently on my Facebook feed, especially from vets of ACT UP. ...

Read more : Ed Koch and the Cost of the Closet (The Nation)

Barack Obama and Ronald Reagan : Conservative Bonafides

Confronting the President of Magical Thinking : A Vocation of Agony

Barack Obama and his family, the vice president and his family, other government officials, and their supporters celebrated the president's second inauguration today, which coïncided with the federal holiday commemorating the life and accomplishments of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

LGBT Americans were jubilant, because the president said some aspirational words in the second half of his inaugural address.

"Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law, for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal, as well."

Immediately, the president's supporters acted in lock-step to express support for this expression of a longing for equality.

Corey Johnson is an up-and-coming LGBT politician, who is patterning himself after New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn's doctrine of putting politically-expedient identity politics before having to deliver any government reforms. Note how the president failed to say the words lesbian, bisexual, and transgender in "LGBT," but already the president's supporters were having to say the words that the president found unspeakable.

It appears that Mr. Johnson's excitement could be being based not so much on the president's promise of legal reforms that would result in LGBT equality, but, rather, on political party discipline that calls for a self-motivated unity in messaging to sway Progressive voters into believing that the Democratic Party was on their side.

But for the incomplete messaging that the president's words offer, there is no plan attached to how the president plans to "complete" our "journey."

On Facebook, some LGBT activists picked up on the incomplete messaging in the president's rhetoric, because they had noticed a pattern in his prior speeches.

Some LGBT activists were already picking up how President Obama was unable to utter the words lesbian, bisexual, and transgender.

To the president's army of speech writers, did those words lack any dignity and respect, and, therefore, did not need to be mentioned ?

In his speech during his second inaugural ceremonies, President Obama seemed to be channeling the "great communicator," who, we may all remember, was notable for his failure to uttered the word "AIDS" until after thousands of people had died.

Many of the president's supporters have made a choice to be excited for the president's re-election. But ...

"By the time President Reagan had delivered his first speech on the epidemic, of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, 36,058 Americans had been diagnosed with the disease; 20,849 had died," Randy Shilts once wrote. Along a similar vein, when will President Obama say all the words in LGBT ?

So many people want to believe in the hope, change, and love that the president so skillfully articulates in his scripted speeches. We are supposed to want to believe in the magical thinking that the president really is on our side, because doesn't he, after all, say so many nice things that he knows that we want to hear ?

While President Obama's lack of clear communication during this inaugural address may not lead to the deaths of tens of thousands of our "gay brothers and sisters," he nonetheless sets the tone for that which the American people become familiar : either feelings of shame and embarrassment that prevent a president from mentioning lesbians, bisexuals, and transgender Americans, or feelings of equality and respect by dignifying and acknowledging the journeys still being made by lesbians, bisexuals, and transgender Americans.

Some activists on Facebook took a more diplomatic, but forward-looking approach to the editing of the president's words : by using the occasion of the president's rhetoric to build forward momentum on the social movement for LGBT equality in the United States.

The hopes and actions of LGBT Americans and their allies are to fulfill on our shared dream for equality.

But LGBT activists and allies already exchange amongst ourselves the vision and prayers for equality.

For all the president's rhetoric, we already seem to have, at first blush, the president's love and affinity for our community, at least that which could be expressed in his own way. What we need now is action.

The longer LGBT Americans have to wait for full federal recognition of their equal rights, the more that members of our community remain fully exposed to legally-permitted forms of discrimination in broad areas of their life, including in the workplace.

The skepticism within the LGBT community about President Obama's commitment to true LGBT equality stems from some major examples of actions that the president refuses to take, which contradicts his rhetoric.

For example, the president refuses to sign the Federal Contractor's Employment Protections Executive Order. National LGBT civil rights groups, such as GetEQUAL, have been mounting a multi-prong campaign to pressure the president to sign the executive order, but the president refuses.

President Obama embarrassed both his administration and the Democratic Party by once having said that while he was nominally committed to the idea that all Americans shared the same civil rights, he still had to "evolve" on marriage equality. It was as if President Obama was admitting that his thoughts on civil rights resembled that of someone a little bit ignorant and a little bit intolerant, like former commissioner Bull Connor, who once, among other depraved acts of discrimination, ordered the opening up of firehoses on African American civil rights activists.

Surely, President Obama was not seriously putting himself into the same league as Bull Connor, but why was the president torturing hisself by proclaiming in speech his support for LGBT equality that could not be matched by his actions ?

And lest we neglect to mention how so many people conveniently seem to forget to remember how it took a national campaign of civil disobedience, among other actions, for national Democratic Party legislators to repeal the military's discriminatory policy known as Don't Ask, Don't Tell. The president's political operatives love to mention how the president "repealed" DADT, but they overlook what it took to get a bill introduced in and voted by Congress.

And if the constant push and pull amongst LGBT activists and civil rights groups to define a winning national strategy to deliver a full federal equality bill through Congress wasn't enough, activists must contend with the political trappings of trying to challenge a president who says all the right things and knows how to manipulate support for his administration. And then there are the other unknown, but nonetheless predictable, obstacles for LGBT activists as they set out to challenge power holders, who fail to act to end de jure and de fact discrimination.

While community organising and activism has evolved since the 1960's with the advent of online tools and other empowering platforms of the Internet like Facebook, YouTube, and blogging, every now and then activists must overcome the occasional opening up of digital firehoses.

Read also : President Obama Must Evolve Again on Marriage Equality

RT @occupylondon Obama is no Martin Luther King! n0.gd/10S4rAe n0.gd/WWZLk2 #mlk #mlkday #occupy

— OccupyBot (@occupybot) January 23, 2013

Christine Quinn and Trickle Down Feminism FAIL

"As long as feminists are lauding the ascension of women to boardrooms for equality’s sake and not questioning what happens in those boardrooms, true liberation is a long way off." Read more : Trickle Down Feminism (Dissent Magazine)