Originally published at Robert Reich’s Blog

For almost a year now, Democratic pollsters have been pointing out how much the public hates the bank bailout and despises Wall Street. But there was no reason for Democratic leaders in Congress or the White House to pay much attention. After all, it was a Republican president and a Republican Congress that came up with the bank bailout plan to begin with. Some stalwart Republicans had grumbled about it, of course, but Republicans have always been on the side of Wall Street and big business and  weren’t likely to call for strong measures to prevent the Street from getting into trouble again.

Larry Summers and Tim Geithner scuttled Paul Volcker’s plan to separate the banks’ commercial and investment functions, and didn’t want to limit the size of banks or the risks they could take on. Summers and Geithner have wanted to get the banks back to profitability as soon as possible. And Dems in Congress have had no stomach to take on Wall Street, a major source of campaign funding.

But suddenly the winds are blowing in a different direction over the Potomac. The 2010 midterms are getting closer, and the Dems are scared. Their polls are plummeting. The upsurge in mad-as-hell populism requires that Democrats become indignant on behalf of Americans, and indignation is meaningless without a target. They can’t target big government because Republicans do that one better, especially when they’re out of power. So what’s the alternative? Wall Street.

Perhaps I’m being too cynical. Maybe the Obama and congressional Democrats are now ready to give up Wall Street trickle-down economics and focus on Main Street trickle-up. “There are two ideas of government,” said William Jennings Bryan at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in 1896. “There are those who believe that you just legislate to make the well-to-do prosperous, that their prosperity will leak through on those below. The Democratic idea has been that if you legislate to make the masses prosperous their prosperity will find its way up and through every class that rests upon it.” He couldn’t have said it better.



 

Last week Iranian activist Abed Tavancheh was sentenced to one year in prison for giving an interview to SPIEGEL about student protests. His lawyer Naser Zarafshan says his client doesn’t regret speaking out.

SPIEGEL: Your client Abed Tavancheh was supposed to have been arrested last Tuesday. What do the authorities in Iran accuse him of having done?

Naser Zarafshan: Abed Tavancheh fights for freedom of expression and democracy. He had already been arrested four times and sentenced to eight months’ imprisonment. A part of the current allegations against him relate to these activities. The primary charge, though, has to do with an interview he did with SPIEGEL in September about the tense atmosphere in the universities. The state prosecutor says that by doing this he spread “propaganda against the holy order of the Islamic Republic” and that he “incited unrest.”

SPIEGEL: How did the authorities become aware of the interview?

Zarafshan: Immediately after the publication of the interview, a “special report” was published in a large, extremely conservative daily newspaper. The report labeled SPIEGEL a “Zionist magazine” and Tavancheh was harshly attacked as a “US-oriented left winger.” Subsequently the state prosecutor summoned him.

SPIEGEL: Did the case go to trial?

Zarafshan: The interrogation was followed by three hearings before a revolutionary tribunal. I was even not summoned to two of the hearings. One cannot hope for justice there. We cited the right to freedom of expression which is guaranteed in our constitution. Nevertheless the court considered the interview to be a “violation of national security.” For this, Tavancheh got a new prison sentence of one year.

SPIEGEL: Did your client accept the verdict?

Zarafshan: No, we don’t recognize this verdict, which wasn’t even given to us in writing. Because my client assumed he would be arrested, he quickly left the courtroom.

SPIEGEL: Now the authorities are looking for Tavancheh. Does he now regret having given the interview?

Zarafshan: My client knew what he was getting into. He stands by every sentence.

 

A Greenpeace activist dressed as an egg plant, or aubergine, protests in Bangalore, India on Friday against Bt brinjal, a genetically modified (GM) egg plant crop. The Indian government is organizing a series of public consultations to decide on whether to approve it as India’s first GM crop.
© 2012 New Jersey CFO Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha