Month: August 2011

Progress

by David Atkins (“thereisnospoon”)

This is progress:

There’s a new commander on this sandy, swampy spit of land that has transformed rawboned recruits into macho Marines for nearly a century. Brig. Gen. L.E. Reynolds, a 6-foot-tall Baltimore native and a veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan, is the latest in a long line of no-nonsense leaders to take charge here.

But she’s the first woman.

And for the tradition-bound Marine Corps, which endlessly promotes a tough-guy image and built its recruiting on the search for “a few good men,” the idea of all those ruthless Parris Island drill instructors having to salute a leatherneck named Loretta could take some getting used to.

But get used to it they will. And in a decade or two, they’ll write the same story about openly gay drill instructors.

And yet no one will hold conservatives to task for denying the career choices of countless qualified women, gays and others whose lives were ruined by official discrimination.

The world moves on, and progress is made. But it would nice if it came with accountability for those who wrecked people’s lives as well.

Another Clever Attempt to Destroy Unions

by David Atkins (“thereisnospoon”)

After the Roberts Court used the Citizens United to allow unlimited corporate money in politics, the only thing left for conservatives to do was to destroy labor unions so that big business would be the only players left in the field.

Scott Walker and his goons have been Exhibit “A” in that game. But conservatives have a bunch of other creative tricks up their sleeve as well. In California, they have no chance of passing Walker-style laws through the Democratic legislature, and the people of the great state of California won’t walk into the anti-worker maw with open eyes. So deception is necessary. To wit: the Stop Special Interest Money Now Act:

Prohibits Political Contributions by Payroll Deduction. Prohibitions on Contributions to Candidates. Initiative Statute.

“Restricts union political fundraising by prohibiting use of payroll-deducted funds for political purposes. Same use restriction would apply to payroll deductions, if any, by corporations or government contractors. Permits voluntary employee contributions to employer or union committees if authorized yearly, in writing. Prohibits unions and corporations from contributing directly or indirectly to candidates and candidate-controlled committees. Other political expenditures remain unrestricted, including corporate expenditures from available resources not limited by payroll deduction prohibition. Limits government contractor contributions to elected officers or officer-controlled committees.”

Since labor unions are essentially the only corporate entities to use payroll-deducted funds, this ballot initiative would singly prohibit labor unions from donating to candidates, while leaving big business free to do whatever they like. Mitt Romney’s best friends would have a voice in politics, but teachers and firefighters would be legally disbarred from sharing that voice.

The initiative would likely be considered unconstitutional under the Roberts Court’s own definition of “free speech”, but then again, the Roberts Court doesn’t exactly decide cases on the basis of consistent merit, but rather on what is best for big business in the short term.

Most disturbingly, there are reports that signature gatherers are lying about the initiative, telling voters in liberal areas that it’s about “corporate influence in politics.”

Fortunately, organized labor in California is fighting back:

Underhanded campaigning has surfaced recently here that jeopardizes labor’s ability to defend itself in the political battlefield, according to the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor.

Steve Smith, communications director for the California Labor Federation, said a group of wealthy conservatives are behind a ballot initiative that would restrict unions’ involvement in political campaigns…

“They say it applies to both corporations and unions but it doesn’t. It leaves corporations unscathed. The reason is that corporations don’t use payroll dues. They say that they’re keeping corporations and special interest groups out of politics but it’s completely wrong. It would hinder working people from having a voice.”

The Los Angeles County Federation of Labor says on its website, “Petition gatherers aren’t being honest with the public. They say this measure is about ‘special interests.’ But the truth is, this proposal seeks to take away our voices and give more power to big corporations and CEOs. It’s a sham backed by billionaires and CEOs who want to control our state without any opposition.”

The L.A. labor federation is urging voters not to sign these petitions. If people encounter canvassers with the petitions talking about “special interests” or “payroll deduction,” the federation urges them to call the toll free number 1-877-440-9585. A team equipped with a video camera and supplemental information will be sent out to educate the public in the area about the real facts, the federation says.

There is some question as to whether the measure will actually get the signatures required to appear on the ballot, but never count the dedicated right wing in doing whatever it takes to destroy the middle class for the benefit of big business. If you live in California and see anyone pushing this petition as I did at the Ventura County Fair last week, be sure to call the hotline at 1-877-440-9585. This sort of fraudulent subversion of democracy should not be allowed to go unchallenged.

.

Mitt Romney continues to insist that corporations are people, too:

The video is entitled “Mitt on the Road: A Week in New Hampshire,” and shows clips of Romney speaking at different locations around that key early primary state, and discussing the poor condition of the economy.

At just over the halfway mark, Romney declares: “Businesses are comprised of people. I’m talking about repair shops, and gas stations, and beauty salons, and restaurants. I’m talking about Apple computer, and Facebook, and Microsoft. I’m talking about businesses that employ people. It’s really astonishing to me that the Obama folks would try and argue that businesses aren’t people. What do they think they are? Little men from Mars? But when they tax business, they tax people.”

Earlier in the video, Romney continually compares the current unemployment situation to those of the “Jimmy Carter years,” positioning himself as the next Ronald Reagan, and conveniently ignoring the fact that Barack Obama took office after Wall St. and the Bush Administration imploded the economy.

What’s especially telling is Romney’s use of Apple, Microsoft and Facebook as exemplars of companies that Americans would evidently have issues taxing more fairly, presumably because those companies are seen as innovators.

The irony is that Facebook employs just under 2,000 people. Apple? Apple sells overpriced products out of the reach of less affluent consumers in order to make a 42% profit margin. And Microsoft? Not exactly the most popular corporation in the world with anyone who has ever seen a blue screen of death.

This smacks of desperation from the Romney campaign, but the best move his handlers can make under the circumstances. Republicans know that when it comes to politics, the only way out of a jam is straight through. It’s just “Don’t Retreat, Reload”, corporate edition.

Class Warfare

by David Atkins (“thereisnospoon”)

Brilliance, courtesy Jon Stewart and team:

Enjoy the rest of your Friday night.

This is How You Do It

by David Atkins (“thereisnospoon”)

Bloggers spend a lot of time criticizing the media for vacuous “he-said she-said” fact-free reporting that more resembles stenography than journalism. Journalists respond that it’s their job to be objective rather than partisan. Bloggers then respond that journalists needn’t have an ax to grind; they merely need to report facts in context, while calling out obvious lies. If reality tends to a liberal bias, then that’s just the way the chips fall.

Of course, that’s the when the conversation stops, because journalists are much more afraid of being called partisan by conservatives, than they are of not telling the truth.

So it’s nice whenever a traditional media outlet covers a story like it should be covered. Case in point: CNN Money’s article about Michele Bachmann saying she’ll bring back $2 a gallon gas, courtesy Charles Riley:

President Michele Bachmann has a promise: $2 gas.

“Under President Bachmann you will see gasoline come down below $2 a gallon again,” Bachmann told a crowd Tuesday in South Carolina. “That will happen.”

This is normally when the traditional media will find some liberal or non-partisan commentator to cast doubt on Bachmann’s ability to fulfill that promise, then counter it with some from the Heritage Foundation claiming if we only do away with regulations and drill American coastlines, Bachmann might be able to get it done.

But that’s not what happens.

Sure, politicians promise all kinds of things on the campaign trail. But Bachmann, a leading contender for the 2012 Republican nomination, is wading into truly tricky territory.

The price Americans pay at the pump is tied to the crude oil market — a global system largely beyond the reach of Washington.

It’s certainly true that prices — now about $3.50 a gallon on average — have risen since President Obama took office.

“The day that the president became president gasoline was $1.79 a gallon,” Bachmann said. “Look what it is today.”

Of course, that’s not the full story.

When Obama took office, the country was mired in a terrible economic contraction.

“That was in the 4th inning of the greatest recession of our lifetime,” said Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst at the Oil Price Information Service.

During recessions, demand for gasoline plummets as trucks pull off the road, companies cut back on travel and laid off workers drive fewer miles.

“You have to be careful what you wish for because the recipe for cheap prices these days is economic disaster,” Kloza said…

“We’re going to have to recognize the rest of the world has this increasing appetite for oil,” he said. “If we go below $2 a gallon, it probably means there has been a lot of wealth loss and we are in a deflationary period…”

That’s because the amount of extra oil that could be produced from more drilling in this country is tiny compared to what the country — and the world — consumes.

Plus, any extra oil the United States did produce would likely be quickly offset by a cut in OPEC production.

Amazingly, CNN is capable of fact-based context. Mention of oil being on a global market, such that domestic drilling won’t lower prices? Check. Mention of recessionary cause for low gas prices in 2009? Check. Mention of danger of deflationary spiral? Check. Mention of OPEC’s ability to negate any potential gains from extra drilling? Check.

The only things missing from the article are climate change impact problems, and the fact that rising gas prices are also largely a result of pure market speculation rather than demand–speculation that Bachmann is ideologically averse to curbing.

But overall, the article reflects the sort of journalism that informs and clarifies while holding politicians acountable. So bravo to Charles Riley at CNN Money for doing journalism right.

.

Helping Out

by David Atkins (“thereisnospoon”)

Bank of America to Rick Perry: We’ll help you out.

Bank of America to its employees: Go jump off a bridge.

Bank of America Corp. is cutting 3,500 jobs in the current quarter and working on a broader restructuring that could eliminate thousands of additional positions, people familiar with the situation said.

The 3,500 positions are spread across the nation’s largest bank by assets, including investment banking and trading, and the cuts are expected to be completed by the end of September. Some employees already have been notified.

Obama Administration to Bank of America: we’ll help you out.

After years of negative judicial decisions about the use of a straw-man on mortgages, MERS was about to lose its existence as well as its credibility. But now all of that is set to change as Wall Street money is pouring into the coffers of those who are receptive (i.e., almost everyone in Congress). The legislation is already being drafted under the interstate commerce clause to ratify MERS and everything it did retroactively. It appears that the Obama administration is ready to pardon all the securitization deviants by signing this bill into law. This information is corroborated by several people who are in sensitive positions — persons who would be the first to know such proposals. Fortunately, there are some people in Washington who have a conscience and do not want to see this happen.

The MERS whitewash is, so far as anyone can tell, still in works pending a review by the Roberts Court, which will almost certainly rule in the banks’ favor, contract law be damned.

What’s important, of course, is that neither political party stand up too strongly against the financial industry. It’s good that everyone is helping each other out like this. Smells like bipartisan spirit, and that’s really what the people want, right?

Update: It appears I had an inaccurate reading of the MERS situation, and there may never have been an actual MERS whitewash bill. And it appears unlikely that the SCOTUS will even hear the case, much less rule in the banks’ favor. David Dayen and Yves at Naked Capitalism have much more.

Suffice it to say, though, that the Washington establishment is determined to not allow any significantly negative repercussions to befall the big banks from the MERS mortgage scam if they can help it–and that that determination is bipartisan in nature.

.

Maddow vs. One Anonymous Democratic Senator

by David Atkins (“thereisnospoon”)

Remember that one anonymous Democratic Senator the L.A. Times quoted, taking President Obama to task for too much partisanship?

Rachel Maddow does a fabulous job taking him or her down a notch or two:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

There are efforts underway to uncover the identity of that Senator. I may or may not be involved in them. I think we’ll probably find out sooner or later, and hopefully Rachel Maddow can report on who it was so that good Democrats can know whom not to assist for re-election.

Ghaddafi on his way out?

by David Atkins (“thereisnospoon”)

President Obama has not made friends with the Right or the Left on dealing with Ghaddafi and the ongoing conflict in Libya. There has been a good deal of room for second guessing of the American strategy in Libya: much analysis has focused on the twin notion that one should go big or not go in at all. Many on the left say that this is an ongoing civil war in Libya that nations outside of Libya should not be involved in. Critics on both the left and right have also argued that if action were to be taken, that it should have been faster, bigger and earlier without allowing the conflict to come to a stalemate.

But the latest reports are certainly a good sign:

Embattled Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi may be preparing to flee the country within days, according to NBC News.

U.S. officials told NBC that intelligence reports suggest Gaddafi is in the process of making plans to evacuate from Libya with his family. The reports indicate he may be headed to Tunisia, where it is possible he will be granted exile.

At least seven loud blasts were heard in Tripoli early Friday morning as bombs fell in the vicinity of Gaddafi’s main headquarters of Bab al-Aziziya.

On Tuesday, U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said the Libyan leader’s days appeared to be numbered. “Gaddafi’s forces are weakened,” he said.

Chris Weigant at Business Insider has a pretty good rundown of the situation:

While the rebel advance has slowed in Brega, though, it has sped up noticeably in Libya’s west. The battle map shows this section of the country in detail. The ultimate objective, of course, is Tripoli. To Tripoli’s east is the second rebel-held area, around the city of Misrata (rebel-held areas are red on the map, loyalist-held areas are in green). The battle for the city of Misrata was the rebels’ first real victory in this civil war, and in recent weeks the frontlines have moved out from the city itself to the surrounding towns. The rebels have expanded their perimeter to the point that loyalists cannot shell Misrata any more, because they’ve been pushed back out of range. Moving southwards along the coast, the rebels took Tarwerga, and today reports are coming in that the rebels have taken Al Heisha (which, unfortunately is not on the map, but seems to be further down the road to Sirte than Tarwerga). In addition to this, the rebels are also pushing west from Misrata, moving the fight along the coast to the city of Zlitan.

In the westernmost part of the country, the rebels have had their biggest successes since securing Misrata. Starting from the border, the rebels have taken town after town until they now control the entire chain of the Nafusa Mountains. A few weeks ago, they took the town of Zintan, and as you can see on the battle map, they have quickly advanced from there in two separate directions.

The rebels are trying to take the words “the noose is tightening around Ghaddafi” in quite literal fashion. It seems obvious that the rebels are attempting to encircle Tripoli, and due to the fact that there just aren’t a lot of roads in or out, this objective may actually soon be within their grasp.

Of course, getting rid of Ghaddafi doesn’t automatically mean that all will be well in Libya. It is entirely possible that there will be retributions against Ghaddafi allies (there are reports that this has already been happening), and the future of a post-Ghaddafi Libya is anything but clear.

What is certainly clear, however, is that had Ghaddafi been allowed to operate without obstruction, mass killings of rebels would almost certainly have resulted. It’s up to one’s individual conscience to decide if foreign military intervention is still the morally less defensible choice in this sort of situation. I would like to believe that in hindsight, any serious progressive would have encouraged Bill Clinton to intervene militarily in Rwanda to prevent that massacre.

If the operation in Libya is successful in removing Ghaddafi while preventing mass recriminatory killings, it will have been a victory not only for Libya and for the Arab Spring, but also for the Obama Administration’s foreign policy.

Progressivism is ultimately not about following a preset ideology, but about doing what works to make life better for the greatest number of people. If the Obama Administration succeeds in doing that in Libya, it will have been a truly praiseworthy result. Time will tell.

.

The Tipping Point

by David Atkins (“thereisnospoon”)

The Administration nears its tipping point, even with the African-American base.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

I wonder what the brilliant minds at OFA think about this, and whether they believe Maxine Waters is an insufficiently supportive firebagger stabbing the Democratic Party in the back.

I had the opportunity to speak with Congresswoman Waters and several others in Congress when I was in Washington D.C. last month. I guarantee you that this anger is not recent. It has been building for a long time now, and it’s widespread within the Democratic caucus.

.

Otters in jackboots

Once nearly extinct in England, otters have now returned to every county, indicating that rivers are at their healthiest in decades. Conservationists had predicted that it would be another 10 years before the otters reached this level of repopulation, so it’s a real triumph for the iittle dudes. Not to mention an overwhelming stroke of good fortune for Brits, who can now watch otters play from the comfort of their homes, the lucky bastards.

Otters have reappeared in places where they have not been seen since the industrial revolution, including Bristol, Birmingham and Manchester, and even on the Thames and the Lea in north London. A recent survey on the river Ribble, in Lancashire, showed a 44% increase in otter numbers since 2008.

Read on for the details of how those environmentalist bastards encroached on Englishmen’s most basic human freedoms by making them stop hunting otters into extinction and insisting on cleaning up all the toxic industrial waste we humans are entitled to create. Oh, the humanity.

.