I remember this guy...
Thursday, August 6, 2009
It's finally happened...
...with more to come, to be sure, actual violence at a Health Care Town Hall.
This is just going to get worse, because at some point, the Progressive Army is going to start showing up at these things. At some point, Union folk are going to be at these town halls, and to the Union guys, this is life and death.
Memo to Teabaggers, screw with a Steelworker at your peril.
Talking Points Memo has more...
This is just going to get worse, because at some point, the Progressive Army is going to start showing up at these things. At some point, Union folk are going to be at these town halls, and to the Union guys, this is life and death.
Memo to Teabaggers, screw with a Steelworker at your peril.
Talking Points Memo has more...
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
TPM: ...and now they're resorting to death threats.
It's very simple, Tea-Baggers. You want to show up at a Town Hall and throw your Congressman some really pointed (but respectful) questions? Be my guest. In fact, I encourage that kind of behavior...
...but that's not good enough, is it? First, there was Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT), now we have Rep. Brad Miller (D-NC).
...but that's not good enough, is it? First, there was Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT), now we have Rep. Brad Miller (D-NC).
Rep. Brad Miller (D-NC) will not be hosting any town hall events this August -- instead, he's making himself available to constituents for one-on-one meetings about health care reform -- and at least part of the reason is this: His offices have received threatening phone calls, including at least one direct threat against his life.
"We had no town hall events scheduled for the August recess anyway, but in light of everything that's happened -- we have received a threatening phone call in the D.C. office, there have been calls to the Raleigh office," said Miller communications director LuAnn Canipe, in an interview with TPM.
"The call to the D.C. office was, 'Miller could lose his life over this,'" said Canipe. "Our staffer took it so seriously, he confirmed what the guy was saying. He said, 'Sir is that a threat?" and at that time our staffer was getting the phone number off caller ID and turning it over to the Capitol Police."
Canipe explained that Miller had no plans for a town hall before and won't be holding any now, due to this event and the examples he's already seem from the around the country: "Our point is, we're not gonna be bullied into having a town hall so it can then be interrupted by the fake grassroots folks."
"We don't want to people to think we're shutting out our constituents," Canipe added.. "We're meeting with them one on one to discuss health care reform."
Obama: Unleash Prosperity speech from Elkhart, Indiana (VIDEO)
The lady with the camera started to get on my nerves (you'll see if you watch), just so you know...
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
TPM: Now they're wishing Sen. Dodd would die (VIDEO)
In case you can't hear: "Barack Obama clearly said, all you should do is take a painkiller. How come we just don't give Chris Dodd painkillers?" shouted one man. "Like a handful of them at a time! He can wash it down with Ted Kennedy's whiskey -- oh excuse me, scotch!"
HuffPo: Maybe they should have had some beers... (VIDEO)
So, middle-class Nebraskan, Michael Snider appears in ad ripping his Senator (and alledged Democrat) Ben Nelson for costing him his Health Care.
Hey, full points for doing this. This is what Democracy is all about. A Constituent has a concern? Let's find out what's the problem is, and then address it.
But that noble impulse soon faded because I don't think Senator Nelson was the least bit interested in listening to Mr. Snider.
"To be real honest with you, I don't know if he was just being aggressive or nervous but he just wanted to put out his position on the issue," Snider recalled in an interview with the Huffington Post. "He said he supported the public option but one that wouldn't affect the current plans of 200 million Americans."
"I told him I didn't understand. And he tried to explain it. He put his position out. He said if we went with a full public option -- which he called a government plan -- it would drive the price down and hurt private companies. I said, 'you mean competition.' And he replied that it would force people off the private plan and onto the government plan."
"That happened twice," Snider concluded. "He was telling me how bad a public option would be and when he was done I said, 'So you don't support a public option.' He would reply, 'That's not what I say.'"
The call lasted roughly ten minutes. In the end, Snider thanked Nelson but made no plans for future discussion.
What Truce???
Okay, it was widely known that Keith Olbermann, on his return from vacation was going to have to address the New York Times story that said, basically that the CEOs of NBC-Universal and NewsCorp had cut a secret deal to dictate to Olbermann and Billo the terms of a truce, a media cease fire as it were.
I thought Keith was going address the subject head on, but instead he does what he usually does...and attacked this sucker sideways.
How?
By naming Billo and Rupert (arrrgh!) Murdoch as his worst persons in the world:
So, in short. Let's go over what Keith said, shall we?
Keith went further in his DailyKos Dairy:
Is that good enough for some? Of course not.
From David Sirota (whom as you know, even though he's a Liberal...is someone I can't stand):
Non-Denial?
What part of "there is no "deal" between MSNBC and Fox over what we can and cannot cover" doesn't Mr. Sirota understand?
Didn't Mr. Sirota read how "This is part of a continuing strategy of blackmail by Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes, that reaches back to 2004, and has as its goal the cancellation of "Countdown." This stuff has ebbed and flowed for five years, it's part of my daily job to push it back with whichever strategy I think will best work at a given moment."
Translation: the story is a Murdoch plant to undermine Countdown's credibility, and s**t like this happens every once in a while, forcing Keith to respond in kind.
Still, Glenn Greenwald was successful in one part of his attack on Countdown, the question about Richard Wolffe's new job outside of Newsweek (a story that was released back in June, but Greenwald is just getting to now). Not that Glenn "Holier Than Everyone" Greenwald is the only one complaining about this.
I'm less comfortable with this part. Anyone who read the story in June, knew that Wolffe had left Newsweek under particularly unfriendly terms. He took a job with Dan Bartlett's PR firm. While this probably should have been disclosed, anyone watching him with Keith knows he hasn't pulled any punches. He has said elsewhere he will not discuss clients while on the air, so it's easy to keep him off the air, but I'm not sure what the big deal is.
I thought Keith was going address the subject head on, but instead he does what he usually does...and attacked this sucker sideways.
How?
By naming Billo and Rupert (arrrgh!) Murdoch as his worst persons in the world:
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
So, in short. Let's go over what Keith said, shall we?
The bronze to Brian Stelter of the "New York Times." Front page story Saturday about a, quote, deal in which, as the headline read, voices from above silence a cable TV feud. Problem, Mr. Stelter asks me at least twice last week if there was such a deal, and I told him, on and off the record, there was not. And told I rather obviously would have to be a party to such a deal. And I told him that not only wasn't I, but I had not even been asked to be by my bosses.And he printed it anyway. And I had even written to him that this was merely a misinterpretation of an announcement I made here on June One, that because Bill Reilly at Fox News had abetted the assassination of Dr. George Tiller, he had become too serious to joke about, and I would thus stop doing so, an announcement that would obtain unless and until, of course, I felt like changing the rule again later since this is not the US Constitution here. It's a half baked television news cast and I make all the rules.
Keith went further in his DailyKos Dairy:
Primarily, there is no "deal" between MSNBC and Fox over what we can and cannot cover. This is part of a continuing strategy of blackmail by Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes, that reaches back to 2004, and has as its goal the cancellation of "Countdown." This stuff has ebbed and flowed for five years, it's part of my daily job to push it back with whichever strategy I think will best work at a given moment. For the last two months I've been employing "News Jujitsu." If you watch tonight and catch the references to Fox and its rogues gallery you will know that the most recent tack has worked, but the fight is endless and there will be reversals in the future, I'm sure.Okay, so let's be clear. Keith is on the record here...there is no truce. If he's lying, he's going to destroy his reputation and take his show down with it at this point.
Ailes himself is tonight quoted as saying he tried to 'broker peace' by restraining his hosts. This is the same Ailes who insisted he would never interfere with what Bill O'Reilly said on the air. Even naked hypocrisy is not too much if Fox can make itself seem victimized, or can muzzle dissent.
But there is no "deal." I would never consent, and, fortunately, MSNBC and NBC News would never ask me to.
Is that good enough for some? Of course not.
From David Sirota (whom as you know, even though he's a Liberal...is someone I can't stand):
Olbermann's Non-Denial and His Good Move.
On his show last night, Keith Olbermann essentially issued a non-denial denial about the GE-MSNBC-Fox story, saying that he himself was "party to no deal" - exactly what he said in the original New York Times article. There's no reason to doubt Olbermann - however, as journalism prof Dan Kennedy suggests (h/t Glenn Greenwald & Jay Rosen), Olbermann's own personal lack of involvement in a "deal" is far less important than the simple fact that GE started trying to give blatant news-content orders to MSNBC's newsroom - orders that may have been followed in places well beyond Olbermann's control.
Non-Denial?
What part of "there is no "deal" between MSNBC and Fox over what we can and cannot cover" doesn't Mr. Sirota understand?
Didn't Mr. Sirota read how "This is part of a continuing strategy of blackmail by Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes, that reaches back to 2004, and has as its goal the cancellation of "Countdown." This stuff has ebbed and flowed for five years, it's part of my daily job to push it back with whichever strategy I think will best work at a given moment."
Translation: the story is a Murdoch plant to undermine Countdown's credibility, and s**t like this happens every once in a while, forcing Keith to respond in kind.
Still, Glenn Greenwald was successful in one part of his attack on Countdown, the question about Richard Wolffe's new job outside of Newsweek (a story that was released back in June, but Greenwald is just getting to now). Not that Glenn "Holier Than Everyone" Greenwald is the only one complaining about this.
As to Richard Wolffe I can offer far less insight. I honor Mr. Greenwald's insight into the coverage of GE/NewsCorp talks, and his reporting on Richard's other jobs. I must confess I was caught flat-footed. I do not know what the truth is; my executive producer and I have spent the last two months dealing with other things (see above) but what appears to be the truth here is certainly not what Richard told us about his non-news job.
I am confident his commentary to this point has not been compromised - he has been an insightful analyst and a great friend to this show - but until we can clarify what else he is doing, he will not be appearing with us. I apologize for not being able to prevent this unhappy set of circumstances from developing.
I'm less comfortable with this part. Anyone who read the story in June, knew that Wolffe had left Newsweek under particularly unfriendly terms. He took a job with Dan Bartlett's PR firm. While this probably should have been disclosed, anyone watching him with Keith knows he hasn't pulled any punches. He has said elsewhere he will not discuss clients while on the air, so it's easy to keep him off the air, but I'm not sure what the big deal is.
Monday, August 3, 2009
WSJ Editorial Page: It’s Certifiable...
...when even the Murdoch Street Journal is agin' you. (And for the record, calling the Birthers racist...is pretty much on the money.)
Obama has already provided a legal birth certificate demonstrating that he was born in Hawaii. No one has produced any serious evidence to the contrary. Absent such evidence, it is unreasonable to deny that Obama has met the burden of proof. We know that he was born in Honolulu as surely as we know that Bill Clinton was born in Hope, Ark., or George W. Bush in New Haven, Conn.
The release of the obsolete birth certificate would not “resolve the issue” to those for whom it is not already resolved. They claim without basis that today’s birth certificate is a fake; there is nothing to stop them from claiming without basis that yesterday’s is as well.
The president would gain nothing politically for his trouble. By acknowledging the birthers’ demands, he would lend them a modicum of credibility. By ignoring them, he actually reaps political benefits from their efforts. His critics, even those who are not birthers, end up looking like cranks by association. His supporters use the birthers to paint Obama foes as racist--which is probably unfair even to the birthers, as we argued Tuesday, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t effective.
In a Commentary article last year, William F. Buckley recounted the way he, Sen. Barry Goldwater and a handful of other top conservatives worked to stigmatize the John Birch Society, whose founder, Robert Welch, maintained, among other things, that President Eisenhower was a “dedicated, conscious agent of the Communist conspiracy,” and that the U.S. government was “under operational control of the Communist Party.” The Birchers, like the birthers, made respectable conservatives look like kooks, and in preparation for a prospective Goldwater presidential campaign, Buckley and his associates “thought it best to do a little conspiratorial organizing of their own against it.”
They succeeded in “excommunicating” the Birchers. It’s probably impossible to do the same to the birthers, because today the right wing is too vast to mount much of a conspiracy. The birthers are likely to be with us for as long as Obama is president--and because of them, it is more likely that this will be for the next 7½ rather than just 3½ years.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Saturday, August 1, 2009
Michael Ware: Pakistan and America, and possibly the Taliban are all "positioning to begin talks to end the conflict."
The whole thing is entertaining, but at the three minute mark things get mega-interesting.
Watch it while you can. The last link was removed by YouTube.
Part 1:
Part 2:
Watch it while you can. The last link was removed by YouTube.
Part 1:
Part 2:
Friday, July 31, 2009
Blue protects Blue...always...
I'm sorry, but you know the world is upside down when Frank Serpico (yes, that Frank Serpico) is taking the side of the Cops in the Gates case.
I'm sorry, but Crowley can never be questioned? Are you kidding me? It's been shown that he lied twice on his Police Report: 1) that he talked to the lady who placed the report (he didn't), and 2) that the caller said two black guys had broken into the home (she never said that).
But a Police Report can never be questioned. Oh no. Blue always protects Blue. That's all that matters to them. Certainly not us, the people they're allegedly protecting.
I'm sorry, but Crowley can never be questioned? Are you kidding me? It's been shown that he lied twice on his Police Report: 1) that he talked to the lady who placed the report (he didn't), and 2) that the caller said two black guys had broken into the home (she never said that).
But a Police Report can never be questioned. Oh no. Blue always protects Blue. That's all that matters to them. Certainly not us, the people they're allegedly protecting.
Same poll, different headlines...
It all depends on how you count the undecideds.
According to Talking Points Memo's Eric Kleefield:
According to Talking Points Memo's Eric Kleefield:
Poll: 28% Of Republican Base Are Birthers.But Huffington Post (which, when in doubt, will always spin things to the extreme) left it like this:
A new Daily Kos/Research 2000 poll finds that 77% of Americans believe President Obama was Indeed Born in the United States, with only 11% saying he was not -- but there's no clear verdict among Republicans.
Among Republicans, it's a much weaker plurality of only 42% who say Obama was born in the U.S., with 28% saying he was not, with a very high undecided number of 30%. Among Democrats, the number is 93%-4%, and among independents it's 83%-8%.
New Poll: Less Than Half Of Republicans Believe Obama Was Born In U.S.
Less than half of Republicans believe that Barack Obama was born in the United States of America, a new public opinion poll finds.
Only 42 percent of Republican respondents in a Research 2000 survey, conducted for the liberal website Daily Kos, said they thought Obama was a natural born citizen; 28 percent said they did not believe Obama was born in the United States; 30 percent said they were not sure.
Sunday, July 26, 2009
The line that I deal with that you do not...
I'm still processing my feelings about the arrest of Dr. Henry Louis Gates. Needless to say, they start at anger, and grow from there.
Still, it is a momentary anger, a fleeting feeling. Why? Because, as a black man in America, I'm used to the kind of treatment African-American men get at the hands of Police. I'm used to hearing about it. I'm used to seeing it. I'm used to receiving it.
What I'm not used to, at least what's at this point, is the nature of the coverage surrounding the incident, and the views of some white Americans...and white people I have some respect for, is shocking me.
I have been treated to a barrage of advice from these very same white people about how black men and women should behave when confronted by Police.
Wow.
Okay, lemme take a deep breath here...
Ummm, how should I put this politely?
Okay, I can't.
White Americans may be shocked to learn that a majority of African-Americans, really don't give a shit what you think about the Gates' case.
Yeah, I know its harsh. And clearly, some white folks don't like being told they don't know what the hell they're talking about...or God forbid that they're flat out wrong.
Just about every time a white person is told this by an African-American, the white person in question almost always bristles.
The simple truth is, you don't know what you're talking about because you don't have to live with this. We do.
What? You haven't noticed the remarkably unified front we've all presented in regards to this case?
To this day, ten-twelve years after the fact, the names of Amadou Diallo and Abner Louima have not left our consciousness. Now, who are Amadou Diallo and Abner Liouma?? You may not remember the names, but I bet you remember their cases.
In 1999, Amadou Diallo was shot reaching for his wallet by New York City Police.
He was shot 41 times.
The first time I heard the term contagious shooting came from this incident.
Bruce Springsteen even wrote a song memorializing the incident, called "American Skin."
For the record, the officers involved in Diallou shooting were acquitted in (let's be honest, mostly white) upstate New York.
Abner Liouma was a Haitian Immigrant who was sodomized by a broom stick (also by New York City Police Officers) in 1997.
Right now, he has his Maryland I.D., with the address of my childhood home on it, not his new one. Right now, he lives a house that doesn't have his name on the deed.
Let's say he gets locked out of the house, like Dr. Gates. Let's say his overwhelmingly white neighbors see him trying to get in, and call the cops. Let's say he's caught in the same situation as Dr. Gates? What, exactly, do you think is going to happen to him?
Remember, this is crazy-ass Houston, not Cambridge. Not that Boston's reputation as a Liberal Town isn't one of the most overhyped ideas in imagination.
Friday morning (July 24, 2009) on the Stephanie Miller Show, Executive Producer Chris "Boy Toy" LaVoie said, flat out, that if confronted by the Cops in a similar fashion, one should just obey them.
Wonderful advice, Chris. Too bad there is every chance it won't work.
I can do what the Cops say and still wind up dead.
Still, it is a momentary anger, a fleeting feeling. Why? Because, as a black man in America, I'm used to the kind of treatment African-American men get at the hands of Police. I'm used to hearing about it. I'm used to seeing it. I'm used to receiving it.
What I'm not used to, at least what's at this point, is the nature of the coverage surrounding the incident, and the views of some white Americans...and white people I have some respect for, is shocking me.
I have been treated to a barrage of advice from these very same white people about how black men and women should behave when confronted by Police.
Wow.
Okay, lemme take a deep breath here...
Ummm, how should I put this politely?
Okay, I can't.
White Americans may be shocked to learn that a majority of African-Americans, really don't give a shit what you think about the Gates' case.
Yeah, I know its harsh. And clearly, some white folks don't like being told they don't know what the hell they're talking about...or God forbid that they're flat out wrong.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Just about every time a white person is told this by an African-American, the white person in question almost always bristles.
The simple truth is, you don't know what you're talking about because you don't have to live with this. We do.
What? You haven't noticed the remarkably unified front we've all presented in regards to this case?
To this day, ten-twelve years after the fact, the names of Amadou Diallo and Abner Louima have not left our consciousness. Now, who are Amadou Diallo and Abner Liouma?? You may not remember the names, but I bet you remember their cases.
In 1999, Amadou Diallo was shot reaching for his wallet by New York City Police.
He was shot 41 times.
The first time I heard the term contagious shooting came from this incident.
Bruce Springsteen even wrote a song memorializing the incident, called "American Skin."
For the record, the officers involved in Diallou shooting were acquitted in (let's be honest, mostly white) upstate New York.
Abner Liouma was a Haitian Immigrant who was sodomized by a broom stick (also by New York City Police Officers) in 1997.
Is there anyone out there, who cares to justify this rather disgusting bit of Police work? Apparently, someone did, because three of the Officers involved were initally convicted of the crime, but that conviction was subsequently reversed.
And, I cannot believe I almost forgot about Sean Bell, who was killed (November 2006) the day before his wedding, shot 50 times...oh, once again New York City Police. And once again, the Cops were cleared of all charges. Mind you, I've just highlighted three pretty famous cases all originating with the New York City Police. Bear in mind I was raised in Prince George's County Maryland. Coincidentally, the richest Black County in America, and reporting the second highest incidents of Police Brutality outside of Los Angeles County where I live now. What fun.
Now, as I have stated before, I'm a black man. I come from the P.G. suburbs. Raised in a two parent home. I have two (count 'em) two college degrees. I have never seen the inside of a jail outside of an MSNBC Special...
...and I don't trust the Cops.
How can I? Every contact with the Police could be the last thing I do on this earth.
Now, I don't give the Cops any grief. I cooperate at all times, hands always visible. I sure as hell want 'em at my house if there's a problem, and you'll never catch me mouthing off at them (except maybe in the blogosphere).
But let's be clear, I meet the wrong Cop on the wrong day, and I'm dead. Period.
Were I to be murdered by a Cop (and yes, I'm choosing that word specifically), the Cop is more than likely going to get away with it. He or she won't even be fired.
Either you get that, or you don't. Either than insults your basic sense of fairness or it doesn't. But like I said, I don't much care what you think. I live with this reality. Dr. Gates lives with this reality. My Father lives with this reality.
Speaking of the old man, my Father is also a distinguished Professor. Certainly, he's not famous like Dr. Gates. (Probably should have chosen a sexier field than Mathematics. I mean, let's be honest, what was the last Mathematics book you picked up at Borders?) He used to be at Maryland. Last month, he moved to Houston to start his new life.
And, I cannot believe I almost forgot about Sean Bell, who was killed (November 2006) the day before his wedding, shot 50 times...oh, once again New York City Police. And once again, the Cops were cleared of all charges. Mind you, I've just highlighted three pretty famous cases all originating with the New York City Police. Bear in mind I was raised in Prince George's County Maryland. Coincidentally, the richest Black County in America, and reporting the second highest incidents of Police Brutality outside of Los Angeles County where I live now. What fun.
Now, as I have stated before, I'm a black man. I come from the P.G. suburbs. Raised in a two parent home. I have two (count 'em) two college degrees. I have never seen the inside of a jail outside of an MSNBC Special...
...and I don't trust the Cops.
How can I? Every contact with the Police could be the last thing I do on this earth.
Now, I don't give the Cops any grief. I cooperate at all times, hands always visible. I sure as hell want 'em at my house if there's a problem, and you'll never catch me mouthing off at them (except maybe in the blogosphere).
But let's be clear, I meet the wrong Cop on the wrong day, and I'm dead. Period.
Were I to be murdered by a Cop (and yes, I'm choosing that word specifically), the Cop is more than likely going to get away with it. He or she won't even be fired.
Either you get that, or you don't. Either than insults your basic sense of fairness or it doesn't. But like I said, I don't much care what you think. I live with this reality. Dr. Gates lives with this reality. My Father lives with this reality.
Speaking of the old man, my Father is also a distinguished Professor. Certainly, he's not famous like Dr. Gates. (Probably should have chosen a sexier field than Mathematics. I mean, let's be honest, what was the last Mathematics book you picked up at Borders?) He used to be at Maryland. Last month, he moved to Houston to start his new life.
Right now, he has his Maryland I.D., with the address of my childhood home on it, not his new one. Right now, he lives a house that doesn't have his name on the deed.
Let's say he gets locked out of the house, like Dr. Gates. Let's say his overwhelmingly white neighbors see him trying to get in, and call the cops. Let's say he's caught in the same situation as Dr. Gates? What, exactly, do you think is going to happen to him?
Remember, this is crazy-ass Houston, not Cambridge. Not that Boston's reputation as a Liberal Town isn't one of the most overhyped ideas in imagination.
Friday morning (July 24, 2009) on the Stephanie Miller Show, Executive Producer Chris "Boy Toy" LaVoie said, flat out, that if confronted by the Cops in a similar fashion, one should just obey them.
Wonderful advice, Chris. Too bad there is every chance it won't work.
I can do what the Cops say and still wind up dead.
Again, its a fact of life. I know it. My Father knows it. Dr. Gates knows it.
The only people who seem surprised by this fact are, frankly...people like Chris LaVoie.
Oh sure, there's outrage when it happens. But expect the shock last about a week or and, but before you can say "Freeze, negro" things have gone back to the way they've always been.
The sight of Armed Police at his door (looking for him, mind you), I'm sure sent Dr. Gates into a frenzy. Yes, I'm sure part of it was pride, having his dignity assaulted like this. But in the end, we all know where his mind went. My mind would have gone to the same place. And, to be frank, I'm not sure Dr. Gates owes anyone an apology.
(Actually, that's not true. I'm sure Dr. Gates doesn't owe an apology to anyone, and I hope he launches a lawsuit that bankrupts the Cambridge Police Department. How else are Police Departments going to learn?)
Now, the President, Officer Crowley (and I say that with apologies, since I'm not sure of his actual rank), and Dr. Gates are all going to have a beer at the White House at some point, and eventually hug it out.
Let's not kid ourselves though, while a couple of beers will go a long way to solving the problem of Gates and Crowley. It's not going to fix the larger issue.
I'm actually pretty much convinced Officer Crowley is decent man. The way he was able to banter with the President at the end of their conversation makes it sound like he's a guy you could (to coin a phrase) have a beer with. I'm even sure he earned his job teaching other Cops how not to racially profile.
But that's just it, isn't it? Crowley isn't the exception. He's the rule.
Even the best of you, the most high-minded, the most liberal of you can have moments where you reveal...I hate to say...how you really feel about things. (If you want a benign example of this principal, ask Whoopi Goldberg about former-boyfriend Ted Danson donning blackface for a roast during their relationship -- which ended soon afterward.)
Now, is Ted Danson a racist? No. Is Chris LaVoie? I doubt it. But both men have shown moments of stuptifying ignorance about race in their own country.
But let's be honest, it's not something they have to think about, do they? I do. Hell, I have to.
The problem with Officer Crowley, and other Officers like him, is that a similar bad moment from him can get someone killed. Someone like me. Someone like Dr. Gates. Someone like my Dad.
Yes, Police work is a highly dangerous job.
The only thing more dangerous, is being a black man anywhere nearby.
The sight of Armed Police at his door (looking for him, mind you), I'm sure sent Dr. Gates into a frenzy. Yes, I'm sure part of it was pride, having his dignity assaulted like this. But in the end, we all know where his mind went. My mind would have gone to the same place. And, to be frank, I'm not sure Dr. Gates owes anyone an apology.
(Actually, that's not true. I'm sure Dr. Gates doesn't owe an apology to anyone, and I hope he launches a lawsuit that bankrupts the Cambridge Police Department. How else are Police Departments going to learn?)
Now, the President, Officer Crowley (and I say that with apologies, since I'm not sure of his actual rank), and Dr. Gates are all going to have a beer at the White House at some point, and eventually hug it out.
Let's not kid ourselves though, while a couple of beers will go a long way to solving the problem of Gates and Crowley. It's not going to fix the larger issue.
I'm actually pretty much convinced Officer Crowley is decent man. The way he was able to banter with the President at the end of their conversation makes it sound like he's a guy you could (to coin a phrase) have a beer with. I'm even sure he earned his job teaching other Cops how not to racially profile.
But that's just it, isn't it? Crowley isn't the exception. He's the rule.
Even the best of you, the most high-minded, the most liberal of you can have moments where you reveal...I hate to say...how you really feel about things. (If you want a benign example of this principal, ask Whoopi Goldberg about former-boyfriend Ted Danson donning blackface for a roast during their relationship -- which ended soon afterward.)
Now, is Ted Danson a racist? No. Is Chris LaVoie? I doubt it. But both men have shown moments of stuptifying ignorance about race in their own country.
But let's be honest, it's not something they have to think about, do they? I do. Hell, I have to.
The problem with Officer Crowley, and other Officers like him, is that a similar bad moment from him can get someone killed. Someone like me. Someone like Dr. Gates. Someone like my Dad.
Yes, Police work is a highly dangerous job.
The only thing more dangerous, is being a black man anywhere nearby.
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Friday, July 24, 2009
CNN apparently has Lou Dobbs' back after all...
Heavy sigh.
In an interview with Greg Sargent this afternoon, Klein backtracked and brushed off the criticism. "Look, Lou's his own show, and CNN in general has repeatedly and thoroughly reported on the facts behind this situation."
TPM: CNN to Lou Dobbs. Drop the Birther Story
Praise Jesus.
CNN President Jon Klein wrote an email last night to "Lou Dobbs Tonight" staffers telling them the Obama birth certificate story is "dead," TVNewser reports.
"It seems this story is dead," Klein wrote, "because anyone who still is not convinced doesn't really have a legitimate beef."
He sent the email just before Lou Dobbs went on the air. He included information CNN's political researchers had gotten from the Hawaii Health Department -- information which "seems to definitively answer the question."
Thursday, July 23, 2009
So sayeth the Nate...
Anybody want to tell me why a former (and I do believe current) Baseball Stats geek is running one of the sanest, most even keeled, most politically relevant blogs in the 'sphere??
Memo to Liberal Blogosphere, re: Health Care Reform. Chill!
Oh, and favorite quote:
Memo to Liberal Blogosphere, re: Health Care Reform. Chill!
Oh, and favorite quote:
I don't think the media has a liberal bias or a conservative bias so much as it has a bias toward overreacting to short-term trends and a tendency toward groupthink.
Memo to Nancy Pelosi...
In short, the Congressional Black Caucus writes Speaker of the House, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) a letter.
In short in negotiating with your new bestest buddies the Blue Dog (or Blue Cross) Democrats, don't take us for granted.
In short in negotiating with your new bestest buddies the Blue Dog (or Blue Cross) Democrats, don't take us for granted.
The President's Press Conference of July 22, 2009 (VIDEO)
From what I understand, the complete Presser.
TPM: Yes, someone went there...
From TPM.
Jesus...H...Christ.
On Sunday night, Dr. David McKalip forwarded to fellow members of a Google listserv affiliated with the Tea Party movement the image below.
Above it, he wrote: "Funny stuff."
Jesus...H...Christ.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
NPR: Predator Drone kills a son of Usama Bin Laden
According to NPR:
Boy, all kinds of amazing questions come up because of this story.
What was Iran's involvement in this, exactly? Holding him until last year, and letting go into Pakistan?
Why exactly was he being held for all those years in Iran? My understanding is there isn't a lot of love lost been the Iranian Shiites and Al Qaeda.
Was this guy meant to make a beeline for his Father? If that was the plan (and that's wild, wild speculation at this point), who's idea was that??
Does this mean we're inching closer to UBL, or not? Going by what the Officials told NPR, the answer is a clear no. Then again, would you want to admit we're getting closer to one of the world's most dangerous fugitives?
BTW, Saad's bio on Wikipedia (and judge Wikipedia for what it's worth) disagrees somewhat with the "Saad bin Laden wasn't important enough to target personally" line, in that he "occupies a position of preeminence in Al Qaeda," and:
All rampant speculation at this point. This could be something. This could be nothing at all.
U.S. officials believe Saad bin Laden — a son of Osama bin Laden — has been killed by an American missile in Pakistan.
Saad bin Laden reportedly spent years under house arrest in Iran before traveling last year to Pakistan, according to former National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell.
It's believed he was killed by Hellfire missiles fired from a U.S. Predator drone sometime this year.
A senior U.S. counterterrorism official tells NPR that without a body to conduct DNA tests on, it's hard to be completely sure. But he characterized U.S. spy agencies as being "80 to 85 percent" certain that Saad bin Laden is dead.
The U.S. counterterrorism official says Saad bin Laden wasn't important enough to target personally — that he was "in the wrong place at the wrong time."
He was active in al-Qaida, but was not a major player, the official said. He was believed to be in his late 20s.
"We make a big deal out of him because of his last name," the official added.
It's not known whether Saad bin Laden was anywhere near his father when he died.
Boy, all kinds of amazing questions come up because of this story.
What was Iran's involvement in this, exactly? Holding him until last year, and letting go into Pakistan?
Why exactly was he being held for all those years in Iran? My understanding is there isn't a lot of love lost been the Iranian Shiites and Al Qaeda.
Was this guy meant to make a beeline for his Father? If that was the plan (and that's wild, wild speculation at this point), who's idea was that??
Does this mean we're inching closer to UBL, or not? Going by what the Officials told NPR, the answer is a clear no. Then again, would you want to admit we're getting closer to one of the world's most dangerous fugitives?
BTW, Saad's bio on Wikipedia (and judge Wikipedia for what it's worth) disagrees somewhat with the "Saad bin Laden wasn't important enough to target personally" line, in that he "occupies a position of preeminence in Al Qaeda," and:
Saad was believed to have been heavily responsible for the bombing of a Tunisian synagogue on April 11, 2002, which killed 19.[1]
The following year, there were disputed claims of his capture by Pakistan in March,[2] though these proved false, and he was implicated in the May 12th suicide bombing in Riyadh, and the Morocco bombing four days later.
Saad accompanied his father on his exile to Sudan from 1991-96, and followed him to Afghanistan after that. He is believed to be married to a woman from Yemen. Iran has stated that a number of al-Qaeda leaders and members are in their custody, possibly including the son of Osama bin Laden, Saad bin Laden.[3][4]
All rampant speculation at this point. This could be something. This could be nothing at all.
"Mmmm, Journalism..." (VIDEO)
...as CNN's Lou Dobbs officially goes off the deep end.
But aside all that, this is a summary of the history of the Birther story, and how ridiculous it all is.
But aside all that, this is a summary of the history of the Birther story, and how ridiculous it all is.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Rachel Maddow v. Pat Buchanan (VIDEO)
Heavy racism pushback day today. Reasonably proud of the MSM.
This is Rachel Maddow smacking back against Pat Buchanan about his rather overt racism in an appearance from last week.
Here's Pat's original (and highly racist) interview-slash-rant.
This is Rachel Maddow smacking back against Pat Buchanan about his rather overt racism in an appearance from last week.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Here's Pat's original (and highly racist) interview-slash-rant.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Chris Matthews (MSNBC) vs. the Birthers (VIDEO)
UPDATE: 5:19pm Pacific. I'm going with the crisper, clearer MSNBC Video.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
The Obama Interviews for July 20-21, 2009 (VIDEO)
First, Obama's slightly contentious interview with Meredith Vieira from the Today Show.
Honestly? This was a second rate interview, by a backbencher looking to make a name for herself by "grilling" the President. I lost count how many times Vieira interrupted him, jumping in on answers. (Of course that could have been sh---y editing). She even brings up a Brazilian Custody Battle in the middle of the Health Care Interview?
...and what he wore at the All-Star Game?!?!?
Excuse me??
And then his sit down with Jim Lehrer from PBS:
Honestly? This was a second rate interview, by a backbencher looking to make a name for herself by "grilling" the President. I lost count how many times Vieira interrupted him, jumping in on answers. (Of course that could have been sh---y editing). She even brings up a Brazilian Custody Battle in the middle of the Health Care Interview?
...and what he wore at the All-Star Game?!?!?
Excuse me??
And then his sit down with Jim Lehrer from PBS:
Monday, July 20, 2009
Uhhh...no, Secretary Geithner...
I've been able to give Geithner a pass on the stuff he's been doing so far, but not this:
I'm all for dealing us out. The quicker the Banks get on their feet, and give us back the money, the better. But we sure as hell shouldn't be taking a loss on this crap. If they lose money or go kaput, then find. We tried. We took the risk, it didn't work out. But if they make money, we make money. End of discussion.
Now that bailed-out banks are reporting record-breaking profits, the U.S. taxpayer, who bought into these institutions at bottom-barrel prices, could wind up on the winning end of a nice profit. That's what happens, after all, when you buy low and sell high.
When Congress bailed out Wall Street, it required banks to give warrants to the treasury. That way, if the market turned around and a bank's stock rose, the taxpayer could profit. Indeed, the notion that the taxpayer might profit from the bailout was floated by members of Congress on both sides of the aisle.
The Congressional Oversight Panel, however, looked into the early sales of warrants and found earlier this month that Treasury would only get about 66 percent of the market value for the warrants. And it was doing so in private negotiations with the banks.
A group of Democrats in Congress want to end that practice. A bill introduced by Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy (D-Ohio) would require the Treasury to sell warrants in a public auction and do so in a transparent way. On Wednesday, the Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations holds a hearing on the sale of warrants, focusing on protecting profits for the taxpayer.
I'm all for dealing us out. The quicker the Banks get on their feet, and give us back the money, the better. But we sure as hell shouldn't be taking a loss on this crap. If they lose money or go kaput, then find. We tried. We took the risk, it didn't work out. But if they make money, we make money. End of discussion.
Lay it on me, Chuck (VIDEO)
Say what you will, but what Chuck Todd says in this piece is the truth of what's going on, and what's about to happen...
...good or ill.
...good or ill.
The B.S. Art of Headline Writing...
Chris Lavoie from the Stephanie Miller show is highlighting a Poll on the front page of the Post that says support for the President's Health Care Plan has slipped below 50 percent:
Yet, in the very same article:
And:
What's really going here, is more overzealous Headline Writers looking to a) make a name for themselves, or b) scuttle Health Care reform, because:
So, the American people (generally) like the President, though Independents are getting weak knees, and they like what's in the Legislation pushing its way though Congress, but they don't like the way the President is handling the issue.
Right.
Heading into a critical period in the debate over health-care reform, public approval of President Obama's stewardship on the issue has dropped below the 50 percent threshold for the first time, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.
Obama's approval ratings on other front-burner issues, such as the economy and the federal budget deficit, have also slipped over the summer, as rising concern about spending and continuing worries about the economy combine to challenge his administration. Barely more than half approve of the way he is handling unemployment, which now tops 10 percent in 15 states and the District.
Yet, in the very same article:
On health care, the poll, conducted by telephone Wednesday through Saturday, found that a majority of Americans (54 percent) approve of the outlines of the legislation now heading toward floor action. The measure would institute new individual and employer insurance mandates and create a government-run plan to compete with private insurers. Its costs would be paid in part through new taxes on high-income earners.
And:
The president's overall approval rating remains higher than his marks on particular domestic issues, with 59 percent giving him positive reviews and 37 percent disapproving. But this is the first time in his presidency that Obama has fallen under 60 percent in Post-ABC polling, and the rating is six percentage points lower than it was a month ago.
What's really going here, is more overzealous Headline Writers looking to a) make a name for themselves, or b) scuttle Health Care reform, because:
Since April, approval of Obama's handling of health care has dropped from 57 percent to 49 percent, with disapproval rising from 29 percent to 44 percent. Obama still maintains a large advantage over congressional Republicans in terms of public trust on the issue, even as the GOP has closed the gap.
So, the American people (generally) like the President, though Independents are getting weak knees, and they like what's in the Legislation pushing its way though Congress, but they don't like the way the President is handling the issue.
Right.
Saturday, July 18, 2009
The Fireside chat for July 18, 2009
Not sure there was a posting last week. Certainly can't find it...
Thursday, July 16, 2009
"No Excuses..." (VIDEO)
The President's speech before the NAACP...
...and it was a barnburner.
...and it was a barnburner.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
The GOP's Anxiety about a changing America...
It's been said many times, many ways over the last week, but I liked Slate.com's Dahlia Lithwick's own take on it:
She also took on the Democrats, cracking on them for not making more of the Roberts Court's tendency for Judicial Activism.
This could have been different, I kept thinking all day. These hearings didn't have to go this way. The instant Sen. Jeff Sessions used his second round of questioning to go back to the well of the "Wise Latina" issue, probing yet again at Sonia Sotomayor's alleged bias and wise Latina prejudice, it was perfectly clear that Senate Republicans wanted this hearing to be all about race and that her single, mangled half-sentence was the linchpin of their strategy. There were lines of people waiting patiently to get into these hearings, even if just for a few moments, and what was striking about it is that so many of them were very young, so many were women, and so many were of different races and colors. America's future was waiting in line to get a glimpse of a hearing at which the woman who will become this country's first Hispanic justice was repeatedly called out as someone with a race problem.
I don't think this is all posturing. Listening to Jeff Sessions and Lindsey Graham and John Cornyn speak, it's clear that their anxieties about a changing America are real. Still, by making the whole case against her with a long, loopy line between her "wise Latina" speech and her panel decision in the Ricci case, they chose to turn this historic hearing into a crabbed and bitter conversation about the impact of race on America.
She also took on the Democrats, cracking on them for not making more of the Roberts Court's tendency for Judicial Activism.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Obama's form was awwwwkwaard (VIDEO)
I am the Obama homer to beat all Obama homers. This site is dedicated, in its own way...to Obama homerism.
But man, that was one an uugggggllllly pitch. His form was terrible. It almost looked like he was going to dislocate his own shoulder. I don't know if it was the White Sox jacket or what, but it was not pretty.
Then again, any pitch that makes it to home plate can't be a completely bad one.
<a href="http://msn.foxsports.com/video?vid=50a75722-7ea2-43ad-8976-f87c730e65dc&from=IV2_en-us_foxsports_HP&fg=gtlv2" target="_new" title="Addressing the baseball nation">Video: Addressing the baseball nation</a>
But you know what? Who cares? He got to fly to the game with Willie freakin' Mays. He got to shake hands with Stan Musial and I do believe that was Bob Gibson glad-handing him as he came off the mound.
But man, that was one an uugggggllllly pitch. His form was terrible. It almost looked like he was going to dislocate his own shoulder. I don't know if it was the White Sox jacket or what, but it was not pretty.
Then again, any pitch that makes it to home plate can't be a completely bad one.
But you know what? Who cares? He got to fly to the game with Willie freakin' Mays. He got to shake hands with Stan Musial and I do believe that was Bob Gibson glad-handing him as he came off the mound.
He's got his own jet, and the greatest home office in the world. He gets us Health Care, I dare say I'll not mention this pitch ever again...
...but I better see a Public Option, otherwise...
...but I better see a Public Option, otherwise...
Jeff Sessions needs to do his homework (VIDEO)
Thus quoth the Josh:
But, wait. It got worse (for Racist Jeff Sessions).
Cedarbaum went outside, and gave an interview to the Washington Wire, where she apparently said (quoted here from the Murdoch Street Journal):
Ooops.
Which led my least favorite Senator (from California) to say:
Remember that scene in Annie Hall where the Alvy and Annie are waiting in line at the movie and Alvy is going nuts listening to the pontificating blowhard going on about Marshall McLuhan and then Alvy pulls McLuhan himself out from behind the movie poster to tell the guy he's an idiot. Not quite identical and Sotomayor could have driven the point a bit harder but Judge Sotomayor managed to pull off something like that.
But, wait. It got worse (for Racist Jeff Sessions).
Cedarbaum went outside, and gave an interview to the Washington Wire, where she apparently said (quoted here from the Murdoch Street Journal):
I don’t believe for a minute that there are any differences in our approach to judging, and her personal predilections have no effect on her approach to judging. We’d both like to see more women on the courts.
Ooops.
Which led my least favorite Senator (from California) to say:
Friday, July 10, 2009
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Stop negotiating...
According to Roll Call, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) (miracula, miraculum) has told Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) to stop chasing Republican votes on the upcoming Health Care Reform Legislation:
According to Democratic sources, Reid told Baucus that taxing health benefits and failing to include a strong government-run insurance option of some sort in his bill would cost 10 to 15 Democratic votes; Reid told Baucus it wasn’t worth securing the support of Grassley and at best a few additional Republicans.
Monday, July 6, 2009
President Obama's and President Medvedev's Press C onference in Moscow (VIDEO)
Admittedly, of a lower priority than any other video item I've posted. The real news was made before Medvedev and Obama took the stage. But since it's been made available...
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
"Thank you, to the people of Minnesota..." (VIDEO)
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Monday, June 29, 2009
The cream rising to the top...
This is from a longer piece on Talking Points Memo. One of the things that I liked about the Public Option was that it was a method by which the Insurance Companies would die a slow death, and we'd transition over time to full on Single Payer.
But there's another side of this, a danger where the Insurance Companies prolong their hold over us, and keep prices high, wherein they "cream" their pools.
Simply put, they insure only healthy people, and dump the unhealthy onto the Public Option, keeping prices high as a result. Josh and Zack have more on their in their highly wonky article, but the key part (and the good news) was this from the Later Update section:
But there's another side of this, a danger where the Insurance Companies prolong their hold over us, and keep prices high, wherein they "cream" their pools.
Simply put, they insure only healthy people, and dump the unhealthy onto the Public Option, keeping prices high as a result. Josh and Zack have more on their in their highly wonky article, but the key part (and the good news) was this from the Later Update section:
The current health care reforms drafts, at least in the Senate, would create regional risk pools that drive out the incentive to "cream." In short, if Insurance Company A insured only the lowest-risk half of a given pool, it would have to pay a subsidy that goes to the company (or public plan) insuring the highest-risk members of the pool. In other words, we would drive out the incentive to cream, while also making it illegal to deny coverage on the basis of a pre-existing condition. CMS would manage that risk-balancing process, and has apparently become quite good at it. The Netherlands does something similar, so successfully that insurers actually seek out diabetics to insure.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Reza Aslan's Appearance on the Daily Show (VIDEO)
The author of "No Got But God", and "How To Win A Cosmic War" gives some interesting (and long-view) perspective on the new Iranian Revolution:
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Reza Aslan | ||||
| ||||
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
The President's Press Conference of June 23, 2009 (VIDEO)
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Saturday, June 20, 2009
Friday, June 19, 2009
Obama Addresses the RTCA Dinner (VIDEO)
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Dr. Nancy Synderman being realistic on Health Care (VIDEO)
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Maybe it's a good thing...
Maybe it's a good thing that Tom Daschle didn't get the damn HHS job.
UPDATE (11:32am): This from Huffington Post. It's on the bottom of the very story I linked to above. Daschle felt the heat.
UPDATE (11:32am): This from Huffington Post. It's on the bottom of the very story I linked to above. Daschle felt the heat.
A spokesman for the former majority leader called the Huffington Post to insist that Daschle is "still committed to the public plan" and was not urging Obama to drop it from his proposal.
"He was saying that we shouldn't let any issue derail what would be health care reform," said Eileen McMenamin, Director of Communications at the Bipartisan Policy Center. "He definitely did not say there should be no public plan."
Daschle, said McMenamin, did believe that a public plan could be administered by the states. And his chief concern with Obama'a approach was not the policy basis but the politics of getting it through Congress.
Hmmm....
It seems that the New York Times has changed its headline on the Obama poll...
Obama Poll Sees Doubt on Budget and Health Care
Not much better, especially after you...you know...read the numbers in the poll. But certainly more accurate.
I really, really, really, really doubt complaints from this blog had anything to do with the change.
Headline honesty...
At least CBS is honest in its reporting of the same NYT/CBS Poll...
Y'see? It notes the high marks for the Economy and overall popularity, but notes the areas where he's weak. This is all I ask.
Poll: No Dent In Obama's Popularity
CBS/NY Times Survey Finds Approval Stays At 63%; High Marks On Economy, Foreign Policy, Though Not Auto Industry Or Deficit
(CBS) Republican criticism of Barack Obama's handling of the economy and other issues does not appear to be having much effect on the president's popularity, a new CBS News/New York Times poll finds. Mr. Obama's overall approval rating now stands at 63 percent, unchanged from last month. Just one in four Americans says they disapprove of the president.
Y'see? It notes the high marks for the Economy and overall popularity, but notes the areas where he's weak. This is all I ask.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
WTF?!?!?
Please, someone explain what the hell's up with Headline Writers nowadays?
Here is the story on the President's recent poll numbers from the New York Times: In Poll, Obama Is Seen as Ineffective on the Economy
Okay.
But looking at Question Five of the poll, you know...where the question is put to people directly, it says: Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling the economy? The answers were as follows:
57 percent approve
35 percent disapprove
7 percent don't know.
I can go ahead and ask my Father, the Mathematics Professor for confirmation, but...those numbers seem to...well...how does one put this??...show that the public approves of the way the President is handling the economy.
In fact, they represent a one point uptick (for a poll that's been hovering around 55-61 points since the beginning of February). Even Keith Olbermann, whom I normally trust without fail, pissed all over the numbers.
Of course, the lead paragraph of said story is as follows:
Riiiiight.
Let's take down the score, then move the goalposts.
Sure, if you want to ask how's the President doing on the Economy, you're going to get the same basic answer we've gotten for the last four months. There's no story there. So let's make one up. Let's telescope on the specifics of what people don't like, and we'll make headlines.
Liberal media my black #$!$$...
Here is the story on the President's recent poll numbers from the New York Times: In Poll, Obama Is Seen as Ineffective on the Economy
Okay.
But looking at Question Five of the poll, you know...where the question is put to people directly, it says: Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling the economy? The answers were as follows:
57 percent approve
35 percent disapprove
7 percent don't know.
I can go ahead and ask my Father, the Mathematics Professor for confirmation, but...those numbers seem to...well...how does one put this??...show that the public approves of the way the President is handling the economy.
In fact, they represent a one point uptick (for a poll that's been hovering around 55-61 points since the beginning of February). Even Keith Olbermann, whom I normally trust without fail, pissed all over the numbers.
Of course, the lead paragraph of said story is as follows:
A substantial majority of Americans say President Obama has not developed a strategy to deal with the budget deficit, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll, which also found that support for his plans to overhaul health care, rescue the auto industry and close the prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, falls well below his job approval ratings.
Riiiiight.
Let's take down the score, then move the goalposts.
Sure, if you want to ask how's the President doing on the Economy, you're going to get the same basic answer we've gotten for the last four months. There's no story there. So let's make one up. Let's telescope on the specifics of what people don't like, and we'll make headlines.
Liberal media my black #$!$$...
5 Things You Need To Know about the President's Financial Reform Plan
I can't claim credit for this. This originally appeared as part of a slideshow on the Huffington Post, but since the text was so much more valuable (and well written) than the pictures were interesting, I thought I'd provide them here:
1. The Financial Services Oversight Council: President Obama wants to install a single agency that’s charged with overseeing the entire financial system -- and which would make sure that government regulatory bodies actually work together. Call it a National Department of Risk.
Bottom line: Presumably, someone will be watching out for those now-ubiquitous “systemic risks.”
2. A Bigger, Beefier Fed: Under Obama’s plan, chairman Ben Bernanke and the Fed will keep their newly expanded powers. The Fed will oversee, well, almost any financial institution. If companies don’t behave, the Fed can now “compel corrective actions” and has “emergency authority.”
Bottom line: Don’t mess with the Fed. Wall Street will continue to have to placate the central bank.
3. Leverage, So Outdated: Obama’s reforms will require companies like the failed Lehman Brothers to have certain levels of cash on hand for emergencies, and to cover consumer deposits. Safety nets, in other words.
Bottom line: The days of cheap loans are likely gone, both for corporations and consumers. Capital requirements could also dampen Wall Street earnings.
4. Safer Financial Innovation: The Obama plan will rein in those combustible and exotic financial products like over-the-counter derivatives and credit default swaps. The plan also aims to remedy loan securitization.
Bottom line: The company that gives you a loan will now have a stake in making sure you’ll pay it, which should help prevent another mortgage crisis.
5. The Consumer's New Best Friend: Say hello to the Consumer Financial Protection Agency, which will try to protect Main St. from complex mortgages, credit cards and predatory lenders. Think of it as the FDA for finance.
Bottom line: Curbing abusive practices from lenders and financial companies will certainly help. But no word on whether or not this new agency will make your credit card statements any easier to read.
1. The Financial Services Oversight Council: President Obama wants to install a single agency that’s charged with overseeing the entire financial system -- and which would make sure that government regulatory bodies actually work together. Call it a National Department of Risk.
Bottom line: Presumably, someone will be watching out for those now-ubiquitous “systemic risks.”
2. A Bigger, Beefier Fed: Under Obama’s plan, chairman Ben Bernanke and the Fed will keep their newly expanded powers. The Fed will oversee, well, almost any financial institution. If companies don’t behave, the Fed can now “compel corrective actions” and has “emergency authority.”
Bottom line: Don’t mess with the Fed. Wall Street will continue to have to placate the central bank.
3. Leverage, So Outdated: Obama’s reforms will require companies like the failed Lehman Brothers to have certain levels of cash on hand for emergencies, and to cover consumer deposits. Safety nets, in other words.
Bottom line: The days of cheap loans are likely gone, both for corporations and consumers. Capital requirements could also dampen Wall Street earnings.
4. Safer Financial Innovation: The Obama plan will rein in those combustible and exotic financial products like over-the-counter derivatives and credit default swaps. The plan also aims to remedy loan securitization.
Bottom line: The company that gives you a loan will now have a stake in making sure you’ll pay it, which should help prevent another mortgage crisis.
5. The Consumer's New Best Friend: Say hello to the Consumer Financial Protection Agency, which will try to protect Main St. from complex mortgages, credit cards and predatory lenders. Think of it as the FDA for finance.
Bottom line: Curbing abusive practices from lenders and financial companies will certainly help. But no word on whether or not this new agency will make your credit card statements any easier to read.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
The President's Interview on Bloomberg (Link)
The Bloomberg Interview with the President is here.
If I can find actual video, I'll post it. But these yahoos look as uncooperative as ABC News.
If I can find actual video, I'll post it. But these yahoos look as uncooperative as ABC News.
The President's Interview on CNBC (VIDEO)
I don't think CNBC has gotten this "embedding" thing figured out yet.
The spaces you see between this sentence, and the video are not mine. Nor is the permanently floating CNBC logo in the middle of your viewer.
The spaces you see between this sentence, and the video are not mine. Nor is the permanently floating CNBC logo in the middle of your viewer.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Obama's Speech to the A.M.A. on Health Care (VIDEO)
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)