That’s the title of a Bloomberg article that also cites Bernie Sanders and Simon. Here are the direct quotes from Blankfein: “Our business is very complex, and I won’t deny that, but it’s far, far simpler than most of the competitors. I wonder myself how some of these things get managed.” “Most of the activities we do, [...]
Pelosi delivers a bucket of snot and labels it Health Care Reform
See the post below in which I urge everyone to please call members of the House of Representatives to ask their support for the Weiner amendment and HR676, which was supposedly going to be discussed and voted upon today. What the heck, besides the post below, see these other posts – here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here.
Yesterday afternoon an email blast was sent by Progressive Democrats of America:
Last night PDA got word from Congressman Weiner’s office that Speaker Pelosi is keeping her promise to allow the Weiner single-payer amendment full debate and vote on the floor of the House. This will happen on Friday or Saturday.
At about the same time yesterday afternoon, Representative Dennis Kucinich and Representative John Conyers withdrew HR 676. Here you have it via the Chicago Sun-Times:
Dear Friends,
We thank you for your continued devotion to the cause of health care for All Americans. We have worked together for many years to write, promote and campaign for HR676, a single payer, not for profit health care system. . . .
Tomorrow, the House of Representatives is scheduled to consider a single payer bill. As the two principal co-authors of the Conyers single payer bill, we want to offer a strong note of caution about tomorrow’s vote.
. . .
Here are the facts: There has been no debate in Congress over HR676. There has not been a single mark-up of the bill. Single payer was “taken off the table” for the entire year by the White House and by congressional leaders. There has been no reasonable period of time to gather support in the Congress for single payer. Many members accepted a “robust public option” as the alternative to single payer and now that has disappeared. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has scored the bill scheduled for a vote tomorrow in a manner which is at odds with many credible assumptions, meaning that it will appear to cost way too much even though we know that true single payer saves money since one of every three dollars in the health care system goes to administrative costs caused by the insurance companies. Is this really the climate in which we want a test vote?
. . .
Sincerely,
Congressmen John Conyers and Dennis Kucinich
You surely recall that this is the same congress that needed no time at all to consider and approve the bailout of Wall Street. I for one find it incomprehensible that Mr. Conyers and Mr. Kucinich would not want every congressperson to go on the record, Yes or No, to health care for all. Do you believe that HR 676 was withdrawn because “this is not the right time“? I for one do not believe it.
Speaker Pelosi is keeping her promise to allow the Weiner single-payer amendment full debate and vote on the floor of the House. This will happen on Friday or Saturday.
After nearly being shut out of the discussion completely, single-payer Medicare for All is being heard in the corridors of power. This is the one opportunity for your Congress member to go on record as supporting the only universal, comprehensive, cost-effective solution to the health care crisis.
Please call to make sure your representative votes in support of the Weiner Amendment.
Four key HR 676 cosponsors also need to get a reminder to vote yes on the Weiner Amendment: Mike Doyle, PA-14; Tim Ryan, OH-17; Howard Berman, CA-28; and George Miller, CA-7. Click here to make those calls.
They need to vote for the plan that most American people—nurses, physicians, and patients—want and so desperately need: Medicare for All.
This vote will make it clear to the movement which elected officials are truly with single-payer, Medicare for All.
George Miller ………………… 202-225-2095 ………….. fax 202-225-5609
Howard Berman ………………. 202-225-4695 ……….. fax 202-225-3196
Mike Doyle ……………………….. 202-225-2135 ………… fax 202-225-3084
Tim Ryan …………………………. 202-225-5261……………… fax 202-225-3719
Your Representative’s contact info can be found here.
A La Cañada Flintridge couple trying to save their home from foreclosure were arrested along with three others on suspicion of beating, torturing and robbing a pair of loan modification agents they believed had done nothing to help them rescue the residence.
The ‘victims’ (loan modification agents) were treated at a hospital and released. The ‘perpetrators’ (homeowners) face charges including torture, false imprisonment, and robbery; their bail is set at $1 million.
I find myself wondering if there might be a case of spontaneous jury nullification when these two homeowners come to trial? I live the same county as the victimsperpetrators homeowners, and I’m about due to be called for jury duty.
Surprise surprise, news today that Obama continues his pattern of reversing his campaign promises.
Back in June I was bemoaning Barack Obama’s about-face on his campaign and day one promise of transparency in his administration. The transparency topic under discussion at that time was -
around releasing photos of prisoners being tortured by Unites States forces. You’ll recall that an ACLU lawsuit resulted in a federal court order to release those photos. Then the Obama’s team said it would release the photos, then Obama reversed that decision.
In September we all became beneficiaries of a transparency effort by CREW (Center for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington) to oblige the Obama administration to live up to its promise and the law in respecting the Freedom of Information Act:
CREW — the Center for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington — has reached a settlement with the Obama administration for access to White House Visitor records. According to a email today from CREW:
The most significant development is the commitment by the Obama administration to affirmatively post visitor records on-line on an ongoing basis, bringing a historic level of transparency to the White House.
Despite the Obama administration’s recent legal settlement to begin releasing White House visitor logs later this year, it has denied a different public interest group’s recent request for those same records in the meantime.
In denying a request by watchdog group Judicial Watch, the U.S. Secret Service, through the Department of Homeland Security, said that White House visitor logs fall under the Presidential Records Act and are not subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act because they do not originate with a federal agency.
“The Obama White House has yet to explain why visitor logs from its first eight months will be afforded special protection,” Judicial Watch said in its release. The Obama administration maintains it needs time to review the records for national security concerns.
Judicial Watch, however, received a blanket denial to its request even though a federal court has ruled that visitor logs are subject to FOIA. In January, U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth said the Secret Service must release the visitor logs to CREW. The administration dropped its subsequent appeal after reaching the settlement agreement with CREW.
Oh by the way … the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press has also updated us on that other transparency issue noted above – the one about releasing photos of prisoners being tortured while in U.S. custody:
The long-fought battle to release images depicting the torture and abuse of detainees in U.S. custody appears over after Congress passed legislation today that specifically exempts them from public disclosure.
The images were initially the center of a denied request under the Freedom of Information Act, that later became the subject of a lawsuit — which dragged on for years — and recently were dropped into the Homeland Security Appropriations Bill as an amendment specifically exempting them from the law in an effort to supersede court decisions on the issue.
The version of the bill that passed Congress contains an amendment originally introduced by Sens. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., that “codifies the President’s decision to allow the Secretary of Defense to bar the release of detainee photos.”
New Oklahoma law will publicy post details of women’s abortions online.
On Nov. 1, a law in Oklahoma will go into effect that will collect personal details about every single abortion performed in the state and post them on a public website. … Here are the first eight questions that women will have to reveal:
1. Date of abortion
2. County in which abortion performed
3. Age of mother
4. Marital status of mother
(married, divorced, separated, widowed, or never married)
5. Race of mother
6. Years of education of mother
(specify highest year completed)
7. State or foreign country of residence of mother
8. Total number of previous pregnancies of the mother
Live Births
Miscarriages
Induced Abortions
Although the questionnaire does not ask for name, address, or “any information specifically identifying the patient,” as Feminists for Choice points out, these eight questions could easily be used to identify a woman in a small community. “They’re really just trying to frighten women out of having abortions,” Keri Parks, director of external affairs at Planned Parenthood of Central Oklahoma, said.
So here’s what I’m thinking. Oklahoma should also post details of vasectomies online.
1. Date of vasectomy
2. County in which vasectomy performed
3. Age of vasectee
4. Marital status of vasectee
(married, divorced, separated, widowed, or never married)
5. Race of vasectee
6. Years of education of vasectee (specify highest year completed)
7. State or foreign country of residence of vasectee
8. Total number of impregnations by the vasectee
…………… How many resulted in Live Births?
…………… How many of those live births were to women the vasectee was married to?
…………… How many of those live births is the vasectee financially supporting?
…………… How many of those live births identify the vasectee on the birth certificate?
Franken Wins Bipartisan Support For Legislation Reining In KBR’s Treatment Of Rape
In 2005, Jamie Leigh Jones was gang-raped by her co-workers while she was working for Halliburton/KBR in Baghdad. She was detained in a shipping container for at least 24 hours without food, water, or a bed, and “warned her that if she left Iraq for medical treatment, she’d be out of a job.” (Jones was not an isolated case.) Jones was prevented from bringing charges in court against KBR because her employment contract stipulated that sexual assault allegations would only be heard in private arbitration.
Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) proposed an amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriations bill that would withhold defense contracts from companies like KBR “if they restrict their employees from taking workplace sexual assault, battery and discrimination cases to court.”
Thank you Senator Franken. We could use another 30 senators who represent the interests of their constituents over those of their clients. Here’s how it’s done:
Take a look at Senate.gov to see how your senator voted on this amendment. Oh what the heck, I’ll just list them for you.
Alabama:
Sessions (R-AL), Nay
Shelby (R-AL), Nay
Alaska:
Begich (D-AK), Yea
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Arizona:
Kyl (R-AZ), Nay
McCain (R-AZ), Nay
Arkansas:
Lincoln (D-AR), Yea
Pryor (D-AR), Yea
California:
Boxer (D-CA), Yea
Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
Colorado:
Bennet (D-CO), Yea
Udall (D-CO), Yea
Connecticut:
Dodd (D-CT), Yea
Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware:
Carper (D-DE), Yea
Kaufman (D-DE), Yea
Florida:
LeMieux (R-FL), Yea
Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Georgia:
Chambliss (R-GA), Nay
Isakson (R-GA), Nay
Hawaii:
Akaka (D-HI), Yea
Inouye (D-HI), Yea
Idaho:
Crapo (R-ID), Nay
Risch (R-ID), Nay
Illinois:
Burris (D-IL), Yea
Durbin (D-IL), Yea
Indiana:
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa:
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Yea
Kansas:
Brownback (R-KS), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Nay
Kentucky:
Bunning (R-KY), Nay
McConnell (R-KY), Nay
Louisiana:
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Vitter (R-LA), Nay
Maine:
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland:
Cardin (D-MD), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Yea
Massachusetts:
Kerry (D-MA), Yea
Kirk (D-MA), Yea
Michigan:
Levin (D-MI), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Yea
Minnesota:
Franken (D-MN), Yea
Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi:
Cochran (R-MS), Nay
Wicker (R-MS), Nay
Missouri:
Bond (R-MO), Nay
McCaskill (D-MO), Yea
Montana:
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Tester (D-MT), Yea
Nebraska:
Johanns (R-NE), Nay
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada:
Ensign (R-NV), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Yea
New Hampshire:
Gregg (R-NH), Nay
Shaheen (D-NH), Yea
New Jersey:
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea
Menendez (D-NJ), Yea
New Mexico:
Bingaman (D-NM), Yea
Udall (D-NM), Yea
New York:
Gillibrand (D-NY), Yea
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina:
Burr (R-NC), Nay
Hagan (D-NC), Yea
North Dakota:
Conrad (D-ND), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Ohio:
Brown (D-OH), Yea
Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Oklahoma:
Coburn (R-OK), Nay
Inhofe (R-OK), Nay
Oregon:
Merkley (D-OR), Yea
Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania:
Casey (D-PA), Yea
Specter (D-PA), Not Voting
Rhode Island:
Reed (D-RI), Yea
Whitehouse (D-RI), Yea
South Carolina:
DeMint (R-SC), Nay
Graham (R-SC), Nay
South Dakota:
Johnson (D-SD), Yea
Thune (R-SD), Nay
Tennessee:
Alexander (R-TN), Nay
Corker (R-TN), Nay
Texas:
Cornyn (R-TX), Nay
Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah:
Bennett (R-UT), Yea
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont:
Leahy (D-VT), Yea
Sanders (I-VT), Yea
Virginia:
Warner (D-VA), Yea
Webb (D-VA), Yea
Washington:
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia:
Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting
Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Wisconsin:
Feingold (D-WI), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Yea
Wyoming:
Barrasso (R-WY), Nay
Enzi (R-WY), Nay
Every woman in the Senate voted in favor of Franken's amendment.
KBR employee gang-raped by her co-workers in Baghdad
Jeff Sessions of Alabama understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Richard Shelby of Alabama understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Jon Kyl of Arizona understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
John McCain of Arizona understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Saxby Chambliss of Georgia understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Johnny Isakson of Georgia understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Mike Crapo of Idaho understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
James Risch of Idaho understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Sam Brownback of Kansas understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Pat Roberts of Kansas understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Jim Bunning of Kentucky understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Mitch McConnell of Kentucky understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
David Vitter of Louisiana understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Thad Cochran of Mississippi understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Roger Wicker of Mississippi understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Kit Bond of Missouri understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Mike Johanns of Nebraska understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
John Ensign of Nevada understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Judd Gregg of New Hampshire understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Richard Burr of North Carolina understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Thomas Coburn of Oklahoma understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
James Inhofe of Oklahoma understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Jim DeMint of South Carolina understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Lindsey Graham of South Carolina understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
John Thune of South Dakota understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Lamar Alexander of Tennessee understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Bob Corker of Tennessee understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
John Cornyn of Texas understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
John Barrasso of Wyoming understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
Michael Enzi of Wyoming understands and supports KBR's preference for arbritation when it comes to rape of it's employees who work in Iraq.
I wonder what their wives and daughters think of their vote?
Paul Krugman makes a common sense observation about the level of political conversation in his Monday article entitled The Politics of Spite. When the I.O.C. awarded the 2016 summer games to Rio instead of to Chicago, there was a lot of coverage on the schadenfreude that erupted.
“Cheers erupted” at the headquarters of the conservative Weekly Standard, according to a blog post by a member of the magazine’s staff, with the headline “Obama loses! Obama loses!” Rush Limbaugh declared himself “gleeful.” “World Rejects Obama,” gloated the Drudge Report. And so on.
we learned that the modern conservative movement, which dominates the modern Republican Party, has the emotional maturity of a bratty 13-year-old … the guiding principle of one of our nation’s two great political parties is spite pure and simple.
The key point is that ever since the Reagan years, the Republican Party has been dominated by radicals — ideologues and/or apparatchiks who, at a fundamental level, do not accept anyone else’s right to govern.
(Why so much attention to the response versus the decision?) Krugman summarizes his premise as follows:
It’s an ugly picture. But it’s the truth. And it’s a truth anyone trying to find solutions to America’s real problems has to understand.
So, what about the blogosphere? Specifically, what about the blogs peopled by hopium smokers, conservative meme mongers, disenfranchised democrats, old school republicans, religious fundamentalists, or church/state separation advocates — you name it. Are the blogs an equally ugly picture, just as biased and agenda-driven as the mainstream media? Do blog owners have any obligation to fact? What about blog commenters? Like the mainstream media, you can find whatever you’re shopping for. After sitting at the table long enough, we come to know our host and our fellow diners. Topics such as the merits and risks of healthcare reform proposals, or evidence of and solutions for climate change — informed discussion or group therapy? We choose who we dine with, and we are what we eat.
What can I say? Perception is everything. This is appalling. via The Raw Story -
Senior official in Bush domestic propaganda program remains Obama’s Pentagon spokesman
A key senior figure in a Bush administration covert Pentagon program, which used retired military analysts to produce positive wartime news coverage, remains in the same position today as a chief Obama Defense Department spokesman and the agency’s head of all media operations.
…
Barstow’s Times expose revealed a comprehensive, covert Pentagon campaign — beginning during the lead-up to the Iraq War and continuing through 2008 — that shaped network military analysts into what internal documents referred to as “message force multipliers” and “surrogates” who could be trusted to parrot Bush administration talking points “in the form of their own opinions.” Barstow’s reporting also detailed how most of the military analysts, traditionally viewed as authoritative and independent, had ties to defense contractors with a stake in the same war policies they were interpreting daily to the American public.
arstow’s Times expose revealed a comprehensive, covert Pentagon campaign — beginning during the lead-up to the Iraq War and continuing through 2008 — that shaped network military analysts into what internal documents referred to as “message force multipliers” and “surrogates” who could be trusted to parrot Bush administration talking points “in the form of their own opinions.” Barstow’s reporting also detailed how most of the military analysts, traditionally viewed as authoritative and independent, had ties to defense contractors with a stake in the same war policies they were interpreting daily to the American public.
I have criticized my Representative several times on this blog. Today I sent him an email of appreciation:
Thank you for being a co-sponsor of HR 3567, the Respect for Marriage Act.
Thank you for your support in repealing the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, which proactively denies a fundamental civil right to a minority of Americans.
Thank you for your support for recognizing the legitimacy of marriage between adults of the same sex.
To repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and ensure respect for State regulation of marriage.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Respect for Marriage Act of 2009′.
SEC. 2. REPEAL OF SECTION ADDED TO TITLE 28, UNITED STATES CODE, BY SECTION 2 OF THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT.
Section 1738C of title 28, United States Code, is repealed, and the table of sections at the beginning of chapter 115 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by striking the item relating to that section.
SEC. 3. MARRIAGE RECOGNITION.
Section 7 of title 1, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
`Sec. 7. Marriage
`(a) For the purposes of any Federal law in which marital status is a factor, an individual shall be considered married if that individual’s marriage is valid in the State where the marriage was entered into or, in the case of a marriage entered into outside any State, if the marriage is valid in the place where entered into and the marriage could have been entered into in a State.
`(b) In this section, the term `State’ means a State, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any other territory or possession of the United States.’.
If you’d like to know whether your Representative is a co-sponsor, check here. And if they are, please send them a thank you note. And if they’re not, please ask them to support HR 3567. Easy contact links can be found over on the right, in the Activism section, where it says Find your Congressperson. You can also click here to sign CREDO’s petition to congress for support of this bill.
So, what about the blogosphere? Specifically, what about the blogs peopled by hopium smokers, conservative meme mongers, disenfranchised democrats, old school republicans, religious fundamentalists, or church/state separation advocates — you name it. Are the blogs an equally ugly picture, just as biased and agenda-driven as the mainstream media? Do blog owners have any obligation to fact? What about blog commenters? Like the mainstream media, you can find whatever you’re shopping for. After sitting at the table long enough, we come to know our host and our fellow diners. Topics such as the merits and risks of healthcare reform proposals, or evidence of and solutions for climate change — informed discussion or group therapy? We choose who we dine with, and we are what we eat. 
