Tag: ek Politics

Oh my yes.  You remember Silverstone don’t you?

Things are not happy in the Formula One Teams Association, there’s also the fact the Concorde Agreement has expired and is extended only through a letter, not a contract, through 2012 following a heated dispute that led many teams to threaten to go CART.  While nominally guided by Martin Whitmarsh of McLaren and Ross Brawn of Mercedes the FOTA is widely viewed as a tool of Bernie Ecclestone who has a distinct conflict of interest and a hazy history of influence on the FIA itself with his cozy relationship to Max Mosley the fifth columnist Nazi’s son who got the boot for his sexcapades. Interestingly enough this was the scoop of the recently deceased and unlamented News of the World who published sick Nazi Sex Orgy by Neville Thurlbeck so who knows what to think?

Well, Neville’s in trouble again-

Rupertgate Friday – “For Neville”

By Gordonskene, Crooks&Liars

July 22, 2011 03:58 PM

As was reported yesterday, there are now growing questions over the honesty of the testimony given by James Murdoch during the Inquiry hearings on Tuesday. One centers around Neville Thurlbeck, who was a registered unpaid Police informant and has been a key suspect in the phone hacking scandal and an e-mail and attached file that carefully listed transcribed hacked messages. Murdoch denies any knowledge of the e-mail, however former NoTW editor Colin Myler and former head of legal affairs for News Of The World Tom Crone claim the younger Murdoch had full knowledge of the “For Neville” e-mail and file and has been lying to the Commission. If this winds up being true, and Murdoch is found to be lying, it tosses an enormous question mark over the entire testimony on Tuesday and puts James Murdoch in the position of being arrested and held for further questioning.

Well today…

Former NOTW Employees: James Murdoch Knew Another Reporter Was Involved In Phone Hacking

Jillian Rayfield, TPMMuckraker

August 16, 2011, 12:56PM

The e-mail, from 2005, contained transcripts of 35 hacked phone messages from Taylor’s phone, and identified them as “the transcript for Neville.” The Guardian identified “Neville” as News Of The World reporter Neville Thurlbeck.

According to (James) Murdoch’s testimony to Parliament, he gave the go-ahead for the settlement without knowing about the “for Neville” e-mail, and believed the phone hacking to be limited to “rogue reporter” Clive Goodman and private investigator Glenn Mulcaire, who had both already been convicted.

But Crone and Myler allege that in a June 2008 meeting, they told Murdoch of the e-mail. Crone, who wrote the letter to Parliament, said that he does not have any notes from his meeting with Murdoch at the time, but the “sole reason” for the meeting was to explain the reason for settling — which was the e-mail. “My invariable practice when seeking authority for settlements would be to take a file of the relevant documents with me to such meetings so that, if asked or if necessary, I could illustrate whatever I was saying by reference to something in writing,” Crone wrote.

Letter Suggests Hacking ‘Widely Discussed’ at News of the World

By PAUL SONNE, JEANNE WHALEN and BRUCE ORWALL, The Wall Street Journal

AUGUST 16, 2011, 12:41 P.M. ET

LONDON-News Corp. came under fresh attack Tuesday as new, written evidence submitted to a U.K. parliament committee suggested that voice-mail interception was “widely discussed” at its News of the World tabloid and showed several former executives bluntly contradicting recent testimony by Deputy Chief Operating Officer James Murdoch.

…

Mr. Murdoch said Messrs. Crone and Myler briefed him on the case during a meeting on June 10, 2008. He said he doesn’t recall receiving any briefing before this date, and doesn’t recall either Mr. Crone or Mr. Myler showing him any documents during the meeting. He said the executives recommended settling the case because “there was evidence” that Glenn Mulcaire, a private investigator, “had carried out this interception on behalf of the News of the World.”

“Let me reiterate that I have no recollection of any mention of ‘Thurlbeck’ or a ‘for Neville’ email. Neither Mr. Myler nor Mr. Crone told me that wrongdoing extended beyond Mr. Goodman or Mr. Mulcaire,” a private investigator on the tabloid’s payroll, Mr. Murdoch said.

…

The new evidence comes as the latest twist in a scandal over allegations that the News of the World tabloid paid bribes to police and intercepted the voice mails of celebrities, politicians and crime victims. News Corp. also owns The Wall Street Journal.

Somewhat flying under the radar even in Blogtopia (yes, Skippy invented that) and here in the People’s Republic of Left Blogistan is the big blowout at the Royal Dutch Shell Gannet Alpha Platform (one of 7 pumping oil from the Gannet Field which drills into the Eocene, Palaeocene and Jurassic period).

The story goes something like this-

Shell has been having cronic problems with breakdowns with its Brent (another oil field in the North Sea and namesake of the ‘Brent Crude’ financial benchmark) platforms that shut down all 4 of them after the discovery of severe maintenance problems including extensive gas leaks at the Brent Delta platform and actual factual chunks of the platform falling off into the Sea at Brent Bravo.

Indeed, on their very own official site an anonymous (though available for interview) expert says-

Experts damning comment on Shell North Sea Oil Spill

by John Donovan

Aug 13th, 2011

Comment from a Shell North Sea Platform Safety & Maintenance Expert on the current oil spill near the Gannet Alpha Platform

…another example of reactive maintenance regime, i.e. allowing, through neglect, equipment to fail and then reacting to the failure rather than, as the Safety Case for Gannet prescribes, preventing failure in the first instance by application of appropriate maintenance, inspection and monitoring.

(Expert in question may be available to the media for comment)

RELATED ARTICLES

• Hypocrisy of Shell CEO Peter Voser on BP Gulf of Mexico disaster
• Oil and gas spills in North Sea every week, papers reveal
• Collusion between Shell and HSE in Brent Bravo cover-up
• Bill Campbell quoted in Final Report on BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill

What happened at Gannet Alpha was a leaky flow pipe which goes from the wellhead to the platform.  The problem is “under control” at the moment, they have shut off the well head and are undertaking repairs on thttps://thestarshollowgazette.com/he flow pipe.

Even though it it is dwarfed by the continuing disaster that is the BP Deepwater Horizon Spill which dumped about 5 Million Barrels into the Gulf of Mexico, Gannet Alpha has released over 1,300 Barrels making it the largest in the North Sea for a decade.

And 1,300 is the conservative estimate.

Additionally Shell is under fire for not promptly reporting the accident which was reported last Wednesday.

Now if you are inclined to believe Shell’s protestations that this was a relatively minor incident and even Aberdeen which is far, far away will not suffer much damage because the spill will break up naturally, let me remind you this is the very same company that recently received a conditional go ahead from the Obama Administration to drill three exploratory wells in the Beaufort Sea “even though the Interior Department has not yet approved the company’s plan for responding to a catastrophic oil spill.”

The editorial published by the Los Angeles Times August 10th, 2011 and distributed by McClatchy-Tribune News Services continues on to say–

Shell’s response plan contends that it can clean up 95 percent of spilled oil, an unprecedented percentage even in much less hostile environments. But the skimmers and booms that are usually employed to clean up spills don’t work effectively in waters with large amounts of floating ice. Nor is there any guarantee that Shell would be able to get disaster equipment to the wells. Canada’s National Energy Board recently reported that on one day out of five, conditions in the Arctic, including the Beaufort Sea, are too harsh to send out spill-response teams. Meanwhile, the nearest Coast Guard station is 1,000 miles away, and the agency told the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation that it cannot be counted on to respond to spills off the North Slope.

Shell’s proposal must clear other hurdles before any drilling can take place. For example, the company must show other federal agencies that its activities would not harm polar bears or marine life. But the application shouldn’t have reached this point without a response plan that is realistic about the environmental dangers of seeking an energy future in the Arctic seas.

Roubini: "capitalism could self destruct"

by Chris in Paris, Americablog

on 8/13/2011 06:10:00 PM

If you have a spare 22 minutes it’s well worth it. Roubini believes that the chances for a double dip are above 50%.

Economists’ outlook darkens: See 30% chance of recession

By Paul Davidson and Barbara Hansen, USA TODAY

8/15/11

The 39 economists polled Aug. 3-11 put the chance of another downturn at 30% – twice as high as three months ago, according to their median estimates.

…

Yet even if the USA avoids a recession, as economists still expect, they see economic growth muddling along at about 2.5% the next year, down from 3.1% in April’s survey. The economy must grow well above 3% to significantly cut unemployment.

As a result, the economists predict the jobless rate will fall painfully slowly, dipping to 8.8% in 12 months, not much below today’s 9.1%. In April, they estimated unemployment would be 8.2% by mid-2012.

I’ve had people opine that I’m overly pessimistic, that a walking talking jackass can’t possibly win.

Well on Wednesday I quoted Robert Reich–

I’m told White House political operatives are against a bold jobs plan. They believe the only jobs plan that could get through Congress would be so watered down as to have almost no impact by Election Day. They also worry the public wouldn’t understand how more government spending in the near term can be consistent with long-term deficit reduction. And they fear Republicans would use any such initiative to further bash Obama as a big spender.

So rather than fight for a bold jobs plan, the White House has apparently decided it’s politically wiser to continue fighting about the deficit. The idea is to keep the public focused on the deficit drama – to convince them their current economic woes have something to do with it, decry Washington’s paralysis over fixing it, and then claim victory over whatever outcome emerges from the process recently negotiated to fix it. They hope all this will distract the public’s attention from the President’s failure to do anything about continuing high unemployment and economic anemia.

Saturday’s New York Times–

Mr. Obama’s senior adviser, David Plouffe, and his chief of staff, William M. Daley, want him to maintain a pragmatic strategy of appealing to independent voters by advocating ideas that can pass Congress, even if they may not have much economic impact. These include free trade agreements and improved patent protections for inventors.

…

Administration officials, frustrated by the intransigence of House Republicans, have increasingly concluded that the best thing Mr. Obama can do for the economy may be winning a second term, with a mandate to advance his ideas on deficit reduction, entitlement changes, housing policy and other issues.

Yup, those same neoliberal ideas that lose jobs and weaken the economy and increase the deficit.

Barack Obama and his advisers are totally out of touch with economic reality-

The ailing economy, barely growing at the same pace as the population, has swept all other political issues to the sidelines. Twenty-five million Americans could not find full-time jobs last month. Millions of families cannot afford to live in their homes. And the contentious debate over raising the federal debt ceiling – which Mr. Obama achieved only after striking a compromise with Republicans that included a plan for at least $2.1 trillion in spending cuts over 10 years – has further shaken economic confidence.

A wide range of economists say the administration should call for a new round of stimulus spending, as prescribed by mainstream economic theory, to create jobs and promote growth.

And they are out of touch with the voters-

So far, most signs point to a continuation of the nonconfrontational approach – better to do something than nothing – that has defined this administration. Mr. Obama and his aides are skeptical that voters will reward bold proposals if those ideas do not pass Congress. It is their judgment that moderate voters want tangible results rather than speeches.

…

Mr. Plouffe and Mr. Daley share the view that a focus on deficit reduction is an economic and political imperative, according to people who have spoken with them. Voters believe that paying down the debt will help the economy, and the White House agrees, although it wants to avoid cutting too much spending while the economy remains weak.

As part of this appeal to centrist voters, the president intends to continue his push for a so-called grand bargain on deficit reduction – a deal with Republicans to make even larger spending cuts, including to the social safety net, in exchange for some revenue increases – despite the strong opposition of Congressional Democrats who want to use the issue to draw contrasts with Republicans.

How’s that plan working out for you Barack?  As I pointed out Friday the latest ABC News / Washington Post poll shows increasing disapproval of Barack Obama and his policies, not just among so-called Independent voters, but also a marked erosion of his Democatic support-

More than four in 10 Americans say they “definitely will not” support Obama in 2012, while fewer than half as many, just two in 10, are certain to back the president for reelection. The number of “definite” Obama voters marks a low in polls since November 2009 and has dropped four percentage points since a Post-ABC poll in June, and eight points since April.

…

Support for Obama has softened considerably on the left: In the new poll, 31 percent of liberals say they are certain to vote for Obama next year, down from 46 percent in June. One in five liberals says they “definitely will not” vote for him, while a 43 percent plurality says they’ll considering casting a ballot for Obama.

Obama’s 2008 election was fueled by winning majorities of key swing groups, including political independents, women and voters under age 50. But with 15 months left before Election Day, more than three times as many independents say they “definitely will not” vote for Obama in 2012 as say they “definitely will” – 45 percent versus 14 percent. And among women and those under 50, more say they’ll definitely oppose than definitely support Obama next year.

How’s that working out in the Electoral College for you Barack?  In the swing state of Pennsylvania–

Public Policy Polling as cited by John Aravosis and Taylor Marsh–

For the first time since last July Barack Obama does not lead Mitt Romney in PPP’s monthly national poll on the 2012 Presidential race. Romney has now pulled into a tie with the President at 45%. Obama’s approval rating this month is 46% with 48% of voters disapproving of him. There are 2 things particularly troubling in his numbers: independents split against him by a 44/49 margin, and 16% of Democrats are unhappy with the job he’s doing while only 10% of Republicans give him good marks. Republicans dislike him at this point to a greater extent than Democrats like him and that will be a problem for him moving forward if it persists. … Obama’s numbers are worse than they appear to be on the surface. The vast majority of the undecideds in all of these match ups disapprove of the job Obama’s doing but aren’t committing to a candidate yet while they wait to see how the Republican field shakes out.

How undecideds change the race if you allocate them based on their approval/disapproval of Obama-

Matchup	Approve	Disapprove	Winner/Margin
Obama/Romney	21%	61%	Romney 52-48
Obama/Pawlenty	9%	75%	Tied 50-50
Obama/Bachmann	10%	67%	Obama 51-49
Obama/Cain	8%	76%	Obama 51-49
Obama/Palin	5%	84%	Obama 54-46

Confirmed by the latest (August 2nd) result from Quinnipiac–

Pennsylvania voters say 52 – 42 percent that Obama does not deserve to be reelected. Matching the president against possible Republican challengers shows:

• Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney with 44 percent to Obama’s 42 percent;
• Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum with 43 percent to Obama’s 45 percent;
• Obama leads Minnesota U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann 47 – 39 percent;
• Obama tops Texas Gov. Rick Perry 45 – 39 percent.

Do you think campaigning on a program of cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid is going to work any better in Florida when Obama is also losing Latino voters because of his harsh immigration policy?

But wait, ek you say, surely in a State as true Blue as New York, where the Republican Party hardly exists, surely Barack Obama can win there!

From Quinnipiac, also August 2nd-

New York State voters disapprove 49 – 45 percent of the job President Obama is doing, a huge drop from his 57 – 38 percent approval June 29 and the first time the president ever has had a negative score in New York, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

Democrats approve 75 – 19 percent, down from 82 – 12 percent in June. Disapproval is 86 – 10 percent among Republicans, compared to a 74 – 23 percent disapproval in June, and 58 – 36 percent among independent voters, compared to a slightly positive 49 – 45 percent in June, the independent Quinnipiac University poll finds.

…

“The debt ceiling hullaballoo devastated President Barack Obama’s numbers even in true blue New York,” said Maurice Carroll, director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. “He just misses that magic 50 percent mark against a no-name Republican challenger.”

Don’t bet on it.  And don’t call me Shirley.

As I pointed out on Tuesday Obama and his advisers have decided that their only hope is a slime campaign to try and drive up his opponent’s negatives faster than the economy tanks.

So that is hope, and you can’t expect things to change either.  Again-

Administration officials, frustrated by the intransigence of House Republicans, have increasingly concluded that the best thing Mr. Obama can do for the economy may be winning a second term, with a mandate to advance his ideas on deficit reduction, entitlement changes, housing policy and other issues.

Who’s the walking talking jackass?  Why vote Obama unless you think things are improving, which an overwhelming and increasing majority of Voters don’t?

The best thing Obama can do for the economy and the Democratic Party is fire his advisers and resign.  The second best thing Obama can do for the economy and the Democratic Party is fire his advisers and not seek a second term.

Electoral victory my ass.

You know, the math is the math regardless of what Karl Rove and neoliberal economists say.  Willie Sutton was right.

Where the money is

by John Quiggin, Crooked Timber

on July 25, 2011

My analysis is quite simple and follows the apocryphal statement attributed to Willie Sutton. The wealth that has accrued to those in the top 1 per cent of the US income distribution is so massive that any serious policy program must begin by clawing it back.

…

In both policy and political terms, nothing can be achieved under these circumstances, except at the expense of the top 1 per cent. This is a contingent, but inescapable fact about massively unequal, and economically stagnant, societies like the US in 2010. By contrast, in a society like that of the 1950s and 1960s, where most people could plausibly regard themselves as middle class and where middle class incomes were steadily rising, the big questions could be put in terms of the mix of public goods and private income that was best for the representative middle class citizen. The question of how much (more) to tax the very rich was secondary – their share of national income was already at an all time low.

…

One thing the Tea Party has shown is that, in the current dire state of the US, there are few penalties for abandoning moderation. What the US needs at this point is someone willing to advocate a return to the economic institutions that made America great – 90 per cent top marginal tax rates, strong trade unions, weak banks and imprisonment for malefactors of great wealth.

It seems to me that a good place to start would be a primary challenge to Obama (Bernie Sanders suggested this, and he’d be a good candidate I think). It would be impossible for the media to ignore completely, and might get enough votes to shift the Overton window. Whether such a challenge could form the basis of a mass movement, I don’t really know, but it seems to be worth a try.

I came across John Quiggan in this piece by Yves Smith of Naked Capitalism substituting for Glenn Greenwald at Salon.

Yves continues-

(T)he fares (verb definitions) of the have versus the have-nots continue to diverge. A new survey found that 64% of the public doesn’t have enough funds on hand to cope with a $1000 emergency. Wages are falling for 90% of the population. And disabuse yourself of the idea that the rich might decide to bestow their largesse on the rest of us. Various studies have found that upper class individuals are less empathetic and altruistic than lower status individuals.

This outcome is not accidental. Taxes on top earners are the lowest in three generations. Yet their complaints about the prospect of an increase to a level that is still awfully low by recent historical standards is remarkable.

Given that this rise in wealth has been accompanied by an increase in the power of those at the top, is there any hope for achieving a more just society? Bizarrely, the self interest of the upper crust argues in favor of it. Profoundly unequal societies are bad for everyone, including the rich.

…

You might argue: Why do these results matter to rich people, who can live in gated compounds? If you’ve visited some rich areas in Latin America, particularly when times generally are bad, marksmen on the roofs of houses are a norm. Living in fear of your physical safety is not a pretty existence.

Japan, which made a conscious decision to impose the costs of its post bubble hangover on all members of society to preserve stability, has gotten through its lost two decades with remarkable grace. The US seems to be implementing the polar opposite playbook, and there are good reasons to think the outcome of this experiment will be ugly indeed.

Memories of 1789 aside,  I would argue that even among the top 400 there will be winners and losers.  The $600 to $700 Trillion notional value of financial derivatives represents over 10 years of the entire World’s output.

Now some analysists see this as a reason to invest in Gold which I find absolutely nutty since Gold’s perceived value except as a non-corroding conductor and a maleable metal for personal adornment is nothing but hype and nostalgia for an economic system that was obsolete 120 years ago and produced exactly the same bad outcomes and inequality of the present one.

What I see instead is that “notions” of value are are about to change and those left without a seat when the music stops are going to take a 100% haircut on their spreadsheet electrons.

And who are they?  The top 20% who own more than 91% of it (38% just by the top 1%).

As Willy said, you have to go where the money is.

Yves again-

It’s easy to see how “big status differences” alone have an impact. The wider income differentials are, the less people mix across income lines, and the more opportunties there are for stratification within income groups. Thus a decline in income can easily put one in the position of suddenly not being able to participate fully or at all in one’s former social cohort (what do you give up, the country club membership? the kids’ private schools? the charities on which you give enough to be on special committees?). And lose enough of these activities that have a steep cost of entry but are part of your social life, and you lose a lot of your supposed friends. Making new friends over the age of 35 is not easy.

So a perceived threat to one’s income is much more serious business to the well-off than it might seem to those on the other side of the looking glass. Loss of social position is a fraught business indeed.

Or to quote Jim Morrison-

Five to one, baby.  One in five.  No one here gets out alive.  Now you get yours, baby, I’ll get mine.  Gonna make it baby, if we try.

The old get old and the young get stronger.  May take a week and it may take longer.  They got the guns but we got the numbers.  Gonna win, yeah, we’re takin’ over.  Come on!

Obama reelect numbers soften, poll says

By Scott Clement, The Washington Post

Posted at 04:54 PM ET, 08/11/2011

More than four in 10 Americans say they “definitely will not” support Obama in 2012, while fewer than half as many, just two in 10, are certain to back the president for reelection. The number of “definite” Obama voters marks a low in polls since November 2009 and has dropped four percentage points since a Post-ABC poll in June, and eight points since April.

…

Support for Obama has softened considerably on the left: In the new poll, 31 percent of liberals say they are certain to vote for Obama next year, down from 46 percent in June. One in five liberals says they “definitely will not” vote for him, while a 43 percent plurality says they’ll considering casting a ballot for Obama.

Obama’s 2008 election was fueled by winning majorities of key swing groups, including political independents, women and voters under age 50. But with 15 months left before Election Day, more than three times as many independents say they “definitely will not” vote for Obama in 2012 as say they “definitely will” – 45 percent versus 14 percent. And among women and those under 50, more say they’ll definitely oppose than definitely support Obama next year.

Gee, do you think that could be related in any way to this?

Consumer Sentiment Drops to Lowest Level in 3 Decades

Reuters

Published: Friday, 12 Aug 2011 | 10:01 AM ET

The Thomson Reuters/University of Michigan’s preliminary August reading on the overall index on consumer sentiment came in at 54.9, the lowest since May 1980, down from 63.7 in July. It was well below the the median forecast of 63.0 among economists polled by Reuters.

High unemployment, stagnant wages and the protracted debate over raising the U.S. government debt ceiling spooked consumers,polled before the downgrade of U.S. sovereign debt by Standard &Poor’s.

…

The survey’s gauge of consumer expectations slipped to 45.7, also the lowest since May of 1980, from July’s 56.0 and below a predicted reading of 55.3.

The Obama administration received poor ratings from 61 percent of respondents, the worst showing among all prior heads of state.

…

Bad times in the economy were expected by 75 percent of all consumers in early August, just below the all-time peak of 82 percent in 1980.

The survey’s barometer of current economic conditions was 69.3 in August, down versus 75.8 in July and below a forecast of 74.3.

Wisconsin and the Case of the Dogs That Didn’t Bark

By: Scarecrow, Firedog Lake

Tuesday August 9, 2011 11:12 pm

With such a profoundly misguided and destructive message coming from the President and national leaders, it must have been particularly difficult for Wisconsin citizens to explain why voters should recall Republican State Senators for taking positions their President and party were embracing in Washington. To be sure, Wisconsin’s Tea-Party Governor is a fraud, and his party’s actions have been abusive and excessive in slashing state programs and benefits. But Walker’s budget goals and methods are consistent with those of his national counterparts whom Mr. Obama and Democratic leaders have now promised to meet half way in slashing federal programs and benefits. There are few at the national level, and none at the top, making the counter argument about how offensive and obscene this is.

…

Our national leaders should have been reminding those fighting in the states that they were not to blame for the budget crises in their state capitals. Instead, men like Greenspan and Bernanke and Geithner and dozens of other federal regulators who were supposed to be watching the financial/banking sector either fell asleep on their jobs or willfully looked away, while Congress passed laws pretending that fraud and looting were okay if it was called “financial innovation” and “market making.” The regulators failed the country and the looters plundered, but thanks to this President, they’re still in power or presuming to lecture us on television. And now men like Boehner and Cantor and McConnell – and yes, Warner and Durbin and Lieberman are preventing desperately needed federal money from helping the states deal with the damage.

The truth is that President Obama and the national Democratic Party undercut the Wisconsin fighters by adopting harmful Tea-GOP talking points and repeating them night after night on national television. While the national Tea-GOP reinforced their state counterparts’ message at every turn, the national Democrats sabotaged the Wisconsin Democrats’ message.

Wisconsin Democrats didn’t need the President or Senate Democratic leaders to come to Wisconsin. What they needed were national leaders fighting for their cause, for their pro-government principles, for recognition of their rights – in Washington. They needed a President making that fight in Washington and carrying that message to the nation.

But the President and his party have abandoned that fight in D.C., and so abandoned those fighting in Wisconsin. And that’s why, despite heroic Wisconsin efforts, the good guys fell short. No one should count on or follow these corrupt leaders again, ever.

If you’re looking for new leaders, look to Wisconsin and other states under siege, where working people understand what’s going down and aren’t afraid to fight back.

Randians make a great big whiny ass hypocritical deal about “not having the government pick winners and losers in the marketplace.”

Well, that’s what Net Neutrality is about.

Pay-TV Providers Face ‘Toxic Mix’ as Subscribers Cancel in Record Numbers

By Alex Sherman, Bloomberg News

Aug 10, 2011 12:01 AM ET

The six largest publicly traded U.S. cable and satellite-TV providers combined to lose about 580,000 customers in the second quarter, the biggest such decline in history, according to company and Bloomberg data.

The economy is forcing the industry to face the reality of cord-cutting — pay-TV customers canceling their subscriptions in favor of online options such as Netflix Inc. (NFLX) and Hulu LLC. While cable executives dismiss the idea that subscribers are switching to “over the top” Internet competitors, the reason isn’t as important as the decision to stop paying for TV, said Craig Moffett, an analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein in New York.

“Rising prices for pay TV, coupled with growing availability of lower-cost alternatives, add to a toxic mix at a time when disposable income isn’t growing,” Moffett said. “For younger demographics, where in many cohorts unemployment is north of 30 percent, and especially for those with limited or no interest in sports, the pay-TV equation is almost inarguably getting less attractive.”

As a matter of fact, I’m working for clients just like this.  What you need is a computer, an internet connection, and (depending on your TV) an adapter.  Look at the video inputs on the back of your TV to decide what type of VGA to ??? you need.  Laptops are particularly good platforms since they almost always include an auxiliary VGA port for an external monitor.  Good sources for the adapters are NewEgg and Tiger Direct.

Oh, the Net Neutrality aspect.  Well, without it ISP companies are free to discriminate against users who choose to get their TV online based on ‘Bandwidth’, thus subsidizing the Cable TV industry in which many of them have a conflicted interest.

Randian hypocrisy?  Companies should be free to discriminate against black people because you can always patronize lunch counters that don’t have “We Don’t Serve Negros” signs on the door.

(h/t Atrios)

Slouching Toward a Double Dip, For No Good Reason

Robert Reich

Monday, August 8, 2011

The American economy is on the verge of another recession. Most Americans haven’t even emerged from the last one. Consumers (70 percent of the economy) won’t or can’t spend because their major asset is worth a third less than it was five years ago, they can’t borrow as before, and they’re justifiably worried about their jobs and wages. And without customers, businesses won’t expand and hire. So we’re trapped in a vicious cycle that’s getting worse.

But the government won’t come to the rescue by spending more and cutting most peoples’ taxes because it’s obsessed by a so-called “debt crisis” based on budget projections over the next ten years.

…

Every time you hear an American politician analogize the nation’s budget to a family budget (as, sadly, even President Obama has done), you should know the politician is not telling the truth. The truth is just the opposite. Our national budget can and should counteract the shrinkage of family budgets by running larger deficits when families cannot.

Americans are more frightened, economically insecure, and angrier than at any time since the Great Depression. If our lawmakers continue to obsess about the wrong thing and fail to do what must be done – and they don’t explain it to the nation – Americans will only become more fearful, insecure, and angry.

Well now wait Bob.  There’s a perfectly good reason (if you happen to be an ignorant Washington neolib like Obama and his advisers) and you know it.

Why the President Doesn’t Present a Bold Plan to Create Jobs and Jumpstart the Economy

Robert Reich

Tuesday, August 9, 2011

The lousy economy is due to insufficient demand. Consumers – who are 70 percent of the economy – can’t and won’t buy because they’re running out of cash. They can’t borrow against homes that are worth a third less than they were five years ago, and most consumers are bad credit risks anyway because they’re losing their jobs and their wages are dropping.  They also have to start saving for the kids’ college or for retirement, which will cut their spending even more.

Without enough consumers, businesses won’t hire enough people and pay them enough to reverse the vicious cycle. So we’re dead in the water. Even the stock market has caught on to the truth.

Which means government has to step in to boost the economy – as it has every time the economy has fallen into recession over the last eight downturns. Include the massive spending on World War II that lifted us out of the Great (Depression), and it’s nine.

…

I’m told White House political operatives are against a bold jobs plan. They believe the only jobs plan that could get through Congress would be so watered down as to have almost no impact by Election Day. They also worry the public wouldn’t understand how more government spending in the near term can be consistent with long-term deficit reduction. And they fear Republicans would use any such initiative to further bash Obama as a big spender.

So rather than fight for a bold jobs plan, the White House has apparently decided it’s politically wiser to continue fighting about the deficit. The idea is to keep the public focused on the deficit drama – to convince them their current economic woes have something to do with it, decry Washington’s paralysis over fixing it, and then claim victory over whatever outcome emerges from the process recently negotiated to fix it. They hope all this will distract the public’s attention from the President’s failure to do anything about continuing high unemployment and economic anemia.

When I first heard this I didn’t want to believe it.

…

There’s still time for political operatives in the White House – and the person they work for – to change their minds. If economic stresses increase, Americans may insist on government doing more. A CNN poll released Monday found 60% believe the nation remains in an economic downturn and conditions are worsening. Only 36% believed that in April.

But for now the President is being badly advised. The magnitude of the current jobs and growth crisis demands a boldness and urgency that’s utterly lacking. As the President continues to wallow in the quagmire of long-term debt reduction, Congress is on summer recess and the rest of Washington is asleep.

Well, now you’re getting closer to it Bob, but the reason the Tsar has bad councilors is he picks bad councilors and chooses to listen to their advice because it’s what he himself believes.

The buck stops with Obama and if polls and history are any indicator he’s going to lose, lose, lose and drag his Democratic Party enablers with him.

Electoral victory my ass.

Obama plan: Destroy Romney

Ben Smith and Jonathan Martin, Politico

Tuesday, Aug. 9, 2011

The dramatic and unabashedly negative turn is the product of political reality. Obama remains personally popular, but pluralities in recent polling disapprove of his handling of his job, and Americans fear the country is on the wrong track. His aides are increasingly resigned to running for reelection in a glum nation. And so the candidate who ran on “hope” in 2008 has little choice four years later but to run a slashing, personal campaign aimed at disqualifying his likeliest opponent.

…

“Unless things change and Obama can run on accomplishments, he will have to kill Romney,” said a prominent Democratic strategist aligned with the White House.

…

“There’s so many wonderful ironies here: Obama spent his whole political career perfecting the best argument against Bush 43, and now he’s going to run as 43?” said Romney strategist Stuart Stevens, who also worked for Bush. “They can try anything they want – but this race is going to be about the economy.”

…

The Democrats who are planning the assault on Romney believe they can avoid a referendum on Obama’s handling of the economy, in part, because both political parties are in such poor public favor.

“People already knew that he’s a political opportunist of the highest order – changing his positions to suit the day’s polling,” said Bill Burton, Obama’s former White House deputy press secretary who now heads Priorities USA, an independent group expected to lead Democratic attacks on the Republican nominee. “But the last couple weeks, this lack of principles has translated into a total lack of leadership on issues like the debt ceiling.”

Oh wait, that last guy was talking about Romney.

Obama’s 2008 Hope Morphs Into 2012 Slash-and-Burn

By: Jane Hamsher, Firedog Lake

Tuesday August 9, 2011 9:47 am

(G)oing negative may be the only path available to Obama right now.  He can’t hope to activate true grassroots support and deliver what Wall Street oligarchs want at the same time.  So he is appealing to  the people who stand to benefit – wealthy donors – and asking for their support to impose austerity measures on the country.

It’s also a tell about how Obama’s campaign team views the political landscape between now and the election. They would not be going negative if his campaign gurus thought there was any possibility of turning around the Independents who have tracked with Republicans on the debt ceiling debate, and according to Gallup, now have a 34% approval rating of the President (down from 43% in early July).  It’s an indication that they think their only hope is to suppress independent voter turnout with a “slash and burn” campaign.

…

You ride to the White House on a campaign to rise above intolerance, negativity and partisanship, and without a moment of self-reflection, announce a campaign based on … intolerance, negativity and partisanship?  Rather than fix the economy by having the political courage to do what you said needed to be done when you were stoking people’s hope in 2008, you now plan to impose the austerity measures they overwhelmingly oppose and raise hundreds of millions of dollars to tell people your “weird” opponent in his “skinny jeans”  is not “principled and consistent”?   You want to fan the same bigotry and cultural biases the President promised to rise above, hoping win reelection by virtue (of) suppressing turnout?

And your message is that the other guy is not principled or consistent?