BartBlog

March 17, 2008

Paul Krugman: The B Word

Filed under: Commentary — Tags: , , , , , , , — Volt @ 6:53 am

Paul Krugman, The New York Times, March 17, 2008

Last week, Robert Rubin, the former Treasury secretary, and John Lipsky, a top official at the International Monetary Fund, both suggested that public funds might be needed to rescue the U.S. financial system. Mr. Lipsky insisted that he wasn’t talking about a bailout. But he was.

It’s true that Henry Paulson, the current Treasury secretary, still says that any proposal to use taxpayers’ money to help resolve the crisis is a “non-starter.” But that’s about as credible as all of his previous pronouncements on the financial situation.

So here’s the question we really should be asking: When the feds do bail out the financial system, what will they do to ensure that they aren’t also bailing out the people who got us into this mess?

Let’s talk about why a bailout is inevitable.

Between 2002 and 2007, false beliefs in the private sector — the belief that home prices only go up, that financial innovation had made risk go away, that a triple-A rating really meant that an investment was safe — led to an epidemic of bad lending. Meanwhile, false beliefs in the political arena — the belief of Alan Greenspan and his friends in the Bush administration that the market is always right and regulation always a bad thing — led Washington to ignore the warning signs.

Read More Here

March 12, 2008

Robert Scheer: Spitzer’s Shame Is Wall Street’s Gain

Filed under: Commentary — Tags: , , , , — Volt @ 2:13 pm

Robert Scheer, TruthDig, March 12, 2008

Tell me again: Why should we get all worked up over the revelation that the New York governor paid for sex? Will it bring back to life the eight U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq that same day in a war that makes no sense and has cost this nation trillions in future debt? Will it save those millions of homes that hardworking folks all over the country are losing because of financial industry shenanigans that Eliot Spitzer, as much as anyone, attempted to halt? Perhaps it provides some insight into why oil has risen to $108 a barrel, benefiting most of all the oil sheiks whom our taxpayer-supported military has kept in power?

Sure, the guy, by his own admission, is quite pathetic in all those small, squirrelly ways that have messed up the lives of other grand public figures before him, but why is an all-too-human sin, amply predicted in early Scripture, getting all this incredible media play as some sort of shocking event? The answer is that, while having precious little to do with serious corruption in public life, it does have a great deal to do with stoking flagging newspaper sales and television ratings.

The sad truth is that reporting on major corruption, say, the rationalizations of a president who has authorized torture, doesn’t cut it as a marketing bonanza. Just days before this grand exposé, the president vetoed a bill banning torture, and instead of being greeted with horrified disgust, the president’s deep denigration of this nation’s presumed ideals was met with a vast public yawn. Torture, unlike paid sex, doesn’t have legs as a news story.

Sex sells, and frankly it would seem far more exploitative for the news media to pimp this tale to the public than anything that VIP escort service did with the pitiable governor. His behavior was not really any more wretched than messing around with a young and vulnerable White House intern who didn’t even get paid for her efforts, yet Bill Clinton survived that one, whereas Spitzer was presumed dead on the arrival of this “news.” The New York Times, which editorially has supported the candidacy of Hillary Clinton, whose vast White House experience clearly did not include corralling her husband, now editorializes contemptuously about Spitzer’s betrayal of the public trust as well as about his exploitation of his “ashen-faced” wife, who, like Hillary, stood by her man.

Read More Here

David Sirota: The False Assumptions In the “Electability” Arguments

Filed under: Commentary — Tags: , , , , , — Volt @ 7:11 am

David Sirota, Credo Action, March 11, 2008

It seems the longer the presidential nominating contest goes on between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, the more idiotic the pontificating and candidate spinning – especially when it comes to the so-called “electability” argument.

The Clinton campaign, as exemplified by surrogate Gov. Ed Rendell (D-PA) this morning on Meet the Press when he said:

“She’s clearly the strongest candidate in the states that Democrats must win to have a chance. Look, it’s great that Barack Obama is doing wonderfully well in Wyoming and Utah and, and places like that, but there’s no chance we’re going to carry those states. Whether he gets 44 percent as opposed to 39 percent doesn’t matter, but we’re not going to carry those states. We do have a chance to carry the big four. We’ve got to in three of the big four. Hillary Clinton’s the strongest candidate to do that. That’s been proven by the voters in the–those states and hopefully by Pennsylvania as well.”

Let’s put aside the fact that the Clinton campaign is insulting the importance of a huge swath of the American heartland – a talking point that has been repeated throughout this campaign by Clinton surrogates. Let’s just take a look at the two questionable assumptions inherent in this “electability” claim.

Read More Here

March 11, 2008

McCain’s Next Big Test: Economics 101

Filed under: Commentary — Tags: , , , , — Volt @ 4:17 pm

Jonathan Martin, Politico, March 11, 2008

When the February jobs report came out on Friday, economists grimaced and Wall Street blanched.

John McCain, however, said the news was “not terrible” – and Democrats pounced.

“Once again, John McCain demonstrated just how little he understands about the economy,” the Democratic National Committee declared in an e-mail to reporters.

McCain suffered in the Democratic translation of his remarks at a campaign stop in Georgia, as he had acknowledged the jobs news was “not good” and was not terrible only because the overall unemployment rate didn’t rise.

But the broadside was yet another example of what is already among the most popular lines of Democratic attack against McCain: that the Arizona senator lacks expertise on the economy and will be uniquely vulnerable on what is shaping up to be the overarching domestic issue of the campaign.

Read More Here

March 9, 2008

House GOP Funk Worsens

Filed under: Commentary — Tags: , , , , , , — Volt @ 9:38 pm

 

John Bresnahan and Josh Kraushaar, Politico, March 9, 2008

For National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Tom Cole (Okla.), every week seems to bring a new set of problems. On Saturday night, things got even worse.

With Democrat Bill Foster’s victory in the Illinois 14th District special election, Democrats now hold the seats occupied only 21 months ago by former Speaker Dennis Hastert (Ill.) and former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (Texas) – the two GOP lawmakers who ran the House from 1998 to 2006.

Since September, Cole has faced a barrage of bad news:

* The NRCC lags behind the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee by nearly $30 million in cash on hand.

* GOP House leadership endured an embarrassing scuffle when Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) tried to fire Cole’s top two staffers, during which Cole threatened to resign.

* There has been a wave of retirement announcements by veteran Republican lawmakers that will force the NRCC to defend what were once seen as safe GOP seats.

* Rep. Rick Renzi (R-Ariz.) was indicted on 35 federal corruption charges, which puts another Republican-controlled district in play.

* And the FBI continues its criminal investigation into a brewing accounting scandal that centers on the former NRCC treasurer’s activities.

Read More Here

March 7, 2008

Bush’s Touch

Filed under: Toon — Tags: , , , , — Volt @ 5:26 pm

The Great Texas Dildo Wars of 2008

Filed under: Commentary — Tags: , , , , , — Volt @ 11:31 am

Amanda Marcotte, Pandagon, March 7, 2008

Editor’s Note: Visit the URL below to see a classic video essay on the current legal aspects of dildo possession and sale in the state of Texas.

Well, I celebrated too soon the new-found legality of female masturbation in Texas. One should never underestimate the lengths to which wingnuts will go to control female sexuality. The Texas attorney general Greg Abbott, who apparently has nothing better to do than to separate women from their dildos, has asked the 5th Circuit Court to rehear the sex toy case.

I’m trying to imagine the mindset of a man who doesn’t realize that when you try to take dildos away from women, basically everyone with a brain and/or a sense of humor is going to assume it’s because you’re afraid you can’t handle the competition.

But I am routinely reminded that we face opposition to sexual liberation, the most prominent face of which is the anti-abortion movement that protests clinics and waves bloody fetus signs from street corners. That movement is made up of people who claim to be in it not because they are misogynists who fear female sexuality, nor because they are control freaks who can’t stand the idea of someone else having fun. They are in it, they say, because they want to save the unborn babies.

Take, for example, their opposition to making emergency contraception available over the counter. For most of us, this one was a no-brainer: Better contraception access means fewer unintended pregnancies, which translates into fewer abortions. Over-the-counter emergency contraception, then, means the abortion rate goes down — and since fewer abortions means more “babies saved” in anti-choice-speak, “pro-life” people should embrace it, right?

Read More Here

President McCain on the Right to Chose

Filed under: Toon — Tags: , , , — Volt @ 11:19 am

David Sirota: Hope in the Time of NAFTA

Filed under: Commentary — Tags: , , , , — Volt @ 11:06 am

David Sirota, TruthDig, March 6, 2008

Reading articles about Hillary Clinton attacking NAFTA can lead you to believe The Onion has taken over America’s news bureaus.

Clinton spent the last 10 years repeatedly praising the trade deal in speeches, most recently calling the job-killing accord “good for New York and America.” Yet, journalists barely mention that record as they transcribe her assertions that “I have been a critic of NAFTA from the very beginning.”

This week, such media negligence went from pathetic to absurd, as a CNN headline blared, “Clinton hammers Obama on NAFTA.” Political scribes breathlessly recounted how the New York senator criticized her opponent-a longtime NAFTA critic-over a thinly sourced television report claiming his adviser, economist Austan Goolsbee, told Canadian officials to not take the campaign’s anti-NAFTA platform seriously. Clinton said the uncorroborated allegations, seeded by Canada’s right-wing government, showed “the difference between talk and action.” Most journalists regurgitated her charges without noting the difference between Clinton’s new fair-trade talk and her decade-long pro-NAFTA actions (nor did they note that the same report said Clinton advisers also did what Goolsbee was accused of).

Of course, Bill Clinton signed NAFTA after pledging to oppose expanded cross-border trade until Mexican wages rose. So Hillary Clinton’s dishonesty, which sealed her Ohio primary win, is nothing new in politics.

What is new is the fact-free coverage. Whereas diligent reporting marked the original NAFTA debate, today’s media reduce trade discussions to vapid cartoons-ones so inane that a leading NAFTA booster is rewarded with glowing headlines for pretending she never supported the accord.

Read More Here

March 5, 2008

David Sirota: The Clinton-Lieberman Connection

Filed under: Commentary — Tags: , , , , , — Volt @ 6:25 pm

David Sirota, Credo Action, March 5, 2008

Confusion and misinformation are two of the most powerful weapons in a desperate politician’s arsenal. They were used by Joe Lieberman in the 2006 general election against Ned Lamont, and exit polls suggest that they helped Hillary Clinton blast her way through yesterday’s primary in Ohio.

Over the last few weeks, Clinton has been telling Ohio voters she never supported the North American Free Trade Agreement – an agreement that has become a symbol of corrupt economic policies to many working-class voters. Clinton has made these claims expecting everyone to forget her speeches over the last decade trumpeting NAFTA as a great success.

Her direct quotes praising NAFTA repeatedly are not up for interpretation – and neither are her absurd claims to “have been against NAFTA from the beginning.” We’re talking about pure, unadulterated lying here – and lying with a purpose: To confuse enough voters into thinking she actually did oppose NAFTA and that her strong support for NAFTA is somehow the same as Barack Obama’s longtime opposition to the pact. Last night’s results prove the scheme worked.

CBS News reports that “among Ohio voters who expressed that trade takes jobs away, 55 percent supported Clinton.” The Associated Press has some more details:

“Clinton’s past support of the North American Free Trade Agreement didn’t hurt her in Ohio where most voters think trade with other countries has cost the state jobs. Blue-collar workers and voters who live in union households backed Clinton as did voters in northern Ohio where manufacturing job losses have been staggering the past decade, according to exit polls for The Associated Press and television networks. Clinton won nearly six in 10 votes from union households in Ohio’s Democratic primary Tuesday and the same number among people who earn less than $50,000 a year.”

Read More Here

Throwing…

Filed under: Toon — Tags: , , , , , — Volt @ 8:02 am

March 4, 2008

2008 Anti-Obama Playbook

Filed under: Toon — Tags: , , , , — Volt @ 8:07 am

March 3, 2008

Paul Krugman: Deliverance or Diversion?

Filed under: Commentary — Tags: , , , , , — Volt @ 5:39 pm

Paul Krugman, The New York Times, March 3, 2008

After their victory in the 2006 Congressional elections, it seemed a given that Democrats would try to make this year’s presidential campaign another referendum on Republican policies. After all, the public appears fed up not just with President Bush, but with his party. For example, a recent poll by the Pew Research Center shows Democrats are preferred on every issue except terrorism. They even have a 10-point advantage on “morality.”

Add to this the fact that perceptions about the economy are worsening week by week, and one might have expected the central theme of the Democratic campaign to be “throw the bums out.”

But a funny thing happened on the way to the 2008 election.

Unless Hillary Clinton wins big on Tuesday, Barack Obama will be the Democratic nominee. And he’s not at all the kind of candidate one might have expected to emerge out of the backlash against Republican governance.

Now, nobody would mistake Mr. Obama for a Republican — although contrary to claims by both supporters and opponents, his voting record places him, with Senator Clinton, more or less in the center of the Democratic Party, rather than in its progressive wing.

Read More Here

March 2, 2008

Helen Thomas: Time To Get Out Of Our Blood Debt In Iraq

Filed under: Commentary — Tags: , , , , , , — Volt @ 10:47 am

Helen Thomas, The Hearst Newspapers, February 28, 2008

Will the next president be the second coming of Jimmy Carter? Given Thursday’s economic headlines, full of dire warnings about the return of 1970s-style stagflation, you might think so.

Bush wants to leave to the next president the burden of ending the debacle he started five years ago when he ordered the invasion of Iraq under false pretenses, against a people who had done us no harm.

Bush cannot explain his reasons for the war without compounding his folly. To this moment, Bush has not given a logical explanation for his disastrous militarism.

How can he tell American families that their sons and daughters died for a terrible, tragic mistake committed by his administration?

History shows that other presidents have found ways to end U.S. involvement in wars. Most times there has been a public sigh of relief when that happens.

Read More Here

March 1, 2008

Anti-Obama T-Shirt Sales Surge Online

Filed under: Commentary — Tags: , , , , , — Volt @ 8:13 am

Alex Markels, US News and World Report, February 29, 2008

If you think the recent photo of Barack Obama wearing a turban – now appearing on the Internet near you – is a cheap shot, well, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

Or, at least, you haven’t seen the arsenal of cheap shots now on display at CafePress.com, an online store that at last count featured more than 900 anti-Obama designs for sale on some 33,000 T-shirts and other tchotchkes.

Indeed, just as Matt Drudge posted the photo of Obama dressed in local garb during a visit to Somalia, which some have alleged was forwarded by the Clinton campaign, the same image – on more than a dozen T-shirts and sweatshirts – was selling on CafePress.com, along with a cornucopia of “Barack Obummer” campaign buttons and “Osama Obama” onesies.

Ranging from silly to downright offensive, the designs are created and uploaded by millions of would-be entrepreneurs, who then pick which products to emblazon them on and even set the price. “We have a review process that keeps out too much love or too much hate,” CafePress CEO Fred Durham says of the more than 250,000 designs displayed on the website at any given time.

Much like what sometimes happens on eBay, offensive stuff occasionally slips through the cracks, such as a recent T-shirt depicting Obama in a Nazi uniform alongside Adolf Hitler under a caption reading, “Don’t Be Fooled by Propaganda.”

Read More Here

February 29, 2008

The Economist: John McCain’s Obstacles

Filed under: Commentary — Tags: , , , — Volt @ 10:18 am

 

The Economist, February 29, 2008

John McCain, an enthusiastic gambler and inveterate collector of lucky charms, has the luck of the devil. For him to win the Republican nomination for president, Mike Huckabee had to beat Mitt Romney in Iowa, Rudy Giuliani had to pursue a deranged strategy, Fred Thompson had to contract narcolepsy, and the “surge” had to go well. Mr McCain has run the tables.

But will the senator’s luck outlast the primary season? The past week or so has produced some ominous signs. On January 21st the New York Times ran a story alleging that Mr McCain had a too-close-for-comfort relationship with a female lobbyist. Four days later the Democratic National Committee filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission, suggesting the McCain campaign had violated the law on spending restraints.

The short-term damage has been limited. The New York Times poisoned its own story by nods and winks. The debate about Mr McCain’s campaign-finance behaviour is so convoluted that only lawyers understand it. The McCain campaign is now hoovering up more cash than ever, thanks to conservative rage at the “liberal media”.

Yet both stories point to a long-term problem: money, not sex. Mr McCain sells himself as a scourge of special interests and hammer of lobbyists. He also styles himself a hands-on reformer who has tried to fix America’s campaign-finance system. For a presidential candidate, this might prove the equivalent of attaching a sign to your behind saying “Kick me”.

Mr McCain is no stranger to the world of lobbyists. Several members of his staff, including his campaign manager, Rick Davis, are lobbyists. So are about 60 of the most generous contributors to his campaign. The senator is not averse to taking lifts on corporate jets. The public-finance system Mr McCain helped design is so unwieldy that even the man who invented it finds it a nightmare.

Read More Here

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress