Nov 072010
Nov 072010
Along with many others, I have been distrustful of the officially sanctioned news coming from the Gulf of Mexico. I have opined that it will take at least a generation to repair the damage from the massive oil spill made possible by Republican deregulation of drilling practices, as pushed by Cheney, and the abject failure of Ken Salazar to do his job. In May, I stated my concern that, since the dispersant BP used in huge quantities is lethal to coral, it could bring about the loss of Florida’s reef system, aka the Keys. Those reefs are the home of thousands of species found nowhere else on earth. We harvest some our most advanced medicines from some of those species. In addition, the loss of the Keys would change the flow of the Gulf Stream and hasten a catastrophic change in climate. For the first time, damaged corals have been found in the Gulf.
For the first time, federal scientists have found damage to deep sea coral and other marine life on the ocean floor several miles from the blown-out BP well – a strong indication that damage from the spill could be significantly greater than officials had previously acknowledged.
Tests are needed to verify that the coral died from oil that spewed into the Gulf of Mexico after the Deepwater Horizon rig explosion, but the chief scientist who led the government-funded expedition said Friday he was convinced it was related.
“What we have at this point is the smoking gun,” said Charles Fisher, a biologist with Penn State University who led the expedition aboard the Ronald Brown, a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration research vessel.
“There is an abundance of circumstantial data that suggests that what happened is related to the recent oil spill,” Fisher said.
For the government, the findings were a departure from earlier statements. Until now, federal teams have painted relatively rosy pictures about the spill’s effect on the sea and its ecosystem, saying they had not found any damage on the ocean floor.
In early August, a federal report said that nearly 70 percent of the 170 million gallons of oil that gushed from the well into the sea had dissolved naturally, or was burned, skimmed, dispersed or captured, with almost nothing left to see – at least on top of the water. The report was blasted by scientists.
Most of the Gulf’s bottom is muddy, but coral colonies that pop up every once in a while are vital oases for marine life in the chilly ocean depths.
Coral is essential to the Gulf because it provides a habitat for fish and other organisms such as snails and crabs, making any large-scale death of coral a problem for many species. It might need years, or even decades, to grow back… [emphasis added]
Inserted from <Common Dreams>
This discovery in no way proves my fears, but it keeps them well within the realm of possibility. We need to determine whether or not BP killed this coral and then determine how widespread the damage is. Since I lack the scientific expertise to recommend how to prevent further damage, I’ll leave that to the scientists, but something must be done, and done quickly. You know that when the next session of Congress begins, House Republicans will rusk to defund all skience [Republican spelling], protect BP from liability, and take the ostrich approach to this problem.
Nov 072010
Elections can be strange things. They do not guarantee democratic government, because they can be fixed. Consider 2000, when Republican thugs physically assaulted campaign workers in Florida to delay the recount, so Republican ideologues on the Supreme Court could deliver the White House to the loser. Consider 2004 when voting machines with no paper trails counted more votes than districts had voters in hundreds of places. In virtually all cases the divergence between the vote count and exit polls were favored Republicans. The odds against so many instances favoring one party so exclusively occurring through random error asymptotically approach infinity. Human intervention was needed to produce those results. Republicans fired US Attorneys who refused to assist them in fixing elections. Even in 2006, there was a 4% divergence between actual vote count and exit polls, favoring Republicans. As horrific as this is, it does not approach the injustice it could become.
The proxy party of Myanmar’s military rulers has been increasing pressure on voters ahead of Sunday’s elections, opposition party officials said, raising fresh worries about the junta’s promised “roadmap to democracy.”
Officials with the junta-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party have told voters they could lose their jobs if they don’t vote for military-supported candidates, and punished voters who cast early ballots for other parties, the opposition leaders said Saturday.
In Yangon, the country’s largest city, there was little fanfare on the eve of the balloting, with many voters expressing apathy about elections they said had already been orchestrated by the ruling generals.
“This will just be the same old wine with a new label,” said Soe Myint, a 65-year-old retired Yangon schoolteacher, adding that she would not cast a ballot.
Thu Wai, chairman of the Democratic Party (Myanmar), said his party had filed a string of complaints against the USDP for campaign violations. “We will press the election commissions to take actions against these improper practices,” he said as he made a last-minute campaign tour through Yangon.
The military, which has ruled Myanmar with an iron hand since 1962, has billed the elections as a key step in its “roadmap to democracy.”
Critics have widely panned the balloting, the country’s first in two decades, as a sham designed to cement military rule. But some in Myanmar — also known as Burma — are holding out hope that they could mark the beginning of a slow democratic transition.
The main opposition party, detained Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy, has refused to take part in the polls, saying the process is unfair and undemocratic. It has been disbanded by the government as a result.
The festive mood ahead of the last elections in 1990 — which were overwhelmingly won by Suu Kyi’s party, which was barred from taking power — was nowhere to be seen Saturday… [emphasis added]
Inserted from <Business Week>
I’m sure the people of Myanmar would be overjoyed to have the opportunity Americans so blithely ignored last Tuesday. Unless Americans start taking the consequences of elections seriously, starting now, the Republican party will see to it that, like in Myanmar, elections have no consequences here.
Nov 072010
Yesterday I slept so late that most of my day was gone before I got up. As a resault, I was not sleepy at bedtime and am posting a little earlier than usual. I did catch up on replying to comments. Today’s holy day for the Church of the Ellipsoid Orb is less sacred for me, because the Denver congregation has a day of rest, aka a bye week. This afternoon I plan to join the conversation with Gwen, Jack and others on the Here Be Monsters show on Blog Talk radio. It starts at 3:00 PM PST (6:00 PM EST), if you’d like to listen or call in.
Jig Zone Puzzle:
Today it took me 4:27 (average 4:47). To do it, click here. How did you do?
Short Takes:
From NY Times: In a letter to colleagues, the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, who is seeking to remain as minority leader despite her party’s steep election losses, urged House Democrats to unite behind her and even said she hopes to help ousted lawmakers return to Congress in two years.
I approve. Pelosi did her job, unlike the leg hound.
From Right Wing Watch: Last week, leaked results from the Pentagon’s survey revealed that most soldiers were unopposed to repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.
So, if you are the Family Research Council, it can only mean that the survey is flawed and cannot be trusted.
Leave it to the Theocons of the American Taliban to insist on inventing their own facts when the real ones conflict with their bigotry. Unless we do this in the lame duck session, repeal is dead for two years.
From Daily Kos: The Seattle Chamber of Commerce, being a local organization in a liberal city, with many liberal members represented, wants to make it crystal clear that they are not in any way associated with [ads aired by] the the U.S. Chamber, which spent millions in the state to pick up the open 3rd district seat, and to oust Patty Murray.
This is a worthy sentiment, but lip-service is not enough. As long as they are members of and pay dues to the US Chamber, they must weat the green letter. $
Cartoon:
Pray (or whatever you do) for America!
Nov 052010
I was horrified to return home this evening to find two action alerts in my email that MSNBC has suspended Keith Olbermann for making private donations to three progressive candidates. Keith is far too important a resource for progressives to stand quietly by and say nothing, especially since MSNBC took no punitive action when Joe Scarborough did the same. So I’m passing on both and urging you to take action.
The first is from Bold Progressives:
BREAKING: MSNBC has suspended star anchor Keith Olbermann following the news that he donated to three Democratic candidates this election cycle.
Sign our emergency petition to MSNBC. Tell them to put Olbermann back on the air NOW!
Then, pass this to your progressive friends.
Media are writing about this breaking story right now, and our growing petition will display the public outrage. Sign here.NBC policy does not prohibit employees from donating to political candidates. But MSNBC president Phil Griffin is miffed that Keith didn’t get “prior approval” first. Seriously. His feelings are hurt.
Meanwhile, Republicans Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanan also gave political contributions — but are not suspended. It must only be ok for MSNBC employees to give to Republicans, not Democrats.
The Democratic Party sadly saw this week what happens when you alienate your base. Tell MSNBC that if they want to keep their viewers, they must put Keith back on the air NOW!
Then tell your friends. Thanks for being a bold progressive.
— Julia Rosen, PCCC
P.S. It’s worth noting that Olbermann donated to 2 PCCC-endorsed candidates: House Progressive Caucus Chair Raul Grijalva (who was just declared the winner, after lots of PCCC help!) and Jack Conway in Kentucky (who sends his immense thanks to PCCC members). Good for Keith.
The second is from FAIR:
MSNBC host Keith Olbermann has been placed on indefinite suspension without pay in the wake of a Politico report (11/5/10) that revealed Olbermann had donated $7,200 to three Democratic candidates, in violation of NBC’s standards barring employees from making political contributions.
A journalist donating money to a political candidate raises obvious conflict of interest questions; at a minimum, such contributions should be disclosed on air. But if supporting politicians with money is a threat to journalistic independence, what are the standards for Olbermann’s bosses at NBC, and at NBC’s parent company General Electric?
According to the Center for Responsive Politics, GE made over $2 million in political contributions in the 2010 election cycle (most coming from the company’s political action committee). The top recipient was Republican Senate candidate Rob Portman from Ohio. The company has also spent $32 million on lobbying this year, and contributed over $1 million to the successful “No on 24” campaign against a California ballot initiative aimed at eliminating tax loopholes for major corporations (New York Times, 11/1/10).
Comcast, the cable company currently looking to buy NBC, has dramatically increased its political giving, much of it to lawmakers who support the proposed merger (Bloomberg, 10/19/10). And while Fox News parent News Corp’s $1 million donation to the Republican Governors Association caused a stir, GE had “given $245,000 to the Democratic governors and $205,000 to the Republican governors since last year,” reported the Washington Post (8/18/10).
Olbermann’s donations are in some ways comparable to fellow MSNBC host Joe Scarborough’s $4,200 contribution to Republican candidate Derrick Kitts in 2006 (MSNBC.com, 7/15/07). When that was uncovered, though, NBC dismissed this as a problem, since Scarborough “hosts an opinion program and is not a news reporter.” Olbermann, of course, is also an opinion journalist–but MSNBC seems to hold him to a different standard.
Two years earlier, the Washington Post reported (1/18/04):
NBC chief executive Robert Wright has contributed $8,000 since 1999, including $3,500 to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and $1,000 to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). Andrew Lack, a former NBC News chief, gave $1,000 to Rep. Billy Tauzin (R-La.) while NBC president, and Wright contributed $1,500–after the House committee Tauzin chairs held hearings on the networks’ election night failures. NBC spokeswoman Allison Gollust said the network allows its executives to make contributions and that Wright “does not make any decisions specific to news coverage.”Wright, however, was reported in a recent New York magazine piece (10/3/10) to have told then-NBC News chief Neal Shapiro to move to the right of Fox News in response to the September 11 attacks: “We have to be more conservative then they are,” the magazine quoted Wright.
MSNBC’s treatment of Olbermann is also in sharp contrast to Fox News’ handling of Sean Hannity, who was revealed by Salon (9/23/10) to have given $5,000 to the campaign of Rep. Michele Bachmann (R.-Minn.), a Tea Party favorite–without Fox expressing any public disapproval. Hannity has allowed Republican candidates to use his Fox program for fundraising (Mediaite, 10/17/10); as Salon noted, Hannity was this year’s keynote speaker at the National Republican Congressional Committee’s annual fundraising dinner.
If the concern is about how giving money to politicians threatens journalistic independence, then companies like NBC should explain why their parent companies can lavish so much money on political candidates or causes with no concern about conflicts of interest or the need to disclose these donations to viewers. The lesson here would seem to be that some of the workers shouldn’t make political donations, but the bosses are free to give as much as they’d like. Anyone who watches Olbermann’s show knows what his political views are. So what do the far larger contributions from GE tell us?
ACTION:
Ask NBC and MSNBC to explain their inconsistent standards regarding political donations.CONTACT:
MSNBC President
Phil Griffin
phil.griffin@nbcuni.comNBC News President
Steve Capus
steve.capus@nbcuni.comPhone: (212) 664-4444
MSNBC’s action is completely hypocritical and blatantly partisan. This is not a direct speech issue, because money is NOT speech, regardless of what SCOTUS has said. The direct issue is that MSNBC’s hypocritical policy violates Keith’s property rights to do what he sees fit with his own property within legal limits. He just gave it to the wrong people, in MSMBC’s corporate view.
I corrected my error and changed the word fired to suspended. My mistake.
Nov 052010
Yesterday I caught up on comments before my volunteer work at a new CoDA (Codependence Anonymous) group sponsored by 7th Step. I returned home at the time I normally wake up to do research, so it will be a short day at PP with this and one very major article. I’m too tired to do research for Short Takes. Comments and visits will depend on how I feel later.
Jig Zone Puzzle:
Today ot took me 5:23 (average 5:54). To do it, click here. How did you do?
Cartoon:
<
/font>
Have you recovered from Tuesday?
Nov 052010
There is a caucus of Democratic Senators. It has no name. Nobody admits membership. But it is there. We see this, because we have seen its stamp on most of the legislation that the Senate has not passed in the last two years. It should be called the Cowardly Caucus. Right now the Cowardly Caucus is quivering with fear over filibuster reform. They know an overwhelming majority of the American people support it. They know that President Obama has called for it. They are whining, “What if moderate Democrats (DINOs) side with Republicans in an up or down vote?” Their fears are probably correct, but I say that Democrats should proceed with filibuster reform by changing the Senate Rules on day one. Here’s why.
The Senate needs to stop being the place where legislation goes to die. If that means the other side gets some of theirs through, so be it. If it hurts Americans, that will give voters an incentive not to return Republicans and DINOs to office, and to support Senators that they see fighting for them.
Democrats still hold a majority in the Senate. They have the stick of stripping plumb committee assignments from recalcitrant Democrats, who refuse to support the people, if they would but have the courage to wield it.
Democrats still hold the White House. Obama can veto anything egregious that reaches his desk.
If we don’t fix this now, Republicans will do so in 2012, because we will have handed them all three branches of government, unless voters see Democrats fighting for them. Allowing Republican Filibuzzards to block everything, crippling the nation, through continued abuse of the filibuster, is the easiest way to keep voters thinking that all Democrats belong to the Cowardly Caucus.
Nov 052010
Here are the results of the Next Majority Leader Poll.
And here are your comments:
From Oso on October 31, 2010 at 9:38 pm.
Feingold would be great although Franken appears to have the lead-Democrats never fail to be impressed by a war supporter! Feingold had the integrity to oppose the war, as well as the (non)financial reform package.
From Orangutan on October 28, 2010 at 10:59 am.
Feingold has the combination of experience and the embodiment of what a Democrat SHOULD be. Franken would be good, but he is still too junior.
From Kempite on October 25, 2010 at 3:25 pm.
If God is good, the liberal-Democrat party will make Al Franken their Senate MINORITY leader. After Harry Reid is gone, who better can demonstrate the sheer insanity of the left? Of course Kerry, Boxer, Wyden and Durbin, can do a fine job of proving the lack of value that exists in liberal leadership, but few can do it quite so offensively and dramatically as Al Franken.
From Lisa G. on October 13, 2010 at 6:04 pm.
I would love to have Franken because he’s ballsy enough to call the Repubs out on their bullshit. But, I don’t think he has enough experience however anyone would be better than Reid. I voted for Durbin – he’s a good solid lib that’s been in Congress long enough to not get pushed around.
From skyblu5555 on October 12, 2010 at 5:51 pm.
Anyone But Reid.
From Momzacarp on October 11, 2010 at 10:17 am.
Franken has the intelligence and the spine to rip the conservatives when they start their nonsense on the floor.
From Grung_e_Gene on October 5, 2010 at 11:09 am.
Dick Durbin would be a Liberal and an excellent Majority Leader.
From Otis on October 2, 2010 at 1:28 pm.
I voted Durbin. Mostly because I am from IL. He seems better than Reid, so it can’t be all bad.
From LenaP on October 2, 2010 at 12:31 am.
Franken would be the best. We finally could get things done without fear.
From Cellophane on October 1, 2010 at 5:14 pm.
I’d love to have our guy Ron (Wyden) in tech position. We just sent money his way (and Kitzhaber) today.
As much as I love Franken, he’s a sophomore next term. Who would have believed we’d lose Feingold? Of the leaders, Durbin is probably the most qualified.
As promised, I am looking for a hosting site for petitions now. There are several choices, so let me know if you have a selection. There will be a Dump The Leg Hound petition coming soon.