The New York Times: So Close, And Yet So Wrong

Enclosed within this article is a hint that the Times of New York could get their hands on the real story, if they wanted to:

When Fred Wilson, a prominent New York venture capitalist who has backed Twitter and Zynga, wanted to watch the Knicks game last month, he got an unpleasant surprise. Time Warner Cable was not showing the game because of a contract dispute.

Frustrated, he turned to the Internet for help. Within minutes he was streaming the game illegally on his big-screen TV. [...]

Seeking out an illicit stream of a game that you should be able to watch legitimately is one thing. But media companies say they are facing a relentless barrage of far less defensible thefts involving movies, television shows and music.

Now, that's true. No one wants to see piracy be the modus operandi of the Internet, except maybe those megapirates who would stand to become the media conglomerates of piracy.

And there's where the story lies: conglomeration.

See, if you frame the piracty as one of giving the artist his due return for his efforts, people are pretty sympathetic to reforming the internet to ensure that, no matter how you view a film or listen to a record, an artist can be reasonably assured he's getting his fair share for creating it.

After all, what's the incentive to make more music or movies if you aren't going to earn a living at it?

It's the corporatocracy that makes this story. The publishers and producers whose only function is to finance and distribute the works that artists create for it take an undue percentage of the "gate," so to speak.

When you frame the discussion this way, suddenly people are less sympathetic to the production end and more sympathetic to pirates.

Take that Time Warner anecdote. It's true, Time Warner, New York City's biggest cable provider, cannot show games from Madison Square Garden (which, ironically, uses Time Warner in its restaurants to show out of market games.) Cablevision, another conglomerate, owns the Garden and the teams that play in it. It was pretty much fated from the get-go that Time Warner would be barred from broadcasts, or at least charged an insane amount of money.

Which would be passed onto the consumer.

Similarly, DISH Network has opted out of its contract with Cablevision. So people resort to piracy.

But here's the thing: opting for piracy in a more legitimate dispute like this encourages the rationalization that leads to more piracy: "I'm not paying $14 to sit in a theatre! I'll Bittorrent the movie!" or "$49.95 to watch a fight? Why, when I can get it for free!"

And so on. It's a slippery slope before you're downloading albums because the CD costs $15 (and the band gets a few bucks of that).

If the Times covered that story, how revenues in arts and culture are divvied up, then we could have an honest story about piracy and how to control it. Until then, it's all smoke and mirrors.

Deer, Meet Headlights

Ladies and gentlemen, Al Cardenas of CPAC

Al Cardenas, the lead organizer for the Conservative Political Action Conference, said Thursday that attendees were arriving at the conference “angrier than [he’s] seen in some time” in part due to the Health and Human Services decision to mandate contraception coverage in employee health care plans.

That's not why they're all butthurt, Al. It's because they're looking at the dismal prospect of four more years under the Kenyan Usurper, and the best you guys can come up with in response is...Mitt Romney.

Clueless Al.

Supercontinent!

 

Introducing Amnesia!

 

Er, Amasia...

How Much To Screw A Nation Like The United States?

 

$25 billion

 

We are a cheap date.

(dogwhistle)

I think we're going to see this trope more, now that Rick Santorum has reeled off some victories:

The resurgence of social and cultural issues in voters' minds poses new challenges for GOP presidential front-runner Mitt Romney as he reels from surprising losses Tuesday to conservative favorite Rick Santorum.

The economy remains the No. 1 issue of concern for a majority of Americans. But the recent hoopla surrounding the Obama administration's support of contraceptives, the court ruling against California's same-sex marriage ban and heated debate about abortion access has created a perfect storm that has pushed these seemingly dormant issues to the surface.

"They've never been far from the surface. A lot of people thought the social issues had disappeared but that has never been the case," said Karlyn Bowman, a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute who focuses on polling data and public opinion. "These issues are obviously very important within a conservative party, the Republican party."

Now, Romney's record indicates a conservative bend on these issues: while he has enacted legislation in Massachussetts requiring hospitals, even religious ones, to perform abortions in the case of rape victims (not an unreasonable position, but more on that in another piece,) he has vetoed bills authorizing the morning-after pill (called the "abortion pill" by the living-room gibbons on the right,) which the legislature passed over his veto.

Yet, Romney gets the blame.

Meanwhile, Santorum has publicly been outspoken on social issues like same-sex marriage and abortion (and likely, the hoopla over contraception for lay employees of the Catholic Church.)

In other words, this is a battle of right v. righty-right.

So where's the dogwhistle?

I mean, you have two candidates who have publicly worn their religion on their sleeves, one a church elder in fact. You'd think the choice would be harder.

Except....wellllllll....see, one's a Mormon. And there's where I think Santorum is striking gold, particularly in states that were part of the westward expansion of the nation.

The history of Mormonism in America is a harsh one: kicked out of New York, Ohio, Missouri, Illinois and nearly every other state Mormons tried to settle in, they headed west. In fact, Mormons would end up being a major component and impetus to expand American hegemony to the west coast.

It probably didn't help that Joseph Smith was a crackpot who conned people left and right. He was a product of New York's Chautauqua "Burned-over District", which also produced the first of the apocalyptic preachers, William Miller, as well as the Fox sisters of Hydesville, who used to hold seances complete with table-rappings that were later admitted to be hoaxes.

The Mormons settled in an area they called Deseret, which actually encompassed most of the plains east of the Rockies from Canada to Mexico. The Federal government looked askance at this idea when the Mormons applied for statehood, and gave them Utah as a playground.

Family oral histories of the people the Mormons encountered are probably the most effective smear that Santorum can use without getting in too much trouble. The beauty of these histories is that he doesn't even have to initiate them. Elder family members will recount what their grandparents told them, which may in fact be twice-told tales already.

 

The irony is, as a Catholic, Santorum is really the lesser of two evils for these people.

Delicious Ironies

 

Just the day after the Appelate court in California took down Proposition 8 in a slam-fest against the legislature, one of the couples that started the whole ball rolling announced they are divorcing

 

It's finally come to pass: gay divorces are making news.

Seems To Be A FOX News Kinda Day

Shorter FOX News website

Blacks are still black!

 

The subtext, of course, is "Why can't we still call 'em [insert N word here]?"

How Desperate Is FOX News To Improve Their Falling Ratings?

 

They interview candy

 

By the way, this exchange shows just how ignorant and idiotic Steve Doocy and the other blonde bimbo are:

Host Steve Doocy, however, seemed to be fully invested in the interview. He mentioned that Eddie Van Halen used to stipulate, in his contract riders, that there should be no brown M&M’s in the dressing room.

“That’s got to make a candy feel bad,” Doocy said, feigning a frown.

“Well, he didn’t know what he was missing,” Ms. Brown replied, “and I’m the ruler of all. So…it’s his loss.”

“Take that, Eddie,” Doocy replied.

"Ms. Brown" was the M&M.

The truth of the Van Halen story is, yes, it was in their contract, no brown M&Ms. But here's the thing: it wasn't that they had anything against brown M&Ms.

They put that clause in there as a very clever way to make sure the contract was being adhrered to. It was a down-and-dirty "checksum." If they found brown M&Ms in the dressing room, they could almost be certain the promoter or arena was screwing them in other ways, too. They would then unleash the lawyers and accountants, and usually recoup bookoo bucks.

Yes, it was a cute way to get a gimmick extended another thirty seconds, but the gimmick shouldn't have happened in the first place AND they shouldn't have doubled down on the stoopit.

A Trainwreck

That's sort of the take-away I get from the 9th Circuit decision on the case against Proposition 8 in California.

 

The relevant paragraph:

"Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples," states the opinion written by Judge Stephen Reinhardt, one of the court's most liberal judges.

This is the litigatory equivalent of "Ohno, you din't!"

Attorneys on both sides seem prepared to take this case to the Supreme Court, and I'd be willing to bet that at least six justices (the four liberals, Scalia and Roberts) are pawing the ground in the starting gate.

But...

The decision applies strictly to California, even though the 9th Circuit could have extended it over all nine states in its jurisdiction.

Too, the Appeals Court relied heavily on the 1996 Supreme Court ruling which overturned a Colorado law that limited civil rights protections for homosexuals.

Taken together, these conditions may force the SCOTUS to say "Thanks, but no thanks." Not that it has a history of non-intervention (Bush v. Gore *koffkoff*) but that was a different court, almost altogether.

It's going to be an interesting year, as the kids say.

 

Santorum Spreads His Wins Around

 

With three wins last night in state caucuses in Minnesota, Colorado and Missouri (technically a primary, altho the results are nonbinding,)  Rick Santorum vaulted rather impressively back into the pack for the Republican nomination for President.

 

See? The MSM isn't the only one who can treat this as a horse-race! But I digress...

 

There are two intriguing results out of these outcomes.

 

First, Missouri should have been solidly in Mitt Romney's column. That there might be a symbolic "Anybody But Mitt" protest in this nonbinding vote is true, and should not be underestimated. Republicans are pretty angry over the weak field of candidates poised to take on the now-formidable re-election effort of President Obama. Will Missouri overturn these results when they choose at convention in March?

 

I think so. I think the voters of Missouri were sending Romney a message to either amp up his volume or expect really tepid support come the fall.

 

Next, Minnesota. What should be considered a moderate state-- after all, this state has sent both Michele Bachmann AND Al Franken to Washington-- should have been a slam-dunk for Romney.

 

Caucuses are peculiar things, however. A small fraction of the actual voting population participates, and that leaves a much larger margin of error from "what should be." It comes down to commitment and enthusiasm, and as the Missouri results imply, there's very little enthusiasm for Mitt out there. The Minnesota Mitt contingent probably took a flier, assuming he'd get the nod anyway in Tampa.

 

So while it's shocking that a rock-ribbed socially conservative loon like Santorum took such a large plurality of the vote, that Romney couldn't even outdraw Ron Paul suggests that the NotMitt vote is very strong in middle America. Could be Mormonism. Could be Massachussetts. Could be misanthropy.

 

The signs were there that Santorum was going to pull a trifecta yesterday. Even the "esteemed" Wall Street Journal got it ass backwards in analyzing the sudden spate of advertising from Romney attacking Santorum, thinking it was just a champ putting the finishing touches on a wobbling opponent, when in truth, Romney was desperate to salvage any victory in any of the votes yesterday.

 

After all, if your rival is drowning, you don't throw him a life vest. That Romney even acknowledged Santorum's presence in the race was a red alert that things were going squirrely.

 

By winning two binding votes yesterday, Santorum makes a strong case to take this race to the convention. All three that he's won (which includes Iowa), and then Missouri, suggest a strong heartland preference for Santorum. At the very least, this puts him at the very top of any short list for Vice Presidential candidates.

 

 

Just When I Thought I Was Out....

 

...they pull me back in!

 

36.3 megapixels....*whistling*

Is The US Constitution A Dying Document?

 

The rest of the world seems to think so.

 

Among the critiques are that it provides very few rights, that it's old and economically worded (e.g. doesn't do a very good job of explaining precisely what it's trying to say.) Add to that recent SCOTUS rulings that have drastically reinterpreted the document according to "original intent" and the general decline in American power and influence around the globe and you have a recipe for a dying document.

 

And with it, a dying nation.

Uncertain? Or Confused?

The Fatah and Hamas factions of the Palestinian people have come to an understanding on a pact to unify the factions. Mahmoud Abbas will continue to be the chief executive for the interim, supported by an independently elected cabinet until full elections can be organized.

 

This surprising move brings the Gaza Palestinians and the West Bank Palestinians together.

 

Understandably, the Arab street as reflected by its press, is uncertain. Note in particular the Israeli reactions.

 

I suppose there's good reason. When they aren't squaring off against Israeli forces, the two factions have been at each other's throats. This is not conducive to settling the larger issues at hand.

 

But here's the thing: a divided Palestinian people is actually in the best interests of many of the more strident regimes in the region, like Syria and Iran and yes, Israel, who can focus attention on the Israeli conflicts while minimizing the internal strife as just frustration with the "Zionist oppression of Israel," or some such conflated attitude. For Israel's part, the strife merely serves to support their claim that, so long as Hamas is a disruptive force, Israel's existence is threatened, so why should he deal fairly with the Palestinian Authority?

 

And yet, interestingly enough, Hamas' leadership in exile in Syria all left that country (the last departed yesterday) to head for Israel, under the guise of security from that nation's uprisings.

 

Sounds like a cover story to me. It's possible that Syria may have undermined Hamas' position as opposed to Fatah (although I admit that's pure speculation, and I really don't have a particular body of evidence to point to). It's also possible that Hamas has started to cozy up to Iran, which would explain the collapse of Syrian safety.

 

Naturally, Bejamin Netanyahu has begun sabre rattling over the deal, all but threatening Abbas with an "either you're with us, or with the terrorists" posture.

 

And yet, it was Netanyahu himself who insisted on a unified Authority before Israel would sit down and negotiate in good faith.

 

Mr. Netanyahu, peace is not for haggling. It is not sold in the open market like a carpet or a pound of meat. Sit down, and shut up now.

Super ButtHurt

By now, you've probably heard about the foofaraw the Clint Eastwood commercial during halftime at the "Super Bowl" created.

 

Most notably, Karl Rove's "disappointment" with respect to the implied political message that Eastwood is endorsing a second Obama term.

 

Now, the ad itself is pretty inocuous, as political ads go-- assuming you want to call it that, which I'm not ready to. Eastwood narrates a script about "halftime in America" and how Detroit has fought back and so can the country. (transcribed here)

 

It's more of a pep talk than a political ad. That's not to say there isn't an undertone of gratitude for Obama's bailout of Chrysler. That is part of the backdrop. If Obama hadn't bailed them out, they wouldn't have the money to sell cars by running advertisements.

 

And interestingly, Eastwood had criticized the bailouts, yet here he is, getting up in ol' Karl's paranoid face about comebacks. Here's where I suspect Rove gets his panties in a twist:

I’ve seen a lot of tough eras, a lot of downturns in my life. And, times when we didn’t understand each other. It seems like we’ve lost our heart at times. When the fog of division, discord, and blame made it hard to see what lies ahead.

Given the toxic nature of rhetoric from Rove's party, particularly the Teabaggers, it's hard not to take a comment like that personally, especially since Rove himself has rattled his chains over some of the nonsense that people like Sarah Palin and Rick perry have spouted.

Rove would be on firmer ground if he critiqued the soon-to-be-released film Act of Valor which features a Navy SEAL team sent in to rescue a kidnapped ambassador, which actually features real SEALs. That seems to be a pretty blatant attempt to remind the American people about Obama's foreign policy, which has been effective and has completed steps that the Bush administration...you know, the people Rove worked for?...could only have dreamed of doing.

Still, to me, Rove's complaint about the Chrysler ad sounds more like "Why in the hell didn't I think of that?"

 

 

 

 

There Won't Be Snow In Africa This Christmas Time

 

It will wait until Valentine's Day.

 

But there's no such thing as global climate change, no sirreee!

Hidden Agenda

 

Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein has released an advertisement endorsing same-sex marriage.

 

Clearly, the logical outcome for Blankfein is to be allowed to marry his money.

Speaking Of Sport

 

Alberto Contador has been stripped of his 2010 Tour de France title after he was unable to convince the Court of Arbitration for Sport that the test results showing he had ingested clenbuterol were erroneous, or more accurately, picked up traces from meat he had eaten. The panel showed great insight by pointing out it was more likely ingested by a "contiminated food supplement," (i.e. pill.)

 

Contrast this with the fact that the US Federal government closed their investigation of Lance Armstrong over allegations he not only used performance-enhancing medications, but pushed them on other teammates. No charges will be filed.

 

This two-year investigation was likely the last Armstrong will be subject to, now that he has ended his professional athletic career, but is also one of at least a half dozen investigations that have throughly looked into the matter and have either cleared Armstrong or refused to level charges.

 

Some would say that's because of Armstrong's pull and his public persona, but here's the thing: Contador had similar pull with the international cycling and sport federations as a multi-time Tour winner and as one of only five men to win the trifecta of the Giro d-Italia, Tour de France and Vuelta d'Espana in the same season. Even Armstrong had not pulled that off. The 2010 victory was arguably one of the most exciting bike races in history, as Contador won by the same margin he gained over eventual second place finisher (and now likely champion) Andy Schleck when Schleck threw a chain on his bike.

 

True, Armstrong is a pretty likable guy, especially after his involvement with his Livestrong organization, while Contador's history is littered with other riders (including, ironically, Armstrong) he's used to climb his way to the top, so there's less loyalty for Contador.

 

But then, Armstrong's personal history is pretty ugly, in and of itself, so six of one, half a dozen of the other.

 

For me, there's a certain schadenfreude in seeing an uberaggressive (steroidally so?) rider bumped down a notch. I wonder, had Contador done the gentlemanly thing (and bike racing is nothing if not genteel in such matters) and waited for Schleck when his chain slipped, if any of this would have happened?

Bread And Circuses

 

(photo courtesy)

 

So, I'm led to understand that last night, one group of talentless millionaires defeated another group of even less-talented millionaires, thus earning hundreds of millions of dollars for a cartel of socialist-billionaires. Even deeper irony is that the entire nation stopped for four hours (or more) to watch this spectacle, which included "entertainment" by yet another passel of millionaires on a broadcast that featured hundreds of millions of dollars spent not on improving the country, but on trying to segregate your pocket, green from white.

 

And the deepest irony? The talentless millionaires all perform under the aegis of the least-powerful sports union and performed in a state that hates them for their union. This is something along the lines of a black gospel choir putting on a performance in Mobile, Alabama at a Klan headquarters in the 1950s.

 

I might have been able to stir up some respect for the game if even one player had made mention of this irony even once during the week, and then vowed to do something about it.

 

But it's a joke. And so are Americans for watching a spectacle involving people who have no concept of what a real job entails (having been prepped and pampered all their young lives) playing for a meaningless trophy in a "sport" that requires no talent and is centrally controlled by a bunch of old white men who "coach" players into executing a game plan that they themselves implement and woe betide the player who doesn't follow the playbook!

 

Every player is replaceable, no matter how successful they are, and our nation is littered with the broken bodies of those who put it all out there on the field and now can't even button a shirt to attend a dinner thrown by the billionaire-socialist who exploited their labor.

 

Sounds like how most Americans make a living, yet here they are, celebrating a victory by the more successful work unit. From another company. One they could never work for.

 

Lest you think I'm a "hater," I've played more football at nearly every level of competition than you've had hot meals, and even today can toss a 60 yard bomb and hit a beer can. So it's not about being anti-sport.

 

It's about being anti-...well, whatever sport has devolved to in America.

 

See, we hand these leagues and the owners trillions in tax breaks and benefits, we prevent other people from infringing on their franchises, creating monopolies at all levels, all so we can spend a few hours...hours!...in rapt contemplation of the beer can in our hand.

 

You know who else used to spend lavish amounts of money on games designed to pacify his populace? At least they had the decency to call a slave a slave and not glorify him.

 

We've turned sport from a competition into a spectacle, from a contest between two groups of people into a battle between two corporations vying for the last advertising dollar out there.

 

Remember the old saying, "It's not whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game"? That fiction, like the fiction that anyone in American can grow up to be president, or if you just work hard and save some money you can have a comfortable life, is a fairy tale that we are seeing stripped away even as you read this.  

 

So for a few hours last night, hundreds of millions of people got the feel an emotion of some sort-- excitement, anger, sadness, joy-- and paid trillions in sum for the privilege.

 

Ain't that America?

Nobody Asked Me, But...

1) The Susan G. Komen Foundation is starting to buckle under the pressure. Komen officials now claim that funding they provided to Planned Parenthood to help poor women get breast cancer screenings was not withdrawn because Planned Parenthood also provides some abortion services (something on the order of one percent of its operation) but because Planned Parenthood was under Congressional investigation for providing some abortion services (something on the order of one percent of its operation) using public money. They had claimed that Planned Parenthood only provided breast cancer screening referrals and that's why they pulled funding.

 

Yet, the Komen Foundation gave Penn State, after the Sandusky child abuse scandal came out, a $7.5 million grant. And almost 11.5% of their budget goes to "administrative costs," a euphemism for executive salaries (starts on p.57), apparently.

 

Disgusting. I suspect that, by the end of the weekend, either the entire executive staff of Komen will be walking the unemployment lines, or Komen will find it's "Race for the Cure" has dwindled down to a couple of bag ladies walking hand in hand.

 

2) In a related story, NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg pledged $250,000 to Planned Parenthood. "Politics have no place in health care," Bloomberg said in a statement, bold words coming from a man who defunded health care for poor CHILDREN, just so Council Speaker Christine Quinn could hand lucrative contracts to a lobbyist buddy of hers, in exchange for third terms for all, who also so piously expressed her support for Planned Parenthood. Hypocrites!

 

3) A protest group in Russia has apparently gotten Putin's panties in a twist

 

4) A suggestion to Mark Zuckerberg: you're about to make billions-- that's right, with a b-- of the sweat of the 750,000,000 million users of your site, their creativity and energy. You owe them, a lot. Certainly a lot more than a shitty interface and an invasion of privacy every three weeks or so.

 

5) Are they so hateful of Obama that they'd reject God? If I was Gingrey, I'd tithe. Twice. And pray. A lot.

 

6) Finally. Inroads into alternative energy have been sporadic in the first term of the Obama administration, but the approval of this wind farm project will be a leap forward to the 21st century and energy independence. This is off-the-shelf technology...admittedly, it's a deep shelf...and once installation begins, it should be up and running quickly.

 

7) They don't hate us for our freedoms. They hate us because we're trying to force them to take our religions.

 

8) Today, in "What Were They Thinking?"

 

9) The man's aim is bad. He just needed bigger holes to sink his putts in.

 

10) Finally, I'm told there's a game of "Feetsball," as Tom Swiftly called it, being played this weekend. As a nominal Jets fan, I'm rooting for the stadium to get sucked into a black hole. But my money is on New England.

::BLINK?::

Newt Gingrich...man of compassion????

But the former House speaker said what the poor really need is a trampoline "so they can spring up."

He added, "Naked. Without tape. And only the ones with big ones, like at least D cups."

 

Psst....Your Fifteen Minutes Are Over!

 

Losers endorse losers.

 

Now, no one was surprised by Trump's endorsement of Gingrich, for a few reasons: a) Like Trump, Gingrich has been divorced and married multiple times and committed adultery with his current wife while married to another, 2) Gingrich wants to drop the capital gains rate to zero, which benefits a real estate typhoon...pardon me, tycoon...like Trump and c) they're both colostomy bags of the highest order.

 

But Sharron Angle endorsing Santorum. That's a bit of a surprise. While Santorum has had the ear of the Tea Party ever since Iowa (and Angle ran openly as a Teabagger in 2010), he is also squarely in the camp of a more intrusive government.

 

Which must make Teabaggers pretty uneasy. Is this the least of three evils, or was Cthulhu unavailable?

Yes, A Sword Was Involved

 

And probably some mood-altering substances.

Um, Oops!

 

I've been following this story for five years now. As a diver and always-hopeful treasure hunter...hey, I've actually found a whole dollar!...I'm fascinated with admiralty law and the rule of finders-keepers.

 

Which does not apply here, apparently.

Today, On "The Rich Get Richer"

 

Real estate values in New York City dropped like a stone last year, as wave upon wave of foreclosures struck the city like a tsunami. The prices of single family homes, generally in the outer boroughs, were deeply impacted.

 

Commensurate with foreclosured properties and other economically distressed housing, building code violations jumped 14%, and not just in the foreclosed homes, but in properties within 250 feet of them.

 

In NYC, that would generally be the next three homes on either side of the property, plus parcels directly across the streets and properties abutting those. So you're talking about ten other houses.

 

This means, not only are more properties in foreclosure, but there are other adjacent properties where owners are in deep trouble and cannot afford maintenance, and some who have simply given up trying to maintain homes in neighborhoods that are by and large, becoming vacated.

 

But hey! Don't tell the one percent that...

Pride Goeth Before A Fall

 

So, um, how much pride can you buy for a half trillion dollars?

The Rich Really ARE Different

 

They're idiots.

 

This is a transparent attempt to screw the family of a man he killed in a drunk-driving accident from winning a large award. He ought to be thrown in jail and all his assets seized.

 

Just for being a douchebag.

Spring Will Arrive In Another Six Weeks

 

It doesn't really matter what Punxatawney Phil or any other rodent says, even if they disagree.

 

Am I the only person who noticed that Spring arrives in six weeks if he doesn't see his shadow, but if he sees it, we have another six weeks of...winter?

Seriously, Dude...

 

...when is she ever?

Romney Hasn't Learned The First Lesson Of Vulture Capitalism

 

"Never Complain, Never Explain."

"Sometimes things don't come out exactly the way you'd like them to," he explained. "That's not exactly what I meant to say. My focus is on middle income Americans. We do have a safety net for the very poor, and I said if there are holes in it I want to correct that."

Opponents on the left jumped on it, saying it shows Romney is out of touch.

Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh noticed, as well. "Everyone knows what he was trying to say," Limbaugh observed, "but he didn't say it. He makes himself a target with this stuff. He comes across at the prototypical rich Republican. ... It's gonna make it harder and harder and harder to go after Obama."

For once, Rush has it right. And wrong.

See, Romney is pretty much cast in stone now as the prototypical aristocrat: wealthy, out of touch, elitist...hell, he's even spent time in France!

Sound familiar? He even flip-flops (only his flip-flops aren't as nuanced as John Kerry's.)

In the primaries, this is a feature, tho: to claim to be for the rich, in Republican jargon, means pro-tax cuts, anti-union, pro-wealth creation, anti-Big Government.

The flaw in the ointment, of course, is the implications of this posture, including a distinct lack of compassion for those whom the American dream has left by the roadside.

Since the fight will be over the two to five percent of true independents-- not those who say they are independent to throw pollsters off, or because they just can't be bothered with political junk mail or what have you-- things like an unChristian attitude towards the poor matter. These are people who aren't ideologues or dogmatic religious types, but who do believe in charity and taking care of those who can't take themselves.

They learned that taking care of the world around them is important and if they made $20 million last year after taxes, they'd do a lot more than tithe to a church. These are the folks who, when they hit the lottery, give a million to the school down the street to make the playground better or to buy computer equipment.

These are the folks who send $10 to the Red Cross the minute a tragedy strikes. They don't need a celebrity or a pastor to tell them to give, they do it, willingly.

Romney's wealth is an ideal for them, but then they assess the character of the man with the money and realize that wealth has created a mean-spirited, spiteful and angry man.

As in:

An ABC News/Washington Post survey released last week, for example, found Romney viewed unfavorably by 49 percent of voters and favorably by just 31 percent. Among independents, just 23 percent viewed Romney favorably, compared to 51 percent who felt that way about President Obama.

Which makes Obama's job that much easier. Not that it was that hard to begin with, even with all the disadvantages Obama brings to the table as incumbent (along with the advantages, to be fair.) The field the GOP put out there was ridiculously weak and thin, and partly to blame was their overeagerness to set a candidate in stone early enough to go after Obama for months, not weeks.

Hell, you could hear the fapping in 2010 if you listened closely enough.

But I give Romney credit: at least he hasn't complained.

 

The Truth Is Out There

 

No. Really.

 

This will go a bit towards figuring out how common life is in the universe.

The Problem Is...

Most people come up blank

 

Still, to be able to actually read a mind is pretty exciting news.

 

I think.

 

You tell me.

Apparently, Poor Women Don't Have Boobs

 

So says the Susan G. Komen Foundation

 

This, from an organization that pats itself on the back for being inspired by its namesake's "thinking of ways to make life better for other women battling breast cancer."

 

Well, "others" who can afford health insurance, apparently.

Executive Decision

 

And he doesn't even need to submit a bill to Congress.

 

Obviously, President Obama has spoken at length with the Big Dog, Bill Clinton.

Who's Buying Who?

 

You can find out here

Just Add Hot Air

 

Wanna reduce the deficit?

 

Do nothing.

 

This ought to be a no-brainer for the Democrats. They excel at doing nothing.

How To Battle On

 

If you're Occupy Wall Street, you build a think-tank.

 

Also, if you believe in what OWS stands for, please give. They'll need the money when the weather warms up to re-start the protests.

An Exceptional To The Rule

 

Interesting quote from Mitt Romney:

"I'm not concerned with the very poor. We have a safety net there," Romney told CNN. "If it needs repair, I'll fix it. I'm not concerned about the very rich, they're doing just fine. I'm concerned about the very heart of the America, the 90 percent, 95 percent of Americans who right now are struggling."

Host Soledad O'Brien pointed out that the very poor are probably struggling too.

"The challenge right now — we will hear from the Democrat party the plight of the poor," Romney responded, after repeating that he would fix any holes in the safety net. "And there's no question it's not good being poor and we have a safety net to help those that are very poor . . . My focus is on middle income Americans ... we have a very ample safety net and we can talk about whether it needs to be strengthened or whether there are holes in it. but we have food stamps, we have Medicaid, we have housing vouchers, we have programs to help the poor."

Now, the main sentiment he was trying to express, that the middle class have it tough in these times, is a pretty accurate one. After all, its the middle and working classes who have lost the most in the mortgage bubble. Significant portions of the money they've invested in their homes-- yea, that's a dopey concept, but you know what? That's what we were told to do-- on the order of 50% or more was lost.

And there is no safety net for that. You can't write it off your taxes like a corporation...pardon me, corporate entity...could. There's no bailout so that you can pay yourself a bonus instead of donating to people worse off than you. You can't leap into a golden parachute because your house is now essentially worthless.

Ah, but there's also no safety net to speak of for the desperately poor: no jobs, no income, no assets. The working and middle classes at least have jobs. They have *something*. The really poor have nothing and the clock is ticking. If they went on welfare because they got laid off from a job cleaning floors at the bank or parking cars on Wall Street, they're bumping up against the five year limit on their welfare.

A smart man, a man who would be President, would know that. He'd know that shortly after he took office, he'd have to put boots on the ground about this problem.

Unless he didn't care. Unless he lived in the double-bubble of conservatism and wealth, he'd see this problem coming.

Don't Republicans get tired of always being in the dark? Don't they get tired of saying, "Well, no one could have seen that coming. A failure of imagination, we missed the signals, the previous administration didn't make it clear enough...." and so on.

I mean, you'd think 9-11 would have been a wake up call to the ignorant that things are not going as swimmingly in America as they are in America Prime, the "exceptionalist" America.

Now, America as we know it is still an exceptional place. Just not as exceptional as even a decade ago. We've been wounded; wounded from abroad, wounded from within, wounded economically, wounded spiritually, wounded morally and perhaps, mortally.

If you had told me, even after 9-11, that we'd condone torture as a nation, I'd have looked at you cross-eyed. If you had told me that we'd spend trillions on two wars that had a goal of no clear victory, I'd have called the insane asylum. And if you'd had told me that the global economy, in large part owing to the lack of oversight of the greediest bastards on the planet, would melt down and destroy the American working and middle classes, I'd give you a sobriety test. 

I mean, it's one thing to screw with a sector of the American economy, bubble it up, make money off the suckers, then light another stewpot, but to screw homeowners?

And yet we did it, and we now have a candidate running for President who wants to ignore the blood stains on his hands and plow on, blithely ignorant of the pain and suffering around him.

I wonder what Romney has on his iPod? It must be loud, since he can't hear the crying.

Stephen Colbert said it best, and its partcularly apt when talking about a Mormon candidate who professes to be a conservative Christian, because maybe he missed this about Jesus:

If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn't help the poor, either we have to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we've got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy without condition and then admit that we just don't want to do it."

So, Mitt...about those poor....

Nothing Like Levelling The Playing Field

 

Pity. This only missed by two votes.

The Buffett Rule Is In Play

Thanks to Senator Sheldon Whitehouse.

Part of Mitt Romney's Problem

"I, Robot"

The Rich Really Are Different

 

And Romney would prefer they be even MORE "different".

What A Tool

 

This is a complete load of horseshit.

As the Congressional Research Service documents, the average effective tax rate among millionaires is already about 30 percent.

A-hem

Top 1% pay about 24% total tax rate.

 

The Clock Is Ticking

 

Shortly, we'll begin to find out who is funding the superPACs

Oh dear!

 

The good scientists at NASA have definitive proof that global warming is caused by greenhouse gases.

 

But shhhhhh. The right wing doesn't want to wake up....

You Keep Fucking That Chicken, Rabbi

 

Some idiot tries to spin Mitt Romney as a Biblical tale.

Occupy Movements

A couple of months ago, I posted a piece about how the Occupy movements could survive the winter off the front lines of protest and come back even stronger.

 

Apparently, various municipalities have given the question some thought as well.

 

They seem to be flailing about, trying to prevent more protests.

Your Bible Verse Of The Day

From Matthew 25:40

Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me

 

Dickhead Is Dickish

 

An idiot Republican Congresscritter has proposed legislation that the Federal government take over Central Park in NYC, because drilling in ANWR, biatches!

$1.02 Million

 

I ought to start a superPAC.

In Other Election News

 

You heard it here first: I fully expect the Democrats to chip large portions of the Republican majority in the House away, if not overtake them completely.

 

Right now, there's a distinct anti-Washington fervor in the nation. There was two years ago, too, but the Teabaggers fucked that up by co-opting any populist agenda into the now-transparent "let's give MORE money to our corporate overlords so we can beg for scraps" ploy that created the whole Mitt Romney candidacy that is limping into the nomination.

 

Really. Think about it. After Occupy Wall Street & the 99% meme, and Mitt's revelations of paying less than 15% on tens of millions in income, the average voter has got to be thinking "Who's really in charge here?"

 

Add to that the overheated anti-Latino rhetoric of the Republican primary campaign-- and the last Congress, altogether-- and you have a recipe for taking back enough seats, 25, to overturn the balance of power in Congress.

 

And for the final kicker, if Romney wins the nomination, the vaunted "enthusiasm" factor the Republicans allegedly had flies out the window. Romney's coattails will be next to non-existent-- he might bolster some Northwest and Mountain races-- and indeed, it will be the down-ticket votes that propel him to any showing whatsoever.

 

That said, it troubles me how much superPAC money there is floating around. As you are no doubt aware, Newt Gingirich has been the beneficiary of something like $10 million from Sheldon Adelson, who could easily afford to pump another $490 million and still break even on one year's taxes.

 

Romney can afford at least nine figures himself. Add Adelson's generosity to any potential Republican candidate, altho clearly not as enthusiastically as to Newt, and you have a formidable bloc of money, despite Obama's war chest of nearly a billion.

 

Worse, this superPAC money can go downstream too and influence tight races, thus propelling Mitt's prospects a little further.

 

Things look good for Democrats this year, but don't get cocky. It ain't over til the last Cayman withdrawal is made.

Well, I Never Thought I'd See The Day!

 

Newt Gingrich plays the #Occupy card!

I'll Be in My Bunk

 

Michelle Obama doesn't wear grannie panties

SASQ

 

Um, duhhhhhhhhhhhh, yes?

Know Your Memes Part Deux

 

Mormon Magic Underwear

It Ain't Over 'Til It's Over

 

But for Assad of Syria, it's over.

To My Younger Male Readers

 

Be careful whose concerts you attend.

Know Your Memes

 

The name strikes terror in the hearts of conservatives everywhere, so much so that you'd think Newt Gingrich believes he is running against him in the general election: Saul Alinksy

 

If you believe the picture painted of him, Alinksy is a Greek-fisherman cap wearing Leninist who wanted Americans to stand in bread lines for hours.

 

In truth, he was a community organizer. From Chicago. And there, the resemblence to Obama end.

 

Except for one: Neither Obama nor Alinsky was a Communist.

 

Alinsky was a radical who believed in the power of large numbers to overcome the influence of the numerically tiny elite. He has been the role model for the Tea Party(!) as well as an influence on the 99% Occupy Wall Street movement (the true heirs of Alinsky's idealogy.)

 

Alinsky worked with labor unions as an organizer first (this might be where the label "socialist" gets applied, but come on...really? American labor unions are as pro-capitalism as unions get,) but then moved onto to try to improve the lot of slum dwellers, those who really needed advocacy: better living conditions, better working conditions, better housing and better safety.

 

Hardly the socialist themes of the twentieth century.

What Happens If...?

 

First, I'm not going to snark on a dying child. No one, no matter how misguided they may be or how evil their opinions may be, should be teased about something like that.

 

Second, of course, I'm talking about Rick Santorum and the health scare of his young daughter that forced him off the campaign trail this weekend, ahead of the Florida primary. It got me to thinking: what happens if the worst scenario unfolds?

 

Santorum stands a pretty good chance of making a case for continuing his campaign in the Florida primary: his religion and his religious nature certainly appeal to one or two of the three ethnic groups in Florida, as according to Bill Maher ("Jews, Cubans, and rednecks").

 

A strong third or even, heaven forbid, swiping second from a faltering Gingrich, would place Santorum squarely back in the hunt.

 

This would, of course, do two things: it would force Mitt to extend the primary season by at least a few more weeks and to divide his fire across two camps, and it would offer more Not-Mitt alternatives that people can choose. It's not a secret that the lion's share of Republicans neither like nor trust Mitt, but factions have their different reasons.

 

I suspect the Newt faction is the faction that dislikes the individual mandate that Romneycare imposed on Massachussetts' citizenry. This is the faction that really dislikes healthcare in any way shape or form, preferring to see people die in the streets than provide a sick person a hospital bed.

 

The Santorum faction, of course, is the faction that dislikes Mitt, or more likely mistrusts him, for his Mormonism. Santorum is Catholic, and while that dismays many Evangelicals, it's a damned sight more palatable than someone wearing magic underwear and re-baptizing the dead.

 

So if Santorum has to drop out, quo vadis? (OK, correctly, "quo ibunt?" but I couldn't resist the Biblical reference). Newt's recent seeing of the light has generally been viewed as a sham, a desperate pandering political ploy, and really serves only as a calculated rationalization by those who are devout but more devoutly devoted to their wallets instead.

 

The Santorum faction, the hard-core ones, at any rate, probably number no more than fifteen percent in Florida. Anything he pulls beyond that is either Not-Mitt or Not-Gingrich. The most recent Marist poll shows Santorum the only candidate to increase his poll numbers after last week's debate. It seems he stole equally from Romney and Gingrich, altho it's hard to be certain.

 

So here's the scenario that I think Romney is hoping for: After tomorrow, Newt, who has said a strong Florida showing will be the reason to keep his campaign alive, flails and ends up in a surprising third. He drops out.

 

Then, Santorum, for his personal reasons, agrees to drop his campaign and unite behind Romney, putting his name in the hat for Veep and angling for a 2016 run after Romney gets swamped in the fall.

 

That scenario, at least vote-wise, seems pretty likely. Whether the egos involved can see the logic behind is awaits to be seen.

Kudos, TSA

It's not often a bureaucracy does the right thing, and in a timely fashion. We often complain about the intrusiveness of TSA searches, but here's a case where laxity was punished properly.

 

Essentially, in late December, bags from two flights triggered alarms in the automated screening at Newark Liberty Airport. The responsible screener failed to remove those bags from the queue and manually screen them.

 

That screener will likely be fired sometime this week, about a month later.

 

There's none of us who hasn't heard or told a story about TSA screenings. They seem haphazard, randomly strict or relaxed, and often seem bungled. I've had friends who snuck double-edged razor blades onto a plane, and I've been frisked for carrying two jars of jelly (I forgot, to be honest) into security.

 

And this is before we get to the news stories about 80 year old grandmothers being strip searched or what have you.

 

More important, however, I've learned, as a diver, to expect my bags to be screened, particularly if my flight includes a stopover somewhere in the States, like Atlanta or Miami. It never ceases to surprise me that I find those little "notes" from the TSA, and yet it shouldn't: I carry batteries, knives (for getting caught up in fishing lines,) flashlights, camera gear...it's a wonder I can make the weight limits.

 

I can't blame them for being diligent. All it would take is for one "Eh! Let it go..." moment and 400 people or more could be dead. I wouldn't want that on my conscience. I don't know what could have been going through the mind of this fellow, but I sure as heck wouldn't want him in charge of baggage security on any flight I'd take.