Saturday, May 9, 2009

Obama's Promise to Repeal 'Don't Ask Don't Tell'

Think Progress has the following information:

In January, Sandy Tsao, an army officer based out of St. Louis, MO, told her superiors that she is gay — a violation of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell law. Tsao then wrote to President Obama, urging him to change the DADT policy: “I do hope, Mr. President, that you will help us to win the war against prejudice.” On May 5, Tsao received a handwritten letter from Obama with a pledge to repeal DADT at some point:

picture-1-300x197

In the letter, Obama wrote that he is “committed to changing our current policy” but that “it will take some time to complete (partly because it needs Congressional action).” Yesterday, Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA), who has sponsored legislation repealing DADT, discussed the issue with Rachel Maddow, saying, “I’d like to see us move it by this summer, and I think we can.”

Friday, May 8, 2009

Military Ejects Gay Arabic Linguist

MyAss.jpg

Via Daily Kos

Dan Choi, a West Point graduate and officer in the Army National Guard who is fluent in Arabic and who returned recently from Iraq, received notice today that the military is about to fire him. Why? Because he came out of the closet as a gay man on national television.

And as is pointed out:

...a soon-to-be-released study by a group of experts in military law will show that “President Obama does, in fact, have stroke-of-the-pen authority to suspend gay discharges.”

Get out your pen, President Obama.

Also see: Obama To Fire FIrst Gay Arabic Lingust

Profits Before People: 7 of the World’s Most Irresponsible Companies

This article originally appeared on EarthFirst.com.

Money isn’t everything – or is it? To most corporations, making a profit is goal number one – but some of those companies take it way too far, sacrificing the health of the planet and its inhabitants for a bigger bank balance. Far too many corporations turn a blind eye to the consequences of their destructive, exploitative practices. The worst of them are committing atrocities that go beyond the realm of objectionable into criminal, dumping toxic chemicals without regard to public health and employing child labor.

What makes these seven companies extra evil is the fact that they’ve committed crimes that are BOTH environmentally and socially irresponsible.

Nestle

Image via Blood in Your Coffee

More than 40% of the world’s chocolate comes from Côte d’Ivoire (the Ivory Coast) in Africa, where tens of thousands of children are estimated to be working in dangerous conditions on cocoa farms. Nestle uses cocoa harvested by slave labor, and only when Senator Thomas Harkin (D-Iowa) led an investigation and introduced legislation that would require chocolate sold in the US to be labeled “slave-free” did the company act. Nestle promised that by July 2005 they would find a way to certify chocolate as not having been produced by any underage, indentured, trafficked or coerced labor, but since then, they have achieved very little.

Nestle’s bottled water business is also a major cause for concern. Nestle controls one-third of the US market and sells 70 different brand names of bottled water including Arrowhead, Deer Park, Perrier and Poland Spring. The company buys up pristine springs in some of the most beautiful natural spaces in America and builds huge factories on the sites, releasing pollution into the air and drawing enormous amounts of water out of the springs.

And, while the company claims an environmentally friendly ethic, saying it would never harm an aquifer, that’s exactly what they have done in places like Mecosta County, Michigan, damaging the watershed with excessive withdrawals, reaping huge profits and leaving the locals to deal with the consequences.

Pfizer

Image via Daylife

Air and water pollution, disregard for safety standards and experimentation on Nigerian children: these are just a few of the environmental and human rights offenses perpetrated by the world’s largest pharmaceutical company. It’s hard to imagine how Pfizer officials can bear to look at themselves in the mirror every day after what they’ve done.

Pfizer is guilty of some of the most despicable price gouging in corporate history: it keeps its HIV/AIDS-related drugs out of the hands of the world’s poor, who need them the most. Pfizer has aggressively fought efforts to make these drugs more affordable, refusing to grant generic licenses for HIV/AIDS drugs to Brazil, South Africa and other countries in need of them.

In June 2008, Pfizer was forced to pay a $975,000 fine for violating the Clean Air Act at one of its manufacturing plants in Groton, Connecticut – a drop in the bucket for a company that makes upwards of $50 billion in profits every year. The Pfizer plant was emitting methanol, hydrogen chloride, methylene chloride, MTBE, hexane, toluene and other chemicals classified by the EPA as hazardous air pollutants. Pfizer had previously paid $430 million in 2004 to settle a large number of outstanding asbestos lawsuits from its acquisition of Quigley Company in 1968, which had sold contaminated insulation.

Worst of all, the company that has little regard for safety standards – having released a number of drugs that ended up being pulled off the market for unforeseen complications – decided to test one of its drugs on poor, critically ill Nigerian children. Masking the trial as a “humanitarian mission”, Pfizer tested an experimental antibiotic called Trovan on meningitis-infected Nigerian children without their knowledge or the knowledge of their families. 11 children died, and others developed brain damage and crippling arthritis.

Wal-Mart

Image via Brave New Films

“Save Money, Live Better”. That’s Wal-Mart’s slogan, but Wal-Mart workers themselves certainly wouldn’t say that they live better after beginning employment with the retail giant. A 2005 study found that Wal-Mart reduced the take-home pay of workers by an astounding $4.7 billion dollars annually, adding insult to injury considering that workers are often forced to work overtime for zero pay. Wal-Mart does everything it can to deny its workers basic rights, spending an enormous amount of time and money keeping unions out including $7,000 anti-union camera packages, $30,000 undercover spy vans, $100,000 24-hour anti-union hotlines and a $7,000,000 rapid response team with a corporate jet.

Furthermore, Wal-Mart pushes its suppliers to go lower and lower on their wholesale prices, until they’re so squeezed that they barely have two pennies to rub together at the end of the day. Thanks to its focus on low, low prices, the retailer has repeatedly turned a blind eye to child slave labor in its manufacturing facilities abroad, particularly in China and Bangladesh.

And, despite all of their claims about ‘going green’, Wal-Mart has broken one environmental law after the other. Wal-Mart became the first company to be fined for violating new standards for stormwater runoff in 2001, and had to pay $5.5 million. In 2004, the company faced fines for violations in 9 states. That same year, it agreed to pay $400,000 to the government to settle claims that Sam’s Club had violated air pollution regulations in 11 states.

Last year, the company admitted as much – but that hasn’t stopped them from continuing the PR effort. Former CEO Lee Scott admitted of the company’s greenwashing efforts, “It has been positive from a PR standpoint, but one of the things we learned is that we are not sophisticated enough to spin a story — ultimately, we’d get hammered. We are not out saying we’re a green company. We are not green. We have an extraordinary distance to go.”

ExxonMobil

Image via Greenpeace

The Exxon-Valdez oil spill is by far ExxonMobil’s most well-known environmental offense, but it’s certainly not the only one. The oil giant was ranked sixth on the Toxic 100 list of US corporate air polluters, and has been accused by Greenpeace of sabotaging efforts to deal with climate change, manipulating peer-reviewed studies and misleading the public with junk science. Indeed, though they have since cut off funding, ExxonMobil once financially supported a number of global warming denial organizations.

Though ExxonMobil trumpeted its investment in renewable energy sources in a series of advertisements over the past few years, the fact is that the company has invested just $300 million in renewable energy sources over the next 10 years compared to the $47 billion they spent between 2003 and 2006 alone on dirty energy sources like oil and gas.

In 2001, ExxonMobil was the target of a lawsuit by a human rights group that accused the company of actively abetting human rights abuses including torture, rape and killings in Indonesia. The suit alleged that ExxonMobil had hired a local army to protect its natural gas fields in the Aceh province, providing them with equipment to dig mass graves as well as building interrogation and torture centers. The company denied all of the charges, but a motion it filed to have the case dismissed was denied in 2006. The case is still pending.

Chevron

Image via Treehugger

Chevron has launched a huge multimedia advertising blitz about its supposed commitment to smart energy use and renewable energy sources – all while destroying pristine forests in places like Ecuador and Bangladesh, and causing myriad health problems right here in the U.S. thanks to the toxic waste at its refineries.

Texaco (which has since been taken over by Chevron) caused a toxic “Rainforest Chernobyl” in Ecuador from 1964 to 1992, cutting through the Amazon in search of oil and leaving behind dead rivers, polluted air, scarred forests and over 600 unlined oil pits. They also dumped 18 billion gallons of toxic production water into the rivers where locals bathe. Living in close proximity to the oil fields has resulted in health effects ranging from high miscarriage rates to cancer.

In Richmond, California, toxic pollutants from Chevron’s refinery in the city have infiltrated people’s homes. Air samples from inside and outside Richmond homes in 2006 were found to contain particulate matter known to come from oil refining that exceeded California’s air quality standards. Unsurprisingly, local residents are feeling the effects in the form of lupus, cancer, athsma and a number of other health problems.

Dow Chemical

Image via Greenpeace

Dow Chemical (along with Monsanto) will never escape the shadow of Agent Orange, the chemical used by the U.S. military during the Vietnam War during the ‘Herbicidal Warfare’ program, which lead to 400,000 deaths and disabilities and 500,000 children born with birth defects. But even with this evil legacy – and that of Napalm, which it also produced – Dow is not contrite. This corporation continues to pollute the earth without apology.

Two rivers downstream of Dow’s plant in Midland, Michigan are polluted with chlorinated furans and dioxins from the company’s past operations. Despite the fact that these chemicals are linked to cancer and other health issues, Dow maintains that the contamination is not a public health threat and has been fighting with the EPA over cleanup for years. Many people in the area aren’t even aware of the extent of the dioxin contamination, and Dow has refused to put up warning signs. Just last weekend, Dow Chemical sponsored a fishing event in a waterway it polluted with dioxin, never even acknowledging the contamination and its possible effects.

Furthermore, following the purchase of Union Carbide – the company responsible for the Bhopal gas disaster which left nearly 20,000 people dead and hundreds of thousands disabled – Dow has refused to take responsibility for the health and environmental effects of the incident.

Monsanto

Image via Flickr user skasuga

Despite the inroads that Dow Chemical has been making lately on the evil corporation front, Monsanto still reigns supreme. It’s hard to overstate just how socially and environmentally irresponsible this company really is. Monsanto has manufactured herbicides (which, during manufacturing, create dioxin as a by-product), Agent Orange, plastics, fuel additives, saccharin, industrial fluids, fertilizers, pesticides and anti-freeze in the past. Some years ago they chose to focus on ‘life sciences’ and are now the world’s largest seed company. They’re also the creators of Recombitant Bovine Growth Hormone (rGBH) and the world’s largest producer of genetically modified food.

Monsanto is responsible for more than 50 Superfund sites including Anniston, Alabama, one of America’s worst man-made environmental disasters. For over 40 years, Monsanto routinely dumped toxic waste into West Anniston Creek while producing now-banned industrial coolants called PCBs. They also dumped millions of pounds of PCBs into open-pit landfills – and proceeded to spend decades covering it up even after confirming that fish submerged in the creek turned belly-up within seconds.

Monsanto knew exactly how dangerous the PCBs were, but chose to keep it secret, altering documents and forcing changes to study results to keep the secret. Though they were forced to pay $700 million in fines in 2003, they have not apologized or taken responsibility.

On top of that, after polluting waterways all over the world, Monsanto proceeded to buy up said waterways, filter the water and sell it back to the public, making a double profit.

Among Monsanto’s worst acts is its attempt to completely monopolize the world’s seed supply. The company has spent over $8 billion in recent years buying up seed companies – including organic seed companies – and making it illegal for farmers to retain the seeds from their crop for the following year’s planting. That means farmers are forced to pay Monsanto for new seeds, again and again. Many of Monsanto’s genetically modified seeds produce plants that are reportedly dependent upon Monsanto herbicides, pesticides and fertilizers.

The people paying the biggest price for Monsanto’s greed are Indian farmers. Every day, at least three of them commit suicide by hanging themselves, drowning themselves in rivers or drinking Monsanto pesticides because they’ve hit rock bottom in desperation, hopelessness and debt. The death toll stands at thousands, with some estimates at over 16,000. The farmers had been promised unprecedented harvests and income if they switched to genetically modified Monsanto seeds in what was basically one big experiment on unwitting subjects. When the crops failed, the farmers felt they had no way out, and they certainly didn’t have money to buy more seeds.

Now, it’s been reported that Monsanto has found a way to profit from its own misdeeds once again. In the Southeast, a “superweed” known as Palmer amaranth pigweed is taking over soybean and cotton fields, often leaving them totally unfit for future cultivation. This particular strain of weed was created thanks to overuse of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide and the attendant use of its patented Roundup-resistant GMOs. So, what will it take to wipe out this superweed? You guessed it – more Monsanto herbicides.

Tuesday, May 5, 2009

Ten Super Plants...

Fighting the Environmental Injustice League

By Julia Griffin/Miller-McCune.com

Who ya gonna call when your tank’s on ‘E,’ the topsoil’s salty or there’s too much TNT? The 10 plants Miller-McCune.com believes can save the world, that’s who.

feature photo

Sunbathers by the day, superheroes by night. In a world threatened by overpopulation and an unquenchable thirst for fossil fuels, a few brave plants are leading the fight against carbon, contamination and climate change. Their identities now revealed, scientists and entrepreneurs are working hard to harness the power of these renewable resources for good, not evil.

Here at Miller-McCune, we’ve scanned the literature for the top 10 most promising trees, shrubs and other flora that are making our lives more sustainable. From the depths of the Patagonian rainforest to the drylands of South Africa, promising natural sources of biofuels abound, but so do new options for carbon storage and water purification. And now, with the help of biological engineering, scientists are creating new ways for plants to clean up our messes and literally grow pharmaceutical or formerly petroleum-based products.

Intrigued? Click on the links below, to read more about which biota made the cut.


































1. "Captain Biodiesel" alter ego: Jatropha Curcus

2. Hydro alter ego: Duckweed

3.
"Commander Carbon" alter ego: Spekboom

4.
"The Spore" alter ego: Gliocladium roseum

5.
"Madame Salt" alter ego: Dwarf Glasswort

6. "Rubber Root" alter ego: Guayule

7. "The Tidy Team" alter ego: Tobacco, Edenfern, Thale Cress

8. "Dr. Pharm" alter ego: Safflower

9. "The Grass Giant" alter ego: Miscanthus

10. "Prof. Plastic" alter ego: Arabitdopsis thaliana


Captain Biodiesel Hydro Commander Carbon The Spore Madame Salt Rubber Root The Tidy Team Dr. Pharm The Grass Giant Prof. Plastic

Monday, May 4, 2009

GOP Moderates: Silence is Mandatory

Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele appealed to the political middle Friday to join his party but added that the party itself wouldn't moderate.

"All you moderates out there, y'all come. I mean, that's the message," Steele said at a news conference. "The message of this party is this is a big table for everyone to have a seat. I have a place setting with your name on the front.

"Understand that when you come into someone's house, you're not looking to change it. You come in because that's the place you want to be."

Steve Benen says:

That's quite a message. GOP moderates are welcome to stick around in the party, just so long as they realize they won't be seen, won't be heard, and aren't allowed to have any influence.

'Hunting People for Jesus'

[UPDATE Below]

When did the constitutional principle of Se
paration of Church and State get diluted and trumped upon by various religious factions? In the 1800's, Thomas Jefferson knew that in order to protect the establishment of religion from the state, a wall of separation was needed between religion and government.

Even though Thomas Jefferson was a man of deep religious conviction - he believed that the government had no business getting involved in religion since religion was such a personal matter. In 1802, Jefferson wrote a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in response to their concern about religious liberties. The letter has become known as Jefferson's 'Wall of Separation' letter:
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.
Now over 200 years later, we need to re-educate the religious faction in the military about this doctrine. A new video has surfaced showing U.S. military soldiers being instructed to "spread Christianity to the overwhelmingly Muslim population." Lieutenant-Colonel Gary Hensley, the chief of the US military chaplains in Afghanistan, is seen telling soldiers that as followers of Jesus Christ, they all have a responsibility “to be witnesses for him.” WATCH:


Evangelical Christians have found that
the military is not only a haven for their proselytizing but in Afghanistan it is 'Heaven'.

UPDATE: A defense official tells the Huffington Post that the preacher did not mean that soldiers should hunt for Afghani souls, but was speaking in general terms. He also said that the Pashtun and Dari Bibles were confiscated so that they could not be distributed to the population.

What Should Be Regulated?


Republicans and the right-wing media are framing Barack Obama as being a "socialist." They complain that there is too much government regulation. They want government to get out of our lives and not control what we do. Unless of course they are refering to what we do in our bedrooms.

Daily Kos has an interesting article,
How Freedom Was Lost, about the need for government regulation because unregulated business does not self regulate.
In recent days there seems to be a trend, especially among those nodding along to Fox News, to look on every government worker as a leach on society. Is there any term said with more innate disdain than government bureaucrat? When George W. Bush first ran for congress, he campaigned for the elimination of two government agencies -- OSHA and the EPA. It's a position that would draw many cheers from those pulling for Rick Perry's rebellion today.

If there is one critical difference between the conservative and progressive view of the nation it is this: Conservatives believe that America became a vibrant, wealthy nation in spite of the government's burden on business. Progressives believe that the United States prospered because of a national effort to reign in the worst of corporate excess.

Over a century, we became a country with safety rules, with environmental regulations, with protection for the elderly. Over that same century our economy and individual wealth outstripped both our historical bests and the record of the rest of the world. Progressives see that as victory. Conservatives call it coincidence.

It's tempting to run the experiment of giving conservatives what they want. A nation without environmental rules, without workplace safety rules, without any social safety nets. Free them from the reign of bureaucrats and petty regulations. Let them live in that place where the medicine you give your baby to ease her teething pains can be made with antifreeze. Let them work in a mine where there is no regulation and thousands die each year. Let them wonder if their next bite of food will put them among the 1.8 million who die horribly each year from severe food-borne cases of diarrhea. Let them drive a car that will fall apart in the slightest collision. Let them breath free air, untainted by government interference -- air you can really sink your teeth into.

Fortunately, we don't have to run that experiment -- because we already did it. That's how we got where we are today. All those areas of our lives became regulated, because left unregulated people overreached to unsafe, and frequently hideous degrees. There would be no Clean Air Act if companies had controlled pollution on their own. There'd be no need to regulate banks, had they not demonstrate time and again that without supervisions they'll chase short term profit into a pit -- and drag the rest of us after them.


America isn't the only example of this experiment. This is an study that's been made hundreds of time in hundreds of nations, and the absolute freedom of the marketplace always runs counter to the good of ordinary citizens. Always. Those places in the world with the fewest restrictions on business are not the places anyone would really want to live. They're not even good places to do business if your task is more complex than ripping resources out of the ground and shipping them to some place that's safer. Business and government must reach a compromise if either is to be effective.

Sunday, May 3, 2009

The Whole Dang Thing!

The Rebranding of the GOP


Top honchos of the Republican Party want to 'rebrand' or 'revive' the image of the GOP. They have launched a new group, The National Council for a New America (NCNA). Republicans behind the effort include:
  • John McCain
  • Jeb Bush
  • Haley Barbour
  • Bobby Jindal
  • Mitt Romney
  • John Boehner
  • Eric Cantor
  • Mike Pence
  • Mitch McConnell
  • Jon Kyl
  • Lamar Alexander
Republicans told FOX News that the initiative is also meant to counter President Obama's portrayal of the Republicans as "the party of 'No.'" The forum, they say, will look to undo any public perceptions of the party as intolerant to new ideas.

The Mahablog says they don’t need a new initiative. They need new blood. Maybe even a whole new gene pool.

For example — At the New York Times, Adam Nagourney and David Herzenhorn write that Republicans are debating among themselves whether they should be working to create a bigger party or a purer party. Here’s a bit –

Patrick J. Toomey, a former head of the Club for Growth whose primary challenge to Mr. Specter led the senator to bow out in the face of what he thought was a probable defeat, said Republicans should be open to a “wide range of opinions on a wide range of issues.”

As Tbogg says, “As long as those ideas are lowering taxes on the rich, drill baby drill, keeping handguns cheap and plentiful, getting rid of capital gains taxes, and re-naming America ‘Reaganland’.”

“But I think fundamental common ground that the vast majority of Republicans share is the belief in limited government, freedom and personal responsibility,” Mr. Toomey said.

The question of how the party should respond to Mr. Specter’s departure was the main subject of a Senate Republican lunch on Wednesday. The party can be a “big tent,” said Senator John Ensign of Nevada, “but here are some core principles: fiscal responsibility, more personal responsibility, looking for a smaller, more effective government.”

In light of what Republicans actually do when they get their hands on the steering wheel of government, what are Mr. Toomey and Sen. Ensign actually saying?

“Fiscal responsibility” means lowering taxes on the wealthy and cutting programs that benefit the not-wealthy, but at the same time making sure the special interests that helped one get elected are well cared for.

“Personal responsibility” means government is to become primarily a tool for protecting the power and assets of the ruling plutocracy at the expense of the interests of the nation and its citizens.

“Smaller, more effective government” is a government rendered incapable of doing anything not covered by “fiscal responsibility” and “personal responsibility.”

Oh, and then there’s freedom,” which is a system by which corporations are the landlords and citizens are the serfs/sharecroppers/tenants.

I’m betting that the Council’s town halls will not include anyone not a shill or a true believer.

If the Grand Old Party doesn't want to be known as the "party of 'No'"...they just need to learn how to sometimes say 'Yes!'

The Un-Loyal Democrat...

Via Think Progress:

Specter: ‘I Did Not Say I Am A Loyal Democrat’

Shortly after news leaked that Sen. Arlen Specter would be switching from the Republican to the Democratic Party, media reports quoted Specter telling President Obama he would be a “loyal Democrat” who would support his agenda:

At 10:32am, President Barack Obama reached Specter and told him “you have my full support” and “thrilled to have you.”

Specter told the president, “I’m a loyal Democrat. I support your agenda.”

Specter immediately exhibited his loyalty by restating his opposition to Dawn Johnsen, Obama’s nominee to head the Office of Legal Counsel, and by joining every Republican in Congress in voting against the president’s budget.

Today on Meet The Press, host David Gregory asked Specter if he would be supporting Obama’s health care plan given reports of his loyalty to Obama’s agenda. “No,” Specter said, adding that he never said he would be a “loyal Democrat”:

GREGORY: It was reported this week that when you met with the president, you said, “I will be a loyal democrat. I support your agenda.” Let me test that on probably one of the most important areas of his agenda, and that’s health care. Would you support health care reform that puts up a government run public plan to compete with a private plan issued by a private insurance company?

SPECTER: No. And you misquote me, David. I did not say I would be a loyal Democrat. I did not say that. And last week, after I said I was changing parties, I voted against the budget because the budget has a way to pass health care with 51 votes, which undermines a basic Senate institution to require 60 votes to impose closure on key issues. …I did not say I am a loyal Democrat.

Watch it:


Trying to clarify Specter’s position on Obama’s health care reform, Gregory then asked, “You would not support a public plan?” “That’s what I said and that’s what I meant,” Specter replied.

Saturday, May 2, 2009

The New GOP Logo

GOPin' All Over Themselves, Once Again...


Justice David Souter has informed The White House that he will be resigning at the end of this court session.President Obama has not yet placed anyone’s name in nomination to replace Justice Souter’s. In fact, the President has not yet even suggested any names. Nonetheless, the Republicans have announced that they are “gearing up for a fight.”
Senate Republicans admit they have virtually no shot at stopping President Barack Obama’s pick to replace Supreme Court Justice David Souter — but they see a definite political upside in waging a fight...
Conservatives Gear Up For SCOTUS Fight
A group of more than 50 conservative groups held a conference call early Friday to begin plotting strategy, sources on the call said.

"You're already having chatter between conservatives on who is going to be the nominee, what type of nominee is going to be put forward by President Obama," said Brian Darling, the Heritage Foundation's Senate director and a former top Judiciary Committee staffer...
Conservatives Gear Up for High Court Fight
Phone lines around Washington began burning this morning as conservative organizations kicked off preparations for the fight over President Obama's eventual Supreme Court nominee. Associate Justice David Souter's decision to step down at the end of this term has awakened a long-dormant network of conservative organizations that will do their best to augment — and at times pressure — Senate Republican efforts to frame Obama's eventual choice...
This week the Republican party kicked off its campaign to shine its party image.
Three prominent GOP leaders kicked off a campaign Saturday to reshape their party's image, gathering at a restaurant in northern Virginia for the first of a series of town hall meetings. The goal of the initiative, called the National Council for a New America, is to connect Republican leaders with voters across the country to help get the party's electoral fortunes back on track. "Certainly our party has taken its licks the last few cycles, but that's why we're here," House Minority Whip Eric Cantor said...

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said it's time for Republicans "to listen a little bit, learn a little bit." He advised Republicans to work on the party's message and "not be so nostalgic."

"I would say you can't beat something with nothing. The other side has something. The GOP isn't listening to the advice of Jeb Bush. They are certainly trying to beat the Democrats with 'nothing.'
The Senate Republicans might have reached out a hand, and offered some suggestions as to the type of jurist they'd like to see. The Senate Republicans could have suggested that they were looking forward to the nomination, and to the conformation hearings.

But once again the Senate Republicans have defined themselves as the "Party of NO." They have become the obstructionist political party. It appears that it doesn't matter to the Republicans who Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court might be.

The Republican Party is gearing up for a fight, because that is what “The Party of NO!” does.
Legions of traditional Republicans are feeling disenfranchised by a party taken over by the Neo-Cons, the crazy Christian Right (who are neither) and the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and that 'drooling cretin' Glenn Beck.

Traditional Republicans as well as most Americans have grown tired of the constant chorus of fear and hate mongering. The GOP non-message has become repugnant.
And the response by the Senate Republicans...”NO!” No to what? They don’t even know yet, but by simple knee jerk reaction, they scream out...”NO!”

Great job at polishing their image!

[H/T] Gil Ross

Mortgage Bankers Celebrate Victory


Via American News Project

Do the Bankers Own Congress?


Legislation sponsored by Senate Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) recently failed to overcome a 60-vote filibuster in the Senate. This measure would have allowed bankruptcy judges "to modify troubled mortgages, lowering the interest rate or principal balance, a process known as a cramdown. Bankruptcy courts can already make those changes for a second home or investment property, but not a primary residence."
Durbin noted that estimated foreclosures during the housing crisis has ballooned from 2 million to 8 million since his campaign for the change to the bankruptcy code began. He said, "I'll be back. I'm not going to quit on this."
Supporters argued the measure would keep 1.7 million borrowers in their homes, but it ultimately foundered in the face of fierce financial industry and Republican opposition. The bankruptcy modification provision, which was offered an amendment to a broader housing bill, failed by a vote of 45 to 51.
Daily Kos is correct:
The concept by Durbin, Boxer, and Schumer was simple -- allow bankruptcy judges to change terms of peoples' mortgages so that they could make payments that they could afford.
This is a sad day for this country when we have so-called "Democrats" who cave into the Republicans as though George Bush were still in office and Tom DeLay, John Boehner, and Roy Blunt were stalking the floors of Congress bullying reluctant members to go along with the Bush administration's unconstitutional schemes.
The following so-called "Democrats" decided that they would favor the banking industry over the well-being over 2 million people whose homes are in danger of being foreclosed on:

Baucus (D-MT)
Bennet (D-CO)
Byrd (D-WV)
Carper (D-DE)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Johnson (D-SD)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Specter (D-PA)
Tester (D-MT)

An interesting point is that 5 of the 12 senators who voted NO [in bold] had previously joined with Evan Bayh's "conservadems." Bayh even voted YES on this bill.

Then of course Arlen Specter, who just switched to being a Democrat in name only, also voted with the Republicans.

Anyone Surprised? Maybe Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid should be.

Sen. Reid believes that the Senate will agree to bipartisan legislation without the need for reconciliation. Reconciliation would insure that major bills would pass by a simple majority vote and avoid a Republican filibuster. He specifically sees this bipartisan legislation working on the issue of health care.

As evidence that he's hoping not to rely on reconciliation, which requires just 51 votes, Reid noted that with Sen. Arlen Specter's defection to the Democratic Party this week, he would need just one Republican to cross over to get the 60 votes needed.

Sen. Reid needs to wake up to reality. The vote on the Durbin amendment was bipartisan only on the Republican side.

What about President Obama? According to Arianna Huffington, Obama needs to say 'enough' to the bankers.

Friday, May 1, 2009

The Issue of Torture

According to Glenn Greenwald, "(t)his is a perfect illustration of how severely our political spectrum has shifted in the last two decades and how depraved and extremist our political and media classes have become."
It's literally true that if you say today verbatim what Ronald Reagan said in 1988 about torture and the need to prosecute those who do it, then you are immediately and by definition a rabid score-settler from the Hard Left who is unfit to be trusted with national security decisions. Conversely, the views that Reagan vehemently rejected by words and by treaty -- that torture can be justified in some circumstances; that torturers should be shielded from prosecution; that other countries have no right to prosecute the torturers from other countries under "universal jurisdiction" -- are now not merely acceptable, but are required views in order to be not only a conservative, but to be a centrist. That's how severely the political spectrum and our elite consensus on these questions have shifted -- descended -- even from the time of the right-wing Reagan era when American exceptionalism and military aggression thrived.

Would the conservative pundits really call Ronald Reagan a "hard left ideologue?"

Pew Forum did a poll on the correlation between religion and justification of torture:
Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, April 29, 2009:

More than half of people who attend services at least once a week -- 54 percent -- said the use of torture against suspected terrorists is "often" or "sometimes" justified.

White evangelical Protestants were the religious group most likely to say torture is often or sometimes justified -- more than six in 10 supported it. People unaffiliated with any religious organization were least likely to back it. Only four in 10 of them did.

Torture