http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/30/spain-unemployed-under-30-emigration
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
GOP Is Demanding Budget Riders That Would Increase Federal Spending #p2 #tcot
from http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/30/riders-gop/
The ongoing budget negotiations between the House Republican leadership and Senate Democrats has broken down, as Republicans continue to insist that their spending bill — H.R. 1 — "serve as a starting point for all negotiations." House Republicans "have demanded everything: not just some of their cuts but almost all of them, and not just a reduction in spending but a reduction only in the programs they don't like," the New York Times notes today. In fact, many are "insisting Democrats also agree to nonbudgetary riders, like ending the financing of Planned Parenthood or health care reform."
But a closer examination of the at least 81 riders from OMB Watch reveals that many would have the opposite of the GOP's intended effect and actually increase federal spending. For instance, a CBO analysis of Sec. 4017 of H.R. 1 — which would strip funding for any provisions in the Affordable Care Act — argues that partially defunding the law increases costs "by $3.1 billion in fiscal year 2012 and by smaller amounts in each of the fiscal years 2013 through 2021." The same may be true for the following riders:
Sec. 4013 — Prohibits funds to the Planned Parenthood Federation of America: Planned parenthood provides services more efficiently and each dollar spent on contraception saves taxpayers multiple dollars down the line. For instance, it's estimated that pushing contraceptive care patients from Planned Parenthood to other clinics would "cost the government an additional $174 million a year."
Sec. 1591 — Prohibits funding for needle exchange programs: As an example, the cost to prevent a single HIV infection by needle exchange "has been calculated at $4,000 to $12,000, considerably less than the estimated $190,000 (listed in 1997 dollars) medical costs of treating a person infected with HIV."
Sec. 4020 — Prohibits funds to take any action to effect or implement the disestablishment, closure or realignment of the US Joint Forces Command: Closing the Joint Forces Command, which "employs more contractors than troops" and which Defense Secretary Gates says is no longer necessary, could save up to $240 million per year.
Sec. 4051 — Prohibits funds for implementing a provision specific to the State of Texas in the "Education Job Fund": This provision prevents Texas from collecting money from the education jobs bill passed last year unless it maintains its own rate of current education funding. Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX) has previously stuck federal education money into his state's Rainy Day Fund. Blocking the provision amounts to giving Texas more than $800 million with no oversight.
Sec. 4012 — Bans funding for the Department of Education regulations on Gainful Employment: These regulations would restrict federal funding for subprime schools, many of which make 90 percent of their revenue from the federal government, while accounting for nearly half of student loan defaults.
Earlier this month, Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Tom Harkin (D-IA) insisted that riders would not be part of a budgetary agreement. "[W]e're not going to have any riders," Harkin told Politico. "So, that's just not going to happen. It won't be part of the deal."
– Pat Garofalo and Igor Volsky
Wisconsin judge insists Walker bill still blocked #p2 #tcot
http://peoplesworld.org/wisconsin-judge-insists-walker-bill-still-blocked/
MADISON, Wis. - A judge here ruled March 29 that a restraining order is still in force blocking a law that kills collective bargaining rights for public workers. Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi issued the ruling yesterday after Republican Gov. Scott Walker defied the restraining order she issued last week.
In issuing the restraining order last week, Judge Sumi said the ramming through of the bill by Republican lawmakers without adequate notice likely violated the state's public notification requirements.
Ignoring the restraining order, the governor has already begun implementing some of the harshest anti-worker aspects of the bill: He has ended the collection of union dues by the state from the paychecks of public workers and he has increased the amounts deducted from their paychecks for healthcare benefits.
Wisconsin Republicans continued their finagling to try to justify the governor's actions. Wisconsin law clearly stipulates that a bill passed by both houses of the state Legislature and signed by the governor becomes law only after it is published by the secretary of state. Secretary of State Doug La Follette, a Democrat, has not published the measure because of the restraining order in place against his doing so. Last Friday, the Legislative Reference Bureau published the bill, and Republican lawmakers said that step made the anti-worker bill into a law.
Walker's moves drew strong condemnation from Wisconsin AFL-CIO President Phil Neuenfeldt.
"This guy thinks he is a dictator who can ignore the laws of Wisconsin and trample down workers' rights in his extreme overreach for absolute power," Neuenfeldt said. "By attempting to unilaterally publish a bill and implement it as law in the face of a court order to the contrary shows Walker and his Republican pals completely unfit to govern the state of Wisconsin."
Judge Sumi, yesterday, also blasted the governor. She said the actions of Walker and the Republican lawmakers, or anyone else who ignores the restraining order, put them "in peril of sanctions" and serve to "jeopardize the stability of the state."
It was revealed during the court hearing yesterday that the Legislative Reference Bureau had been strong-armed into publishing the bill by Republican Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald. Visibly uncomfortable staffers of the bureau were asked in court if they had been put under pressure. After hesitating, Cathlene Hanahan, deputy chief of the bureau, said of Fitzgerald, "He is our boss. His asking could be seen as insisting." Stephen Miller, the bureau's director, said he did not believe the publishing of the bill by his bureau would make it law.
The judge's latest ruling, observers note, is a warning to state agencies such as the Department of Administration, which has begun implementing the anti-union bill, that they too are in violation of the court order.
Republicans are now claiming that state agencies like the DOA are not parties to the lawsuit and are not subject to Sumi's restraining order.
Asked if the agency would observe the court order, DOA Secretary Mike Huebsch said, in a phone interview, "We will continue to confer with our legal counsel and have more information about how to move forward in the near future."
Commenting on the Republican resistance to the court orders, Senate Minority Leader Mark Miller, D-Morona, said, "They seem incapable of hearing people who say they are wrong."
All over Wisconsin, meanwhile, unions and their allies continue their fight against Republican attacks on workers' rights.
On April 4 the state will be the scene of major gatherings and protests in a national Day of Action. The labor movement picked that day because it was on April 4, 1968, that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated in Memphis, where he had gone to stand with sanitation workers demanding their right to bargain collectively under the auspices of AFSCME, the public employees' union
Thousands are expected to kick off the actions in Madison a day earlier, on April 3, by marching on the Capitol and massing in the rotunda for an event titled "Been to the Mountaintop." Inside the Capitol they will conduct a mass singing of labor songs, with local unions providing thousands of songbooks.
On April 4 AFSCME will help lead a Poor People's Campaign march and rally at Madison's City Hall. The Rev. Jesse Jackson will address thousands who gather for a rally at the Capitol, followed by a candlelight vigil expected to fill the grounds surrounding the building well into the night.
Also, on that day there will be Rock the Vote rallies around the state, in preparation for crucial state Supreme Court elections April 5, when labor and its allies hope to elect Assistant Attorney General Joanne Kloppenburg to the state's high court and defeat pro-Walker incumbent David Prosser.
The Rock the Vote rallies are also intended to build support for recall campaigns against Republican state senators. The rallies are planned for Milwaukee, De Pere, Janesville, La Crosse, Sheboygan and numerous other towns and cities.
GOP Communications Arm Fox News Attacks Democrats For Using Talking Points #p2 #tcot
 | |||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
| You can help support our work: donate to Media Matters for America. | |||||||||||||||
corporate America has treated Chief Justice Roberts Court as its personal genie #p2 #tcot from thinkprogress
Ever since Chief Justice Roberts joined the Supreme Court, corporate America has treated his Court as its personal genie, and Roberts has been eager to grant even many of their most outlandish wishes. As soon as Roberts and his fellow conservative Justice Alito joined the high Court, the Chamber of Commerce's win rate before the justices spiked eight percentage points above its already very high levels under his conservative predecessor William Rehnquist. Nor is Roberts alone in his willingness to go the extra mile for wealthy corporations. A recent study found that every single justice is more likely to side with the Chamber than the just ice who held the seat 25 years ago. As one of the Chamber's top Supreme Court litigators bragged, "except for the solicitor general representing the United States, no single entity has more influence on what cases the Supreme Court decides and how it decides them than the National Chamber Litigation Center." This week, corporate America made three especially large wishes to the justices, and the Court's conservatives once again appear eager to grant them.
ELECTIONS FOR SALE: The best way for big business to push its agenda is to ensure that elected officials throughout the country owe wealthy corporations their jobs -- and the Supreme Court took a big step towards making this vision a reality with its infamous Citizens United decision. In the wake of Citizens United, the Chamber pledged to spend a massive $75 million to elect corporate-aligned conservatives, and the Chamber's right-wing allies kicked in hundreds of millions of dollars more. Yet Citizens United is merely one part of a much larger campaign to cement big money's control over American elections. On Monday, the justices moved on to the next stage of this effort. Public financing laws provide one of the strongest defenses against the corrupting influence of big money in politics, but public financing schemes only work if they allow candidates who opt into them to remain competitive. To defend against this problem, Arizona developed a two-tiered public financing system. Candidates receive additional funds if their opponent or corporate interest groups overwhelm them with attack ads, and thus candidates who are determined not to be tainted by the corrupting influence of major donors are n ot left defenseless . Yet, in a case called McComish v. Bennett, the Court's five conservatives appear poised to strike this two-tiered system down. If they do so, it could be the death knell for public financing, since no candidate is safe from massive infusions of corporate money after Citizens United.
SLAMMING COURTHOUSE DOORS: Many of the Court's most corporate-friendly decisions create complicated and arcane procedural barriers to Americans seeking justice. The Court's discredited Ledbetter decision didn't literally take away women's right to equal work for equal pay. It just created a procedural rule that made it impossible for women to vindicate their rights if they didn't learn that they were paid less than their male colleagues until a short time after the discrimination began. In Wal-Mart v. Dukes, the Supreme Court will decide whether to shut off another opportunity f or women in the workplace to seek relief — class actions. Class action lawsuits are brought by groups of plaintiffs who share a common injury with each other. These suits are essential to allow ordinary Americans, who often lack the resources to hire lawyers capable of taking on a major corporation on their own, to pool their resources in order to hire counsel that are capable of facing off against someone like Wal-Mart. There is substantial evidence that women who work for Wal-Mart stores shared the same experience of systematic pay and promotion discrimination and thus should be able to bring a class action. If the Supreme Court denies them this right -- which it seems likely to do -- many of them will be left powerless before Wal-Mart's legal team.
IMMUNITY TO THE LAW: Procedural victories are all well and good, but there's nothing corporate America loves more than actual immunity from the law. Past Supreme Court decisions gave sweeping legal immunity to medical device manufacturers and health insurers, and even gave the thumbs up to a biased system of corporate-owned courts that overwhelmingly rule against consumers and employees. In a case called PLIVA, Inc. v. Mensing, the justices will now decide whether to give sweeping im munity to the makers of generic prescription drugs. If the Court sides with the drug makers in this case, two women could be left with no recourse after a prescription drug caused them to develop a horrific neurological disorder resulting in "grotesque involuntary movements of the mouth, tongue, lips, and extremities, involuntary chewing movements, and a general sense of agitation." And thousands of other Americans could be left similarly defenseless against the powerful pharmaceutical industry.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai has condemned the actions of the five American soldiers charged with the murder of three unarmed Afghan men. Karzai, in his first public comments on the soldiers: "They killed our youth for entertainment. They killed our elders for entertainment."
Rep. Joe Walsh (R-IL) is maintaining his position that a government shutdown could be good for the country . In an interview with CBS News, Walsh said that "if we need a jolt, if we need the government shutdown for a few days for us to really get serious, I think the American people are with that."
An Ohio House committee passed a bill that would severely limit the collective bargaining rights of public sector unions yesterday, and the legislation is expected to pass the full House today. The bill will leave "hundreds of thousands of Ohio's families with less job security, lower wages and, in many cases, no job at all," said Representative Dan Ramos, an Ohio Democrat.
"IBM is breaking with other American multinationals by not pushing for a corporate tax holiday," a proposal which Republicans and their corporate backers have been pushing recently. The tech giant called a tax holiday a "distraction" from more meaningful tax reform. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has signaled it may hold a similar position.
Yesterday, the House voted to terminate the Home Affordable Modification Program , the Obama administration's program "designed to reduce mortgage payments for homeowners" in danger of foreclosure. While helping 600,000 homeowners, the program has underperformed and House Republicans said "it is a prime example of a federal program that isn't worth the cost to taxpayers."
In a speech on U.S. energy policy today, President Obama "will set an ambitious goal" to cut oil imports by a third over 10 years. He plans to outline four areas of focus to curb U.S. foreign oil dependence -- domestic energy production, more natural gas in vehicles, car and truck efficiency, and encouraging biofuels.
Two co-founders of Park 51, the Muslim community center planned to be built blocks from Ground Zero in New York City, are considering a new project: building an interfaith cultural center to be built nearby. "Once we are ready to announce our new vision, we will talk to the property owner and see if it is the right location for us," said co-founder Daisy Khan.
And finally: Karlos Marks came in second in elections for student government president at the University of Michigan last week, despite the fact that the candidate doesn't exist . But not existing didn't stop Marks — "and other variations of his name, including Karlos Marx, Karlos Markus and Carlos Marx" — from winning two seats on the student council. A mark appears to be a hoax organized by graduate students who must think they're pretty clever now.
Issa Secured Nearly $1 Million In Earmarks Potentially Benefiting Real Estate That He Owns #p2 #tcot
from http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/30/issa-earmark-property/
As Roll Call reported earlier this month, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) has a history of blending his personal business interests with his work as a member of Congress. Companies owned by the Issa family, including a firm called DEI (an acronym for Issa's initials), set up websites to channel users to Issa's official congressional campaign website. After Roll Call made an ethical inquiry to Issa, he changed the website.
As Roll Call reported earlier this month, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) has a history of blending his personal business interests with his work as a member of Congress. Companies owned by the Issa family, including a firm called DEI (an acronym for Issa's initials), set up websites to channel users to Issa's official congressional campaign website. After Roll Call made an ethical inquiry to Issa, he changed the website.
ThinkProgress has discovered more troubling evidence that Issa may have blended his work as a lawmaker with his own business empire. After founding a successful car alarm company, Issa invested his fortune in a sprawling network of real estate companies with holdings throughout his district. One of Issa's most valuable properties, a medical office building at 2067 West Vista Way in Vista, California, is called the Vista Medical Center, and was purchased in 2008 for $16.6 million. Described as "a long-term investment," the property was bought by a company called Viper LLC, a business entity operated by Issa's family that Issa has up to a $25 million dollar stake in.
Around the same time Issa made the Vista Medical Center purchase, the congressman began requesting millions of dollars worth of earmarks to widen and improve the highway adjacent to the building. In 2008, he requested $2 million to expand West Vista Way, the road in front of his "long-term investment," but only received $245,000 from the government. The next year, Issa made another earmark request for improving the West Vista Way highway next to his building. He earmarked another $570,000, bringing his total to $815,000, to add parking lots, widen the road, add bus stops, improve the sewer system, and other utility work. A map showing the location of Issa's property, and the road, is below:
Issa has said that an "earmark is tantamount to a bribe." While Issa has handed out earmarks to his campaign donors in the past, in this case, he appears to be helping himself.
Although the highway project has not begun yet (because of local budget problems), the federal money is allocated through Issa's efforts. Already, a firm representing Issa's real estate company is advertising the Vista Medical Building and its "Excellent Access with Freeway Visibility." As ethics experts have explained, lawmakers should avoid earmarks in the immediate area of their own business interests.
Issa's highway earmarks not only potentially benefit his multi-million dollar medical office building, they provide better access to his other properties in the area. About 2 miles down West Vista Way from the Vista Medical Center, Issa owns a commercial office building worth over $9 million, as well as an adjacent retail office building. The commercial office building leases to a number of different clients, and Issa's retail building leases to a Hooter's. All three properties are on the same highway, which Issa plans to retrofit with taxpayer money.
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Anti-abortion Obama billboard in Chicago, for now #p2 #tcot
http://washingtonindependent.com/107138/anti-abortion-obama-billboard-in-chicago-for-now
Barack Obama is back in Chicago, looking over the South Side of the city from a billboard above in an empty lot on 58th and State streets.
As The American Independent previously reported, this is Texas-based Life Always' latest anti-abortion billboard campaign, and this time the target is African-American communities in Chicago.
The billboard, which features an image of Obama frequently used on "Hope" or "Change" posters during his 2008 presidential campaign, comes with the slogan: "Every 21 minutes, our next possible leader is aborted." The ad then directs the viewer to ThatsAbortion.com, which is a Life Always website. Another website used for some of the group's other African-American-centered anti-abortion campaigns is PPabortsAA.com. (Both Web domains are owned by Majella Cares, under which both Life Always and Heroic Media are registered in their IRS filings.)
The group has gotten away with such billboards in Jacksonville, Fla., and cities in Texas, but when a Life Always billboard popped up in New York City last month, not only did incessant protesting cause the billboard to come down after less than 24 hours, but it brought national attention to the ad campaign.
In Texas, Heroic Media's home base, the abortion rights advocacy group NARAL has started its own campaign to fight down the billboards.
So now it's time to see what happens in Chicago, which if all goes according to plan, will be the home of about 30 anti-abortion messages warning the black community that an abortion could cost the world another Barack Obama. The first billboard went up Tuesday during a press conference featuring three reverends and one pastor.
In Chicago, there are seven Planned Parenthood clinics, only two of which offer abortion services. The spot where the billboard has been erected, in an empty lot on 5812 S. State St., is 2.63 miles away from the nearest Planned Parenthood clinic, in Englewood, which does not offer abortion services. The nearest clinic that does offer abortions is about nine miles away, on the near north side of the city.
The Chicago billboards offer a different slogan than the one used in the other cities, that being, "The most dangerous place for an African-American is in the womb."
Obama has frequently been lambasted by anti-abortion rights groups, congressmen and political pundits for speaking at Planned Parenthood fundraisers. Early this month, conservative media picked up a LifeNews story that Michelle Obama invited Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, to a White House celebration commemorating the 100th anniversary of International Women's Day.
The president has been heavily criticized for voting against "partial birth abortion" bills when he was a senator in the Illinois Legislature.
Independent News Site ColorLines points out the irony of Life Always using his image for their message.
"The first billboard, which declared, 'The most dangerous place for an African American is in the womb,' ran on Welfare Queen fumes," ColorLines' Akiba Solomon writes. "The latest capitalizes on the African American community's legitimate fears about how white supremacy, gun violence, police brutality and mass incarceration endanger the lives of black men."
Independent filmmaker and photographer Stacey Muhammad has taken that sentiment and made digital versions of two Life Always' billboards revising the first to read: "The most dangerous place for an African American is in a world that criminalizes its mothers" and the second: "Every minute our next possible leader scholar hero is murdered."
The Chicago Abortion Fund, which assists low-income women in Chicago obtain abortions, by providing them with clinic referrals and financial assistance has condemned the billboard in a media statement: "The ongoing anti-choice movement to target women of color in cities across the country is both despicable and deplorable. … Not only is the ad attempting to shame black women but placing a picture of the President Obama alongside the message is cynical and misleading."
Defending public radio and TV is a working-class issue #p2 #tcot
http://peoplesworld.org/defending-public-radio-and-tv-is-a-working-class-issue/
The ultra-right leadership of the House of Representatives has decisively moved to defund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, public radio and public television. They argue that "conservative taxpayers" should not have to "subsidize liberal media."
These ultra-rightists leave out the fact that taxpayers who are not pro-corporate conservatives massively subsidize Fox News and right-wing talk radio, both of which are basically lobbying firms broadcasting corporate political ads disguised as news and "guy on the street" opinions.
In 1987 the Reagan administration abolished the Federal Communications Commission's Fairness Doctrine, opening the door to the brazen corporate political advertising we now refer to as Fox News. The Fairness Doctrine required holders of broadcast licenses to present controversial issues of public importance and to do it an honest, equitable and balanced way.
The Reagan administration's action gutted the fundamental premise of the 1949 FCC report that established the doctrine. This premise was that the electronic airways are a publicly owned resource and, as the Supreme Court said in upholding the doctrine in 1969, radio and TV station owners are "public trustees" obligated to air honest, equitable presentations of opposing views. No wonder that the Wall Street Journal has editorialized against the Fairness Doctrine.
By abolishing the Fairness Doctrine the Reagan administration established a different broadcast doctrine: media companies "own" the airwaves that used to belong to the public, and these companies thus have the right to broadcast political advertising and call it news with no obligation to truth or objectivity.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. recently reported, in an article on Reader Supported News, that Fox News abandoned efforts to establish a Canadian Fox News because Canada still has a Fairness Doctrine that makes it illegal to knowingly broadcast lies. The right-wing Canadian Prime Minister tried to abolish this rule but Canadian lawmakers said no. Fox News threw in the towel.
We, the American working-family majority, have been forced to hand over ownership of the airwaves for a pittance to corporate media hacks who can then broadcast falsehoods to gain political and economic advantage over us, the very same folks they hijacked the airways from.
Right-wing commentators' answer to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is: get with market-oriented programming, win a bigger audience and advertisers, get off the public "dole." But the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 defines the most important purposes of public broadcasting to be "instructional, educational and cultural," not market-driven broadcasting.
To see the difference, let's look at one aspect of public broadcasting's content. One rule of the market is "please the customers and advertisers." Science education requires pursuit of the truth based on fact not popularity. Real science education can be fun, but it cannot be based on current market popularity. It must be based on deriving the truth from studying reality in all human arenas. Must public television's "NOVA" stop broadcasting the massive evidence for evolution in markets where it's not popular? Must NPR's "Science Friday" stop discussing global warming facts because some listeners or advertisers might be offended?
Imagine if in 1987 the Reagan administration had said to the American people, "Hey, let's turn over the public airwaves to a few media giants, and we are going let them have the airwaves for a song, and we are going to let them lie in their self-interest with impunity, and they will make billions and use your airwaves to destroy your economic well-being - what do you say folks?" We might have reacted more forcefully to the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine. (Hey, wait a second, maybe somebody on one of those crazy educational channels said exactly that, but who was listening?)
Cost of War in Libya: $600 Million for First Week but no money for NPR #p2 #tcot
http://www.blacklistednews.com/?news_id=13278
http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2011/03/cost-of-libya-intervention-600-million-for-first-week-pentagon-says.html
http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2011/03/cost-of-libya-intervention-600-million-for-first-week-pentagon-says.html
One week after an international military coalition intervened in Libya, the cost to U.S. taxpayers has reached at least $600 million, according figures provided by the Pentagon.
U.S. ships and submarines in the Mediterranean have unleashed at least 191 Tomahawk cruise missiles from their arsenals to the tune of $268.8 million, the Pentagon said.
U.S. warplanes have dropped 455 precision guided bombs, costing tens of thousands of dollars each.
A downed Air Force F-15E fighter jet will cost more than $60 million to replace.
And operation of the war craft, guzzling ever-expensive fuel to maintain their positions off the Libyan coast and in the skies above, could reach millions of dollars a week, experts say.
Read more HERE from my colleagues Luis Martinez and Devin Dwyer.
And CLICK HERE to see what Amb. Susan Rice said about a possible exile deal for Moammar Gadhafi.
Pentagon to Obama: icanhasbilliondollars plz? But no $$$ for food stamps. #p2 #tcot
Capitol Hill may be awash in tough talk on cuts to domestic programs, but that's not stopping the Pentagon from seeking an additional billion dollars in funding for cyber security, according to a report from Nextgov.com.
The Department of Defense is requesting $3.2 billion, almost $1 billion more than the $2.3 billion the Pentagon requested from the Obama administration's 2012 budget for network security. The increased funding request reflects a re-categorization of a number of existing programs that were found to be cyber-security related, the DoD said.
According to the report, the money would pay for information assurance programs, such as critical public infrastructure, digital certificates, and other private sector projects that support the military. However, the $2.3 billion figure reflected only a partial picture of their information assurance budget. The DoD claims that the new $3.2 billion budget better accounts for programs and initiatives both related and unrelated to information assurance activities across various defense agencies and services, said DoD spokesperson, April Cunningham.
"The department recognizes that there are other activities not traditionally captured as part of its information assurance budget that are integral to its overall cyber security posture," says Cunningham. "The department is in the process of assessing whether the information assurance justification book should be expanded to include these additional cyber security items in future submissions."
Of the more $944 million increase, the DoD is requesting $500 million in funding spread across some 75 communications security activities at specific agencies and services. Funding related to information assurance for these programs is only a portion of the programs' funding request, meaning that it is not readily identifiable in the DoD budget exhibits, Cunningham said.
The remaining $444 million would be allocated to elements outside standard information assurance accounts such as cyber-operations, innovation, and forensics.
Cunningham says the specifics are provided to congress in detail in the Pentagon's 2012 classified budget book.
rest at http://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/pentagon-obama-icanhasbilliondollars-plz-032811
Largest Mortgage Firms Profit from Crime, Kill Moral Hazard for All of Wall Street #p2 #tcot
http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2011/03/29/largest-mortgage-firms-profit-from-crime-kill-moral-hazard-for-all-of-wall-street/
(photo: peterkreder)
I truly fear the next financial collapse, which indeed will happen, because over the past three years, both Republican and Democratic administrations haven't just killed moral hazard for the larger financial sector, they have dragged its corpse down Wall Street in an elaborate funeral procession for all to see. The latest example of comes from the Huffington Post:
The nation's five largest mortgage firms have saved more than $20 billion since the housing crisis began in 2007 by taking shortcuts in processing troubled borrowers' home loans, according to a confidential presentation prepared for state attorneys general by the nascent consumer bureau inside the Treasury Department.
[...]
The dollar figure also provides a basis for regulators' internal discussions regarding how best to penalize Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citigroup and Ally Financial in a settlement of wide-ranging allegations of wrongful and occasionally illegal foreclosures. People involved in the talks say some regulators want to levy a $5 billion penalty on the five firms, while others seek as much as $30 billion, with most of the money going toward reducing troubled homeowners' mortgage payments and lowering loan balances for underwater borrowers, those who owe more on their home than it's worth.
Let's assume just for the sake of argument that this $20 billion made by the banks cheating regular people was the correct amount and the only important number, which, as Yves Smith explains, is a largely made up number and unimportant compared to the huge potential liabilities.
Even if the banks get slapped with the "large" $30 billion penalty, that is only a net loss of 50% more than was saved by cutting corners. More likely, though, the settlement will cost the banks less than $30 billion. If I know the maximum punishment for robbing a bank was only being required to pay back what I stole plus at most another 50%, my life of crime would start tomorrow.
Add to this the fact that no major players have gone to jail as a result of this meltdown, all the biggest firms were bailed out by the government so they can return to record profitability, and none of the individual bonuses that resulted from the artificially inflated the bubble were ever clawed back. Everyone can see that moral hazard on Wall Street is totally dead. The behavior that will become common as a result of total freedom from any punishment or responsibility in the coming years should truly terrify anyone who isn't a member of the financial overclass.
Setting Barton Straight On Obama's Use of "Endowed By Their Creator" #p2 #tcot
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/setting-barton-straight-obamas-use-endowed-their-creator
David Barton continues to demonstrate that he is an absolute joke:
A leading Christian historian told WND he believes President Obama is engaged in a pattern of "willfully, deliberately" repudiating America's Christian heritage.
As WND reported, Obama has been caught numerous times – seven, by WND columnist Chuck Norris' count – omitting the phrase "endowed by their Creator" when quoting the Declaration of Independence and misquoting the national motto "In God We Trust" in official White House communication.
Potential presidential candidate and WND columnist Herman Cain said he believes the omissions are "intentional," and historian David Barton told WND at the Iowa Renewal Project's Pastor's Policy Briefing that he agrees:
"The first time or two I thought, 'Well, he's flustered, he wasn't thinking.' But seven times? There's no way. Especially when he was called on it," Barton said. "Congressmen sent him a letter challenging him on it. There's no way it's matter of ignorance or slip or excuse at that point. I believe it's by design and by intent.
"I gave him the benefit of the doubt a few times, I waited," Barton continued, "but there's no way in a court of law that would not be seen as willful, deliberate intent."
Barton, head of Wallbuilders, an organization dedicated to presenting America's moral, religious and constitutional foundations, said unlike previous presidents – notably Founders like Washington and Adams – who publicly proclaimed God's hand in America, Obama has been going out of his way to not acknowledge the Almighty.
"You remember when he spoke at Georgetown, he had them cover the Christian symbols [behind him on the stage]?" Barton asked. "There's a pattern. When he misstates the national motto, it's not just the Declaration omission of 'their Creator.' When he became president, one of the first things that happened on the White House website was they took off the faith-based office. That kind of reaction is circumstantial, but in a court of law it would convict him."
Let's take a look at Barton'd "circumstantial evidence," shall we?
First of all, Barton cites Chuck Norris' earlier WND column in which he asserts that Obama has dropped "endowed by their Creator" seven times ... but if you actually look at Norris' list, you see that several of the instances he cites were times when Obama was simply paraphrasing to make a point:
- On Sept. 11, 2010, at the Pentagon Memorial in Arlington, Va.:
"For our cause is just. Our spirit is strong. Our resolve is unwavering. Like generations before us, let us come together today and all days to affirm certain inalienable rights, to affirm life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
- On Sept. 10, 2010, at the president's press conference at the White House:
"With respect to the mosque in New York, I think I've been pretty clear on my position here, and that is, is that this country stands for the proposition that all men and women are created equal; that they have certain inalienable rights – one of those inalienable rights is to practice their religion freely."
It is absurd to claim that Obama was directly quoting the Declaration in these instances, so the assertion that he intentionally dropped "endowed by their Creator" is ridiculous.
Secondly, what about all of the times Obama has, in fact, cited that passage?
Remarks by the President at United States Military Academy at West Point Commencement -
May 22, 2010But this nation was founded upon a different notion. We believe, "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." (Applause.) And that truth has bound us together, a nation populated by people from around the globe, enduring hardship and achieving greatness as one people. And that belief is as true today as it was 200 years ago. It is a belief that has been claimed by people of every race and religion in every region of the world. Can anybody doubt that this belief will be any less true -- any less powerful -- two years, two decades, or even two centuries from now?
Remarks by the President at Independence Day Celebration - July 4, 2010
Two hundred and thirty-four years later, the words are just as bold, just as revolutionary, as they were when they were first pronounced: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
Remarks by the President at Las Vegas "Moving America Forward" Rally - October 22, 2010
Look, change has always been hard in this country. This country was founded when 13 colonies came together in a revolution that nobody believed could happen, except they believed. They founded this country on ideas that hadn't been tried before: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal -- (applause) -- that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Remarks by the President at DCCC General Reception - October 25, 2010
So don't let people tell you you're not making a difference. Yes, it's hard. But it's always been hard. The history of America has been hard, starting with a revolution to found this country. The idea of America is hard, based on a document and ideas that had never been tried before: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
Remarks by the President at a rally for Congressman Perriello - October 29, 2010
So don't let them tell you -- don't let them tell you change isn't possible. Here's what I know. This country was founded on what seemed impossible. We had 13 colonies come together and have to battle the greatest empire on Earth. And then they drafted this document nobody had ever tried before, proclaiming, "We hold these truths to be self-evident." A son of Virginia wrote those words. (Applause.) "That all men are created equal." (Applause.) "And they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
Remarks by the President at DNC "Moving America Forward" Rally in Chicago, Illinois - October 31, 2010
You know, this country started -- 13 colonies -- who folks said didn't have a chance against the British Empire. And then they drafted this document with ideas that had never been tried before: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
You know, the first few times I saw David Barton misrepresent facts in order to further his right-wing agenda, I gave him the benefit of the dobut, thinking perhaps he just misspoke.
But when you see him do it time and time again, it becomes impossible to see it as anything other than a willful, deliberate intent to deceive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
