Support for Charles Rangel within his home state delegation is showing signs of strain -- with upstate New York Democrats grumbling about the impact of Rangel's ethics woes on their already tenuous reelection chances.
Politically vulnerable junior Democrats have been agitating with more senior counterparts to intervene -- either with Rangel or with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) -- in an attempt to ease Rangel out as Ways and Means chairman until the House ethics committee completes its review of the allegations against him, members tell POLITICO.
"The past month it's escalated," said one of the lawmakers, noting that Rangel's restatement of his personal finances in August "put additional pressure on those members" from northern swing districts.
"There's concern. There's rumblings," said another New York member about the dean of the state delegation. "Is it palpable? No. But there is talk."
Several members of the delegation said Democratic Reps. Eric Massa and Michael Arcuri, both elected by the barest of margins, have been the most rattled.
A top House Democrat said the complaints don't pose an immediate threat to the Ways and Means chairman but "are significant" because they reflect growing impatience among Democrats from all over the country disgusted with the slow pace of the yearlong Rangel investigation.
A major crack in the pro-Rangel facade appeared last week when Bill Owens, the Democratic candidate for the western New York seat vacated by Republican John McHugh, essentially endorsed a GOP effort to strip Rangel of his committee post.
"Elected officials should be held to the highest possible standard," Owens said in a statement. "I encourage the ethics committee to complete its investigation as quickly as possible and establish a firm deadline for reporting their findings to the House of Representatives. In the interim, Chairman Rangel should voluntarily step down as chairman of the committee."
But Owens is hardly the only Democrat worried about the effect Rangel's presence could have in 2010. Many Democrats -- especially those who have been beneficiaries of recent Rangel campaign contributions -- fret that a guilt-by-association attack could provide just enough of a push to knock them out of office next year.
Even members who profess total loyalty to the still-popular Rangel want the ethics committee to complete its work as soon as possible.
"I love Charlie," said one downstate member, "but this can't go on forever."
Posted by: Fred ||
10/20/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Keep Charlie going. The longer he stays the more the damage.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
10/20/2009 4:35 Comments ||
Top||
#2
They'll carry Charlie out of the House feet-first. He's a lifer, so to speak ...
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/20/2009 8:37 Comments ||
Top||
#3
This may agitate Rangel further:
Thirty-eight forged or fraudulent ballots have been thrown out, according to records at the Rensselaer County Board of Elections in Troy, N.Y. Enough votes, an election official admits, to likely have tipped the November election to the Democrats...Republican and Democratic candidates in the Empire State can also run on third party lines, such as the Working Families Party, as well as the Liberal, Conservative, and Independence parties, among others. The extra line means extra votes that could bring victory.
Hillary Clinton garnered 2.7 percent of her total votes from the WFP line when she first ran for Senate in 2000, which increased to 5 percent of her total vote in 2006. In September, Clinton's former campaign manager for her 2000 Senate run, New York City Councilman Bill DeBlasio, who has been endorsed by the WFP, beat two long-established politicians in the Democratic primary. Critics also accuse the Working Families Party of having a long association with the troubled activist group, ACORN. Bertha Lewis, ACORN's CEO, is one of the party's co-founders. The New York Times reported this month that "Patrick Gaspard, the White House political director, worked with ACORN in New York to set up the Working Families political party and sat on the party's board with Ms. Lewis."
The WFP has also endorsed New York Democratic Sen. Kristen Gillibrand, who was one of only seven Senators who voted against cutting federal housing funds to ACORN in September.
"You hear stories about this or that but I really didn't belive it until actually this happened," he said. "These people were taken advantage of -- whether they voted for me or not." Cause, you know them lying Republicans have been saying for years this stuff goes on and good old party people like myself just never would for any reason believe them [or Fox News]. Heh.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce said Monday that it will ask law enforcement officials to investigate a fake press release sent out in the group's name.
The business group condemned the phony release, which claimed the group had shifted its stance on climate change legislation, as "irresponsible and foolish."
"We will be asking law enforcement authorities to investigate this event," said Thomas J. Collamore, the Chamber's senior vice president for communications and strategy.
"Public relations hoaxes undermine the genuine effort to find solutions on the challenge of climate change," he added.
The release was fabricated by the activist group Yes Men, according to TalkingPointsMemo, and was initially reported by Reuters this morning.
"These irresponsible tactics are a foolish distraction from the serious effort by our nation to reduce greenhouse gases," Collamore said. "The U.S. Chamber believes that strong climate legislation is compatible with the goals of improving our economy and creating jobs."
Posted by: Fred ||
10/20/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
good luck.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
10/20/2009 4:25 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The new identity theft laws should make this very interesting.
#3
Identity theft is fine as long as it carries forward the proper political agenda. That's why it's always okay to fabricate malicious quotes attributed to Rush Limbaugh but never okay to do so for a proper-thinking Dhimmicrat.
Get with it comrades citizens ...
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/20/2009 8:39 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Can a corporate entity have it's identity stolen?
#5
They could go down the copyright/trademark infringement route, but that's a civil matter. Taking the identity theft approach would make it a criminal matter. It'll require a little creative application, but that's why they invented lawyers.
Posted by: Tom- Pa ||
10/20/2009 14:46 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Maybe for their next spoof the Yes Men can again pretend to be the US Chamber of Commerce but only this time they are now against amnesty for illegal aliens.
Kampala Over three decades ago a 14-year-old girl, her sister and a group of young teenagers from Bukwo headed to the River Amana for a ceremony that would change their lives forever.
Since her childhood, Gertrude Chebet had been told of the day she would become a woman. She was led to believe it would be a great moment of change and it was something to look forward to with much joy.
As she and her sister began that early morning trek, from their village in eastern Uganda, in the cold and through the bushes to the place of initiation, she expected it to be the best day of her life. But she was wrong. It turned out to be the most harrowing.
"One of the elder women overseeing the circumcision took a sample of our saliva, urine and pubic hair and buried it. She then ordered us to lie on the ground and after the first cut, I lost consciousness and cannot remember what happened next," she remembers now.
Even after passing out she and the other girls were not allowed to use modern medicine to treat their wounds. Instead she was forced to use cow urine, prescribed by her elders.
Today Chebet is a primary school teacher and campaigns against female circumcision, otherwise known as female genital mutilation.
Chebet condemns it as unnecessarily cruel and inhuman. She is the chairperson of the Kapchorwa/Bukwo Women in Peace Initiative, a lobby group advocating for the enactment of laws to abolish female genital mutilation.
But it has turned out to be a long, hard battle to change an age-old tradition that involves the total removal of the clitoris and scraping of the female private parts.
In fact, even those in positions of power are finding it difficult to change the culture of mutilation against young girls. While earlier this year President Yoweri Museveni condemned the practice, his government has been slow to pass a total ban on female circumcision, partly because his party needs the votes of those who largely support the practice.
The strength of the voters is especially evident in communities where female circumcision is a wide-spread practice. Here, women who have not been mutilated have difficulty being elected and some have lost elections because of their anti- female genital mutilation campaign.
Jane Frances Kuka, the former Gender Minister and former woman Member of Parliament (MP) for Kapchorwa district, an area that has laws banning female circumcision, lost her parliamentary seat partly for having campaigned against female genital mutilation.
"My opponents used my stand against female genital mutilation as a weapon against me. Elders were saying who is this (she) to interfere with our culture?" she says.
Female circumcision is practiced among the Sabiny, Sebei and Pokot in eastern Uganda. It is conducted in various ways around the world, but in Uganda it involves the total removal of the clitoris and scraping of the female private parts.
"It is common for girls to bleed to death after circumcision. Others are infected with disease, some dying of tetanus. Many girls develop problems that affect them during child birth," Chebet says.
In 2007 the district councils of Kapchorwa and Bukwo passed by-laws prohibiting female circumcision. However these laws are largely ignored and in December 2008 close to 40 girls in Kapchorwa and more than 100 in Bukwo were subjected to the ritual.
Chebet says the road to elimination of female genital mutilation is long and hard. However a few strides are being made through the enactment of by-laws against practice by sub-counties in Kapchorwa and Bukwo. She says the key lies in a national law against female genital mutilation.
Chebet admits that there is great resistance to the abolition of the practice, because it is risky especially for those with political ambitions.
Although Uganda is a signatory to the Maputo Protocol, a charter adopted by the African Union that guarantees the rights of women including the right to end female genital mutilation, it has not passed a law outlawing the practice.
Museveni's government has been hailed at international female activist conferences for advancing the emancipation of women but has been slow to pass a total ban to female genital mutilation.
Museveni and his party members have had the wider support of voters from Kapchorwa and Bukwo districts partly because he has not interfered with their culture - especially the practice of female circumcision.
In April 2007 women activists under their umbrella boy known as Law and Advocacy for Women in Uganda petitioned the constitutional court in an effort to ban female circumcision.
They argue female genital mutilation is a violation of women's constitutional rights and that it is a form of torture that constitutes cruel and inhuman treatment.
The Attorney General's Chambers headed by Attorney General also Ministry of Justice asked the court to dismiss the petition. The constitutional court heard the matter was yet to pass a ruling.
Rukia Nakadama, a culture minister in Uganda says the government was now resolved to work with communities where female genital mutilation was practiced in order to ban it.
She says government will also back the anti-female genital mutilation bill presented to Parliament by a back bench MP - who is a member of the ruling National Resistance Movement party.
Kinkizi East MP, Chris Baryomunsi, a medical doctor from an area where female genital mutilation is not performed has tabled a private member's bill in the Ugandan Parliament to ban the practice. Ugandan MPs, under article 94 of the Constitution, can initiate a law (under the private member's bill) if they feel the executive arm of government has not initiated one.
Baryomunsi tells IPS that he feels obliged as a medical practitioner and a legislator to do something for girls and women in that part of Uganda.
"I feel pain and sadness that this is going on in Uganda. That women, willing or unwilling, are subjected to crude methods of having part of their bodies cut when there is no medical benefit. I had to take the lead to fight this injustice," he says.
Baryomunsi is backed by some female activists including Uganda's Parliament Deputy Speaker, Rebecca Kadaga, and he wants the law to criminalise female genital mutilation.
The bill proposes harsh penalties for traditional surgeons and parents who promote female genital mutilation; it suggests that they face up to 15 years in jail once implicated.
Baryomunsi also wants the law to provide that the consent of a girl or woman will not be valid defence, given the health risks associated with female genital mutilation.
The World Health Organisation in June 2006 released a first study to give evidence of the harmful effects of female genital mutilation. The study indicated that women who have had female circumcision were likely to experience difficulties during child birth and their babies were more likely to die as a result of the traditional yet gruesome practice.
Even male contestants in elections agree that the female genital mutilation has always come up as an issue among the elders concerned about preserving their culture.
Dr John Yeko, a MP representing Kween county, says the stand against female genital mutilation was not the only issue of concern during elections. It was the way people spoke about the issue that also made a difference.
"I agree some people have lost (elections) because of the language they use against female genital mutilation. I have personally spoken against it by emphasising its negative aspects."
Yeko has three daughters and they have not undergone the practice. "I totally support the ban against (it) because it is a useless part of our culture which should not be tolerated at this point in time," he says.
The situation is no different in neighbouring Kenya. Linah Jebbi a MP from Marakwet in northern Kenya says the issue of anti- female genital mutilation has always come up during the two times contested the elections.
She says she may have lost the elections if she was not involved in other campaigns, like the campaign for peace among the pastoralist tribes. Even at the age of 46, many elderly persons view her as a child who should not be entrusted with leadership responsibility.
(CBS) ¯ Faced with a $550 million budget deficit, Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley on Monday said that all non-union city workers would take nearly five working weeks of unpaid leave next year to save the city money.
Daley announced plans Monday to save $114 million by requiring 3,600 non-union city workers to take 24 unpaid days off, eliminating 220 vacant jobs and cutting expenses like travel and supplies by $20 million.
It's about a nine percent pay cut next year for top city officials, administrators and middle managers at City Hall -- including the mayor himself. That will cost about $8,100 for a boss who usually makes $90,000.
Those furlough days would not affect frontline employees who actually deliver services to the public. But one analyst said the move would still affect city services.
"You won't have enough people on the management side of the ledger making sure that people, like I say, show up on time, do their job, are held accountable," said Ralph Martire, executive director of the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability. "For any business to function, for any service to be provided well, whether in the public sector or the private sector, you need adequate number of managers or administrators to go along with the front-line workers."
Unlike this year, when City Hall shut down on three regular work days, there will be none of that in 2010.
The city's non-union workers were set to take off one personal day a month, a total of 12 unpaid personal days for each worker. The 12 regular holidays, such as New Years Day and Thanksgiving Day, will also be unpaid.
Dozens of city labor unions previously cut a separate furlough-day agreement.
Daley has said he won't support tax increases in these tough financial times to raise more city revenue.
The mayor will present his proposed 2010 budget at Wednesday's City Council meeting.
The city will also save $70 million through union agreements and continued unpaid holidays and furloughs for nonunion workers.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/20/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I note Daley's name is conspicuously absent.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
10/20/2009 2:47 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Round the non-patronage "non-union" jobless up and give them make-work gummit TSA jobs harassing travelers out at O'Hare Airport. That's what we do in Atlanta. Anyone traveling to Brazil for the Olympics could get extra harassment. It's the Chicago way!
#3
It's about a nine percent pay cut next year for top city officials, administrators and middle managers at City Hall -- including the mayor himself. That will cost about $8,100 for a boss who usually makes $90,000.
The mayor is taking a hit, too, Redneck Jim. But with a $550 million budget deficit, he is going to have to find more cuts than the $204 mil. listed in the article, plus cutting vacant jobs that aren't a running cost to the city at the moment anyway. Politics is suddenly becoming interesting in an entirely new way at the state and local level, witness all the unpaid leave being mandated around the country. I look forward to discovering whether things run better with less government, because that's effectively what's happening.
The U.S. dollar has fallen to recent lows due to reckless Congressional spending, a key Republican lawmaker said on Monday.
Rep. Kevin Brady (Texas), the top House Republican on the Joint Economic Committee, called recent proposals to trade commodities with other currencies than the dollar "frightening."
"I think one of the reasons the dollar is struggling -- I think why we're having other forms of reserve -- is because they don't think this Congress will get its financial house in order," he told a conservative talk radio show today. "And that's frightening."
Last week, the U.S. dollar's value fell to a 14-month low against the Euro, prompting alarm among economic observers. Iran, Russia, Venezuela, and OPEC nations have recently discussed the possibility of pricing oil with a currency other than the dollar.
The congressman pointed to the economic stimulus package and other spending measures passed by this Congress as the main causes of the record $1.4 trillion budget deficit reported last week. Brady said than in a poor economy, U.S. investments and the dollar still appeal to foreign investors but that if the budget situation worsens, then "we'll be one of those countries others will shake their heads at."
He proposed a number of programs cuts, which included entitlement programs, and a cap on federal spending as remedies for the budget gap. Brady predicted, however, that the situation would get worse under the current Congress.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/20/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"I think one of the reasons the dollar is struggling -- I think why we're having other forms of reserve -- is because they don't think this Congress will get its financial house in order,"
According to a new News7 SurveyUSA poll, if the governor's election was held today, Republican Bob McDonnell would easily win the race over Democrat Creigh Deeds.
It shows McDonnell with a 59 percent to 40 percent lead over Deeds.
When it comes to the race for lieutenant governor, the poll shows Republican Bill Bolling would defeat Jody Wagner by taking 56 percent of the vote to Wagner's 42 percent.
Here is a look at the results:
Asked of 595 likely voters
Margin of Sampling Error for this question = ± 4%
If the election for Virginia governor were today, would you vote for... (candidate names rotated) Republican Bob McDonnell? Or Democrat Creigh Deeds?
59% McDonnell (R)
40% Deeds (D)
1% Undecided
Asked of 595 likely voters
Margin of Sampling Error for this question = ± 4.1%
Virginia will also elect a lieutenant governor. If the election for lieutenant governor were today, would you vote for... (candidate names rotated) Republican Bill Bolling? Or Democrat Jody Wagner?
56% Bolling (R)
42% Wagner (D)
2% Undecided
Asked of 595 likely voters
Margin of Sampling Error for this question = ± 4.1%
Virginia will also elect an attorney general. If the election for attorney general were today, would you vote for... (candidate names rotated) Republican Ken Cuccinelli? Or Democrat Steve Shannon?
56% Cuccinelli (R)
41% Shannon (D)
2% Undecided
I figured the Repubs must be way ahead by the more shrill and desperate attack ads being aired against them by the DemocRats....
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/20/2009 18:17 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
WaPo: "Can I hear a Macaca? Anyone? Did you read his college thesis? He kept Playboys under his mattress in his teens? Hello? Is this megaphone on?"
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/20/2009 19:08 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Just a reminder to all Virginia Rantburgers - get out there and VOTE no matter what the opinion polls show.
The only poll that really matters is the one on election day.
(Same goes for the rest of U.S.-based Rantburgers wherever you have a chance to vote the leftist bastards OUT.)
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/20/2009 20:56 Comments ||
Top||
I guess Beck's outing of Anita "Lizard Lips" Dunn stung more than we thought...
The White House is calling on other news organizations to isolate and alienate Fox News as it sends out top advisers to rail against the cable channel as a Republican Party mouthpiece. If only they could take such quick, decisive action against our external enemies like Imanutjob and the Taliban...
Alinsky strategy, out in the open: identify the target, freeze the target, isolate the target, destroy the target. Only it doesn't seem to be working as well as planned...and others are taking notice. 'Tis more important to be feared than loved, but it's critical not to be gently given good advice by those one is trying to intimidate.
Top political strategists question the decision by the Obama administration to escalate its offensive against Fox News. And as of Monday, the four other major television networks had not given any indication that they intend to sever their ties with Fox News.
But several top White House officials have taken aim at Fox News since communications director Anita Dunn branded Fox "opinion journalism masquerading as news" in an interview last Sunday. White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel told CNN on Sunday that President Obama does not want "the CNNs and the others in the world [to] basically be led in following Fox." Well, yeah, but it's so much easier to follow the NY Slimes' lead and hire someone to watch Fox and report back instead of, you know, digging up your own leads...
Obama senior adviser David Axelrod went further by calling on media outlets to join the administration in declaring that Fox is "not a news organization." "Other news organizations like yours ought not to treat them that way," Axelrod counseled ABC's George Stephanopoulos. "We're not going to treat them that way."
Asked Monday about another Axelrod claim that Fox News is just trying to make money, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said that while all media companies fall under that description, "I would say sometimes programming can be tilted toward accentuating those profits."
Providing what the customers want -- what a concept. Especially since in this case what customers want is less-biased news, which for some reason they increasingly seem to think FoxNews provides.
But by urging other news outlets to side with the administration, Obama officials dramatically upped the ante in the war of words that began earlier this month with Dunn's comments. So far, none of the four other major networks has given any indication that they wish to disinvite Fox News from the White House pool -- the rotation through which the networks share the costs and duties of White House coverage and the most significant interaction among the news channels. That would be the nuclear option ...
The White House stopped providing guests to "Fox News Sunday" after host Chris Wallace fact-checked controversial assertions made by Tammy Duckworth, assistant secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs, in August. Gawd forbid a reporter would ever check sources ...
Dunn said fact-checking an administration official was "something I've never seen a Sunday show do." "How DARE you verify our official talking points, peasant!!" She's got a point, the Sunday shows are for propaganda ...
"She criticized 'Fox News Sunday' last week for fact-checking -- fact-checking -- an administration official," Wallace said Sunday. "They didn't say that our fact-checking was wrong. They just said that we had dared to fact-check...Let's fact-check Anita Dunn, because last Sunday she said that Fox ignores Republican scandals, and she specifically mentioned the scandal involving Nevada senator John Ensign," Wallace added. "A number of Fox News shows have run stories about Senator Ensign. Anita Dunn's facts were just plain wrong."
Fox News senior vice president Michael Clemente said: "Surprisingly, the White House continues to declare war on a news organization instead of focusing on the critical issues that Americans are concerned about like jobs, health care and two wars. The door remains open and we welcome a discussion about the facts behind the issues."
Observers on both sides of the political aisle questioned the White House's decision to continue waging war on a news organization, saying the move carried significant political risks.
Democratic strategist Donna Brazile said on CNN: "I don't always agree with the White House. And on this one here I would disagree."
David Gergen, who has worked for Democratic and Republican presidents, said: "I totally agree with Donna Brazile." Gergen added that White House officials have "gotten themselves into a fight they don't necessarily want to be in. I don't think it's in their best interest."
"The faster they can get this behind them, the more they can treat Fox like one other organization, the easier they can get back to governing, and then put some people out on Fox," Gergen said on CNN. "I mean, for goodness sakes, you know, you engage in the debate.
"What Americans want is a robust competition of ideas, and they ought to be willing to go out there and mix it up with some strong conservatives on Fox, just as there are strong conservatives on CNN like Bill Bennett."
Bennett expressed outrage that Dunn told an audience of high school students this year that Mao Zedong, the founder of communist China, was one of "my favorite political philosophers."
"Having the spokesman do this, attack Fox, who says that Mao Zedong is one of the most influential figures in her life, was not...a small thing; it's a big thing," Bennett said on CNN. "When she stands up, in a speech to high school kids, says she's deeply influenced by Mao Zedong, that -- I mean, that is crazy." You just earned yourself a spot on the doubleplus ungood list, buddy...
Fox News contributor Karl Rove, who was the top political strategist to former President George W. Bush, said: "This is an administration that's getting very arrogant and slippery in its dealings with people. And if you dare to oppose them, they're going to come hard at you and they're going to cut your legs off."
"This is a White House engaging in its own version of the media enemies list. And it's unhelpful for the country and undignified for the president of the United States to so do," Rove added. "That is over-the-top language. We heard that before from Richard Nixon."
Media columnist David Carr of The New York Times warned that the White House war on Fox "may present a genuine problem for Mr. Obama, who took great pains during the campaign to depict himself as being above the fray of over-heated partisan squabbling."
"While there is undoubtedly a visceral thrill in finally setting out after your antagonists, the history of administrations that have successfully taken on the media and won is shorter than this sentence," Carr wrote over the weekend. "So far, the only winner in this latest dispute seems to be Fox News. Ratings are up 20 percent this year."
He added: "The administration, by deploying official resources against a troublesome media organization, seems to have brought a knife to a gunfight." Ah, there's the problem. If they brought a real Chi-town weapon, like a railroad tie...they'd whomp Fox for sure....
#2
This is frightenung at so many levels. When the Jews in Germany watched the gays being hauled off they probably wondered who's next, as the Jews were hauled off the gypsies watched wondering, but knowing. I may have the order wrong, but the point is MSNBC and the rest need to understand where this will go. This is just disturbing.
This is an all out assault on the Constitution by our White House, this is Sedition, I can think of no other term that fits. Free speach IS the cornerstone to our nations constitution. That president is going to disregard the very foundation of our nation until we are in a full blown totalitarian state.
BTW, I'm not a big fan of FOX or any of the major networks, but this is unacceptable.
Posted by: 49 pan ||
10/20/2009 11:15 Comments ||
Top||
#3
the more they can treat Fox like one other organization, the easier they can get back to governing, and then put some people out on Fox," Gergen said on CNN. "I mean, for goodness sakes, you know, you engage in the debate.
The problem is they don't want to govern, and they don't want to engage in debate. All they want to do is destroy their enemies (i.e. anyone with a different opinion).
P.S. Anita Dunn really damaged the other "news organizations" when she claimed the WH controlled them. She essentially admitted that they are nothing but pro-Obama propaganda outlets.
Why would anybody listen to them?
Posted by: Frozen Al ||
10/20/2009 11:22 Comments ||
Top||
#5
So far, none of the four other major networks has given any indication that they wish to disinvite Fox News from the White House pool -- the rotation through which the networks share the costs and duties of White House coverage and the most significant interaction among the news channels.
Cause if WH pool reporting is reduced to the lowest common denominator, it will demonstrate to the next administration [if there is one], that they have no need for any of them. Got to protect their phoney baloney jobs!
#6
Anita Dunn really damaged the other "news organizations" when she claimed the WH controlled them. She essentially admitted that they are nothing but pro-Obama propaganda outlets.
They are control-freaks and Fox didn't conform. This is a unique situation as we are living in as a post-MSM world with the advent of the internet, cell phone videos, and access to real news and varied opinion. They must be going bonkers with each new incriminating video! Beck has called on the citizen watchdogs so they won't know what will blindside them next! Hee, hee:)
#7
News Corp, which owns the Fox cable network and local TV stations has been rumored to be interested in buying NBC/MSNBC. GE, owner of NBC, has lots of debt. I don't seen Eric Holder allowing that sale to happen; he would invoke anti-trust laws most likely.
#8
Fox has in many cases far greater number of viewers than other networks. This bunch in the White House really don't give a rats ass about that do the? Either a very calloused move or a very dumb move.
#10
News Corp, which owns the Fox cable network and local TV stations has been rumored to be interested in buying NBC/MSNBC. GE, owner of NBC, has lots of debt. I don't seen Eric Holder allowing that sale to happen; he would invoke anti-trust laws most likely.
GE has been borrowing all the money it wants at Treasury interest rates because of the TARP program. Why would it jeopardize its hundred billion dollar credit line with the Treasury to sell a measly network?
#11
Tapper: It's escaped none of our notice that the White House has decided in the last few weeks to declare one of our sister organizations "not a news organization" and to tell the rest of us not to treat them like a news organization. Can you explain why it's appropriate for the White House to decide that a news organization is not one...
Gibbs: Jake, we render, we render an opinion based on some of their coverage and the fairness that, the fairness of that coverage.
Tapper: But that's a pretty sweeping declaration that they are "not a news organization." How are they any different from, say â
Gibbs: ABC -
Tapper: ABC. MSNBC. Univision. I mean how are they any different?
Gibbs: You and I should watch sometime around 9 o'clock tonight. Or 5 o'clock this afternoon.
Tapper: I'm not talking about their opinion programming or issues you have with certain reports. I'm talking about saying thousands of individuals who work for a media organization, do not work for a "news organization" -- why is that appropriate for the White House to say?
CLEAR MAJORITY NOW BACKS PLAN sez WaPo
A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that support for a government-run health-care plan to compete with private insurers has rebounded from its summertime lows and wins clear majority support from the public.
Independents and senior citizens, two groups crucial to the debate, have warmed to the idea of a public option, and are particularly supportive if it would be administered by the states and limited to those without access to affordable private coverage. That's not what I saw in the poll, but perhaps I didn't study it close enough.
But Obama's approval ratings on health-care reform are slipping among his fellow Democrats even as they are solidifying among independents and seniors. Among Democrats, strong approval of his handling of the issue has dropped 15 percentage points since mid-September.
Posted by: Bobby ||
10/20/2009 06:35 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It is a peer pressure strategy hoping to reverse the dropping poll numbers. Come on, everyone else supports it. Pathetic, simply pathetic.
#2
In the same poll it was determined that 98% of Americans don't want another Hiroshima, 92% of Americans don't want another Nagasaki, 78% think they have a "better than average" chance of winning the Powerball jackpot, and 33% of Americans think that Muppets are alive.
#4
Hot Air notes: The sampling comprises 33% Democrats, as opposed to only 20% Republicans
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/20/2009 11:39 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Oversampling to push the policies the leftist media support. Rasmussen does a much better sampling job. 42% of voters nationwide favor the health care reform plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 54% are opposed to the plan.
The numbers have been remarkably stable throughout the debate. With the exception of bounces following presidential television appearances, support for the plan has stayed in a very narrow range from 41% to 46%. Currently, 24% Strongly Favor the legislative effort and 42% are Strongly Opposed.
Just 36% of the nations senior citizens favor the current legislative effort while 59% are opposed. Support is highest among voters under 30 (i.e. the sucker demographic), the age group least likely to use the nations health care system.
Posted by: ed ||
10/20/2009 14:47 Comments ||
Top||
KINSTON, N.C. | Voters in this small city decided overwhelmingly last year to do away with the party affiliation of candidates in local elections, but the Obama administration recently overruled the electorate and decided that equal rights for black voters cannot be achieved without the Democratic Party. Need I say more?
The Justice Department's ruling, which affects races for City Council and mayor, went so far as to say partisan elections are needed so that black voters can elect their "candidates of choice" - identified by the department as those who are Democrats and almost exclusively black.
The department ruled that white voters in Kinston will vote for blacks only if they are Democrats and that therefore the city cannot get rid of party affiliations for local elections because that would violate black voters' right to elect the candidates they want. Re-read that three more times. Either the department or the writer are morons. Or both.
Several federal and local politicians would like the city to challenge the decision in court. They say voter apathy is the largest barrier to black voters' election of candidates they prefer and that the Justice Department has gone too far in trying to influence election results here. Why would black voters in Kinston be apathetic? Detroit and Chicago, sure, but Kinston?
Stephen LaRoque, a former Republican state lawmaker who led the drive to end partisan local elections, called the Justice Department's decision "racial as well as partisan."
"On top of that, you have an unelected bureaucrat in Washington, D.C., overturning a valid election," he said. "That is un-American." But so Obaman.
The decision, made by the same Justice official who ordered the dismissal of a voting rights case against members of the New Black Panther Party in Philadelphia, has irritated other locals as well. They bristle at federal interference in this city of nearly 23,000 people, two-thirds of whom are black. Much more at link, but you've got the idea.
Posted by: Bobby ||
10/20/2009 06:13 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I didn't go far enough. here's the rationale. Now I understand.
"To begin with, 'nonpartisan elections' is a misconceived and deceiving statement because even though no party affiliation shows up on a ballot form, candidates still adhere to certain ideologies and people understand that, and are going to identify with who they feel has their best interest at heart," said William Cooke, president of the Kinston/Lenoir County branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.
Some people can't tell the candidates apart without a label.
Posted by: Bobby ||
10/20/2009 6:26 Comments ||
Top||
#2
president of the Kinston/Lenoir County branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.
And here I thought referring to blacks as 'colored' was racist. /sarc off
This was never about equality, fairness, or justice. This was about power.
#3
The city government of Phoenix used to be terribly corrupt until it adopted non-partisan "charter government", which means that candidates cannot officially run by party, and there are no party tickets. The party hacks hate it, because the candidates have to run on credentials instead of just affiliation.
Just yesterday, it was suggested that FOX News should counterattack Obama by advocating that Chicago be federally, or by the State of Illinois, forced to have a charter government.
If they did that, you could hear the screams of pain from the Democrats all the way in Peoria.
#4
because that would violate black voters' right to elect the candidates they want.
Correction
The candidates the Demicratics shove in Black's faces and ORDER them to "Like" and vote for.
(Or the EEEVIL republicans will kill you all by eliminating the freebies that the HONEST DEMOCRATS are trying to give you (Buy your vote) with.)
(We know that you Blacks are too Lazy to research the candidates so we HONEST DEMOCRATS wii choose for you.)
I wish I could say Snark, but it's too true.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
10/20/2009 13:37 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Yes, the Justice Department is collaborating with the Democratic party machine to keep the local voters locked on the plantation -- ensuring the blacks vote along racial lines and the whites along party lines to the same result. The locals need to hire themselves an effective community organizer to ensure the will of the people, expressed overwhelmingly a year ago, is enforced.
#9
"The Justice Department's ruling, which affects races for City Council and mayor, went so far as to say partisan elections are needed so that black voters can elect their "candidates of choice" - identified by the department as those who are Democrats and almost exclusively black."
Translation: The DemocRat-run federal gummint thanks black people are too stupid to vote for their own choice unless Daddy gummint labels the candidates for them so they don't screw up at the ballot box.
Typical leftist bigotry.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/20/2009 19:00 Comments ||
Top||
#10
If this had been The Onion or Scrappleface, it would have been seen as an over-the-top, overly mean piece of satire.
For Democrats determined to get a health care bill, Sen. Roland Burris is like the house guest who couldn't be refused, won't soon be leaving and poses a plausible threat of ruining holiday dinner. Suddenly, he can no longer be ignored.
The Illinois Democrat, appointed by disgraced former Gov. Rod Blagojevich, says he'll only vote for a bill to provide health care to millions more Americans as long as it allows the government to sell insurance in competition with private insurers.
And he says he won't compromise.
"I would not support a bill that does not have a public option," Burris, 72, said in a recent interview with The Associated Press. "That position will not change."
Those words caught the attention of the very Democratic leaders who tried to keep Burris out of the Senate, suggested he resign and have shunned him in unprecedented fashion. Burris is not the only Democrat to insist on creation of a government-run health plan. But he is the one who has the least to lose by defying President Barack Obama and the Democrats who once turned him out in the cold rain.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/20/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"What's the matter, kid? You look like you've got somethin' caught in your throat..."
#2
.....sez he'll only vote for a bill to provide health care to millions more Americans as long as it allows the government to sell insurance in competition with private insurers.
That's what Barry told me to say, and that's what I'ze sayin! We didn't get the Obamolympics and we needs the 3-4 million new jobs!
(CNN) -- A leading fiscal mind on Capitol Hill and a one-time Obama Cabinet pick sounded the alarm Sunday over the projected long-term financial challenges the country faces.
"This deficit is driven by us," New Hampshire Republican Sen. Judd Gregg candidly said Sunday on CNN's State of the Union when asked about the federal government's projected $1.42 trillion operating deficit for the 2009 fiscal year.
"You talk about systemic risk. The systemic risk today is the Congress of the United States," the Ranking Republican on the Senate Budget Committee told CNN Chief National Correspondent John King, "that we're creating these massive debts which we're passing on to our children. We're going to undermine fundamentally the quality of life for our children by doing this."
"Now you can't blame that on [former President] George [W.] Bush," Greg said, noting that using the Obama administration's projections the budget deficit for the next ten years is $1 trillion per year. And Gregg said that during the same ten-year period, public debt as a percentage of gross domestic product would increase from 40 percent - which Gregg called "tolerable but still too high" - up to 80 percent.
The figures, Gregg told King, "mean we're basically on the path to a banana-republic-type of financial situation in this country. And you just can't do that. You can't keep running these [federal] programs out [into the future] and not paying for them. And you can't keep throwing debt on top of debt."
"Standards of living will drop if we keep this up," Gregg also said.
After repeated promises from the White House that the final health care reform bill will be deficit neutral, Gregg said a Democratic plan to avoid otherwise automatic Medicare cuts without having a funding source for the projected expense of $250 billion over the next decade was "gamesmanship."
Asked about criticism leveled Sunday by former Republican-turned-Democrat Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania that Republicans were being obstructionist in the health care reform debate, Gregg replied, "Well, I suppose he has to call us something now that he's left the party."
Responding to the Democratic charge that the GOP is "the party of 'no,'" Gregg pointed to Republican health care reform proposals including his own and another co-sponsored by Republican Sens. Tom Coburn and Sen. Richard Burr, as well as a bipartisan proposal put forward by Sens. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Robert Bennett (R-UT)."
Gregg said the versions of health care reform voted out of the Senate Finance Committee and the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee would amount to "a huge expansion of government."
"You're talking about taking the government and increasing it by $1-$2 trillion over the next ten years," Gregg said. He added that he thought growing government at that rate would have a "very debilitating effect" on the overall economy and the ability of Americans to get health care in the future.
At one point earlier this year, Gregg, who is not seeking re-election to his Senate seat in 2010, was President Obama's choice to head the Commerce Department. But the fiscal hawk removed himself from consideration because of differences with the new administration on several policy issues.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/20/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sooner the government's borrowing power runs out, the sooner rational policies will have to be implemented.
Posted by: ed ||
10/20/2009 1:13 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"Standards of living will drop if we keep this up," Gregg also said.
....trains will no longer un on time. A gallon of gas will cost $7.00 or about the same as a cup of coffee. A 'temporary' 19.5% European style VAT will be levied to assist the poor. Essentially a 'banana republic' but with no bananas.
The standard of living was bound to take a fall when the easy credit eventually went away and labor markets completed their globalization. But what the administration and Congress are doing aren't the techniques required to make the fall less hard. If anything, they'll prolong the agony.
It remains to be seen whether or not this is on purpose or the result of ignorant hubris. These days I lean towards believing it's the former.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
10/20/2009 6:00 Comments ||
Top||
#5
When buyers stop showing up for treasury auctions, the printing will continue anyway. The Federal reserve will just hold the treasuries as collateral instead of selling them.
This leads to a debasement of the currency. When that can't go on any farther, you get venezuala, or maybe agentina.
There are several ways to stop the slide, but implementing costly government programs like national health care make the problem worse.
President Obama's presidential campaign focused on "making" the news media cover certain issues while rarely communicating anything to the press unless it was "controlled," White House Communications Director Anita Dunn disclosed to the Dominican government at a videotaped conference. "Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn't absolutely control," said Dunn.
"One of the reasons we did so many of the David Plouffe videos was not just for our supporters, but also because it was a way for us to get our message out without having to actually talk to reporters," said Dunn, referring to Plouffe, who was Obama's chief campaign manager. "We just put that out there and made them write what Plouffe had said as opposed to Plouffe doing an interview with a reporter. So it was very much we controlled it as opposed to the press controlled it," Dunn said.
Continued Dunn: "Whether it was a David Plouffe video or an Obama speech, a huge part of our press strategy was focused on making the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to why the campaign was saying it, what the tactic was. ... Making the press cover what we were saying."
Posted by: Fred ||
10/20/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It sdoesn't seem wise for them to brag about controlling the press. I hope it backfires on them.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
10/20/2009 4:27 Comments ||
Top||
#2
So Fox can now put in their ads - "The only non-state controlled news media."
#3
This would seriously bug me if I worked at one of the non-fox network. It is one thing to be a voluntary lapdog, it is another to be told that publicly you are the lapdog, by the master.
I still think the attacks on Fox were to secure the base. Attacking Fox is always a crowd pleaser with the left. I think however even the media realize a line was crossed. We have been at a tipping point regarding Obama for some time. The comedians have already started taking a "the gloves are off" approach recently. I suspect the media will wait until the tip into unpopularity is glaringly clear but they are ready to attack him now. If nothing else than to separate his failure from their chosen party in time for the 2010 elections.
#5
"....it was a way for us to get our message out without having to actually talk to reporters,"
What a statement - not actually having to talk to any reporters. Just wave the hand, and issue the edict, and all the little people will tug on their forelocks and do as the master says.
This is gonna backfire big time, and like RJ says, with the other media. They may have fallen into Obama-worship, but I don't think they counted on being made into obedient lapdogs.
#6
This is exactly why Americans feel such anxiety is our growing distrust and discontent with our Govt. Certain groups shouldn't read stuff like this: those predisposed to high blood pressure, anxiety attacks, heart attacks, strokes or while pregnant if high risk, or right before bedtime. It is becoming more frought with complications to be an American, and with higher stakes to keep liberty or in this case freedom of press as our birthright. I am not joking on this one. Its really scary.
The next time I want to hear an a-hole talking, rather than to waste electrical energy by turning on my "temple-vision" for your latest hot air; I'll just fart.
I'd be willing to bet they'll both smell the same.......
#10
White House Communications Director Anita Dunn disclosed to the Dominican government at a videotaped conference. "Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn't absolutely control," said Dunn.
"after which she snatched a fly from the air with her tongue"
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/20/2009 12:51 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Speaking of Anita Dunn, the one who came out recently in the news as having Chairman Mao as one of her favorite political candidates. Her Mao quote that made the rounds recently made me laugh because Mao basically dodged the question. Her quote is Mao dodging the question and she puts that up as some kind of heroic choice. Damn she's a hack.
#14
Anita, allow me to tell you a little thing here about men that I think would also apply to the media.
It's one thing for a guy to be whipped, and to know it. A lot of guys can live with that, and in a weird way, actually be happy about it. It's another thing completely for his girl to brag about it openly to whoever will listen. A guy's got his pride, after all, and you might not like how he's gonna act after hearing this.
(Yes, I know, sometimes girls are that way, too, but mainly guys. And yes, I can tell by looking at her she probably doesn't have much experience with guys in personal relationships, either.)
#15
Anita Dunn is married to Robert Bauer who is a partner at Perkins Coie, a political law firm. He is President Barack Obama's personal attorney and has been the general counsel of the Obama for America presidential campaign since January 2007. He is also the general counsel to the Democratic National Committee.
It seems that these clowns have little regard for the Bill of Rights and Constitution. These documents are nuisances and impediments to get around that don't serve their purposes.
Conservative Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) has endorsed former Florida state House Speaker Marco Rubio (R) in Florida's open Senate race.
Inhofe's endorsement means he will oppose the NRSC-back candidate in the race, Gov. Charlie Crist (R).
"Like me, Marco believes that the federal government works best when it returns dollars, decisions and freedom to our local communities and families," Inhofe said in a statement. "In the Senate, Marco will stand up for America's taxpayers, not with President Obama and dangerous big government spending."
The Inhofe endorsement comes a week after Rubio announced raising a strong $1 million in the third quarter. His campaign appears to have new life, as Crist's standing as the presumptive nominee begins to be called into question.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/20/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Seems someone inside the beltway is getting a clue. Too bad its not the K-streeters and "leadership" of the GOP.
A poll released over the weekend shows that only 34 percent of Californians approve of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-Calif.) job performance, down 14 points from March.
Only the opinions of the voters in her district matter, just as the world does not get a say in who becomes president of the United States. Se we're stuck with Representative Pelosi until her voters decide to throw her out. We do have a shot at getting her out of the Speaker's office in 2010, though.
The study, conducted by the Field Research Corportation, also showed that 44 percent of respondents disapproved of her job performance while 22 percent held no opinion. In the organization's last poll in March, 48 percent of respondents approved of Pelosi's job performance while 35 percent disapproved.
Democrats approved of Pelosi's performance as leader by a count of 51-23, with 26 percent expressing no opinion. Republicans overwhelmingly disapproved of her performance: 7 percent approved, 79 percent disapproved and 14 percent said they held no opinion.
39 percent of "non-partisans" approved of her while 37 percent disapproved, with 24 percent responding that they had no opinion.
Pelosi's job approval had sunk to similar lows in October and December 2007 during President George W. Bush's second term.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/20/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
They decided that smoking pot was more important than fiscal freedom, so it'll probably soon be the only freedom left to them.
#2
Only the opinions of the voters in her district matter,..
Not exactly, as she holds the Speaker post as long as she has support within her caucus. If enough of the other representatives perceive she's more of a danger remaining in that post, she'll be gone as fast as Tom Delay. That's why Nancy keeps her gang of wannabe ward healers like Rangel in their chairs, so she can keep hers. As things deteriorate further in 2010, her life will become even more interesting.
Senate Finance Committee members have been notified that the committee's health reform bill was filed today. S. 1796 weighs in at 1,502 pages, according to a Senate Republican leadership source.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/20/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
CNN's Carol Costello began a new series on political talk radio on Monday's American Morning, suggesting it was unfairly dominated by conservatives, and brought on a liberal psychiatrist who theorized that Rush Limbaugh has an audience because he's "operating like the bully, and if you're on the playground...you want to be...under the bully's wing and go along with him and get...some power by proxy."
The correspondent's report, which aired just before the bottom of the 7 am Eastern hour, was the first installment in a "special series on talk radio," according to anchor John Roberts. Costello zeroed in on the listeners and why the format "can capture people for such long periods of time." A graphic on the screen during her report heralded "anger on the air: what listeners don't know about talk radio." [MP3 audio available here]
Towards the end of her report, the CNN correspondent played a sound bite from radical left-wing host Randi Rhodes, who speculated that "the reason they don't passionately listen to liberal talk radio is access" (Costello outrageously downplayed Rhodes's political leanings by describing her as someone whom "many consider a liberal talker"). The "liberal talker" noted that apparently, "ninety-one percent of talk radio is conservative." Costello continued that "according to Talkers magazine, liberal talkers fill just nine percent of the nation's news talk radio on the commercial dial. Change that, Rhodes says, and liberal listeners would listen just as much."
The 91 percent figure actually came from a 2007 report titled "The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio," written by two liberal organizations- Center for American Progress and Free Press. However, the report, which was co-authored by current FCC "chief diversity officer" Mark Lloyd, "suffers from a number of structural flaws," as a 2008 special report by MRC's Culture and Media Institute pointed out. The CMI report continued that "the CAP report's greatest flaw is ignoring noncommercial talk radio," such as NPR's many public radio affiliates.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/20/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Liberals tend to be filled with hate, not logic. That makes for dull radio.
#3
Note the sponsors of the study. It may be dominated by conservatives, but talk radio is two-way street with listeners excercising free speech and the liberty to change the dial if they so choose. The libs are really fascists at heart and get their panties in a bunch when they can't control what others think or do--Anita Dunn, case in point.
Says it all, we peons need to be told what we're doing and how to do it. We aren't smart enuff to decide for ourselves. Thank Gaia for the wisdom and guidance of our coastal liberal overlords.
#5
Maybe it is just me, but I've noticed that outside of the Religious Left, there seems to be an awakening that Obama and those that back him are dangerous. And even more importantly, the blind believers are looking more shrill and mean-spirited to those who haven't staked their identity to The Cause of Obama. And this is a huge problem for Obama. They have already had to defend Acorn as being a right wing smear and thus turn away from the fact that these people wanted to set up brothels for teenagers. They've had to find excuses for Polanski's not rape-rape with contortions about how they don't approve of the rape BUT,HOWEVER... They have to look the other way at Dunn's love of a mass murderer (not that hard to do since they've always been big fans of Che and Castro). They have to defend Pelosi's lack of action against ethics violations against democrats that are staggering in their depth. And worse for them is that Obama is wimping out on the war that they claimed for years was the one we needed to fight and make the absurd argument that we should be fighting in Pakistan instead.
I've noticed that just on the Fox battle alone, the hard core believers are having to put multiple qualifiers in their comments. Their logic goes something like this:
I think that Obama should punch up, not down, BUT Fox is not a news organization so I don't really care anyway. Or, I don't think that Obama should be in the process of determining who is and who is not a news organization, BUT....
What I've noticed is that as they get more shrill and more ridiculous in their logic, they are reduced to simply blaming the Religious Right. It's the one topic that the less fanatical dems and independents don't feel the need to back away slowly from. It's really all about a need to feel the love of hating a group that is "lesser than themselves".
But the reason I say that this Fox battle (combined with all of the others) is a problem for Obama is because the member of the Religious Left are finding their excuses for Obama starting to wear thin and worse, they aren't getting much applause anymore for jumping up and screaming at the umpire, every time Obama strikes out.
#6
the report, which was co-authored by current FCC "chief diversity officer" Mark Lloyd
At that point I said to myself the report isn't credible. The liberal shrink also sounds like she needs a shrink job herself.
Dear Abby: My wife have known some people in town for years. They are self-avowed liberals. They have drunk the Koolade and buy the whole BO deal. Not too long ago I was astounded to find out they had put a block on the FOX channel. Now these two people don't have any kids at home so the only people watching TV is them. Do they not trust themselves to take a peek at FOX? Or are they trying to make a statement of protest? Or are they just moronic about this?
#7
This country is in a race between awakening and awareness on one hand and the rise of fascism on the other. And the stakes are high as can be.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
10/20/2009 19:38 Comments ||
Top||
#8
That is exactly what I keep saying, Alaska Paul. The Obama administration is not "making mistakes" as some say. They know they have until 2010 to shore up their power if they are to keep it and they are going to go full stop grabbing any and all they can. They don't care how they look. It's just a raw power grab and sadly too many Americans are too naive to see it.
(CBS) ¯ With Democrats in charge in Washington, supporters of so-called "net neutrality" rules seem poised to finally push through requirements that high-speed Internet providers give equal treatment to all data flowing over their networks, CBS station KPIX-TV reported.
These rules at the heart of a five-year policy debate are intended to guarantee that Internet users can go to any Web site and access any online service they want. Phone and cable companies, for instance, wouldn't be able to block subscribers from using cheaper Internet calling services or accessing online video sites that compete with their core businesses.
Yet making that happen is proving thorny and it's likely that the courts and perhaps even Congress will ultimately get involved.
The Federal Communications Commission is set to vote Thursday on a proposal by the agency's chairman, Julius Genachowski, to begin crafting regulations to prohibit broadband providers from favoring or discriminating against Internet traffic.
Although Genachowski has the support of the other two Democrats on the five-member commission, his proposal has run into strong opposition from the large phone, cable and wireless companies that provide the bulk of U.S. high-speed Internet connections.
Broadband providers such as AT&T Inc., Verizon Communications Inc. and Comcast Corp. argue that after pouring billions of dollars into their networks, they should be able to operate those networks as they see fit. That includes offering premium services over their lines to differentiate themselves from competitors and earn a healthy return on their investments.
Genachowski's proposal has also encountered misgivings among Republicans on the FCC and in Congress, who fear network neutrality rules could discourage broadband providers from continuing to expand and upgrade their systems.
"The risk of regulation really inhibits investment," said Republican Commissioner Robert McDowell. Noting the agency's estimated price tag of up to $350 billion to bring broadband connections to all Americans, he added: "How do we pay for all that?"
One thing everyone agrees on is that the FCC will have to sort through some tricky issues as Genachowski's plan moves forward.
One question is how much flexibility broadband providers should have to keep their networks running smoothly by ensuring that high-bandwidth applications such as YouTube videos don't hog too much capacity and impede other traffic like e-mail and online searches. In other words, when does legitimate network management cross the line to become discrimination?
Lawrence Spiwak, president of the Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal & Economic Policy Studies, a think tank that promotes free-market approaches, fears the FCC could hurt small, rural carriers that face higher costs to build out their systems. Without the ability to manage traffic, he said, these companies could be forced to make expensive network upgrades they cannot afford.
The FCC also needs to sort out how the rules would apply to wireless systems, which have less bandwidth capacity than wire-based networks and might have greater need for traffic management. AT&T, the exclusive U.S. carrier for Apple Inc.'s iPhone, already is running into capacity challenges given the popularity of the gadget and its scores of bandwidth-consuming applications.
"There could be unintended consequences of applying net neutrality to wireless," said Christopher Guttman-McCabe, vice president of regulatory affairs for CTIA-The Wireless Association, an industry trade group.
Genachowski's plan calls for the agency to formally adopt four broadband principles that have guided the FCC's enforcement of communications laws on a case-by-case basis. Those principles state that network operators must allow subscribers to access all online content, applications, services and devices as long as they are legal.
The FCC relied on those guidelines last year when it ordered Comcast to stop blocking subscribers from using an online file-sharing service called BitTorrent, which is used to transfer large files such as online video. Comcast is challenging the FCC ruling in court.
Genachowski also wants the FCC to adopt two more principles. One would make it clear that broadband providers couldn't discriminate against particular content or applications, either by blocking them completely or by letting other traffic jump ahead in the queue. The other would require providers to disclose network management practices.
He is also seeking to extend all six principles to wireless systems, which have been largely unregulated.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/20/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
ION GUAM PDN FORUMS > BARACK WANTS ALL YOUR GUNS [via BLAIR-HOLT FIREARM LICENSING & RECORD OF SALE ACT OF 2009].
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Support for Charles Rangel within his home state delegation is showing signs of strain -- with upstate New York Democrats grumbling about the impact of Rangel's ethics woes on their already tenuous reelection chances. 
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce said Monday that it will ask law enforcement officials to investigate a fake press release sent out in the group's name. 
Kampala Over three decades ago a 14-year-old girl, her sister and a group of young teenagers from Bukwo headed to the River Amana for a ceremony that would change their lives forever.
The U.S. dollar has fallen to recent lows due to reckless Congressional spending, a key Republican lawmaker said on Monday. 
For Democrats determined to get a health care bill, Sen. Roland Burris is like the house guest who couldn't be refused, won't soon be leaving and poses a plausible threat of ruining holiday dinner. Suddenly, he can no longer be ignored.
President Obama's presidential campaign focused on "making" the news media cover certain issues while rarely communicating anything to the press unless it was "controlled," White House Communications Director Anita Dunn disclosed to the Dominican government at a videotaped conference. "Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn't absolutely control," said Dunn. 
Conservative Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) has endorsed former Florida state House Speaker Marco Rubio (R) in Florida's open Senate race.
A poll released over the weekend shows that only 34 percent of Californians approve of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-Calif.) job performance, down 14 points from March. 
Senate Finance Committee members have been notified that the committee's health reform bill was filed today. S. 1796 weighs in at 1,502 pages, according to a Senate Republican leadership source.
CNN's Carol Costello began a new series on political talk radio on Monday's American Morning, suggesting it was unfairly dominated by conservatives, and brought on a liberal psychiatrist who theorized that Rush Limbaugh has an audience because he's "operating like the bully, and if you're on the playground...you want to be...under the bully's wing and go along with him and get...some power by proxy."
