Archive for April, 2008
Dem Delegates Don’t Rule? Huckabee Signs For Hollywood Comeback!
Rep and Majority Whip James Clyburn (D) South Carolina was asked by Wolf Blitzer of CNN if after the primaries are all over and the Super Delegates have voted, does that mean the Democrat with the most delegates will be the nominee?
NO. Not necessarily. Popular vote, current polls, number of states and other factors will determine the Democratic nominee. This is BIG news, but Wolf passed on it.
No?
Republican Huckabee recently signed on with a Hollywood talent agency, now I’m beginning to see why. Just because he gave up on the delegate vote does not mean he is out of the race to become the Republican nominee, most now presume to be McCain. No, I think telegenic and funny Huckabee is now going to work on “other factors” in order to make this the most entertaining election ever.
Madonna Or Maduhna.
“I don’t know what our government does period, instead of getting us in more debt and blowing up countries,” Madonna told the Tribeca Film Festival audience as attendees Rosie O’Donnell and Natalie Portman nodded and grinned.
Notwithstanding Madonna’s ignorance the United States remains the most generous nation on earth contributing about a trillion dollars ($1,000,000,000,000) in all forms of aid worldwide.
“You can take a SOB story and a stick of candy and lead America right off into the DEAD SEA.” Will Rogers 1933.
Character Doesn’t Count!
Nationwide, in what is being called the “Bill Clinton Effect” 52% say character doesn’t count and matters less than a politician’s policies according to a Rasmussen poll released Wednesday.
Democrats, by a 2-to-1 margin, say it’s the policy options that matter most. Republicans, by a narrow 49% to 43% margin, disagree and say that character counts. Among unaffiliated voters, 49% say policies are more important while 32% say character is more important.
Dizzy’s Ten Post Round-Up
I don’t know if the electorate are really bitter or not, but today’s Ten Post Round-Up will probably leave a grimy taste in your mouth:
1: So it seems that the only people that benefit from your college education is the college and the banks that issue student loans…
America’s Most Overrated Product: the Bachelor’s Degree–The Chronicle of Higher Education
2: Glass houses come to mind…
You Can’t Complain About Sexism If You Participate In It–The Democratic Daily
3: Single mom flips the script and sues RIAA…
Accused music pirate turns the tables on the RIAA–Geeks Are Sexy
4: Dizzy is a sucker for true crime murder mysteries…
Smiley Face Killers: All About The Growing Mystery Gang–The Huffington Post
5: Wright-Obama controversy: An interesting perspective on why religion and politics should stay separate…
Separation of Church & State Really of Religion & Politics.–Hypocrisy.com
A Wright Update
I am sure a lot of people are congratulating Obama on his denunciation of Jeremiah Wright even though it took him more than 24 hours to do so. But before he tries to finally put this to rest there are still a few disturbing questions that have gone unanswered.What about all those people applauding and cheering Rev. Wright when he gave his speech at the National Press Club? What will they do now that Obama has renounced Wright? And how will the congregation react now that their church is torn between their former pastor and Obama? What about Farrakhan and all of his followers, including the men now guarding Rev. Wright? Since Obama has also denounced Farrakhan what will these members of the Nation of Islam do now? And how can the Senator truly reconcile his denunciations with the fact that he had been a part of Farrakhan’s Million Man March and that his book was named after a sermon by Rev. Wright?
Most of all, I can’t help but ask why the change of heart when just a day ago Senator Obama was defending Wright for his earlier hate filled statements? Perhaps it is because in his latest speech Wright betrayed Obama when he said that the Senator is a politician who would say whatever was needed to get elected. Hmmmm. You don’t suppose maybe Obama is now being a politician and only dumping Wright because of the strong public reaction against him? It certainly makes you wonder if on this statement maybe the Rev. Wright is right….
Separation of Church and State Really of Religion and Politics.
Separation of church and state was really about separating religion from politics. Before mass media and the internet most Americans heard the news at church and then disseminated it to friends and neighbors. To have someone in a pulpit espouse an idea was tantamont to approval from on high.
The English tradition was originally a church inhabited by the nitwit siblings with less knowledge or ability than an alder brother, and virtually no theological training or even intent. The Puritans, as odd as they may have been, resisted mixing political ideology with what they saw as theology.
Now comes the personal resurrection campaign of Rev. Wright that has put a political expedient Barack Obama who used that church when it was convenient for his ambitions in a tight spot. Irrespective of the relative narcissism of that pair it underscores separation of the religious and the political.
Republicans and Hillary Clinton are giddy watching this brace of monumental egos make the other look hypocritical. Obama tossed Wright overboard Tuesday, and looks all the more duplicitous and disingenuous.
Another Example of the Separation Created by Organized Churches
Each religion believes certain things. Included in those beliefs are things that can do nothing but create separation from someone who does not believe and understand that certain belief in the same way. Wars have been and are still being fought over the tensions that that separation creates.
Will the current televised spectacle that some label as occurring in the American Black Church (as if there really is such an institution) during an American Presidential campaign when an articulate and thoughtful half black really had a shot at the Democratic candidacy and indeed then the Presidency given the disappointment of the Bush years, cause all religious leaders to look at this serious issue? Will they look at their beliefs and try to reinterpret and represent some of their beliefs in ways that does not cause true believes to have to suspend beliefs or live a lie or fight a religious war?
That is my prayer.
Wright’s Rants Wrecking Obama
Barack Obama said Tuesday that his relationship with REV JEREMIAH WRIGHT has changed because of what Wright said contradicts much of what Obama stands for has done and is trying to do. Obama said yesterday’s “performance” by Wright was a “bunch of rants.” Obama said what Wright said contradicts his fundamental convictions; was a:show of disrespect to me” and an “insult to what we have been trying to do in this campaign.” Obama said nothing Wright said yesterday was constructive and Wright “caricatured” himself. Obama said he made clear to Wright that his “sound bites” was inexcusable when he spoke with him before his Philadelphia speech.
Obama said Wright was never his spiritual mentor nor advisor but his pastor. That parses the words “mentor” and “advisor” when compared with what Obama described in his book. Obama has been sent reeling by Rev. Wright’s radicalism. Obama said it was only yesterday that he realized the tone and impact of Wright. Main stream media is filled with denunciation of Wright.
NEWT GINGRICH said yesterday and on Tuesday’s ABC SHOW the VIEW that Wright appears is trying to harm Obama. Observation and polls appear to prove that if that is correct Wright is succeeding.
Wright’s comments have raised Obama’s already majority unfavorability ratings even higher with 41% saying he hurts their opinion of Obama.
Bravo Barack
Today at a press conference, Barack said when he goes to church it is not for spectacle, not to posture politically, not to hear things that violate his core beliefs and he says the extremists comments of Rev Wright, do not represent him or his campaign and he disavows them.
Some of the most outrageous comments Wright made included about the US being complicit in HIV, 9/11. Beyond those conspiratorial views, he said he disavowed most of his “performance’ topics. He says Wrights assertion that he “just says what a politician has to say” is not what he or his whole life has been about and that Wright did him wrong.
This kind of straight talk is what I had thought I had heard even early in his campaign. As an independent who holds positions that disqualify me for gold label membership in either of the mainstream parties, as well as smaller parties also, I detected things in his speeches that I think will cause many of his ardent supporters to experience disappointment after he is in office (of course I mean “if”).
That is because, like all presidents, he would be presented with the world as it is, not as any of us would have it were we able to mold it. He will have to start with today and will have to make the near impossible decisions a president has to make even though most voters believe there truly is a single right or wrong decisions. Wrong. Not Wright.
At that time during which he gained early strength from mostly only liberal and progressives and idealistic college students as well as the inevitable extremists in those movements, the kind of extremists that exist in all movements, that energetic support was from an adoring constituency that could not see or hear what I believe I did.
Some of those extremists and others less extreme, give voice every day on the internet in endless conspiratorial tirades on sites that because I can see both sides and admit it, I am INELIGIBLE to be a blogger. Many of you know the names of those sites.
Will that prevent him from getting the nomination and if so from beating John McCain? I don’t know, conventional wisdom and probably Vegas odds seem to think so. But if I truly knew such things, beyond a belief or a hope, I would buy up and rename Hawaii to “Justo Land” and the airports and seaports would be private.
Dizzy’s Ten Post Round-Up
Sometimes it’s hard to believe in the “benevolent brotherhood of man”. Today’s Ten Post Round-Up will probably not make it any easier:
1: The Supremes say it’s OK to require government-issued photo ID card in order to vote…
As Election Nears, Supreme Court Upholds Repressive Voter ID Law–AlterNet
2: The Secret Service rampant with racism?…
Cox reports “Noose allegedly found at Secret Service Training Center” and the Secret Service already has serious problems with racism–AMERICAblog
3: Money-saving tip: A stamp that is always equal to whatever postage is being charged for a 1 oz. letter, forever…
4: Well, it looks like the media has found Jesse Jackson’s replacement…
5: More of your tax dollars at work, supporting the troops, in Iraq…
DynCorp Manager Used Armored Car To Transport Hookers in Iraq–Muckraked
The Wright Stuff
I just watched John McCain come closer to winning the election this fall. His odds of becoming the next President increased with every word that Rev. Jeremiah Wright said this morning. Unfortunately most people were at work and missed a spectacle, a production, a carny show by a man who only cares for himself, Jeremiah Wright.The phrase “It’s all about me” was created just for this man. The Rev. Jeremiah Wright likes nothing better than to be center stage and to hear himself talk. He thinks he is the smartest, wittiest and wisest man in the room. And when given free reign as he was at the National Press Club today his attempt at humor becomes heavy handed, his sarcasm sounds malicious and he turns on the innocent as he did to the young moderator during the Q and A. This poor woman was simply reading other people’s questions and there was no reason for Wright to be mean to her and to try to look witty and smart at her expense.
As for an apology for any previous statement, forgettaboutit. It would be impossible for this man to say he is sorry because he firmly believes is he always right (no pun intended), that he speaks not for himself but for all black churches, and that he and the church are the victims to whom apologies are due.
Speaking of which, victimhood was a major tenet of his speech. I certainly could understand how the black Christian church originated by the slaves. Yet it seems as if they have never left slavehood according to this preacher. He feels that white America owes an apology to black America for something that occurred over 130 years ago. Instead of an apology I kept thinking sarcastically “Get over it already.” And apparently the government is evil and capable of doing anything, even starting the Aids virus and downing the Twin Towers, according to Rev. Wright. And with every conspiracy theory he spews his credibility drops another notch (and McCain gets another vote). I also wondered where is the outcry for the separation of church and state? Is the Rev. Wright preaching politics only when it suits him and then turns around and argues that he is not a politician but a preacher as he did later on in his speech.
Then there was his theme of divisiveness. He hammered on the message that black America was different from everyone else. When he said that their churches were not bad, only different, I again thought of his statements of God Damn America. I am sorry but to me that kind of different is bad. But I was even more astounded when he continuously said that black children learn differently. Excuse me? What does he want, a repeal of Brown v Board of Education? And throughout his speech on how black America was different I kept thinking about our founding fathers and their message of “United We Stand, Divided We Fall”….
As for the Q and A afterwards you really had to see it to believe it. This man was so damned smug as he tossed off sarcastic or scathing or demeaning remarks. He was literally strutting behind the podium and you could see his pleasure in being the center of attention while he delivered controversial remarks. It was obvious that he had prepared for questions on his prior controversial statements and he tossed off these retorts with malicious glee knowing that his answers were nonanswers that only added fuel to the fire.
I have been channel surfing through the major news channels since Rev. Wright’s performance (and it was more performance than speech). Ironically Wright has done something that I have rarely seen before – CNN, MSNBC and Fox pundits all agreed on something! Pundits on all three channels agreed that Wright is a kook who threw Barack Obama under the bus. Of all the sound bites from Wright’s speech (and believe me there are a lot to choose from) the pundits go back to Wright’s response when asked about Barack distancing himself from his preacher. To which Wright basically said that Obama is a politician who will say anything to get elected. Wow. And this is the man that Barack compares to his beloved grandmother. To which I can’t help but think “My, Grandmother, what big teeth you have!” And unless Barack decisively walks away from the Rev. Wright then this wolf in sheep’s clothing might take him down for good.
“Dozens” of Obama Media Supporters Are Playing Distressed
It seems striking to me that the talking heads who are obviously Obama supporters (Chris Matthews et al) seem most completely distressed by the witty performances of Rev Wright.
There is a poll out saying that 41% or more say the Reverend’s non bombastic debut on the national stage “with a difference” has harmed Barack Obama. Thrown him under the bus according to Keith Olberman and others.
What if those 41% were already McCain or Hilary supporters? If so, is this just so much hysteria about nothing? Could the media actually be guilty of making the news rather than reporting it?
“Ysk not what your country can do for you, Ysk….
what you can do for your country.” Circa Jan 1961, wright?
As the self appointed arbitrator of hypocrisy on and off the internet, I get it. I am the only person I know who does not have an irritating accent.
Obama Outspends Clinton But She’s Still Better Against McCain - Maybe
Obama and Clinton have spent a combined $110 million on TV ads up to now in their nearly year long and still in conclusive campaigns for the Democrat presidential nomination. Obama has shelled out nearly $70 million of the total spent so far, Still, it hasn’t necessarily worked in Texas, Ohio and then Pennsylvania. Obama outspent Chinton two to one or more in Pennsylvania and is expected to do the same in next weeks lead up in North Carolina and Indiana. Evan Tracey of TNS Media Intelligence/Campaign Media Analysis Group adds: “Clinton doesn’t have as much money … but if she’s allowed to dictate the tempo, she can make up for that lack of spending.” John Kerry spent a then record $20 million in his failed campaign four years ago.
Hillary Rodham Clinton has a better chance than Barack Obama of beating Republican John McCain, according to a new Associated Press-Ipsos poll released Monday apparently reflecting a “bounce” after her big win in Pennsylvania and repeated revelations about Obama. In a hypothetical head-to-head match up with the GOP nominee-in-waiting; she now leads McCain, 50 percent to 41 percent, while Obama remains virtually tied with McCain, 46 percent to 44 percent.
Rasmussen polling has Obama and McCain tied but McCain leading Clinton 47-44%. 37% of Republican voters nationwide now believe the Democratic frontrunner would be the tougher candidate against John McCain. That’s down from 54% earlier this month. An essentially equal number, 35%, now believe Hillary Clinton would be the stronger Democrat in November. That’s up from 20%.Unaffiliated voters are also evenly divided on this question. Forty percent (40%) see Obama as the most electable Democrat while 36% say the same about Clinton. Earlier in April, unaffiliated voters saw Obama as the bigger challenge to McCain.
Dizzy’s Ten Post Round-Up
Ah, Monday! It’s like the weekend never happened. Rest assured, today’s Ten Post Round-Up will shake those weekend cobwebs from your brow:
1: A few things the MSM neglected to report on…
Unearthed: News of the Week the Mainstream Media Forgot to Report–The Huffington Post
2: As the cost of food soars, so do the lines at local food banks…
3: Just for kicks: Join the Million Blog List…
Welcome to Million Blog List - A blogosphere experiment–Million Blog List
4: Just who will benefit most from those “rebate checks”?…
$100+ BILLION giveaway to the oil, credit card and retail industries–My Three Cents
5: Americans are coming up with creative ways to save a few bucks…
The selling of the mainstream media: A threat to American democracy
Thomas Jefferson once said, “Our citizens may be deceived for a while, and have been deceived; but as long as the presses can be protected, we may trust to them for light.” For the past eight years, George W. Bush has been breaking both national and international laws with reckless abandon and lying repeatedly to Congress and the American people. He has started two ill-advised wars, and authorized the torture of detainees from those wars. He has admitted to illegally spying on his own citizens. He has vetoed several pieces of legislation designed to improve the lives of low- and middle-class Americans, calling them fiscally irresponsible. Yet, he’s spending at least $12 billion per month on the illegal, no-win war in Iraq and is borrowing money from other nations to do so. In spite of all this, there is not much light being shone on this administration from the mainstream media.
There’s always a “honeymoon” period for a newly elected president, but President Bush’s honeymoon has gone on for eight years. The last journalist I remember challenging Bush on anything substantive was veteran White House correspondent Helen Thomas. During a televised press conference, she had a heated discussion with President Bush about the war in Iraq. His irritation at her was palpable. It was almost as if she had no business challenging him. For the most part, however, the mainstream media uses ‘big picture’ journalism when covering the Bush administration. This approach allows our government to do exactly as it pleases because nobody is paying attention to the details. This is what President Bush and his minions are counting on.
The mainstream media is neither free nor independent
The consolidation, and subsequent compromise, of the news media actually began during the Reagan administration, but it really hit its stride in the last decade. In 1983, fifty corporations controlled all of the news media in the United States. Back then, the experts found that alarming. By 1992, that number had dwindled to fewer than a couple of dozen corporations. Today, a mere five major corporations control the majority of the news media in the United States: Time-Warner, Disney, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, Bertelsmann AG (Germany), and Viacom (formerly CBS). For the sake of argument, add General Electric’s NBC, which comes in a close sixth. (1)
The door to media monopolization was opened by passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the first major overhaul of the nation’s telecommunications law in sixty-two years. This ill-conceived piece of legislation eliminated most media ownership regulations. The FCC further relaxed the rules in 2003, allowing broadcast networks to own television stations that reach a combined 45% of the national audience. When citizens, who are largely opposed to media consolidation, voiced their dissent about the changes in 2003, their opinions were simply ignored. Then, in December 2007, the FCC again voted 3-2 along party lines to eliminate the ‘newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership ban’ that prevents a local newspaper from owning television and radio stations in the same market. These decisions may be good for big business, but they are bad for Americans and for democracy.
Consolidation does not serve local communities and does not promote diversity
The media conglomerates that control our news use the public airwaves free of charge and reap billions of dollars in profits as a result. In return, they are supposed to be serving the public by producing quality programming that focuses on the concerns of local communities. They do not, however, hold up their end of the bargain. Instead, they have cut the staffing of local newsrooms and failed to address local issues. In Boston, where I live, I was surprised to find out a couple of weeks ago that three of the longest-serving members of a local television station were let go. When I phoned to ask why, I was told it was a “business decision.”
The consolidation of media outlets also results in limited ownership opportunities for women and people of color. In addition, coverage of issues important to women, people of color and other minorities, the working class and rural inhabitants have virtually disappeared.
Consolidation compromises journalistic quality and American democracy
If the public is to hold our leaders accountable, the news they rely on to do so must be unbiased and from independent sources. Consolidation, however, actually reduces the number of reliable and independent news, opinion and information sources. It also affects the way the news is reported to the public. In a study done by Pew Research Center for the People and the Press and the Columbia Journalism Review, more than one quarter of the journalists surveyed said they avoided stories that might conflict with the interests of their news organizations or its advertisers.
News Corp., Rupert Murdoch’s company, has had amazing success with Fox News Network, consistently thrashing rival CNN in the ratings in the battle of the 24-hour news networks. However, Fox feeds the general public a steady diet of right-wing commentators, like Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly, and is repeatedly accused of biased reporting. News Corp. gave $4,995,768 in individual, soft money and PAC contributions between 1997 and 2006, with $60.4% going to the Republican Party. (2) That’s where one would expect the money to go since Murdoch is a conservative. Fox network’s biased messages are then further disseminated to its affiliates. Time-Warner operates in the same manner, except that the lions’ share of its individual, soft money and PAC contributions go to the Democrats. (2) The point is that such far-reaching media influence on either side of the aisle results in bias and is unacceptable.
Where have all the journalists gone?
To call today’s breed of news person an ‘investigative journalist’ would be a misnomer. They are more like talking heads regurgitating what they are fed. There’s plenty to investigate with this administration in power, but nobody is doing it. In the fall of 2001, a series of anthrax attacks further traumatized a nation already made shaky by the 9-11 terrorist attacks. Five people died and many others were infected. The attacks made news for a while, but the story simply disappeared from the mainstream media’s radar screen. It is still an unsolved crime, but do we even know if the FBI is still working the case? Has any progress been made? We know military-grade anthrax was used. We know it was sent only to Democratic lawmakers and news media outlets. Could this be something the administration wants the public to forget? Isn’t this enough to raise some questions? Isn’t this a story that begs pursuit?
It was the pursuit of the facts by Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein of the Washington Post that resulted in the downfall of Richard Nixon. Woodward and Bernstein knew they were onto something and pursued the facts, with the encouragement, support and guidance of their superiors (who, by the way, were constantly under pressure from the administration to back off). The journalism had integrity, the facts were corroborated and the stories ran day after day, keeping Americans informed and tying all the loose ends together. We have no such situation today. In fact, many feel that the Washington Press Corps have too cozy a relationship with members of the Bush administration. Several members of the press corps have admitted that, at the end of the day, they often wind up running what the White House suggests as a story. It just so happens that packaging the news is another specialty of the Bush administration.
In 2003, the same Washington Post helped to spread the Pentagon’s lie about Pfc. Jessica Lynch. The invasion in Iraq was beginning to hit some rough times and the Iraqi people were not welcoming us with open arms, as was promised by the Bush war machine. The rescue of Jessica Lynch would be just the piece of propaganda the administration would need to rally the American public. The Pentagon painted her rescue as a valiant Special Ops effort, replete with gun battles on the ground and Black Hawk helicopters firing from the air. The Washington Post, the New York Times and other media claimed that Lynch shot several Iraqis during her rescue and sustained several gunshot wounds herself. This could only have happened with the cooperation of a complicit media, a media that did not check the facts being fed it by the government. It was months later that the truth came out. Jessica Lynch had never sustained gunshot wounds. She had indeed been severely injured when her Humvee crashed during an ambush. Her captors took Lynch to a hospital, where she was apparently treated well. As far as her rescue was concerned, her captors actually left two days before the raid took place.
By the time the media found out it was misled and recanted the story, months had passed and to some the issue was not important anymore. Sadly, there were no great repercussions for the mainstream media. It is Jessica Lynch who received hate mail for making up the story, but it was not Jessica Lynch who was guilty. The Pentagon made up the story and the media went along for the ride, much like they did when our president decided to lie about the reasons for invading Iraq. The media didn’t question the Bush administration then either.
The Bush administration isn’t just adept at twisting the truth and lying to make its point. Apparently it is also pretty adept at pre-packaging the media.
Bush administration engages in domestic covert propaganda
In February of 2006, a GAO report (3) identified over $1.6 billion in public relations and media spending by the Bush administration during 2003, 2004 and the first two quarters of 2005. For example, the Department of Education contracted with Ketchum Communications, who then sub-contracted with conservative commentator Armstrong Williams to editorialize in favor of the No Child Left Behind Act. However, the most disturbing use of taxpayer dollars is in the creation of ‘video news releases,’ something the Bush administration is apparently quite adept at. These spots are made to look like independent newscasts and are designed to fit seamlessly into news broadcasts. While the issue of legality is not addressed in the report, prior GAO reports take the position that video news releases by federal agencies violate the ban on covert propaganda if they are broadcast to the public without revealing the role of the federal government. (4)The Department of Health & Human Services hired a PR firm to develop a series of video news releases promoting the Bush administration’s Medicare Modernization Act. Another video news release filmed in Kansas City about reaction to the fall of Baghdad shows an Iraqi-American thanking Bush and the United States. Still another focused on the Bush administration’s diligence at strengthening airline security. This particular segment even utilized a PR person as a fictitious reporter espousing how remarkable the Bush program is.
Major media outlets further distribute this government-created, covert propaganda. For example, Fox uses Medialink to distribute them to 130 affiliates through Fox News Edge. CNN distributes video news releases to 750 stations in the U.S. and Canada via CNN Newsource. AP Television News distributes video news releases on a worldwide basis via its Global Video Wire.
A system in desperate need of reform
The state of the mainstream media in America is desperate and as a nation we are in need of media reform, but not the reform the FCC has in mind. Because the FCC failed to listen to the American people back in 2003, Congress has decided to intervene this time. Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) has introduced S.J. Res. 28. This legislation would veto the FCC’s December 18, 2007 decision relaxing media ownership rules, which was presented to Congress as Report and Order FCC 07-216 on February 22, 2008. The vote has been postponed until April 24, 2008 in order to give the public more time to weigh in on the measure.
This critical piece of legislation will be enough to temporarily halt big business’s stranglehold on the media. How we get back to the place where the media fully understands and appreciates the importance of its role in a democracy is entirely another challenge. This topic is worthy of a national dialogue. The preservation of our democracy relies on a free and independent media. That is the only way we can have an informed public. And an informed public is the only way our government can be held accountable for its actions.
References
(1) Bagdikian, Ben; The Media Monopoly (1992-2004).
(2) The Center for Public Integrity web site; http://www.publicingtegrity.org
(3) Government Accounting Office Study on Public Relations and Advertising Spending released February 13, 2006, by the Minority Staff of the Committee on Government Reform.
(4) See U.S. Government Accountability Office, Prepackaged News Stories (Feb. 17, 2005) (B-304-272). See also U.S. Government Accountability Office, Office of National Drug Control Policy – Video News Release (Jan. 4, 2005) (B-302710); U.S. Government Accountability Office, Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services – Video News Releases (May 19, 2004) (B-302710).
Howard Dean Clarifies
In an interview today with Tim Russert, alleged new foe of the Democrats, Howard “Dean conceded that there is no set criteria laid out for the superdelegates on how they should vote. “They have to vote with their conscience,” he said. “My personal view is that they should vote for the person who can best beat John McCain.””
Earlier in the interview he said he wants the Super delegates to commit by the end of June because if they go into the convention in Denver divided, they will come out divided. Further he said he has never seen the Super delegates go against the will of the voting majority. He was not clear how Michigan and Florida votes figure into that calculation, but said one way or another they will somehow be seated. That’s clear.
I wonder who he believes can most handily beat John McCain? He did not clarify that and of course it would be an egregious move if he did but it seemed he was making it clear that the Super delegates can meet their original mandate, that of preventing the majority from making “mistakes” as the Democratic leadership believed has happened in several past primaries that yielded Muskie, Carter and Dukakis.
I agree with Jeffry Tubin, legal analyst for MSNBC who said last week that if the Democrats can not take the White House in 2008 they should change their party name to the Whigs.
Prepare For Big Chill - Even Ice Age.
Prepare for the big chill. Notwithstanding the near hysteria over global warming the earth cooled 0.7C in 2007, the fastest decline in the age of instrumentation, putting us back to where the Earth was in 1930.
Geophysicist Phil Chapman, the first Australian to become a NASA astronaut, and who served as mission specialist on the Apollo 14 lunar mission writes the same solar phenomenon that doomed Napoleon’s army may soon stop Al Gore’s march to glory cold.
The sun goes through a series of 11-year cycles in which sunspots fluctuate in both number and intensity, greatly influencing Earth’s climate and weather. The end of each cycle is called a solar minimum, where sunspot activity is at a low point. Activity usually picks up after that as each new cycle begins. The most recent minimum occurred in March 2007. Sunspot activity should have increased shortly after that but sunspot activity has remained at a virtual standstill.
If you log on to www.spaceweather.com, you will see a current picture of the sun from the U.S. Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) with but a single tiny sunspot, dubbed number 992. The previous time a cycle was delayed like this, according to Chapman, was during what was called the Dalton Minimum, a particularly cold period that lasted several decades starting in 1790. “Northern winters became ferocious,” he says.
Solar researchers report no change in the sun’s magnetic field so far this cycle and warns that if the sun remains quiet for another year or two, it may indicate another repeat of that period of drastic cooling of the Earth. Were that to continue at that rate for 20-years a drop of 14 degrees Celsius would trigger glaciation and an ice age would return.
Chapman and increasing numbers of other scientist are asking the rhetorical question “What’s wrong with this picture.”
ET PHONE HOME YOUR MOM WANTS TO TALK TO YOU.
SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) has been listening to the “nearby” universe for decades for any sign of intelligent life elsewhere. Funding comes and goes with interest and enthusiasm and to some extent with popular movies like ET and CONTACT. But, except in science fiction, nobody has called earth yet – as far as anyone at this end of the line knows. Nevertheless devotees are trying to raise $50 million to erect an array of radio telescopes in far northern California’s Shasta County.
A light year is 5,865,696,000,000 (trillion) miles and since radio waves travel at the same speed the problem is simply the vast distances and consequently time involved. The fastest manmade object was the Helios solar probes in the mid-1970s that reached 150,000 MILE per hour. In comparison the space shuttle orbits the Earth at about 27,000 miles per hour – 5 miles per second.
Voyager 2 flew past Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune and is headed out of the solar system toward Sirius, the brightest star in the night sky, and will pass near it in only about 160,000 years.
Statisticians argue the expansive vastness and age of the universe makes it virtually a certainty life has come and gone elsewhere any number of times and some of it would have achieved high intelligence. But, it must be a tenuous process fraught with uncertainties.
Now comes an extensive genetic study that suggests human beings may have had a brush with extinction 70,000 years ago. The report notes that a separate study by researchers at Stanford University estimated the number of early humans may have shrunk as low as 2,000 before numbers began to expand again in the early Stone Age. “ An epic drama, written in our DNA, ” says Spencer Wells, National Geographic Society explorer in residence.
Previous studies using mitochondrial DNA — which is passed down through mothers — have shown that all modern humans share one female ancestor (out of thousands), the “mitochondrial Eve,” who lived in Africa about 200,000 years ago well before the near extinction.
Scientists at Rambam Medical Center in Haifa, Israel and Saharon Rosset of IBM T.J. Watson Research Center in Yorktown Heights, N.Y., and Tel Aviv University, concluded that humans separated into small populations prior to the Stone Age. About 60,000 they came back together and began to increase in numbers and spread to other areas. Today more than 6.6 billion people inhabit the globe. But , only in the last few thousand years have humans had the luxury to study and think abstractly, and only in the last 100 or so found ways to broadcast communicate.
For much of that time it is almost certain humans pondered the night sky; wondered at the twinkling stars, and just now started to listen for other intelligent life and taking the first baby steps to explore.
Hello, is anybody listening?
What is the Mission of Planned Parent Hood?
Recently a a black minister said that Planned Parenthood was begun by Margaret Sanger, and that she was a favorite speaker at KKK gatherings who wanted to eradicate blacks. He said they commit genocide on blacks, receive funding from Congress, place their offices in black neighborhoods and convert those who come there for counseling, away from condom use and other family child placement services and guide them toward abortions.
Planned Parenthood has always been supported by liberal elements and bashed by mostly religious conservative activists. This charge was made by a black minister, who statistically is in a group that will vote for Barack Obama, and failing his nomination, for Hillary, who by belonging to the Democratic Party, is part of the traditional supporters of Planned Parenthood. It will be interesting to see if that support erodes. I have supported them in general but was unaware of this kind of ancestry nor these charges.
Now here is my question, as I was flabbergasted to hear the charges. Is Planned Parenthood a valuable social service that deserves to continue to receive public funding?
I have no idea if anything on this link is true, but since its on the internet, why wouldn’t it be? It is an interesting diatribe and I would appreciate any comments that can add to or clarify her role and these accusations.