Tuesday Mashup (1/31/12)

It’s been a little while since I checked in with the Fix Noise BS factory (with an assist from the equally wretched “Daily Tucker”), but based on this, it’s still “same old, same old”…

Concerned that too many “deniers” are in the meteorology business, global warming activists this month launched a campaign to recruit local weathermen to hop aboard the alarmism bandwagon and expose those who are not fully convinced that the world is facing man-made doom.

The Forecast the Facts campaign — led by 350.org, the League of Conservation Voters and the Citizen Engagement Lab — is pushing for more of a focus on global warming in weather forecasts, and is highlighting the many meteorologists who do not share their beliefs.

If that were actually true, then how do they bother to explain the following (from here)…

The smear allegation is disturbing and important to dispense with first. Presumably (Jason Samenow of the Washington Post’s Capital Weather Gang, echoing a similar charge) is referring to the fact that we have included quotations from climate change-denying meteorologists on our site. As yet, not one of those quoted has suggested that we have misrepresented their views. Indeed, many of these TV meteorologists are openly proud to be considered deniers. They say so on air, online, in emails to us, and in their affiliation with prominent denial sites like Icecap. Compiling a careful count of weather reporters who reject the scientific consensus on climate change hardly qualifies as a smear campaign. In fact, there are many weather reporters we have researched that we believe fall in the denial camp, but we have not quoted on our site because we do not have sufficient evidence.

There’s a lot more information about the “Forecast the Facts” campaign from the Think Progress post; it definitely makes for interesting reading.

Next, I give you more corporate media hand-wringing here on the issue of so-called “Right to Work” legislation…

The battle over the right-to-work issue may be reaching a conclusion in Indiana as the state prepares to adopt its law, but the argument over exactly what the measure means for a state's economy is likely to rage on, unresolved, as it has for 70 years.

Since the 1940s, 22 states have passed laws barring unions from collecting mandatory fees from workers for labor representation. Supporters, mostly Republicans, insist the measure helps create a pro-business climate that attracts employers and increases jobs. Opponents say the law only leads to lower wages and poorer quality jobs.

The evidence on the issue is abundant, but also conflicting and murky. The clearest conclusion, according to many experts, is that the economies of states respond to a mix of factors, ranging from the swings in the national economy to demographic trends, and that isolating the impact of right-to-work is nearly impossible.

Oh, please – in response, I give you the following from here (centered on Indiana, where former Bushie and current Repug governor Mitch Daniels is the last to try and foist the “right to work” scam)…

Not only have ‘right-to-work’ laws been found to reduce wages while not stimulating job growth in states that adopt them, this week’s Economic Snapshot shows Right-to-Work (RTW) is associated with a significant reduction in private-sector pension coverage. Private pension coverage in Indiana is currently greater than in 21 of 22 RTW states but will likely decrease if the state legislature passes the RTW law.

And on this issue, I give you the following from the National Football League Players Association (this issue affects them because the upcoming Super Bowl is going to be played in Indianapolis)…

“Right-to-work” is a political ploy designed to destroy basic workers’ rights. It’s not about jobs or rights, and it’s the wrong priority for Indiana.

The facts are clear—according to a January 2012 Economic Policy Institute briefing report (“Working Hard to Make Indiana Look Bad”), “right-to-work” will lower wages for a worker in Indiana by $1,500 a year because it weakens the ability of working families to work together, and it will make it less likely that working people will get health care and pensions.

So-called “right-to-work” bills divide working families at a time when communities need to stand united. We need unity—not division. We urge legislators in Indiana to oppose “right-to-work” efforts, and focus instead on job creation.

And of course, the usual suspects have been propagandizing about “right to work” in the typical manner, as noted here.

Continuing, I give you a rather interesting bit of editorializing from The Old Gray Lady here, concerning Governor Lex Luthor Scott of Florida…

Looking for more savings, Mr. Scott pushed to privatize prisons andMedicaid and to institute drug testing for people seeking public assistance. At the same time, he provoked the ire of environmentalists by reducing financing for the state’s water management districts, directly affecting the environmentally fragile Everglades. Many of the most contentious measures, including drug testing and prison privatization, have landed the state in court.

But the governor had a few failures, too.

Umm…so, “land(ing) the state in court” over drug testing and prison privatization qualifies as “success”?

Also…

Still, Mr. Scott possesses an unshakeable belief in the free market. It is what defines him. At a lunch on Thursday about economic development, he expressed disbelief over the attacks (all-but-named Repug presidential nominee Willard Mitt) Romney has faced for being a successful private equity manager with Bain Capital.

“We shouldn’t be allowing candidates to attack people in business,” he said. “We should be saying, ‘Gosh, that’s us.’ ”

Gee, I wonder if Scott is worried that, if our august corporate media and we humble, filthy, unkempt blogger types each give Romney’s Bain antics the scrutiny they deserve, then maybe, just maybe, more attention will be paid to Scott’s tenure at Columbia/HCA, the company that “perpetrated the greatest Medicare fraud in U.S. history” according to this (as well as the fact that Scott has now transferred his interest in Solantic, a health care company he co-founded that sells cheap prescription drugs…to his wife)?

Gosh!

Finally, I give you another journey through the looking glass courtesy of Investor’s Business Daily, carping over their claim that there’s a $1.2 trillion “gap” in “Obama’s recovery” because “Real GDP climbed a less-than-expected 2.8% in final quarter of 2011” (here).

In response, I think the following should be noted from here (with a scolding for Number 44 to boot)…

Current-dollar GDP was revised down for all 3 years: $77.6 billion, or 0.5 percent, for 2008; $180.0 billion, or 1.3 percent, for 2009; and $133.9 billion, or 0.9 percent, for 2010. The percent change from the preceding year was revised down from an increase of 2.2 percent to an increase of 1.9 percent for 2008; was revised down from a decrease of 1.7 percent to a decrease of 2.5 percent for 2009; and was revised up from an increase of 3.8 percent to an increase of 4.2 percent for 2010. Current-dollar gross national product (GNP) (GDP plus net receipts of income from the rest of the world) was revised down for all 3 years: $82.9 billion, or 0.6 percent, for 2008; $174.1 billion, or 1.2 percent, for 2009; and $132.8 billion, or 0.9 percent, for 2010… Current-dollar GDP was also revised down for all 4 years from 2004-2007: $14.5 billion for 2004, $15.4 billion for 2005, $21.7 billion for 2006, and $33.1 billion for 2007.

So basically, “current dollar GDP” has been getting “written down” by the US Bureau of Economic Analysis for some time, even predating Obama back to the ruinous reign of Former President Highest Disapproval Rating In Gallup Poll History.

And I think this pretty much tells us why (and how sad is it that a publication in China has such a firm grasp of our predicament, while our supposed genius policy makers continue to caterwaul about “austerity,” insuring nothing but slower growth and/or economic contraction?).

Oh, but look – Romney is outpolling Gingrich in Florida, and the latter just made another speech calling that “Kenyan Muslim Socialist” the “food stamp” president while invoking Saul Alinsky once more.

…

(Sssh, don’t wake the American sheeple – will the last one to leave please turn out the lights?)

Monday Stuff

RIP Dick Tufeld, the voice behind an iconic boomer TV catchphrase for one of the most awful shoes that has ever aired (based on an idea stolen from Gene Roddenberry, by the way – it turned into that whole Kirk, Spock, Bones, U.S.S. Enterprise thing later for Desilu Studios instead)…



…and here is another episode of “Debunktion Junction” (Florida, as usual, does something dumb politically and ends up paying a price, Willard Mitt Romney of 2012 needs to reacquaint himself with the Willard Mitt Romney of 2005, and a South Dakota Indian tribe quite rightly sues for early voting)…

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

…and kudos to St. Louis for their parade honoring our Iraq war vets (and Paul Rieckhoff poses a GREAT question to Mayors Menino and Bloomberg)…

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

…and happy 70th birthday to Marty Balin of Jefferson Airplane/Starship/Whatever (sorry, no video).

Sunday Stuff

So RNC head pimp Reince Priebus alleges that President Obama is not unlike the Italian cruise ship captain who ran his ship aground and is, at this moment, “suspected of multiple counts of manslaughter,” as Think Progress tells us here.

…

I know the Repugs will go ever lower accusing Obama of anything they think they can get away with; given that, though, I thought it was a good idea to remind us of a president who did, in fact, get people killed for his own personal motives…



…though Priebus is merely reading from the same delusional script that his ideological fellow travelers are reading from, as Bill Maher notes here (and by the way, the Maher eye-roll towards that moron Dana Rohrabacher was for this...also, "f"-bomb alert here).



Update: God, that doddering old fossil Bob Schieffer is such a corporate media clown (and good call by karoli at C&L to invoke Capt. Sullenberger instead here).

Saturday Stuff

Happy 100th birthday to Jackson Pollock (no, he didn’t live that long - great movie about him with Ed Harris and Marcia Gay Harden, by the way)...



...and it looks like Allen West is at it again here (you must be so proud, you Floridians dumb enough to actually help elect this sociopath; love Jim Manley's response - he'd better not apologize)...



...also, Martin Bashir is a guy I should pay more attention to, and I’ll try to do so; here is some spot-on commentary about the Repugs (Bashir also appeared on “Real Time with Bill Maher” this week and looked knowledgeable and a bit funny when I saw him)...



…and yep, it’s time for “Retro Saturday Night” – enjoy.

Saturday Mashup (1/28/12)

I give you BoBo in the New York Times yesterday (here, on the matter of President Obama’s State of the Union speech the other night)…

There was nothing big, like tax reform or entitlement reform. There was no comprehensive effort to restore trust in government by sweeping away the tax credits and special-interest schemes that entangle Washington. Ninety percent of American workers work in the service economy, but Obama spoke mostly about manufacturing.

Instead, there were a series of modest proposals that poll well. In that sense, it was the Democratic version of Newt Gingrich’s original “Contract With America” — a series of medium-size ideas with 80 percent approval ratings.

Of course, the esteemed David Brooks doesn’t provide sourcing for this claim (figures). However, I think the following should be noted from here…

The truth about the fabled Contract With America is much different than (the portrayal by Jeffrey Goldberg in the New Yorker) in fact, he is propping up a thoroughly discredited bit of revisionist history. Rather than being the catalyst for the Republican’s 1994 victory, as many reporters have since portrayed it, the Contract with America actually made its debut only six weeks before the 1994 election, which makes its effect on the outcome a debatable proposition.

What isn’t debatable is that, back in the days before the 1994 election, the Contract’s celebrated “drama and clarity” was lost on the majority of Americans. The fact is, according to an article that appeared in the December 1994/January 1995 issue of Campaigns & Elections, “very few voters were even aware of this contract during the election: just 31 percent had heard of the Contract in a late October [1994] NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

“Moreover, very few Republican candidates ran television ads promoting their signing of the contract, while scores of Democrats ran commercials attacking their opponents for supporting a proposal that would endanger Social Security and Medicare.”

Similarly, a poll taken by New Jersey’s Star-Ledger in Febraury1995 found that 55 percent of New Jersey residents polled “have not read or heard much about” the Contract. The poll also found that “Among those who voted Republican, 55 percent say that the Contract with America was not a reason why they selected their candidate.”

From what I read of these things, apparently Willard Mitt Romney is getting plenty of help from the Repug establishment in deflating the candidacy of Baby Newton Leroy (and some corporate media support too, including this shocking bit of actual reporting from Brooks’s co-worker Sheryl Gay Stolberg). So try as BoBo might, somehow I don’t think all the king’s horses and all the king’s men are going to put the disgraced former U.S. House speaker back together again.

Also (and keeping with the State of the Union), the Doughy Pantload is in high dudgeon (here)…

President Obama's State of the Union address was disgusting.

The president began with a moving tribute to the armed forces and their accomplishments. But as he has done many times now, he celebrated martial virtues not to rally support for the military, but to cover himself in glory -- he killed Osama bin Laden! -- and to convince the American people that they should fall in line and march in lockstep.

He said of the military: "At a time when too many of our institutions have let us down, they exceed all expectations. They're not consumed with personal ambition. They don't obsess over their differences. They focus on the mission at hand. They work together. Imagine what we could accomplish if we followed their example. Think about the America within our reach."

That is disgusting.

What Obama is saying, quite plainly, is that America would be better off if it wasn't America any longer. He's making the case not for American exceptionalism, but Spartan exceptionalism.

Umm…here is more context on what Obama actually said…

Think about the America within our reach: a country that leads the world in educating its people; an America that attracts a new generation of high-tech manufacturing and high-paying jobs; a future where we’re in control of our own energy; and our security and prosperity aren’t so tied to unstable parts of the world. An economy built to last, where hard work pays off and responsibility is rewarded.

We can do this. I know we can, because we’ve done it before. At the end of World War II, when another generation of heroes returned home from combat, they built the strongest economy and middle class the world has ever known.

My grandfather, a veteran of Patton’s Army, got the chance to go to college on the G.I. Bill. My grandmother, who worked on a bomber assembly line, was part of a workforce that turned out the best products on Earth.

The two of them shared the optimism of a nation that had triumphed over a depression and fascism. They understood they were part of something larger, that they were contributing to a story of success that every American had a chance to share: the basic American promise that if you worked hard, you could do well enough to raise a family, own a home, send your kids to college, and put a little away for retirement.

The defining issue of our time is how to keep that promise alive. No challenge is more urgent. No debate is more important. We can either settle for a country where a shrinking number of people do really well, while a growing number of Americans barely get by, or we can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, and everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules.

Doesn’t sound so “disgusting” after all, does it?

Of course, this is in keeping with the predictable right-wing bloviation on display here…

And does Jonah have a problem with the “within our reach” language? If so, here are more examples from another president (and I’m not checking on Number 43’s veracity here, it should be noted, only the wording)…

For Americans who now purchase health insurance on their own, my proposal would mean a substantial tax savings — $4,500 for a family of four making $60,000 a year. And for the millions of other Americans who have no health insurance at all, this deduction would help put a basic private health insurance plan within their reach.

…

It is in our vital interest to diversify America's energy supply — and the way forward is through technology. We must continue changing the way America generates electric power — by even greater use of clean coal technology ... solar and wind energy ... and clean, safe nuclear power. We need to press on with battery research for plug-in and hybrid vehicles, and expand the use of clean diesel vehicles and biodiesel fuel. We must continue investing in new methods of producing ethanol — using everything from wood chips, to grasses, to agricultural wastes. We have made a lot of progress, thanks to good policies in Washington and the strong response of the market. Now even more dramatic advances are within reach.

And by the way, do you want to know how our pal Jonah rose to prominence to begin with? Check this out…

Goldberg's career as a pundit was launched following his mother Lucianne Goldberg's role in the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal, when he wrote about the "media siege" on his mother's apartment in The New Yorker.[2][3]

Goldberg has spoken of his mother and the Lewinsky scandal:

My mother was the one who advised Linda Tripp to record her conversations with Monica Lewinsky and to save the dress. I was privy to some of that stuff, and when the administration set about to destroy Lewinsky, Tripp, and my mom, I defended my mom and by extension Tripp... I have zero desire to have those arguments again. I did my bit in the trenches of Clinton's trousers.[4]

And Goldberg is the one telling us what is disgusting?

Finally (and I know I’m a little behind on this), I give you Nike CEO Phil Knight, saying the following during the funeral of Penn State football coach Joe Paterno (here)…

"If there is a villain in this tragedy, it lies in that investigation, and not in Joe Paterno's response."

And of course, the remark earned a standing ovation.

Oh, so the investigation is the villain? Not the alleged child-raping activities of Jerry Sandusky, one of Paterno’s coaches? Not “Joe Pa” himself either, of course, for turning the matter over to the trustees and not going public MUCH earlier when the trustees apparently sat on their hands?

Please read this about Nike from October 2009, particularly the following, to understand how Knight allowed those in his employment to be abused, perhaps in not quite as horrific a manner as some of those under Paterno’s charge were abused, but still bad all the same…

… because of the pressure that was placed on Nike by consumers, women workers no longer have to prove they are menstruating to get their legally guaranteed leave. Also, workers are no longer beaten with machetes or threatened at gunpoint for union organizing activity.

However, while we have seen the progress mentioned above, we still have no movement on the two most important issues - Nike workers are still being paid a poverty wage and Nike still refuses to bargain with their workers in good faith.

I’m not going to try and equate Nike’s business practices with the recruiting and coaching activities of Joe Paterno, since I believe there is no comparison. What I’m saying, though, is that, given all this, Phil Knight has no right whatsoever to try and claim the moral high ground here.

So, when it comes to demonizing the accusers of Penn State, including Joe Paterno, I have the following advice for Knight: Just (Don’t) Do It.

(Sorry – too easy).

Friday Stuff

(I hope to get back to posting one of these days - couldn't quite make it happen today, though I have stuff in my "in" box.)

Gee, I wonder if Oklahoma State Sen. Ralph Shortey thought the following was a documentary (here)…



…and I keep asking about Baby Newton Leroy’s space-based air traffic control system because I just haven’t gotten an answer, and I don’t expect that I ever will (here – more “Nail. Hammer. Head.” stuff from Jon Stewart)…



…and speaking of space (and getting a lot more serious), today is the solemn 45th anniversary of this tragedy…



…and in another milestone, Brian Wilson played the first of four sold-out performances of "Smile" at The Royal Festival Hall, London ten years ago today; a clip follows (and by the way, concerning Wilson’s remarks at the end about The Beach Boys and The Beatles, it should be noted from the concert film that Sir Paul met Wilson backstage before one of the ’02 shows and wished him luck, which Wilson appreciated – a classy moment all around).

Thursday Stuff

(I'll try to do that posting thing tomorrow, but I can't promise anything yet.)

RIP, Politifact (and kudos to Rachel here – try “Totally, Unarguably, And Completely 100 Percent True” instead, morons)...



...and here’s a poppin’ little number, for no particular reason (maybe The Mittster has this at one of his palaces – ???...by the way, that’s all I have to say that is even remotely tangential to the 256,344,722nd Repug presidential candidates’ debate tonight).

Wednesday Stuff

Godspeed, Gabby...