(I also put up some videos over here.)
1) As noted here, In case anyone had thought that the wretched specter of Bushco somehow had not invaded the nuclear talks currently underway in Washington, D.C. (the largest gathering since the 1945 San Francisco meeting of individuals representing the member countries of the United Nations), well, think again…
While Pakistan struggles to make sure its weapons and nuclear labs are not vulnerable to attack by Al Qaeda, the country is getting ready to greatly expand its production of weapons-grade fuel.
The Pakistanis insist that they have no choice. A nuclear deal that India signed with the United States during the Bush administration ended a long moratorium on providing India with the fuel and technology for desperately needed nuclear power plants.
And as noted here (from about four years ago)…
India never joined the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), but it did develop nuclear weapons. The deal is being sold to the Congress and American people on the basis of strengthening relations with the world’s largest democracy, while the fact that it undermines the non-proliferation regime is being swept under the carpet.
The deal with India also undermines US credibility in its efforts to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Unlike India, Iran is a party to the NPT and has publicly renounced nuclear weapons. Iran is subject to inspection and monitoring by the international community, which could be strengthened. The US loses its ability to influence the Iranians by dealing in such an unprincipled manner with India. Certainly Iranian leaders have not failed to notice the double standards in the US application of its non-proliferation policies.
Further, the nuclear weapons states that are parties to the NPT have obligations under the treaty to participate in ?good faith? negotiations to achieve nuclear disarmament. India has no such obligation. India gets all the benefits with none of the obligations. Iran gets none of the benefits and all the burdens. What does this say to the rest of the world?
And by the way, a notable absentee from today’s nuke meeting is “Bibi” Netanyahu of our “ally” Israel, no doubt trying to avoid a confrontation over its own unconfirmed status as a nuclear power (and of course, Israel never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty either).
2) Also, former Oregon Repug Senator Gordon Smith created the following fiction here about the efforts of FCC chair Julius Genachowski to reallocate TV station’s airwaves for wireless services…
As part of the National Broadband Plan, Genachowski has proposed asking broadcasters to volunteer to give up some of their spectrum holdings in exchange for a cut of the auction proceeds.
But Gordon Smith, a former Republican Senator from Oregon, says the plan is far from voluntary and broadcasters won't actually have a choice in the matter.
"This sounds about as voluntary as Marlon Brando saying in the Godfather that he wanted either the guy's signature or his brains on the contract," said Smith in his keynote speech at NAB's trade show in Las Vegas.
In response, I thought this was a good article, including the following…
“Spectrum allocation is always a contentious issue,” said Cedric Fernandes, VP of Technology, MobiTV. “We are somewhat indifferent, as we have enabling technologies that allow for the efficient distribution of mobile video over broadcast and/or 3G and 4G radio networks.”
He means this in the context of keeping options open for his business, but the underlying point is more important: It doesn’t make a difference how video gets from point A to point B. What matters is an efficient use of the airwaves. A dynamic mix of one-to-one and broadcast programming, with cooperation from both sides, could be the best way to achieve that.
For example, if Nielsen, wireless networks, app developers and other entities noticed that a significant number of viewers are watching a particular show over the internet, the show’s signal could eventually flip to over-the-air broadcast. If niche broadcast shows have fewer viewers in a given area, it could eventually change to internet and mobile data connections. Users wouldn’t even need to notice or care which way it’s delivered, so long as the same software played it back, which would be simple from a technical perspective.
And as wireless data devices decrease in price and coverage increases, it should be possible for any household to access programming that’s only available on the internet or cellular data networks, even if it means connecting a cellphone to a television set.
To me, that means that technological developments should be driving this whole discussion instead of threatening language from a hired gun to protect the “turf” of broadcasters worried about losing analog bandwidth.
So how about somebody telling Smith to give a rest to his gangster-ish imagery and enter the 21st century instead (though, based on this, Smith has a history of obstructing consumer choice in this technological space already).
3) Also, I give you Adam Nagourney of the New York Times with another concern troll, “oooh, those poor Dems are going to get it because this year is going to be just like the 1994 elections” columns here (with Marjorie Connelly)…
For Democrats, the biggest obstacle appears to be that they are once again working in the kind of environment that has historically proved toxic to the party in power. Mr. Obama’s favorability ratings, like Mr. Clinton’s in 1994, have slipped below 50 percent, almost invariably a bad harbinger for the party in power in midterm elections. Congress and the Democratic Party are today extremely unpopular, as they were in 1994.
“Obama has done the same kind of overreach that Clinton did back then with the tax increases and the crime bill,” said Joe Gaylord, the (Newt) Gingrich adviser who directed the 1994 takeover strategy, and who is now advising Mr. Gingrich on a potential presidential run.
To begin, President Obama signed into law the largest middle class tax cut in history with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (here). Also, Baby Newton Leroy and the brand of “values voter” reactionary Repugs that call the shot in that party now were pretty much an unknown commodity sixteen years ago, whereas they now have a record of wretched political failure they’re desperately trying to sweep under the rug (also, we in the lefty “blogosphere” – still hate that word – didn’t exist and there really was nothing whatsoever that responded to all of the corporate media garbage being foisted on us during the closing decade of the prior century and much of this first decade of the new one).
And another thing – it is pretty much corporate media gospel that the health care reform law has galvanized those nutty “teabaggers” out there, though this Mother Jones article tells us why HCR might be the best present they ever got (what with most of them being white and elderly and all).
4) Finally, I give you the following dreck here from former Laura Bush employee Andrew Malcolm…
President Obama sneaked away from the media this weekend, reportedly to watch a daughter's soccer game, and then, like Tiger Woods, he returned to the golf course but with no one allowed to watch.
(And by the way, I thought this was kind of a funny column about our presidents and golf.)
See, Obama didn’t return to the course like Masters winner Phil Mickelson, or Lee Westwood or K.J. Choi.
No, he returned like Tiger Woods.
You get it?
…
I thought this was a good comeback from Wonkette, albeit from a couple of years ago (and I can think of a really good way to use a nine iron at this moment that has absolutely nothing to do with the game of golf).
No comments:
Post a Comment