Why I Am A Blogger

If there's one thing I am absolutely damn sick of out of my bloody mind, it is yet another of these tedious, mendacious, quasi-intelligent extrusions of literary claptrap espoused by The New Republic-Liebercrat-Pretend-Democratic wing of the party I support whenever they feel that they must write the be-all and end-all column about The Infamous Netroots.

Yet another example of this was analyzed over at Eschaton earlier today; it seems that Jonathan Chait of TNR was the latest of these clueless dweebs to speculate as to why lefty bloggers exist, no doubt believing that we are all clones manufactured by The Daily Kos Factory in Berkeley, California.

I'm not going to dignify Chait's article by refuting it point by point; you can go here if you want to read more about it. I will only highlight one utterly laughable sentence.

The netroots consider the notion of pursuing truth for its own sake nonsensical.

OK, Chait, you asked for it. Since you apparently are trying to tell the world what netroots bloggers are all about without, apparently, affording us the respect of actually ASKING A FEW OF US, I will tell you why I do this.

(God, this is going to be a bit boring, and I apologize in advance. I teed off on Smerky when he wrote a "What I Believe" column in his Inky debut, but if I have any hope of shutting up people like Chait by writing one of these things myself, I guess I'd better do it - sigh).

Here goes...

I read about Dumbya doing something else stupid, dangerous, illegal, or otherwise clueless, so I blog. I read about Repugs selling the working, middle class, heart and soul of this country down the river yet again, so I blog. I read about Dems sitting on their hands while the Repugs do what I just said, so I blog. I read totally tilted misinformation tinged with more than a little sarcasm from columnists such as Tom Friedman, David Brooks, Victor Davis Hanson, Suzanne Fields, Kathleen Parker, Jack Kelly, this Ruben Navarrette person now over at CNN, and of course Smerky, Kevin Ferris, Jonathan Last, and J.D. Mullane (though not lately, which is surprising), so I blog. I read about the exact opposite from people such as Paul Krugman, Paul Craig Roberts, Paul Campos, Gene Lyons, Joe Conason and a precious few others that I think I can use as part of posts, so I blog. I read about legitimate news stories that are twisted by misinformation, so I blog. I read about corporate media shills cozying up to Bushco and not doing their jobs, so I blog. I read about courageous Democrats trying to do great work such as Russ Feingold, Max Cleland, John Edwards and Patrick Murphy and I try to help them however I can, so I blog. I see information from the Democrats, Working for Change, the AFL-CIO, The Century Foundation or People for the American Way in my "in" box and I think, "Gee, it might be neat to tie this stuff into a post if I can," so I blog. And I see news items that, through no one's fault, are missing background information that I try to provide, so I blog.

I also blog because I am inspired by other bloggers. In addition to the "A" listers we all know about, Prof. Marcus always has pithy, interesting observations about how we are looked upon by the rest of the world (wish I could say it was positive). Len Hart at The Existentialist Cowboy is a factory of scholarly posts utterly laying waste to any credibility that Bushco could ever hope to possess. Lukery at Wot Is It Good 4 along with Miguel and the rest of that bunch is connecting the dots and telling the story of Sibel Edmonds, and if you are totally unfamiliar with what they're doing, you don't know what you're missing. Shaun at Kiko's House writes interesting, reflective posts providing a refreshing context to current events. I also try to touch base with Richard at Itsez and Andrew at Pixel Monkey for other unique perspectives; I know I'm leaving out a bunch of other talented, terrific bloggers (never forget D-Mac at Philadelphia Will Do), and I apologize.

I also try to toss in some posts that I hope and pray are interesting to other people besides myself (I guess that goes for everything, really, when you think about it), and I throw in the videos as a change of pace so this blog never turns into a "one-trick pony."

I can't think of any other reasons why I engage in this exercise. I will add, though, that it takes time away from other writing projects and a bit of time from my family, but I'm sure this is the balancing act that is performed by anyone who chooses to do this. I think, in our way, we're all trying to tell the story of our life and times as accurately and thoroughly as we perceive it because that isn't being addressed anywhere else.

So there, Chait. Yes, many of us have a lot of ideological commonalities, but I would guess that our differences would quickly become apparent if we all gathered in one location. Despite that, though, I have no doubt that we would find a way to work together to tell our stories in the hope of bringing light to darkness and order to chaos in our own special way.

There is no agenda, there is no template (really), and there is no shared list of talking points. We're a discordant, rebellious bunch, and maybe, somehow, someday, all of this will matter. And I'm proud to be a part of this freak show.

And one more thing - I wouldn't read The New Republic if you paid me.

Doug Gets "Schoen" Up

The Philadelphia Inquirer published this column in its editorial section today from Doug Schoen, who is described as “an author and political adviser” (I can assure you that there's more going on with this guy, though, and I'll get to it later).

There is probably more that I could say in response to this, but this is what I have for now.

Diplomacy is back.

During its first six years, the Bush administration disparaged diplomacy. It refused to negotiate a nuclear weapons deal with North Korea, declined to allow U.N. inspectors to continue to search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and ignored the Iraq Study Group's recommendation to open a dialogue with Iran and Syria.

Over the last few months, however, this attitude has begun to change. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has embraced shuttle diplomacy in the Middle East and brokered a nuclear weapons deal with North Korea. Across the aisle, Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi braved White House objections to visit Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, while Rep. Tom Lantos (D., Calif.), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, has reiterated his long-standing desire to visit Iran.

This return to diplomacy is welcome. However, to someone who has spent a significant portion of his career as a political consultant working internationally - often in turbulent countries attempting to make the transition from authoritarian rule to democracy - this conception of diplomacy seems strangely pinched.

“The conception of diplomacy seems strangely pinched” – I don’t know what the hell that means.

Diplomacy in today's interconnected world should suggest more than sitting face-to-face with foreign leaders in formal anterooms. Instead, it should mean focused, data-driven attempts to understand and mobilize public opinion in countries whose conduct is vital to the interests of the United States.

We've done it before. In Mexico and Serbia in 2000 - and again in the Dominican Republic and Ukraine in 2004 - nongovernmental organizations and Western governments mounted subtle and successful efforts to secure free, democratic elections and, in the process, thwart anti-Western leaders. Those techniques are particularly effective in pseudo-democratic regimes, such as the ones that currently govern Venezuela and Iran. Here's how such an approach would work.

Pay attention to public opinion. Some of the most pressing problems facing the United States today can be attributed, at least in part, to its failure to take public opinion seriously.

In Iraq, even a rudimentary understanding of Islamic insurgents and the various sectarian factions continues to elude the United States. As journalists such as George Packer have pointed out, surveys and public opinion research should have featured prominently from the beginning.

The same hindsight can be applied to Iran. In 1997, a Western-oriented reformer, Mohammad Khatami, became president. His success would have transformed Iran and benefited the entire world. Yet the West allowed Khatami to fail and was then caught off guard when he was replaced by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a fundamentalist demagogue intent on securing nuclear weapons. As the United States considers how to respond to Iran's nuclear program, we would do well to spend as much time monitoring Ahmadinejad's domestic favorability ratings and cultivating pro-Western sentiment.

No. “The West” didn’t allow Khatami to fail. George W. Bush allowed Khatami to fail when he included Iran as part of his “axis of evil” in the State of the Union speech and undercut Khatami by stirring up nationalist, anti-U.S. sentiment.

Ensure that the winner wins. Democracy does not always produce results favorable to the United States: The terrorist organization Hamas' recent electoral triumph in the Palestinian territories attests to that. Yet on the whole, the United States has been well served by ensuring that the people who win elections take office - and hurt when it has ignored election fraud in sensitive parts of the world.

In 1992, the West stayed quiet and allowed Serbia's Slobodan Milosevic to steal the election. It was a decision that would cost the Balkans tens of thousands of lives.

Though such a statement could definitely be true given Milosevic’s history, I think it is naïve to imply that this is what led to the bloody conflict in that region where we still keep a peacekeeping force. The breakup of the Soviet Union and communist rule unleashed nationalist forces in Serbia, Slovenia and Croatia, with the latter two countries seceding from the federation of Yugoslavia in 1991. Short of directly involving ourselves in Serbia’s affairs with the required military force, I’m not sure what else we could have done at the time (as we found out to our detriment later, the world is full of lousy leaders, but we can’t take out all of them).

Similarly, during the 2004 election in Venezuela, the West turned away from compelling evidence that incumbent President Hugo Chavez had committed election fraud, an oversight that ensured an avowedly anti-American leader continued control of the largest oil supply in the Western hemisphere.

I guess Schoen is referring to the recall vote against Chavez, though the vote was monitored by The Carter Center and the Organization of American States, which certified the vote as “fair and open.” Also, five other opposition polls declared a Chavez victory (all noted here).

Gee, maybe if we weren’t busy trying to help organize coups against this guy (in 1992 under Poppy and 2002 under Dubya), we would not have indirectly helped to consolidate his support. Didn’t learn anything from dealing with Fidel, I guess.

Embrace exit polling. The best way to establish or protect democracy in difficult circumstances is to promote credible, outside polling, particularly exit polls on Election Day. Multiple, well-funded exit polls can help remove the temptation for incumbent governments to commit fraud, as in Mexico's successful transition from one-party rule in 2000.

Applying the strategies of public opinion research abroad is not a panacea. Indeed, the experience of countries such Venezuela under Chavez demonstrates how cleverly authoritarian regimes can misuse polling and political communications. All the more reason for the United States and other like-minded allies, be they governments or NGOs, to mount winning campaigns.

I think Schoen is on the right track with his notions to promote diplomacy and free elections, though this is kind of vanilla, boilerplate stuff here (taking on the powerful “anti diplomacy-and-free-election lobby”?).

And I wonder if the Inquirer was second on Schoen’s list anyway in terms of trying to obtain a forum? I ask that because it sounds like he approached The Daily Kos already, and Markos Moulitsas Zuniga handed him his head (gee, dude, tell us what you really think, OK?).

Oh, to be The Great Orange Satan…

Remember May Day

This link takes you to an article on the history of May Day which, despite what I consider its unfortunate association with communism, is rooted in our history instead. This would be cautionary history for us on any other date also, given the fact that this country is on a course to return to the conditions referred to in this article, sad to say.

In a similar vein, Paul Krugman wrote this Times Select column yesterday about what our esteemed captains of industry in this country are doing with their wealth generated at our expense and aided by our horrific tax policy under the current administration. You would hope that they would reinvest it into their businesses for expansion and greater employment opportunities (of course, you would hope that, but you would be wrong).

Jane M. Von Bergen wrote this column on Saturday in the Inquirer about workers who have died on the job, remembered in a ceremony at the Sheet Metal Workers Hall in Philadelphia (registration required). And the Daily Kos blogger Devilstower has a great post here about the truth behind the alleged shortage of tech workers in this country.

Finally, here is a Guest Opinion that appeared in Saturday’s Bucks County Courier Times from Bruce Paone who, according to his bio, is a lifelong resident of Bucks County and a married father of two adult children. After pursuing undergraduate studies in the 1970s, he has acted in various capacities within the corporate setting, including owning and operating his own business (I'm troubled by his characterization of manufacturing as "a lost economic sector," but I think he makes good points otherwise).

Because so many notable business pundits appear bemused by America’s most recent economic vexation, specifically the collapse of the mortgage markets, I thought I’d take a crack at edifying readers, to the extent that I’m capable, as to its true nature and causes.

What’s actually occurring in this economy is the globalization of assets and wealth. That is to say, because the value of American labor is falling so precipitously (due to the use of cheap foreign labor around the world), the value of the assets held by workers is falling in direct correlation with their declining wages. It must, and here’s why:

A worker formerly employed in a lost economic sector (manufacturing, for example) earned between $50,000 and $60,000 annually. That job gets outsourced. Now that worker takes a job paying $20,000 to $25,000 annually. All the tax cuts, cheap foreign goods, and low-paying jobs created by President Bush and globalization aren’t going to restore that worker’s former standard of living.

Presently, someone trying to pay off a debt service based on his former “un-globalized” salary and prior level of affluence just can’t do it. Now that America has been globalized, that worker – along with all others of the same economic rank – can’t afford the assets he has purchased and is trying to hold on to.

Just as wages within workers’ economic sector are being deflated, so must the value of their assets deflate. This has to occur so that new members of their socioeconomic group, those just entering America’s global work force, can afford to participate, including those living and working here illegally.

What we’re seeing now is just the beginning of a global revaluation, a downward harmonization of American workers’ livelihoods with the livelihoods of the world’s other working people. Furthermore, this state of affairs isn’t going to end any time soon, not until the descending worth (wages and assets) of America’s working classes meets the ascending worth (wages and assets) of the labor they compete with globally.

Therein lies the rub. Most of the rest of the world’s labor works for nothing, or almost nothing, and holds no assets. Truth be told, the only country whose entire economy has prospered due to globalization is communist China, where free-market capitalism doesn’t exist and where every societal need is provided by the government.

As Ross Perot so aptly phrased it during his debate with Vice President Gore in 1993, we’re in “a race to the bottom.”

Exacerbating this crisis is the fact that, while the wages and assets of those forced to compete globally are deflating, the costs of goods and services they must provide to subsist are inflating. The primary sources of this inflation, it seems evident to me based on my own reading, are deregulation and President Bush’s lust for printing money, principally to pay for the globalization of Iraq.

As for the true health of America’s overall economy, international spending is out of control; Iraq alone is costing American taxpayers more than $412 billion! Yet the Washington oligarchs have no compunction.

Across the board, Americans have experienced the steepest decline in their standard of living since The Great Depression as the United States has become a debtor nation. Bankruptcies, home foreclosures and personal debt are at an all-time high, as is our trade deficit, while concurrently real wages and property values plummet.

Still, globalist fanatics boldly proclaim their manifesto: “Free trade will promote a global ecumenism and provide us economic prosperity.” All the while America’s two greatest exports remain her jobs and wealth.

With the mendacious predictions that brought about globalism in the first place (being implemented without the true consent of the governed), and with America’s economic power declining, here’s the real question: What type of country is America destined to become in the 21st century?

Perhaps the answer can be found only in the past. Perhaps in Charles Dickens’ novel, “A Tale Of Two Cities.”

Sorry, I know this isn’t very cheery stuff, but this is the reality (click here for more information).

Happy Mission Accomplished Day!

(Not really that happy of an occasion, I’ll admit…).

I should note that Atrios has all of this covered from wall to wall, you might say, so if you haven’t gone to Eschaton yet, please do so (after you read this post, of course :-).

To me, this infamous anniversary is yet another reminder of the egregiousness of Bushco’s lies. I mean, if you’re going to be evasive and mendacious, don’t do so in a way that insults our intelligence.

Here’s what I mean (regarding the actual “Mission Accomplished” banner that appeared on the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln); the post from this link by Lisa Rein informs us that, on October 30, 2003, Dubya said that the banner wasn’t his idea. Instead, it came from the actual crew of the ship, which had finished its 10-month tour just in time for the infamous photo-op.

The banner didn’t mean that the mission in Iraq was accomplished, according to President Brainless (who, apparently, had a major private hissy fit recently – continues to astonish me how people can still think this guy is “playing with a full deck”). The banner meant that a mission of the vessel was accomplished.

Riiiight…

Name for me any naval crew throughout the history of recorded time that would create and unfurl a banner for completion of its mission, let alone doing so on the exact same day that the President of the United States lands for a major oh-I’m-so-great-I’ll-just-pat-myself-on-the-back speech.

And let’s not forget the phony bit of staging noted in this story, as follows…

Despite initial claims that the ship was too far out to sea for a helicopter landing, forcing the president to use a jet, the Lincoln was actually within helicopter range when Mr. Bush arrived.

The jet flight was much more dramatic than a helicopter arrival would have been, as the president took the control stick for part of the flight and emerged on deck wearing a flight suit and helmet.

In addition, Pentagon officials told the Washington Post that after the president's speech, the Lincoln waited offshore for hours while he slept rather than heading into port after its 10-month voyage.

So the crew, after its 10-month voyage, still had to wait while Dubya nodded off before they could pull into port.

I know future generations will study this period in our history and render their judgments. The problem is that I think many will find it so farcical and absurd that they’ll never believe that it really took place.

Monday Videos

Barenaked Ladies ("Wind It Up," one of the great "hey-this-relationship-is-toast-so-let's-go-down-in-flames" breakup songs; I always wondered what happened to Robert Palmer's background singers, and don't they work hard too - I think I saw this kid in the young one's day care class one day, and doing the very same things)...



...and a great big Happy 74th Birthday wish goes out to Willie Nelson ("Blue Eyes Cryin' In The Rain" - he's such a larger-than-life character that it's easy to forget how good a singer-songwriter and musician he is; the best friend our family farmers ever had).

The Inky Calls Defeat A Victory

Brian Tierney and Philadelphia Media Holdings L.L.C. can “whistle in the dark” all they want over the fact that the daily paid circulation of the Inquirer rose 0.6 percent based on the latest report from the Audit Bureau of Circulations (here), but the Sunday paper circulation declined by 2.5 percent, and the Sunday editions are where newspapers make their money.

I wonder if the Sunday circulation slid because of the installation of Smerky into the “Currents” sections (it would be cumulative, I realize, maybe one too many straws on the camel’s back, when added to Jonathan Last and others…Mark Bowden’s contributions have been interesting, but then again, he’s a legitimate journalist). And by the way, they snuck in Little Ricky Santorum a week ago in some column supposedly pertaining to “family values” or something – you can tell how much attention I paid to it, and I honestly can’t find a link.

The paper’s almost microscopic rise in weekday circulation went slightly against the national trend of declining daily newspaper circulation, as noted here.

And I honestly don’t mention this to delight in the Inky’s misfortune. I’m only pointing out that this is what happens when the paper fails to understand this market and instead delivers recycled noise and prose that merely frames right-wing talking points instead of the groundbreaking journalism this newspaper once produced regularly in an era when it mattered to them.

He's Your Daddy

I’ll give Bushco National Security Advisor Steve Hadley points for persistence if nothing else based on this story that appeared in today’s New York Times by Sheryl Gay Stolberg and David E. Sanger. It seems that Hadley is still looking for someone to serve as “War Czar,” despite the fact that Hadley has been shot down by three generals who he approached about the job earlier in the month.

Boy, if there was ever an assignment that you would want to stay away from with the proverbial ten foot pole, this would be it.

And assuming that Dubya wanted this to be anything more than a ceremonial position (definitely atypical for these guys, I’ll admit), it would have to be entrusted to someone who could make this pitiable charlatan finally, at long last, pay attention to what is going on in the hell hole that he, more than anyone else (with the possible exception of Dick Cheney), has created.

So, George W. Bush, allow me to introduce you to the perfect candidate for “War Czar.”

Meet George H.W. Bush.

I have issues with Poppy too, but they’re drops of water compared to the ocean of difficulty I have with his son. Out of a sense of a father’s desire to let his son try and manage things (as nearly as I can tell), he has stood aside while his ungodly prodigy has run the ship of state straight into a reef upon which it has very nearly sunk.

If there was ever a time for a father to step in and corral his misbegotten son, it is definitely now (so many analogies, but one which comes to mind immediately is Anthony Quinn as pere to Earl Holliman in “Last Train From Gun Hill”…a failing of mine I guess that I reference this stuff in terms of movies and T.V. shows – almost Kubrick-esque (word?) in its absurdity to the point where it’s hard to tell the difference at times).

Also, I think the article from this link communicates that Bush 41, along with his former National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft, understood and continues to understand what is going on better than anyone else among the current cabal that has made such as hash of things, particularly this excerpt (noting why we didn’t go all the way to Baghdad after Gulf War I, and it looks to me now like the authors possess the wisdom of the ages for that)…

While we hoped that popular revolt or coup would topple Saddam, neither the U.S. nor the countries of the region wished to see the breakup of the Iraqi state. We were concerned about the long-term balance of power at the head of the Gulf. Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream, engaging in "mission creep," and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We had been unable to find Noriega in Panama, which we knew intimately. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger and other allies pulling out as well. Under those circumstances, furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-cold war world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the U.N.'s mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the U.S. could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different--and perhaps barren--outcome.

Yep, Poppy sounds like the guy for this job, all right.

A Big Media Lauer Lovefest

I try to avoid “puff” pieces in the TV news biz, particularly regarding some of our corporate media icons, but I did find this column by David Bauder of USA Today about Matt Lauer of The Today Show.

I have neither the time nor the desire to indulge in weekday morning television and thus can’t adequately critique Lauer in real time, so I’ll have to rely on Bauder when he says that Lauer’s questioning of his boss, MBC News President Steve Capus, about the whole Imus fiasco was “direct, sharp, and to the point.”

Oh, and I have to laugh when I read about how Lauer apparently was unforgiving to Capus, stating that “NBC was caving to pressure from advertisers and some of the loudest voices” when it let go of Imus. See, that’s an issue when it happens to someone who is sympathetic to the Repugs, as Imus was by granting them air time so frequently, but it’s OK when, say, a large segment of this country goes utterly insane at the sight of Janet Jackson’s 40-year-old, diamond-studded, African-American boob during the Super Bowl halftime show to the point where a 7-second delay was added to the performance of The Rolling Stones at the same venue the year after, and a song lyric by the group deemed controversial even though it had been heard on “classic rock” radio stations a million times before was edited out.

Well, as long as Bauder is creating this heroic narrative, I thought it would be a good idea to recall some episodes involving this supposedly evolving journalistic icon.

As you can read here, it would have been nice if Lauer had known, when interviewing Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, that the Iraq Study Group report by Charles Duelfer had stated that Saddam Hussein had no formal strategy for reconstituting his WMD program after the first Gulf war, instead allowing her to state, unchallenged, that "it was clear that he was continuing to pursue (WMD).”

And Lauer acknowledged the Repug PR spin here on the "Pelosi and the plane" non-story, but still tried to turn it into a negative towards her at the end.

Oh, and of course, Lauer notes here that Pelosi is guilty of "bad behavior" in her trip to Syria, accused by Dick Cheney, a Ph.D candidate on the subject, reading off a list of unchallenged freeper talking points.

And as we all know, Democrats took money from Jack Abramoff also, according to Lauer, as well as Katie Couric and Timmeh Russert, although no proof has ever substantiated that charge (here).

So maybe instead of The Peacock Network blaming the fact that more people are getting their information in the morning online versus the teevee or crying about a lack of bad winter weather (happily, too late for that now), maybe they should make sure their lead person on their flagship morning show sitting in the big chair reports the news the way he’s supposed to (though he admittedly has a lot of company when it comes to falling down at that task).

Saturday Videos

Happy 64th birthday to The Fantastic Johnny C ("Boogaloo Down Broadway" featured in this unintentionally hilarious '60s film clip: I think they filmed "Night Of The Living Dead" at around the same time as this program, and probably the same area (same extras??), and I hadn't seen saddle shoes since the Johnson Administration; at least the judges bothered to put out their cigarettes first, and who can forget Jonathan King anyway - predates me, but not by much)...



...now, let us go from the ridiculous to the sublime; as an appreciation for Mstislav Rostropovich, here is his performance of the prelude from Bach's Cello Suite Number One.

The Inky's Funny Math On Patrick

So one of the headlines in yesterday's front page story on the impasse between Congressional Democrats and President Brainless on the Iraq Supplemental states, "Mixed on Murphy: His Stand Leaves Voters Divided."

Uh huh.

Well, here is more from writer Larry King's article (prefaced by noting Patrick's slim margin of victory over Mikey Fitzpatrick last November, hence the "again" reference)...

"Back home, reaction again revealed a county divided. Most voters interviewed yesterday supported the notion of getting out, but legislating a deadline left some at odds. Many were oblivious to Murphy's stance, or his unique credentials to be a spokesman for the Democratic opposition to the war."

Well, at least he didn't say the "Democrat" opposition. And I don't know how on earth anyone in Bucks could know who Patrick Murphy is but be "oblivious to (his) stance," but I'll take King at his word on that.

The part that gets me, though, is how most voters wanting to get out of Iraq while some opposed a deadline constitutes a 50-50 split (implied when stating that Bucks County is "divided" on the Iraq war).

Also, how can Bucks be "divided" when the ubiquitous G. Terry Madonna of Franklin and Marshall College, the person The Philadelphia Inquirer always contacts regarding public opinion polling in stories about politics, says that "pre-election polls (last November) found greater dissatisfaction with President Bush and the war among Bucks voters than in most of the state"?

It doesn't sound to me like Bucks is very "divided" on the Iraq war, and I'm not reading anything in this story to tell me that Bucks is "divided" on Congress installing a timetable for withdrawal as part of war funding.

But speaking of math, Patrick noted the following...

"Ninety-five percent of my time is spent on local issues," he said, "yet 95 percent of our press has been on Iraq."

And that is the only reliable math that appeared anywhere in this story. And if you guessed that it appeared at the very end, then give yourself a gold star pat on the back.

Friday Videos

Happy Birthday to Kate Pierson of The B-52s, she of the bigass beehive hairdo playing keyboards in this clip ("Dance This Mess Around") from 1979 (I dare not mention the name of the show lest there be legal trouble, but I'll give you a hint; the guest host in the parka is Teri Garr - close enough for the '80s...



...also, here is a link once more to the John Edwards petition telling our Democratic congress not to go "all boneless" and cave to Dubya on Iraq, and though I don't think we need any motivation to sign on, I'm going to provide it anyway ("Dover," by John Flynn).

Time To Bleat The Press Again

The Overseas Press Club dinner was held in Manhattan last night, as noted here (no word on whether or not Rich Little was on hand to render bad impersonations of ex-presidents), and various press luminaries gathered to tell war stories (figuratively and literally) and dine on asparagus napoleon, black bass and a dessert sampler, according to the story.

I’m not being snarky by pointing that out, by the way. I think some of these men and women are entitled to kick back in style on occasions like this, given that they usually have to live out of their suitcases in some truly God-forsaken locations to do their work on a regular basis.

As I read about the reminiscences of Andy Rooney (who is a thoroughly accomplished writer and a lot more than the end-of-60-Minutes chronic complainer, by the way) and the praise heaped upon the Washington bureau of McClatchy Newspapers (God, I wish they’d held onto The Inquirer – the bureau was singled out in Bill Moyers’ fine program the other night which I will see eventually), I unexpectedly came across this testimonial regarding media coverage in Iraq…

Then there was Rita Cosby, recently departed from MSNBC, saying she wants to see more coverage of the soldiers in combat. A veteran of Afghanistan and other hot spot reporting, she says "It should get more coverage on American news. We can't lose sight of Americans involved."

Uh, what exactly has Rita Cosby done to merit a place in some imaginary journalistic pantheon that would consider her as a legitimate member? Is it merely her outstanding resume with her thoroughly verifiable credentials? Is it her fervent desire to “break through the glass,” if you will, to tell the story?

I mean, this woman was let go from both Fox and MSNBC; I guess, as noted here, Extra or The Insider is next.

Fortunately, Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times (who is doing some truly courageous overseas reporting for the New York Times on a catalogue of human rights abuses) took the occasion to state the following…

Kristof, a former foreign correspondent, went on to push journalists to go beyond just reporting. "I don't think we should be embarrassed if we have a little bit of advocacy, that we can do good. We have to serve the public good, not just the bottom line," he declared. "The reality is that we do have an incredibly valuable spotlight."

In addition, the columnist urged his colleagues to do more stories off the radar, and more in-depth. "We do a pretty good job of covering news that happens on any one day, particularly if it happens at a press conference," he said. "We do need to try harder to cover stories that aren't sexy and are the reasons we went into this profession. We in the news business have to think about our larger responsibility to society."

I know there are lefty bloggers out there who dump on Kristof from time to time, and I swear to God, I will never understand why.

Update: Speaking of courage in the press, Digby via Atrios has a great post on someone who came and went amidst the media "flotsam and jetsam" (I hesitate to say this is a must-read, but I'll say it anyway - this is a must-read).

And finally (speaking of media), I just wanted to point out the passing of Jack Valenti as noted here. Yes, he was a player among political and corporate types for years, but I would ask you to consider something.

Valenti established the ratings for motion pictures in 1968, and though they have always been arbitrary to an extent, I would argue that this helped free filmmakers from studio conventions, labeling content in an age-appropriate fashion. This resulted in all kinds of stories written, directed and acted in new ways that led to some of the greatest films ever made in the 1970s.

Thanks for that, Jack.

End This War

The latest from John Edwards...

Are you ready to end this war? Then it's time to act.

In the last 48 hours both houses of Congress passed a bill to end the war by funding the troops with a clear timeline to bring them home. Bush's inevitable veto will probably happen in less than 4 days.

Everything depends on what Congress does next. Many in Washington think it's time to give in. We made our point, they argue, and now we should just give Bush another blank check to extend his war.

No. This Congress was not elected to make points—it was elected to end the war. When Bush vetoes, Congress must pass another spending bill just like this one, that funds the troops and brings them home. And they should do it again. And again. Until we end this war.

We've got about 96 hours to flood Washington with the names and comments of constituents calling on Congress to stand firm. We're aiming to deliver 100,000 names and comments from all over the country before Congress decides its next move.

We are not spectators in all of this. Our voice has real power. Please use yours today:

Click here.

What are we up against here? You've seen it already.

How many times have you already heard things like "Democrats are the party of surrender" or "Democrats want to wave the white flag" from right-wing talking heads?

This is the classic Rove/Bush strategy: Pump the airwaves so full of frightening spin that the Democrats second guess themselves into paralysis and give up.

Not this time.

We will not be intimidated because we see what's behind every empty, chest-thumping right-wing talking point. We see another soldier who will never again leave his wheelchair. We see another American family stricken with grief. And we see hundreds of thousands of our men and women in uniform waking up every morning wondering if their family will be the next to lose someone they love.

That's why we have no choice: we've got to be louder than Rove, louder than Bush, and louder than any fear that might throw Congress off course. That might sound impossible. But if that's what it takes, then we've got to do the impossible—and together I firmly believe that we can.

Please add your name and comments today, and we'll make sure you are heard in Washington at this critical time.

Click here.

Thank you for taking action when your country needs you most.

Sincerely,

John Edwards
Friday, April 27, 2007

To learn more, click here.

Where The Rubber Meets The Road (4/27/07)

As reported in last Sunday's Philadelphia Inquirer, here is how Philadelphia-area members of Congress were recorded on major roll-call votes last week.

House

D.C. congressional seat. The House passed, 241-177, and sent to the Senate a bill to expand the House from 435 to 437 seats by declaring the District of Columbia a congressional district and awarding Utah another House seat.

A yes vote was to pass the bill (HR 1905).

Voting yes: Robert E. Andrews (D., N.J.), Robert A. Brady (D., Pa.), Michael N. Castle (R., Del.), Charles W. Dent (R., Pa.), Patrick Murphy (D., Pa.), H. James Saxton (R., N.J.), Allyson Schwartz (D., Pa.), Joe Sestak (D., Pa.) and Christopher H. Smith (R., N.J.).

Voting no: Jim Gerlach (R., Pa.), Tim Holden (D., Pa.), Frank A. LoBiondo (R., N.J.) and Joseph R. Pitts (R., Pa.).

Not voting: Chaka Fattah (D., Pa.)

I had planned to ask Tim Holden why on earth he would oppose a U.S. House Seat with full privileges to the District of Columbia (as opposed to the one now in which Eleanor Holmes-Norton doesn’t have the authority to vote on anything), but his web site will not accept correspondence from outside of his district. Nice.

Small business aid. The House passed, 267-158, and sent to the Senate a bill that would spend $562 million over six years to make the Small Business Administration more responsive to companies harmed by natural disasters.

A yes vote was to pass the bill (HR 1361).

Voting yes: Andrews, Dent, Fattah, Gerlach, Holden, LoBiondo, Murphy, Saxton, Schwartz, Sestak and Smith.

Voting no: Castle and Pitts.

Not voting: Brady.

I guess Castle and Pitts aren’t expecting any flooding in Delaware and Lancaster County for the foreseeable future. I hope they’re right.

Iraq troop withdrawal. House members affirmed, 215-199, a previous vote that requires a March 1, 2008, start for withdrawing U.S. forces from Iraq. This vote occurred in advance of House-Senate negotiations on a $100 billion war-funding bill (HR 1591) containing the deadline.

A yes vote was to affirm the troop-withdrawal deadline.

Voting yes: Andrews, Brady, Murphy, Schwartz and Sestak.

Voting no: Castle, Dent, Gerlach, Holden, LoBiondo, Pitts, Saxton and Smith.

Not voting: Fattah.

Your basic slam-dunk here, with the predictable partisan opposition…

Executive pay. The House passed, 269-134, and sent to the Senate a bill empowering shareholders of publicly traded companies to conduct nonbinding votes approving or disapproving of top executives' compensation.

A yes vote was to pass the bill (HR 1257).

Voting yes: Andrews, Dent, Holden, LoBiondo, Murphy, Saxton, Schwartz, Sestak and Smith.

Voting no: Castle and Pitts.

Not voting: Brady, Fattah and Gerlach.

I guess the securities in the portfolios for Castle and Pitts contains companies managed efficiently to achieve maximum profitability to the point where earnings accurately reflect the worth of their management (in other words, no Circuit City). How astute of them.

Of course, it would be nice if they gave a fig about the rest of us, though I know that’s WAY too much to expect for Pancake Joe (I hope Castle’s health is OK – that might be a reason for these awful votes).

Water projects. The House passed, 394-25, a bill authorizing $14 billion over several years for nearly 700 Army Corps of Engineers projects, such as navigation, flood control and shoreline protection.

A yes vote was to pass the bill (HR 1495).

Voting yes: Andrews, Brady, Castle, Dent, Gerlach, Holden, LoBiondo, Murphy, Pitts, Saxton, Schwartz, Sestak and Smith.

Not voting: Fattah.

Senate

Medicare drug prices. Voting 55-42, the Senate failed to reach the 60 votes needed to advance a bill requiring the U.S. government to use its purchasing power to achieve lower prices in the Medicare prescription-drug plan.

All Philadelphia-area senators voted to advance the bill (S 3).

Intelligence budget. The Senate failed, 50-45, to reach the 60 votes needed to end a GOP filibuster blocking action on the fiscal 2007 intelligence budget. The bill (S 372) would require the CIA to tell Congress the locations of its secret prisons abroad and identify interrogation techniques.

A yes vote was to advance the bill.

Voting yes: Thomas Carper (D., Del.), Bob Casey (D., Pa.), Frank Lautenberg (D., N.J.) and Robert Menendez (D., N.J.).

Voting no: Arlen Specter (R., Pa.).

Not voting: Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D., Del.).

I admire what this bill is trying to achieve, but I don’t think this will ever be passed; the part about the interrogation techniques is really a reach. Good try by the Dems, though, to try and bring an element of sanity to what should be our intelligent prosecution of the legitimate war or terror.

And by the way, screw you, Arlen.

This week, both chambers passed the conference report of the bill funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and setting a timetable for withdrawing U.S. forces from Iraq.

Don't Give In, Ed

As noted in this Philadelphia Inquirer story, this banner was displayed at a gun rights rally in the state Capitol Rotunda in Harrisburg, PA protesting legislation sponsored by Angel Cruz of Philadelphia requiring gun registration and a $10-a-gun annual fee.

Here is how Governor Ed Rendell responded…

At a news conference yesterday, Gov. Rendell decried the violent sentiment and racist overtones in the banner's language, but said he did not support a state police investigation into the incident.

"I prefer to use the state police to protect people," Rendell said. "Rep. Cruz should take it for its worth and understand that there are people out there who say inappropriate things. He should let it go."

Wrong answer, Ed.

I support Gov. Rendell perhaps to a fault, some would say, though I think they’re incorrect. However, I’m tired of watching politicians cave in the face of noisy idiots.

Yes, it’s wearying to deal with people who refuse to listen or engage in anything that approximates an informed discussion, but that comes with the territory, unfortunately, especially if you hold a position in government. Besides, that kind of mentality is responsible for the repeal of the motorcycle helmet law in this state.

(As an aside, I should point out that I set up comment moderation again in response to a recent post. And since I’ll manage to piss off both the pro-gun and anti-helmet people at once here, I’m sure I’ll have to maintain it for at least a little while.)

And I love this excerpt also…

One of the protesters who held the banner, Alan Kiser of Warren, said yesterday that an investigation would be "totally frivolous."

"I didn't even know the color of the guy's skin," Kiser said.

(As if that has anything to do with it when all is said and done…).

Oh, I don’t know, Mr. Kiser. If the case were to be made that your sign constituted a terrorist threat and you were tried and convicted of such a charge, it would constitute a first-degree misdemeanor punishable by a maximum sentence of five years in prison, as you can read here. That doesn’t sound very frivolous to me.

I’m not going to say that you would deserve that for your stupidity; I’d say giving you the scare of your life over it instead would suffice.

Update 4/28/07: The same is true for the person who threatened House Rep. Jewell Williams here (registration required).

Mitt Romney, Surrender Monkey

Even on a good day, it’s hard to take Michelle Malkin seriously, but on a day such as this in which Mitt Romney, presumptive Repug presidential nominee on behalf of all of the fundie hypocrites, says that “it’s not worth heaven and earth” to try and capture bin Laden, it is impossible.

See, the woman who defended the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II alleges, with the help of a couple of her acolytes here (h/t Atrios), that the Democrats should be considered “the white feather party” in light of the recent passage of the Iraq Supplemental with timelines for troop withdrawal.

Now I ask that you consider this while reflecting on mcjoan’s great post on Romney that I linked to above. You know, the one where Romney thinks it’s too much trouble to utilize any and all resources from the country that is supposed to be the most powerful on earth to capture and, if at all possible, kill outright the individual responsible for the worst terrorist attack on our soil.

Here is a link to information on the 9/11 Memorial Garden in Lower Makefield, Pa. From there, you can read the stories of the 17 fellow Americans from Bucks County, Pa. who died on that most horrific of days. And, inasmuch as my own words on this subject matter for anything, here is a prior post.

As I noted here, Romney had planned a little while back to give a speech something along the lines of John F. Kennedy’s speech stating that his religion was secondary to the political office that he sought. I’m still waiting to hear about Romney’s supposed visionary words on that subject. Or did he bail out on that also because of the same tone deafness and cowardice he portrayed in his remarks on terrorism?

Thursday Videos

Alice In Chains ("Would")...



...and we lost William "Count" Basie 23 years ago today ("In A Mellow Tone," sitting in on piano of course with his wonderful big band, from about 1979 I believe).

Pre-Summer Gas Pains

This story appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer on Tuesday (I was going to point out that one spring tradition is the rise of gas prices prior to the summer travel season, but prices have been so high for so long that I can’t recall when gas was actually cheap…and why do I feel that, somehow, that’s exactly what Bushco wants?).

Gasoline at $4 Coming to a Pump Near You, Unfazed by Rising Tab

By Joe Carroll

April 23 (Bloomberg) -- Whether it's $50 to fill up your Prius or $130 for the Ford Expedition, $4-a-gallon gasoline is coming to a pump near you.

Fuel prices are rising at a pace not seen since Hurricanes Katrina and Rita knocked out a third of the U.S. oil refining industry in 2005. Gasoline consumption is climbing twice as fast as last year and will accelerate when summer travel begins late next month.

``What we're surprised by is the increased demand,'' said James Mulva, chief executive officer at ConocoPhillips, whose refineries from California to New Jersey produce 56 million gallons of gas a day, enough to meet 14 percent of the country's needs. ``Even though the price of gasoline is up, the demand is up,'' he said in an April 12 interview in Houston.

Population gains and U.S. economic growth are causing an increase in fuel purchases, according to Orlando, Florida-based AAA, the nation's largest organization for motorists. The U.S. economy will expand at a 2.4 percent annual pace in the second quarter, up from 1.8 percent in the first three months, according to the median estimate of 74 economists surveyed by Bloomberg. Gasoline use is rising almost 5 percent above the five-year average.

The economy will expand at 2.4 percent, huh? Wow.

Under the Clinton Administration (as noted here), the economy expanded at 4.0 percent a year.

Americans are resigned to higher prices, says David Pursell, a principal with Pickering Energy Partners, a consulting firm in Houston.

Really? If that’s true, then why, for example, is mass transit ridership up in Philadelphia while vehicular traffic dropped for the first time in 50 years?

``Last year, we had pump prices well over $3 for the summer and gasoline demand was up,'' Pursell said in an interview. ``Would $4 gasoline cause demand contraction? I think it will, but I also thought $3 gasoline would.''

Pump Prices

Gasoline inventories, measured by the days of demand they will cover, are at the lowest level in two decades for this time of year because of refinery fires, power failures and maintenance work oil companies failed to complete in 2006. No new U.S. refinery has been built in three decades, increasing the strain on existing plants.

Do you think another factor here is that oil companies may have deliberately produced below capacity to maintain profitability (see the quote from Jamie Court in “Shot Across The Bow” here).

Pump prices in the U.S. may increase to $4 a gallon from a nationwide average of $2.87 today, especially if hurricanes threaten Gulf of Mexico refineries, says Peter Beutel, an analyst at Cameron Hanover Inc. in Stamford, Connecticut, who helps industrial consumers manage energy costs.

``Hurricanes are always the huge wild card,'' said Beutel. ``We're all praying for a year like 2006 rather than 2005.''

Here’s another factor involving gas prices: world instability, particularly in Iraq, Iran, and Venezuela. An increase in tensions in that area of the world automatically jacks up the price of petroleum (and though I know Dubya isn’t solely to blame here, his total inability to approach those issues diplomatically have resulted in increased costs at the pump).

The June-to-November Atlantic Ocean hurricane season may produce 17 tropical storms, with nine reaching hurricane force and four becoming major hurricanes whose winds exceed 111 miles per hour (179 kilometers per hour), London-based forecasters at Tropical Storm Risk said. Some of the storms will strike the Gulf Coast this year after a benign 2006, AccuWeather.com predicted.

Inflation Risk

Higher pump prices will make winners of refinery owners such as ConocoPhillips, San Antonio-based Valero Energy Corp. and Royal Dutch Shell Plc of The Hague. Shares of Valero and Sunoco Inc., whose only business is refining, are rebounding after a decline at the end of last summer.

The increase in fuel costs threatens to quicken inflation and restrain consumer spending in the U.S. An appreciation to $4 a gallon would add more than $10 for a driver who fills the 12- gallon tank of a Toyota Motor Corp. Prius. The owner of an Expedition, a Ford Motor Co. sport-utility vehicle with a 34- gallon capacity, faces an increase of almost $40.

Many Americans have no choice but to drive more, says Christopher Knittel, an economist who studies fuel consumption at the University of California in Davis.

More Commuters

``We live farther from our jobs than we did in the 1970s, and with the rise of dual-income households, we now have two people who drive those distances every day,'' Knittel said.

On April 26th, 2007, this should not be “news” to anybody.

Consumers also do more driving for things such as taking children to soccer practice, which they are unlikely to quit, he said. The U.S. population has increased 1 percent a year in the past decade to 301 million in 2007, adding to demand for gasoline, economists said.

Rising fuel prices make it less likely that Federal Reserve policy makers, who have cited inflation risks for the past year, will cut interest rates to spur economic growth. Before the hurricane-induced peak in 2005, U.S. gasoline topped out at $1.42 a gallon in March 1981, or $3.21 when adjusted for inflation, according to the Energy Department.

Economies in Europe and Asia are less likely to be hurt by gasoline prices because fuel already is subject to high taxes designed to encourage conservation. A gallon of unleaded costs about 3.25 pounds a gallon ($6.49) in the U.K., and in Japan it's 130.3 yen per liter ($4.16 a gallon).

$4 Barrier

U.S. consumers will get little relief on gasoline prices from Europe this year, unlike 2005, when oil companies shipped more across the Atlantic after the hurricanes. Europe's gasoline inventories in February were 114.2 million barrels, down 11 percent from two years earlier, according to the International Energy Agency in Paris. The drop in Europe was almost twice the 5.7 percent decline in U.S. supplies in that time.

``Just as we used to think $3 a gallon was an impenetrable barrier, now it's $4,'' said Peter Morici, a professor at the University of Maryland School of Business in College Park and former chief economist for the U.S. International Trade Commission. Gasoline at $3.50 is likely, Morici said, and a conflict with Iran or any event that disrupts crude supplies may push it to $4.

Pump prices rose 33 percent in the past 11 weeks, the fastest rate of gain since a six-week, 34 percent rally to the record $3.069 in September 2005, Energy Department data show.

Bodman's `Worry'

U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman in an interview last week said the national average pump price could break the record this summer. While his agency's official forecast is for gasoline to peak next month at about where it is today, hurricanes, refinery closures or crude oil supply cuts may send prices higher, he said.

Higher prices are ``a legitimate worry,'' Bodman said. ``We have trouble spots all over the world'' that could boost crude oil prices. ``We're in a very tight situation.''

Spending on fuel in the U.S. consumes half as much household income as in the early 1980s, which means gasoline would need to reach almost $6 a gallon to have the same effect on the economy as in 1981, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.

I don’t know what the hell that sentence means in terms of my overall spending and income, but I tell you this: if we ever see gas at $6 a gallon, I will either a) telecommute for the rest of my life, or b) try and buy a horse.

Storage tanks at U.S. refineries, terminals and ports hold enough gasoline to cover almost 22 days of domestic demand, 8.2 percent less than the five-year average and the lowest for this time of year since the 1980s, Energy Department figures show.

Shortages

Valero-owned filling stations in Denver and Colorado Springs, Colorado, ran dry after a Feb. 16 explosion and fire shut the company's McKee refinery in Sunray, Texas. A day earlier, a blaze at an Exxon Mobil Corp. plant in Nanticoke, Ontario, slashed output, resulting in shortages and higher prices across eastern Canada.
The McKee shutdown strained supplies so much that ConocoPhillips postponed maintenance at its Borger, Texas, refinery north of Amarillo to prevent shortages in the region.

``Refineries are becoming more complex,'' Mulva said in the Houston interview.

``What we're finding is it's more difficult keeping reliability up with more sophisticated pieces of equipment that are highly integrated.''

Tesoro Corp. of San Antonio, the second-largest refiner in the western U.S., said first-quarter refinery use dropped because oil companies delayed until this year maintenance that could have been done in 2006. The portion of U.S. refining capacity that was in operation in the first quarter declined to 87.3 percent from 88.9 percent a year earlier, according to Energy Department data.

`Refineries Blow Up'

``Prices will depend entirely on whether we have a couple of refineries blow up,'' said Philip K. Verleger, an economist who runs a consulting firm in Newport Beach, California. ``It's almost impossible we'll get to $4 a gallon if all the refineries run well this summer. But if something happens and there are problems, then anything's possible.''

The average share gain for Valero, Tesoro and six other oil-refining companies is 26 percent this year, outperforming the 4.1 percent gain for Exxon Mobil and a 4.7 percent increase for the Standard & Poor's 500 index.

The shares will continue to rally, said Paul Carlson, who helps manage $3 billion at HGK Asset Management in Jersey City, New Jersey.

``Refiners are doing very well these days,'' said Carlson, whose holdings include ConocoPhillips, the second-biggest U.S. refiner. ``There will be lots of demand for any new refining stocks.''

`Back in Favor'

As recently as August, investors were selling oil refiners on concern an economic slowdown would slash fuel demand in the U.S., the world's largest energy market. During seven weeks last August and September, Valero shares fell 29 percent, wiping out $12 billion in market value.

``Refining is very much back in favor,'' said Douglas Ober, who helps oversee $2.3 billion at Baltimore-based Adams Express Co. ``Even with higher prices, we haven't seen any substantial cutback in demand. They're cranking out as much of this stuff as they can, and we're throwing it in our tanks as fast as we can.''

The margin earned from processing crude oil into fuels rose to $24.68 a barrel on April 11, the highest since right after the hurricanes in September 2005. The margin has since retreated to $22.12 a barrel, still about double the five-year average.

``It'll be a fairly tight gasoline market all through the summer,'' said Robert Hinckley, an analyst at Rochdale Securities in New York.

As I read this article, I couldn’t understand why the oil companies, altruistic corporate citizens all, somehow managed to be struggling with the cost of upgrading their refineries and even trying to build new ones (partly for ethanol conversion), especially given their obscene profits (as noted here, for example).

All I know is that I'm paying just about $3 a gallon now for regular at the Shell down the street, and instead of "reporting" on this like it's the cost of doing business, I'd like to see a reporter try and earn his or her keep by looking at this issue in its totality for a change.

"Termination For Klaus" At Siemens

Now that I’ve posted about terrorists trying to kill us, it may be time to try and lighten the mood a bit.

As noted here, Siemens CEO Klaus Kleinfeld is leaving the company after the expiration of his contract in September of this year (I try to keep my wary eye towards the goings-on in corporate America and the world, often because the behavior of people in it who are regarded as such geniuses is often so totally ridiculous).

Well, one of my intrepid field agents was able to secure the intra-company communication from Our Boy Klaus to the rest of his overworked and underpaid staff. It appears below with appropriate commentary…

Siemens is in a unique and difficult situation.

i.e., Interpol is knocking down our doors and the news media is camping out at our homes 24/7 and skewering through our unshredded trash – and though we don’t know the German translation for the phrase “lawyered up,” I can assure you that we’re covered in that area also.

While the performance of the company's businesses is outstanding, we are in the midst of intensive compliance investigations.

We’re getting sued every way over Sunday, and it’s only a matter of time before Der Spiegel provides all of the gory details.

In times of such challenges, our customers, the capital markets and, above all, you, the employees of Siemens, expect clear leadership more than ever.

First and foremost, that’s why I’m outta here.

Clear signs of stability are required - and rightly so. Confidence in Siemens' management and its ability to keep the company on course over the long term is essential.

Not for you, but for the safe return of my shares of company stock.

The current public discussion regarding the company's future management is creating uncertainty both internally and externally. Our customers, employees and shareholders rightly expect a clear decision regarding Siemens' future leadership. However, the Chairman's Committee of the Supervisory Board has communicated the intention to postpone this decision once again.

No sense committing to anything until you’ve seen all the indictments, I guess.

I consider this lack of clarity regarding the company's management and my own mandate to be burdensome and unacceptable for the company and for you, its employees. For this reason, I have decided to no longer be available for the extension of my contract.

He’s leaving for “lack of clarity”? In what, the length of his sentence?

Together, we have achieved much, and I would particularly like to thank you, the employees of Siemens, for your outstanding performance in difficult times and for your daily commitment to the company and its success. Only through your efforts has it been possible to achieve the excellent position we hold today.

So excellent, in fact, that I’m going to “beat it out of Dodge” by the time this Email arrives in your inbox (again, I don’t know if there’s a literal German translation out there).

Regarding our compliance challenges, I am convinced that we are on the right course. We have put in place an independent process that will uncover any problems that may have occurred in the past and that will make Siemens a model of transparency.

One of my long-time corporate rules is that, when companies start talking about “transparency,” rest assured that you won’t be able to see a damn thing.

At the start of the investigations by the independent lawyers, I requested to be the first to be scrutinized.

Good for you, Schicklegruber.

Mr. Cromme, the Chairman of the Audit Committee and the new Chairman of the Supervisory Board, has relayed to me the expected news that the comprehensive independent investigations to date have yielded absolutely no suspicions of misconduct on my part.

But he’s leaving anyway after 20 years because of “a lack of clarity”…riiiiight.

It has been a great honor for me to have served as President and CEO of this magnificent company for the last two years. Together, we have succeeded in achieving extraordinary business success. Through our joint efforts, we have positioned the company optimally for the future. For this, I am very grateful to each and every one of you who worked so hard to achieve that great result.

While I sincerely regret having to leave the company that has been such an important part of my life for the past 20 years, I make this decision for the welfare of Siemens and its employees. The company must have a clear mandate for leadership. I hope that my decision will help make this possible.

With best regards,
Klaus Kleinfeld

Whoever authored this piece of corporate gobbledygook should stand up and take a bow.

And by the way, here’s more past fun with our boy Klaus (regarding the disappearing Rolex).

The Enemy Is Us (4/26)

The New York Times also reported today that Peter Clarke, Great Britain’s antiterrorism chief, was reported as saying that “Al Qaeda had survived ‘a prolonged multinational assault’ and that its supporters had established ‘an inexorable trend towards more ambitious and more destructive attack planning (in their nation),” as quoted in the article.

By the way, when it comes to evaluating the threat of terrorism facing us and the world, I take the British more seriously than I do our own elected officials.

One of my concerns is that, when we look at the threat facing our country, we have an implicit understanding that homegrown terrorism from paramilitary groups, lethal a threat as it is, does not possess the same danger as thoroughly indoctrinated radical Islamists. The perception may exist that, since paramilitary groups such as those emboldened by the standoffs at Waco and Ruby Ridge have not engaged in suicide bombings, then that is not part of their repertoire of violence.

Or, as noted here by author Kaja Perina…

Attempts to understand suicide terrorism are understandably culture-bound. Western media emphasize a Palestinian society awash in calls to self-destruct: Iraq and Saudi Arabia pay thousands of dollars to the families of suicide terrorists, and schools teach reverence for martyrs alongside arithmetic. Palestinian mental health professionals counter that Westerners ignore the despair inherent in this logic. Mahmud Sehwail, M.D., a psychiatrist in Ramallah, says that post-traumatic stress disorder abounds among the potential – and eventual – suicide bombers he treats and cites surveys indicating that more than a quarter of all Palestinians are clinically depressed.

To me, there isn’t much of a difference between a bigot spouting anti-discriminatory garbage against gays, Jews or African Americans, for example, and someone recruited for an al Qaeda cell in this country currently waiting for some coded command to launch an attack. Both demonstrate a potential for violence, and we are foolish to think that there could never be an overlap between these types of individuals (and by the way, that includes anyone prone to act against immigrants, illegal or otherwise – that’s one of the reasons why people like Lou Dobbs should know what they’re talking about on this issue before they decide to start pontificating about it, so they don’t unwittingly provide motivation for these people).

I think the most dramatic example of this is Timothy McVeigh, obviously because of the horror of his offense (aided by severe depression along with drug abuse, methamphetamines in particular), but also because the book he and other terrorists consider their “bible,” if you will, is The Turner Diaries by William Pierce, leader of the neo-Nazi National Alliance. As noted in the linked information, McVeigh’s destruction of the Murrah building in Oklahoma City was patterned after an attack on the FBI headquarters in Pierce’s book, and the book’s last entry concludes in the successful suicide bombing of the Pentagon in 1999; afterwards, Aryan forces triumph and “the New Era” begins.

I don’t know if white supremacists could ever make common cause with Islamist terrorists against our country; I don’t see how that could be possible because of cultural differences, but as I said, we should anticipate that possibility anyway. I think these people have more in common than not, namely insanity stemming from depression quite possibly fueled by drug addiction and indoctrination into a methodology of murder.

In addition to voicing my own personal concerns, one of the points of this post is to link to the Southern Poverty Law Center, a group in the vanguard of the fight against intolerance (which, when all is said and done, terrorism is all about anyway).

All The More Reason To Leave

(In response to the New York Times headline noting the quote from Gen. David Petraeus about how long he wants us in Iraq…).

Now that both the Senate and the House have passed the Iraq Supplemental, the next step is the inevitable veto from President Brainless, followed by the congressional battle to try and override it.

One of the questions I’d had throughout was the status of permanent bases in Iraq, but thanks to Sen. Joe Biden (as noted here), the measure barring permanent bases was included in the bill sent to the White House (Biden has been a goof on a lot of issues, but he has been occasionally dead-on concerning the war).

Screw You, Rudy

Well, it looks like "America's Mayor" has started sliming opposition party candidates for president already, and we're still in the "beauty contest" phase of the primaries (no other way to interpret his "white flag" remark, and kudos to Barack Obama for picking up the gauntlet and tossing it right back in Giuliani's face).

And here is more recent fun with the nominee who has no shot whatsoever of competing against the "bible belt" life forms who have no tolerance for much of anything, especially a divorced, pro-choice mayor from a blue state (as noted here). And how arrogant anyway to attack the opposition when he hasn't even secured his party's nomination yet.

And what appears below will follow Giuliani forever.



On another note, posting will be very light today - this may be it.

Update: Click here to tell Rudy to stop peddling this crap, and Keith Olbermann (who else?) had a great Special Comment that you can play from here.

Tuesday Videos

Green Day ("Warning")...



...and happy birthday to Barbra Streisand (yes, I know this isn't a place you will usually find show tunes, but here's her live version of "You'll Never Walk Alone," performed shortly after 9/11 from the looks of it - sometimes I think she's the only Democrat who has any guts).

Time For More Employment Propaganda

More “water wet, sky blue” time…

I know we’ll be trying to debunk this stuff forever, but Yahoo News presented this glowing report about how our economy is supposedly rebounding so well because a bunch of trade industry association types and government apologists threw around some percentages to make it look like everything is fine.

Also, I love the sentence in the story stating that “only 2 percent of unemployed software engineers were sitting home reading the classifieds,” or something like that, as if it is beyond the realm of possibility that these individuals could now be forced to work one or two crappy-paying jobs at one time as they continue to look for one mediocre-paying one.

There is probably tons of more information in the Yahoo story I could hammer on, relinking to Paul Roberts and Paul Krugman and others yet again who actually know what they’re talking about, but instead, I’ll just present this information from the AFL-CIO which pretty much shreds all of the B.S. our media likes to peddle on this subject.

I’ll just point out one difference between the two stories: in the Yahoo story, William Archey, president of the American Electronics Association, trumpets the supposed creation of 147,000 new jobs (Over how long a period of time? What kind of salary/bennies? Temp or perm?) .

In the AFL-CIO information, however, the following is noted…

Goldman Sachs estimates 400,000–600,000 professional services and information sector jobs moved overseas in the past few years—accounting for about half of the total net job loss in the sector since January 2001.

It’s actually insulting to read fluff like the Yahoo News “story” when considering the human cost behind those staggering numbers.

Uh, CNN?

Do your headline writers need to enroll in a remedial English class?

Atrios has some thoughts...

(they just fixed it - tee hee...)

Oh, and by the way:

As noted here (January 19, further down on the list), Cheney’s most recent approval rating was 37 percent.

As noted here (April), the approval rating of the Democratic congress is 40 percent.

Say goodnight, Dick.

Update: Hey, at least I snagged the screen shot with the typo instead of this one (and what Atrios sez here also).

Philly's Crackpot History

I think it’s important to keep up with local trends in this area from time to time, so I want to note an editorial that appeared in yesterday’s Philadelphia inquirer by writer and local historian Ron Avery.

And in another triumph of technological innovation for Philadelphia’s “newspaper of record,” I am unable to find a link to Avery’s column. However, Inky staff writer Julie Stoiber wrote in a similar vein here.

(I mean, I have to look extra hard for good posting material from the Inky, especially since it seems that they’ve ended the “Carnal Knowledge” column by writer Faye Flam. As I said, at least she was trying to do something interesting, but I think the most recent one about hermaphroditic worms may have been the last straw for Bruce Toll and Brian Tierney of Philadelphia Media Holdings, L.L.C.).

Avery recounted a recent carriage ride he took around the historic Olde City section closer to the Delaware River in which the tour guide spouted some truly amazing nonsense, such as the location where George Washington and Abraham Lincoln once ate dinner together, and the “fact” that our first president is buried in Washington Square. And this was uttered by the guide with the approval of this person’s supervisor, who appeared to be as misinformed as her pupil.

Well, as a public service announcement, I’d like to clear up the following misconceptions about the city so tour guides don’t communicate further incorrect information to tourists:

- Ben Franklin never met Betsy Ross at “the clothespin” at 15th and Market streets for a late-night session of French kissing.
- Thomas Holme, a surveyor hired by William Penn to design the city’s well-known grid pattern, never saw Beru Revue in concert at The Ripley on South Street in the 1980s.
- Upon the death of former Philadelphia mob boss Angelo Bruno from a shotgun blast to the head, he was not succeeded by Bobby Rydell.
- Former mayor Bill Green, Inquirer columnist Steve Lopez and Flyers legend Bobby Clarke were never seen panhandling in front of Zipperhead on South Street (at least, not as far as we know).
- King Kong never hung from the top of One Liberty Place while swatting at Wright Model B airplanes and averting Fay Wray from machine gun fire.
- Dulary (pictured), the elephant at The Philadelphia Zoo who was destined for transfer to Maryland before he had to be returned here at the last minute (but now it looks like he’ll end up in Tennessee – and it sounds like Smerky is wrong here also), never ran up the steps of the Philadelphia Museum of Art.

I hope this information helps in some small way.