Open thread

Read More......

Worst still to come on economy

How did CNBC manage to let this guy on their show? Usually the blow hards over there like to prop up the GOP economy no matter how ugly the truth may be. Easy money only made things worse and delayed the tough times.

But the economist fears that the Fed's "throwing money at the system" will not help improve the fundamentals of the real economy. Instead, he believes, excessive monetary growth has merely driven excessive consumption in the U.S., with consumers living beyond their means and speculators "piling one bubble, housing, on top of the Nasdaq [tech] bubble" that popped in 2001-2001.

"The easy money, the easy credit -- you can't solve your problems with what caused them in the first place," Faber declares.

He posits that a fully-realized recession at the turn of the millenium might have been for the best, restabilizing the world credit markets. "The longer you postpone the hour of truth, the worse it will be," he augurs. "We will reach 'zero hour,' when more debt doesn't help."

Read More......

BREAKING: Obama says won't pull anti-gay bigot from big campaign event

Funny how Obama is a big supporter of civil rights when blacks are being maligned, but not so much when gays are the victims. Kind of puts his screw up over General Pace's homophobia in a whole new light. I really like Obama. I'm from Illinois. But this is despicable.

From the Chicago Trib blog:

About 6:40 pm today, the Obama campaign issued a written statement from the candidate saying that he "strongly disagree(s)" with McClurkin's views. Still, a spokesman said McClurkin would remain part of the concert line-up.

“I have clearly stated my belief that gays and lesbians are our brothers and sisters and should be provided the respect, dignity, and rights of all other citizens. I have consistently spoken directly to African-American religious leaders about the need to overcome the homophobia that persists in some parts our community so that we can confront issues like HIV/AIDS and broaden the reach of equal rights in this country," Obama said in the written statement.

"I strongly believe that African Americans and the LGBT community must stand together in the fight for equal rights. And so I strongly disagree with Reverend McClurkin’s views and will continue to fight for these rights as President of the United States to ensure that America is a country that spreads tolerance instead of division," the statement added.

That's nice, Senator. You strongly disagree with the bigot who thinks I need to be cured, and who has declared "war" on me and my people, but you're going to put the guy on stage with you anyway in order to make a few bucks. Nice. I wonder what Obama would say if Hillary invited David Duke to speak at an event but then said, not to worry, she really loves black people - kisses!

If you're afraid to lead, Senator, then maybe you're not the leader we thought you were.

Huge mistake.

More to come. Much more. All week.

PS You know Obama's campaign was fully aware of just who this bigot was - this wasn't a mistake. The bigot has been in the news, a lot, for his virulent homophobia. Obama simply didn't care. And he doesn't care now. Read More......

Obama campaign asked to distance itself from anti-gay singer invited to perform at Obama event, no reply yet

UPDATE: AP has the story now.

From TPM Election Central:

McClurkin's appearance on behalf of the Obama campaign is now drawing fire from at least one gay rights group, and it was criticized sharply by writer Earl Ofari Hutchinson, who observed that "healing and consensus building does not mean sucking up to someone that publicly boasts that he's in 'a war' against gays, and that the aim of his war is to 'cure' them." It's also become something of an issue in the liberal blogosphere and more specifically on the gay blogs, too. The critics point out that Obama demanded the firing of a Justice Department official for racially-charged comments, and want him to condemn McClurkin, too.

We contacted the Obama campaign for comment on this early this afternoon, asking whether it would disavow his remarks. As of this evening, the Obama campaign had yet to comment. We'll bring you their statement if they do say something.

Read More......

Fundies freaking after White House won't commit to vetoing ENDA, admits WH staffers helped draft legislation

Time for some crow.

I wrote a few weeks back about how odd it was that George Bush's White House was being so quiet about its views on ENDA, and that it was odd that neither Bush nor his staff were even hinting at a veto. Some raised the point that formal veto threats often aren't issued until right before the vote, but still, the White House's silence struck me as odd.

Well, I'm not the only one struck.

Now, let me say first that religious right crusader Peter LaBarbera is a bit of an odd duck. But he's a duck who has worked as an anti-gay expert at the Family Research Council and as one of the men at the Concerned Women for America. And more importantly, Peter, more so than many of the haters who work for the religious right, "gets it" in terms of the cultural impact of the gay civil rights battle (meaning, he understands that our small advancements are incredibly dangerous for his cause). Fortunately, Peter himself is so personally goofy that few listen to him.

This is from WorldNetDaily (another goofy mouthpiece of the far-right that is widely read and quoted by the far-right):

"Americans For Truth has learned that a White House official has boasted to pro-family leaders attending a private administration briefing that White House staffers were involved in the negotiations to craft expanded religious exemption language for the new ENDA bill," according to Peter LaBarbera's Americans For Truth organization.

"At the briefing, the White House official did not commit to the assembled evangelical leaders that the president would veto [ENDA], saying that they will wait to see the bill's final language, according to our source. This is troubling in that vetoing ENDA in any form is regarded as a 'no-brainer' by pro-family activists, who are counting on Bush to stop it," he continued

Three things we learn from Peter.

1. White House staffers were involved in negotiating ENDA's language. That's huge, if true. It means that the White House either isn't sure whether it will veto ENDA (or they think they may support it), and therefore they want the bill as "good" as possible for their side. Or it means that the White House isn't sure that they can stop ENDA - e.g., they fear that it may be added to some must-pass legislation that they'll be reluctant to veto, like an appropriations bill.

The White House simply doesn't negotiate the language of legislation that it doesn't think is going to pass or that it plans on killing.

2. The White House saying that they're going to wait and see what the final language of ENDA is before they decide on a veto - and telling this privately to religious right leaders - is also huge. This implies that there is some language, some version, of ENDA that might prove acceptable to the White House. And in any case, why wouldn't they hint to the religious right that they're going to veto ENDA - seems like a no-brainer - unless of course they're not sure they are.

3. The United ENDA coalition, which is advocating that we not pass ENDA until America, and Congress, are ready to vote for transgender (e.g., transsexuals, cross dressers, butch women, fey men) civil rights, has been claiming that ENDA without the transgender provisions is toothless. Well, it's interesting that the religious right doesn't seem to think so. They think that ENDA opens the floodgates for our civil rights:

"ENDA would ultimately give liberal judges the authority to subjectively determine who qualifies for the exemption. It's the goose that laid the golden egg for homosexual activist attorneys, and it would open the floodgates for lawsuits against employers who wish to live out their faith and even those who don't," he said.... "Failure to veto ENDA would be a devastating defeat for pro-family forces and a huge gift to homosexual lobbyists.... He said it is a dangerous precedent to install in federal law "rights" based on changeable homosexual/bisexual behavior.... "It must be remembered that top homosexual strategists now assert that their 'moral' claim (the right not to be treated differently based on their 'sexual orientation') trumps our religious/moral obligation to oppose homosexuality," LaBarbera said.

The religious right understands the cultural, legal, and political implications of passing ANY federal gay civil rights law, regardless of how "toothless" it is, or is claimed to be.

I wrote repeatedly about my inkling that ENDA could very well become law this year, in spite of the naysayers who said that Bush would definitely veto, that there was no way around his veto, and that I was either naive or a liar (in addition to being a racist, misogynist, native-American hater, bigot, rich, white, transphobe, homocentrist). Well, the religious right doesn't appear as unequivocal about that veto, and neither does the White House.

Then again, the United ENDA campaign run by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (the campaign that has called for ENDA to be killed unless it includes transgendered people, and if it includes transgendered people the bill is killed anyway since it doesn't appear to have the votes with them in) has publicly called for the gay, lesbian, bisexual (but not trans) version of ENDA, the one the full House will vote on later this week, to be killed, and they haven't rescinded that call - and as a result, numerous state coalition members of United ENDA are still calling for ENDA to be killed.

If United ENDA has its way, the religious right can stop worrying. Later this week, 25 million gays and lesbians may be derailed from getting their civil rights recognized by a house of Congress for the first time in US history. But the big question is who will be cheering louder if ENDA doesn't pass? Peter LaBarbera or United ENDA?

PS As an aside, I've just learned that there's at least one senior transgender leader in America who is married (and I'm sure other straight transgendered people are married). That's nice, and I support their right to marry. But I do find it odd that the gay community is being asked (well, told) to put our employment rights on hold until the transgender community can get theirs, but the transgender community isn't putting its marriage rights on hold until we get ours. Then again, I'd never ask them to put their rights on hold until I got mine. Read More......

Bush down to 25% approval in new poll

From American Research Group:

George W. Bush's overall job approval rating has dropped to 25% as nearly seven in ten Americans say the national economy is getting worse according to the latest survey from the American Research Group. This matches the lowest approval rating for Bush recorded by the American Research Group.

Among all Americans, 25% approve of the way Bush is handling his job as president and 67% disapprove. When it comes to Bush's handling of the economy, 23% approve and 67% disapprove.

Among Americans registered to vote, 26% approve of the way Bush is handling his job as president and 67% disapprove. When it comes to the way Bush is handling the economy, 25% of registered voters approve of the way Bush is handling the economy and 67% disapprove.

Approval among Republicans has dropped back to 67%.

I really suspect that moderate Republicans are no longer calling themselves Republicans anymore, and that's why Bush's poll numbers stay so high among Republicans - meaning, the Republicans who don't approve of Bush have left the party, or at least don't declare themselves as Republicans anymore. There is no way that 67% of the Republicans I know still approve of Bush. Read More......

Bush/Republicans now want $46 billion MORE for their wars

It never ends. From AP:

President Bush will ask Congress for another $46 billion to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and finance other national security needs, The Associated Press has learned....

To date, Congress has already provided more than $455 billion for the Iraq war, with stepped-up military operations running about $12 billion a month. The war has claimed the lives of more than 3,830 members of the U.S. military and more than 73,000 Iraqi civilians.

And just in case you didn't think Bush and the Republicans play politics with the money that they keep telling us is the lifeline for our troops:

The delays in submitting the remaining war funding request were in part due to unease among congressional Republicans about receiving it during the veto override battle involving a popular bill reauthorizing a children's health insurance program.

Yes, they need the money or our troops will be in harm's way. That is, unless it's not politically expedient to ask for the money to "save our troops," then the Republicans won't. Read More......

As US prepares for incursions into Iran over Iraq, US tells Turkey to calm down over incursions into Turkey from Iraq

Could this be a bigger mess?

Yesterday, on Fox News, chief warmonger Bill Kristol indicated the U.S. was preparing incursions into Iran:

Bill Kristol of The Weekly Standard, appearing on Fox News Sunday, contended that "it looks like the Iranian government is going for the full hard line on their nuclear program. And I think we are going to have to be serious about dealing with both their intervention in Iraq -- which is now the only real threat, I think, incidentally, to relative success in Iraq -- and their nuclear program." Asked if he is predicting war, Kristol replied, "I think there could be a use of force. ... There has to be the credible threat of force both on the nuclear issue. ... I think the short- term question is does [Gen. David] Petraeus think he needs a little help across the border to secure our successes in Iraq. And if so, I think the president will give it to him. We can't let them just build IEDs and train Iraqis with impunity across the border."

At the same time, the U.S. is trying to prevent Turkey from responding to an attack within Turkey launched from Iraq:

Turkey has deployed as many as 100,000 troops, backed by tanks, F-16 fighter jets and attack helicopters along its border with Iraq in anticipation of a possible incursion.

Asked about any pending attack, Defense Minister Vecdi Gonul said on Sunday: "Not urgently. They are planning a cross-border (incursion)...We'd like to do these things with the Americans."

The United States and Iraq have called on Turkey to refrain from a military push into the largely autonomous Kurdish region, one of the few relatively stable parts of the Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.

And we wonder why the U.S. has no credibility. Read More......

NASA covered up and tried to destroy "air safety" study because if air travelers knew how unsafe it was up there they'd be upset

Seriously, that was NASA's logic. This is part of the larger Republican war on science. They've taken every agency and twisted its goal from one of public safety, public health, public trust and made it a vehicle for their own special interests, be it the religious right or corporate America. Our government no longer represents us, it only represents a very small and very powerful and very fringe element of the Republican party.

From the Associated Press:

Anxious to avoid upsetting air travelers, NASA is withholding results from an unprecedented national survey of pilots that found safety problems like near collisions and runway interference occur far more frequently than the government previously recognized.

NASA gathered the information under an $8.5 million safety project, through telephone interviews with roughly 24,000 commercial and general aviation pilots over nearly four years. Since ending the interviews at the beginning of 2005 and shutting down the project completely more than one year ago, the space agency has refused to divulge the results publicly.

Just last week, NASA ordered the contractor that conducted the survey to purge all related data from its computers.

The Associated Press learned about the NASA results from one person familiar with the survey who spoke on condition of anonymity because this person was not authorized to discuss them.

A senior NASA official, associate administrator Thomas S. Luedtke, said revealing the findings could damage the public's confidence in airlines and affect airline profits. Luedtke acknowledged that the survey results "present a comprehensive picture of certain aspects of the U.S. commercial aviation industry."

Read More......

Mr. Bubble: Wall Street meltdown inevitable, deficit no problem

What a CYA from the man who was asleep at the wheel and ignored all of the warning signs. How many bubbles does one get a pass on in his mind?

"The financial crisis that erupted on August 9 was an accident waiting to happen," Greenspan said in a speech on the sidelines of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank meetings. "Credit spreads across all global asset classes had become suppressed to clearly unsustainable levels."

"Something had to give," he said.

"If the crisis had not been triggered by a mispricing of securitized U.S. subprime mortgages, it would eventually have erupted in some other sector or market," Greenspan said.

Uh huh. What a convenient answer. Read More......

Hitting Close To Home

Last week the Pentagon announced another “call up” of our National Guard for combat duty in Iraq along with a smaller contingent for duty in Afghanistan.

One of the units is in the heart of Northeast Philadelphia – right where I grew up.

Close by is the state of New Jersey that will lose half of their guard forces in this mobilization.

Traditionally the mission of the National Guard was to respond to emergencies here at home. And not to give anyone a history lesson, but in the 1960s and early 1970s one could ensure their avoidance of the war in Vietnam by serving in the National Guard. After all, that was the alternative route our cowardly president pursued. Now this same man who hid in the Guard during Vietnam is using our Guard men and women for multiple deployments to Iraq.

The news of this alert reminded me of a time when I was providing a security detail for a convoy to the Baghdad airport in the summer of 2003. I passed an Army fuel tanker with a sign that read “one weekend a month my ass.”

I can’t agree more.

My theory is that you should just sign up for active duty if you are going to join the military. Because now there is almost no difference between the active, reserve, and guard components. You are going to end up in Iraq regardless.

The National Guard is overextended and broken along with the rest of our Army. We are in the midst of a total national security nightmare- courtesy of George W. Bush.

This president has not once called upon Americans to serve their country. He just tells us to go shopping while he touts the all volunteer Army.

Instead of breaking our military Bush should go to each college campus and rally the “Young Republicans” to join the fight. Then Bush should go on national television and call on all the true believers of his war in Iraq to put their blood and money in the game . Finally, just for shiggles, Bush should call his goofy pal Bill Kristol and ask him to encourage Matthew Continetti to join the Army or Marine Corps. I would love to see him get a taste of the war he so ardently supports.

Last week Bush was talking about the possibility of World War III. He should take that into consideration while he continues to deplete the strength of our armed forces on his hopeless, needless, and endless war in Iraq.

Bush obviously has no regard for the lessons of Katrina and Kansas. Just think of how useful our National Guard forces could have been if they were home instead of Iraq.

Disasters and emergencies here at home only matter to Bush if it's election time in his brother's state of Florida. I think that is a pretty fair assumption judging by the scorecard. Just something to think about.

John Bruhns
Iraq Veteran

PS. For clarity - I'm fully aware that the National Guard has always been subject to activation for overseas combat duty. I just wanted to point out that throughout American history and especially during Vietnam NG units were used primarily for stateside duty. Now they are practically an active component of our armed forces. Read More......

Monday Morning Open Thread

The week begins. What's on the agenda?

And how about those Red Sox? (Yes, that's a sports reference.) Read More......

Far right in Switzerland wins in elections

The Swiss People's Party, the party that ran with a hard line anti-immigrant platform, rolled to victory yesterday capturing 29% of the Swiss vote. The party, locally known as SVP, was infamous for their campaign posters showing three white sheep and one kicking out a black sheep. Anti-immigrant fever in Europe continues. Read More......

Halliburton's move out of US paying rewards already

Now remember, as a US citizen this is completely illegal and not allowed though for businesses, it's perfectly OK to pack your bags and stop paying US taxes. US citizens are required to file US taxes regardless of where they reside and even if you rescind your US citizenship, you are required by law to continue filing (and possibly paying) for 10 years.

Why corporate America is allowed to operate with such different terms speaks volumes. Halliburton must be so happy to have saved $133 million in taxes. Why does Halliburton, who has profited so handsomely courtesy of the US government, hate America? Read More......

Poland rejects radical right extremist

What a sigh of relief. Poland had been going down a very confrontational and extreme right wing path with the Kaczynski twins. The Polish voters turned out in high numbers (for Poland, or America) yesterday to vote in Donald Tusk with a 9 point advantage. Tusk is already calling for Polish troop removal from Iraq and is seeking a balanced relationship with Washington. George isn't going to like hearing that his junior lapdog in Europe has lost. Read More......