E-Trade baby meets the Market

Thanks to Emptywheel.net and their ever-interesting daily links page, a little spot of fun at the E-Trade baby's expense. Enjoy.



Teaching the young is never a bad thing.

GP Read the rest of this post...

Jobs: Private-sector growth—Public-sector contraction

Via Atrios, a telling chart from Media Matters' Political Correction arm.

Note the red line (public sector jobs) going down, while the blue line (private sector jobs) goes up. Imagine if both lines were going up—after all, job growth is the net of the two (so be sure to look for the Zero point; it's right in the middle, vertically).


As Atrios points out, we've lost 500,000 public sector jobs since July 2009, the point at which the graph starts. (With more to come, obviously.)

So two points: First, as Media Matters notes, the claim that the Recovery Act hurts the private sector is false:

[T]he private economy has actually gained 1.2 million jobs net since the Recovery Act took effect[.]

Second, if you follow 1930's hard-right economists like Hayek and Schumpeter and take Mellon's advice — to liquidate everyone and let the work of the Depression complete itself — what you're seeing in that chart is a good thing.

[L]iquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate farmers, liquidate real estate… it will purge the rottenness out of the system. High costs of living and high living will come down. People will work harder, live a more moral life. Values will be adjusted, and enterprising people will pick up from less competent people.

The dismantlement of government is a feature, not a bug, and it's understood that the process will be painful, even wrenching. Just as the dismantlement of the safety net will be wrenching (witness the Dow this week). It's just the price of doing the damage that needs doing. (Besides, all the really smart money is in Treasuries, not stocks. Dimmo Congressman Eric Cantor shorted the wrong market!)

My little secret (shh) — The NeoLibs and Movement Conservatives, if they succeed, will get exactly what would have happened in 1932 if FDR hadn't been elected (not referencing Black; note Roosevelt's 1936 Syracuse speech).

I think they think they're prepared for that, what with that NSA spying and all those hard-core cops (public and private) everywhere. But as they say, the best laid plans, etc. Bummer that, for all of us.

[Updated for clarity.]

GP Read the rest of this post...

White House statement on S&P; downgrade fails to mention Republicans, implicitly blames Senate Dems with election looming

You'll note that the White House blames Congress, all of Congress, including Democrats who are trying to hold on to the Senate in next year's election, for the S&P downgrade while exonerating the President:

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
___________________________________
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 6, 2011

Statement from the Press Secretary

The President believes it is important that our elected leaders come together to strengthen our economy and put our nation on a stronger fiscal footing.

The bipartisan compromise on deficit reduction was an important step in the right direction. Yet, the path to getting there took too long and was at times too divisive. We must do better to make clear our nation’s will, capacity and commitment to work together to tackle our major fiscal and economic challenges.

Over the past weeks and months the President repeatedly called for substantial deficit reduction through both long-term entitlement changes and revenues through tax reform, with additional measures to spark jobs and strengthen our recovery. That is why the President pushed for a grand bargain that would include all of these elements and require compromise and cooperation from all sides.

Over the coming weeks the President will strongly encourage the bipartisan fiscal committee as well as all members of Congress to put our common commitment to a stronger recovery and a sounder long-term fiscal path above our political and ideological differences. -

The White House's statement, and their ongoing effort to equate Democrats in Congress with Republicans in Congress reminded me of this passage from the book Dune:

Paul glanced at Halleck, took in the defensive positions of his guards, looked at the banker until the man lowered the water flagon. He said: "Once, on Caladan, I saw the body of a drowned fisherman recovered. He--"

"Drowned?" It was the stillsuit manufacturer's daughter.

Paul hesitated, then: "Yes. Immersed in water until dead. Drowned."

"What an interesting way to die," she murmured.

Paul's smile became brittle. He returned his attention to the banker. "The interesting thing about this man was the wounds on his shoulders--made by another fisherman's claw-boots. This fisherman was one of several in a boat--a craft for traveling on water--that foundered . . . sank beneath the water. Another fisherman helping recover the body said he'd seen marks like this man's wounds several times. They meant another drowning fisherman had tried to stand on this poor fellow's shoulders in the attempt to reach up to the surface--to reach air."

"Why is this interesting?" the banker asked.

"Because of an observation made by my father at the time. He said the drowning man who climbs on your shoulders to save himself is understandable--except when you see it happen in the drawing room." Paul hesitated just long enough for the banker to see the point coming, then: "And, I should add, except when you see it at the dinner table."

Or the Oval Office. Read the rest of this post...

Five New Orleans police officers found guilty on all charges in post-Katrina shootings, deaths, cover-up on Danziger Bridge

Just in from the Times-Picayune:

Five New Orleans police officers have been convicted in the deaths of two people and the injuring of four others on the Danziger Bridge in the days after Hurricane Katrina.

In all, 25 counts were charged, ranging from using a firearm to violate civil rights, to conspiracy to violate civil rights, to making false statements (the cover-up).

The jury also ruled that while the "use of a firearm" guilty verdicts caused the deaths of several defendants, that use did not rise to the level of "murder."

For background, here's a little about what's been reported about the Danziger Bridge incident:

Three federal civil-rights lawsuits charge that a group of New Orleans police officers gunned down unarmed, innocent citizens in the chaotic days after Hurricane Katrina.

The lawsuits focus on an incident that happened on a bridge in east New Orleans. Two people were killed, including a mentally retarded man shot in the back; two others were maimed.

The police say they were firing in self-defense. Now, a grand jury has begun looking into the shooting. ... At 9 a.m. on Sunday, Sept. 4, six days after Katrina, police received a Signal 108: Two officers down, under the concrete lift bridge that spans the Industrial Canal.

Seven officers rushed to the scene.

Police say when they arrived, at least four people were shooting at them from the base of the bridge. Officers took positions and returned fire. The official police report identifies two sets of gunmen going up the east side of the half-mile-long bridge.

The investigation hinges on whether these people were the shooters, as the police maintain, or whether they were innocent civilians in the wrong place at the wrong time, as the lawsuits claim.

Looks like the jury believed the civilians. If you accept the verdict as fact, it's apparent that New Orleans was something of a free-fire zone (very Iraq-like) in the days following Katrina. Rules of engagement–collateral damage territory. (Did you know? Even Blackwater showed up.)

Without that murder charge, though, I'm not sure what changes will be made. I don't see anyone dealing with the structural problem — the militarized police and the rules of engagement themselves.

GP Read the rest of this post...

NYT gives credence to Holocaust revisionism, suggests it’s only "disputed" that Hitler was gay, links to known hate group as "proof"

Erik Eckholm of the NYT should be fired. As should his editor.  I mean seriously, it's a "disputed theory" that Hitler was gay?  How about it's a crazy theory, and downright bizarre that the NYT would give it credence, then link to "proof" on the Web site of a known "hate group," and then not even refute it?

In the Sunday Times, Jews and horns, some say yes, some say no. Read the rest of this post...

Rudolf Brazda, last gay "Nazi death camp survivor," dies

Yes, the Nazis came after gays too. Although, you would not know that from reading yesterday's NYT profile of the hate group, American Family Association. Read the rest of this post...