Cracks in wing of new Airbus superjumbo

The earlier problems with engines stopping in mid-flight was bad enough, but now cracks? The cracks were initially rejected as not serious but who wants to fly on a plane - especially that size - that has cracks in it? Airbus needs to stop PR spin and fix the damned thing.

European safety regulators ordered the checks for a flaw that first emerged in the wake of an A380 engine blowout in 2010, when a Qantas-owned jet suffered a serious engine failure over Indonesia. Subsequent inspections of the Airbus aircraft revealed hairline cracks in a rib-foot – part of the metal frame of a wing. Further cracks were then found on other A380s, but in the latest development the European Aviation Safety Agency (Easa) said a "new form of cracking" had now been found that was more significant than previous flaws. Easa said in a statement on Friday: "This condition, if not detected and corrected, could potentially affect the structural integrity of the aeroplane." It added that further mandatory actions might be considered as the investigation continues.

Carbon composite materials are widely used in the wings, which reminds me of my local bike shop telling me that a fissure is not a big deal. Uh huh. Except that carbon doesn't break nicely so collapses tend to be catastrophic and unpredictable. It's bad enough to find a crack on a small, one person bike but in a plane with 400 or 500 people, it's a much bigger problem. Read the rest of this post...

GOP prez debate coverage, on NBC now, 9pm ET

Read the rest of this post...

White House petitioned to investigate MPAA bribery

Chris Dodd and the MPAA don't seem to appreciate how angry they're making the public. The White House is going to have to balance the desire to win over financial support from Hollywood and the recording industry versus winning over many more voters who are sickened with the actions of the MPAA. TorrentFreak:

Although it’s no secret that the movie industry has a powerful lobby in Washington, explicitly admitting that bribery is one of the tactics the MPAA uses to have their way wasn’t well received by the public. A few hours ago a White house petition was started to investigate Chris Dodd and the MPAA for alleged bribery. “This is an open admission of bribery and a threat designed to provoke a specific policy goal. This is a brazen flouting of the ‘above the law’ status people of Dodd’s position and wealth enjoy,” the petition reads. “We demand justice. Investigate this blatant bribery and indict every person, especially government officials and lawmakers, who is involved.” In just a few hours the petition amassed more than 5,000 votes and this number is increasing rapidly. As a former Senator, Chris Dodd has many friends in Washington so it’s unclear whether the petition will accomplish anything, but if the numbers grow big enough the White House won’t be able to ignore it either.

This battle is not unlike many of the others that we've witnessed recently where it's the 1% versus the 99%. The 1% has had a winning record for a while thanks to the high cost of political campaigns but nothing is forever. Read the rest of this post...

Video: Guys bounce huge tire into lake (way cooler than it sounds)

I know, my inner environmentalist cringed a little at first.  Then I watched the video and my inner Homer said "coooool."

Read the rest of this post...

GOP Sen. Rand Paul refuses TSA pat down. Sorry, that doesn’t make him a hero.

The metal detector went off and he refused a pat down. Sorry, but I don't want the guy on my plane if he's setting off metal detectors and then refusing a pat down. From ABC:

The TSA version of events is that Paul triggered an alarm during routine airport screening and refused to complete the screening process (pat-down) in order to resolve the issue. Paul was escorted out of the screening area by local law enforcement.

“When an irregularity is found during the TSA screening process, it must be resolved prior to allowing a passenger to proceed to the secure area of the airport,” according to an official statement released by TSA. “Passengers who refuse to complete the screening process cannot be granted access to the secure area in order to ensure the safety of others traveling.”

GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul says this is "the police state" at work.

Is this Washington Post writer correct, is too much too much? I know Chris has been critical of the TSA in the past, and I'm no fan of the TSA'sa seeming inability to rezip my luggage after they've finished searching it. But is it really too much to ask that you let them pat you down after you set off the metal detector at the airport?

Shorter me: Ron Paul has a point, but this isn't it. Read the rest of this post...

GOP establishment will panic and meltdown if Newt wins FL, top McCain aide says

Top McCain 2008 presidential campaign aide Steve Schmidt says that if Newt Gingrich wins Florida, establishment Republicans are going to lose it because they don't think he can beat Obama.  Via Heather at Crooks & Liars:

SCHMIDT: Look, I think, not only are we not moving towards a coalescing of support by the Republican establishment for Newt Gingrich, we're probably moving toward the declaration of war on Newt Gingrich by the Republican establishment. And if Newt Gingrich is able to win the Florida primary, you will see a panic and a meltdown of the Republican establishment that is beyond my ability to articulate in the English language.

People will go crazy and you will have this five week period until the Super Tuesday states which is going to be as unpredictable, tumultuous as any period in modern American politics. It will be a remarkable thing to watch should that happen in Florida.

C&L; has video of Schmidt's comments as well. Read the rest of this post...

Obama admin on verge of horrible bank mortgage fraud settlement deal

There's lots of talk about the pending deal between what used to be 50 state Attorneys General and the nation's five largest banks around what started out around robosigning, but seems to have expanded to broadly include foreclosure fraud and securities fraud.

It looks like the Obama administration is on the verge of announcing a deal with some number of state AGs, a handful of regulatory bodies, and the nation's five largest banks. There's a meeting today between HUD officials and an undisclosed number of Democratic AGs or their staffs. Liberal groups are pushing to make this as strong as possible, with lots of activity from Credo, New Bottom Line, Color of Change, MoveOn, Rebuild the Dream, and many blogs who have been covering this crisis for years. The expectation is that the Obama administration wants to announce this deal in connection to Tuesday's State of the Union address.

A couple pieces worth highlighting are by Simon Johnson at Politico and Van Jones and George Goehl of NPA at Huffington Post. Johnson makes a strong case against a quick, small settlement (that is, what we are now looking at), noting that "If there is a settlement after all the facts are known, the amount involved would likely be far greater than what is now on the table for robo-signing. Jones and Goehl likewise outline the principles for what a deal would have to do to actually be helpful to homeowners.

But if you're wondering what the reported terms of the deal actually mean and if this is something which should be supported by Democrats or liberals or anyone else, I highly recommend you read Yves Smith's post from this morning at Naked Capitalism. There are lots of reasons in my mind to oppose the deal as it's been reported, but perhaps none greater than this:

The story did not outline terms, but previous leaks have indicated that the bulk of the supposed settlement would come not in actual monies paid by the banks (the cash portion has been rumored at under $5 billion) but in credits given for mortgage modifications for principal modifications. There are numerous reasons why that stinks. The biggest is that servicers will be able to count modifying first mortgages that were securitized toward the total. Since one of the cardinal rules of finance is to use other people’s money rather than your own, this provision virtually guarantees that investor-owned mortgages will be the ones to be restructured. Why is this a bad idea? The banks are NOT required to write down the second mortgages that they have on their books. This reverses the contractual hierarchy that junior lienholders take losses before senior lenders. So this deal amounts to a transfer from pension funds and other fixed income investors to the banks, at the Administration’s instigation. [Emphasis original]

I've yet to see an explanation of why transferring money from public workers' and retirees to major banks is a good idea. There are other large, constitutional issues at play regarding how this deal mandates the breaking of contracts (which again is OK, it seems, as long as it is to benefit major banks), which Smith outlines in her post.

Unless and until the banks are forced to pay legal, economic, social and political costs in connection to their foreclosure fraud and securities fraud schemes, there's no reason to expect them to treat homeowners an better and there's no reason to expect that a similar crisis will not happen again in a few years' time. Of course, a deal like this being driven by the Obama administration clearly belies the notion that there would be any meaningful federal investigation by law enforcement with an eye towards criminal prosecution. The only hope for criminal prosecution is with a handful of Justice Democrat AGs (Eric Schneiderman in New York, Catherine Cortez Masto in Nevada, Martha Coakley in Massachusetts, Beau Biden in Delaware, and Kamala Harris in California, to name a few). These investigations become even more critical in the face of a deal that would dramatically curtail the banksters civil liabilities. If you can't change their behavior by forcing a huge cost for their crimes, putting executives in jail becomes even more important as a means of stopping this from happening again in the future.

One can only hope that AGs continue to balk at the deal being pushed by the Obama administration to forestall them from moving it forward. We should know in the next 36 hours whether or not this will happen as described.

Read the rest of this post...

GOP Sen Grassley’s twitter account hacked by Anonymous over SOPA, PIPA

UPDATE: They set up a new password so Grassley's office can't fix it.

Right now. Sure looks like it. (H/t to EmptyWheel)

It's still going on.

And more:

Read the rest of this post...

Unanimous Supreme Court says cops need a warrant to secretly put GPS on your car

Wow. I'm actually surprised. Here's the decision. And there's our Justice Department:

The Justice Department had argued that drivers do not expect their movements on public streets to be kept private, no matter the duration, so GPS tracking should not fall under the Fourth Amendment protections regarding searches and seizures.

Sounds like a recipe for stalking. Wonder how they'd feel if it were their family, their spouse, their kids, being followed around by some weird guy saying "hey, you don't expect any privacy when you're kids are walking in public to school."

A lot of our lives are now public because of new technology.  While we may expect less privacy as a result, it doesn't mean we deserve less.  Or that the government should be permitted to take advantage of it.

Sotomayor raises another important point:

Sotomayor, who fully joined Scalia's opinion, suggested in a separate concurring statement that she agreed with parts of Alito's analysis, which would cover privacy expectations not only when police affix a device but when there's no physical invasion. That could cover when police access signals from a GPS-enabled smartphone.

Right. They can track you on your smartphone too. You consented to have that phone with you, the cops don't even need to enter your physical space to track you. Is that okay, without a warrant? I think not. Read the rest of this post...

Romney says Newt is "erratic," not "stable"

Mmm mmm. Via ABC News:

Mitt Romney continued to attack Newt Gingrich today, calling the former House speaker “erratic” and comparing him to a “pinball machine.”

“I think as you look at the speaker’s record over time, it’s been highly erratic,” said Romney during a press conference following a campaign event in Tampa. “You know, he voted in favor of establishing the Department of Education, and yet he gets in a debate and says we should get rid of the Department of Education and send all the education issues back to the states. He’s opposed vehemently to the Massachusetts health care system, and yet just a couple years ago wrote about what a superb system it was.”

“He’s gone from pillar to post almost like a pinball machine, from item to item in a way which is highly erratic,” said Romney. “It does not suggest a stable, thoughtful course, which is normally associated with leadership.”

It's a smart move by Romney. He hopes to pique Gingrich, tick him off, and just make him all the more crazy on the stump. Read the rest of this post...

IL GOP Senator Kirk suffers stroke

UPDATE: Things aren't as rosy as the initial reports.  From Aaron Blake at the Washington Post:

@FixAaron: Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) update: They had to remove 4x8-inch section of his skull. Full mental recovery odds "pretty good," per doctor.

@FixAaron: But Kirk sounds as though he will have limited use of the left side of his body, particularly his arm.

HuffPost has it.  It was an "ischemic stroke," and there was swelling around his brain. It sounds like this kind of ischemic stroke, since they appear to have found it in his neck:

An embolic stroke is also caused by a clot within an artery, but in this case the clot (or emboli) forms somewhere other than in the brain itself. Often from the heart, these emboli will travel in the bloodstream until they become lodged and cannot travel any farther. This naturally restricts the flow of blood to the brain and results in near-immediate physical and neurological deficits.

From Mike O'Brien of MSNBC:

@mpoindc: Kirk was "beginning to deteriorate neurologically" on Sunday evening, which precipitated surgery to relieve brain swelling, says doc.

Read the rest of this post...

Actress Cynthia Nixon says being gay is a choice. And she’s wrong.

Sex & the City star Cynthia Nixon (aka Miranda) says in a NYT interview today that, to hell with the PC police, being gay is a choice!

Except of course, it's not.  She's using incredibly sloppy language, and thinking, and in so doing did some real damage to our fight for civil rights.  I delve into this in detail over at AMERICAblog Gay, but let me put it this way.  Straight guys don't desire oral sex from other men, but only shun it - "choose" not to do it - because it's "wrong."  Any guys who do desire it are not straight, they're bi.  And for bi guys, they're only "choice" is between two things, men and women - two "flavors," as it were - that they already like.  For the rest of us, it doesn't work that way.

When the religious right, and other gay-haters, say that being gay is a choice, they very often equate it with being an alcoholic (which is funny, since we now know that alcoholism is genetic and not really a choice either).  What they mean is, you choose to put that drink to your lips.  And you can choose not to put that man to your lips.  What they really mean is that gay men are into women, but we somehow "choose" to be into guys instead, and we can unchoose any time we want and start being into women again, which is ridiculous.  That's what Cynthia Nixon "confirmed" when she told the Times that being gay is a choice.

What the haters, and Cynthia Nixon, are leaving out is that for most men it's an easy choice since they're not into other men at all, they're only into women.  But for gay guys, they're into other guys, and not into women.  So for us, it's the only choice; and for straight guys, it's no choice at all. Read the rest of this post...

The NYT Goes Pollyanna on Europe

The New York Times succumbs to the lure of short term happiness in their latest article on the ongoing European self-inflicted Depression, in which the most recent half-measures to contain the crisis are applauded as a solution.

Don't believe it. The European Central Bank refuses to do what a "normal" central bank would do - buy up the debt of endangered governments like Italy and Spain in exchange for Euros, much as the Fed has done in the US since 2008 in exchange for dollars. Instead of buying the bonds on their own account the ECB is lending money to Euro zone banks to buy the bonds themselves. The result is even worse looking balance sheets for the already shaky banks, and a clear limit to how long this can continue given the finite size of the European Stabilization Fund. Even though bond markets are stabilized for the moment, they can't stay that way once the money runs out.

And it will run out. Not only have the Germans refused to enlarge the fund beyond what is already agreed but they are insisting on a level of fiscal austerity on the part of Euro zone governments that virtually guarantees an economic downturn and further large deficits. Insisting on automatic budget cuts in response puts a downward spiral on autopilot.

Even more problematic is what the financial sector lords in Germany call a "lack of political will" to "do what is needed" to control fiscal deficits. What rot. Rich bankers think it is perfectly OK to insist on economic policies that will throw people out of work for a decade and that in reality can only be enforced at the point of a gun. It isn't going to happen in any democratic way. Greeks - however guilty their leaders may be of causing this situation in the first place - won't and shouldn't put up with destroying the lives of their middle and working classes on the altar of solidarity with German monetary policy. Spain already has unemployment greater than 20% and the downturn is only just starting. When that figure approaches 30% can there be any doubt that the government should do whatever is needed to ensure their citizens don't starve? For a little context, remember that here in the US we considered an unemployment rate of only 10% bad enough to guarantee an electoral victory for the Republicans in 2012.

I can't imagine that a democratic country would fail to see a major political party call for an end to such a disastrous course of action long before balance sheets are balanced to the EU's satisfaction. Nor should they. Leaving the Euro has costs. It won't be long before the costs of staying will be bigger and more widespread. If the Germans can't see that they should bear some responsibility (and yes, some of the cost) for fixing the situation in return for the profits earned on a decade long export boom to the now-endangered "peripheral" countries in the EU then they are going to share in the Depression that results.

So will we. Lets hope it doesn't happen before November, or we may join them in chasing arbitrary and pointless deficit goalposts down a rabbit hole. Read the rest of this post...

Roboverkill: Will a glut of robocalls kill Citizens United?

Jonah Goldberg posts an email from a reader in the NRO Corner blog:

Regarding Romney’s loss, one thing I have not seen mentioned is the robo calls. All this week, the Romney campaign flooded republicans with robo calls. From Monday through Friday we would get literally four to five calls a night. They would come sometimes ten minutes apart. If you did not answer them, they left long messages on your answering machine.

I think it is pretty clear that this is not the only reason Romney lost to Gingrich, but what if it did have an effect of a point or so?

Come November there will be 'independent' groups making robocalls left, right, right, wing nut right and Koch brothers right every hour of the day and night. When people start to get sick of them there will be false flag robocalls pretending to be from the other side.

Robocalling is now dirt cheap and the FTC 'do not call' list doesn't apply. So lots of people are going to be getting very upset. Obama can point to the fact that he condemned the decision in front of the activist judges who decided corporations are people. How will the GOP contender react? Read the rest of this post...

MPAA's Chris Dodd openly threatens Congress and White House

Not satisfied with having his hands all over the collapse of the banking industry and recession, Dodd is now brazenly threatening politicians who don't tow the line for the greedy 1%. But to be fair to Dodd, standing up for the 1% has been his life mission. TechDirt:

This certainly follows what many people assumed was happening, and fits with the anonymous comments from studio execs that they will stop contributing to Obama, but to be so blatant about this kind of corruption and money-for-laws politics in the face of an extremely angry public is a really, really, really tone deaf response from Dodd. It shows, yet again, that he just doesn't get it. People were protesting not just because of the content of these bills, but because of the corrupt process of big industries like Dodd's "buying" politicians and "buying" laws. To then come out and make that threat explicit isn't a way to fix things or win back the public. It's just going to get them more upset, and to recognize just how corrupt this process is. If Dodd, as he said in yesterday's NY Times, really wanted to turn things around and come to a more reasonable result, this is exactly how not to do it. It shows, yet again, a DC-insider's mindset. He used Fox News to try to "send a message" to politicians. But the internet already sent a much louder message... and, even worse for Dodd, he bizarrely sent his message in a way that everyone who's already fed up with this kind of corruption can see it too. It really makes you wonder what he's thinking and how someone so incompetent at this could keep his job.

Read the rest of this post...

Top 1200 London bankers to average nearly $3 million in pay

As I mentioned yesterday, I don't know much about MegaUpload nor do I care what flashy lifestyle the CEO had. What I do care about is the continuing lifestyle of the bankers who crashed the economy. The top bankers in London are averaging almost $3 million. Yes, the same 2011 that was a struggle for most others was another bumper crop for the bankers. It's insulting to the rest to watch this vulgar display while we have to listen to the political class talk about and implement cutbacks for the middle class and poor. It's amazing how the global powers don't mind orchestrating global hunts for one company that had a limited impact on the economy yet they can't find the directions to Wall Street or The City to arrest bankers. Wow. Since bankers are still being richly rewarded for high risk gambling, it's clear the problems that led to the crisis have not been addressed.

Research by the Guardian has found that the average pay deal was £1m or more for employees regarded as having the most influence over risk-taking activities at their firms. The highest average was at Goldman Sachs (£4m) and the lowest at HSBC (£1m), during a year when data from the Office for National Statistics showed the average wage in the UK was £25,900. Banks are being forced to publish the information for the first time under European rules that are helping to lift the lid on secretive City bonuses at a time when top pay is a politically charged issue. Executive pay has been rising faster than salaries for the average worker across the UK and Cable is expected to announce a range of measures to give shareholders more powers to vote down pay deals. However, he is expected to step back from putting employees on remuneration committees.

Read the rest of this post...

British middle class eyes lost decade

Austerity isn't helping but even without austerity in the US, the end result is very much the same. Until we stop making life easy for those who caused the crisis and make it specific government policy to strengthen the middle class, we shouldn't expect any different results. The Guardian:

Millions of ordinary families are unlikely to see their earnings return to pre-recession levels until at least 2020, a report from a leading thinktank has warned. But it predicts that the income of the wealthy will continue to rise over the same period. The study, which focuses on the state of the "squeezed middle" and is produced by the independent Resolution Foundation, looks at the situation of 10 million adults, who crucially do not rely heavily on means-tested support from the state, and their 5.2 million children. A report by the foundation last year led to Ed Miliband's championing of the squeezed middle, a part of Britain that the foundation says remains a key political battleground. It says that households without children earn between £12,000 and £29,000 a year to be part of the squeezed middle; homes with children, between £16,000 and £41,000.

Read the rest of this post...