BoehnerLand.com

Dems have a new web site about John Boehner and his incessant ties to corporate lobbyists. More from the Washington Post. Read the rest of this post...

McDonald's not happy with new 'I was lovin' it' TV ad

Wow, that's a brutal advert. It's not possible to argue against the reality that fast food churns out high blood pressure and high cholesterol product. One missing item that isn't mentioned is "highly processed" as well. The products all seem to chemically engineered which is another part of the problem. As much as I am in agreement with the campaign, I doubt this will have much impact on consumers. Read the rest of this post...

Taibbi on NFL players' pro-union 'statement'

We all know (without quite remembering) how political many football broadcasts are.

For example, during the Kerry–Bush contest, we were treated to sneering "flip-flopping is weak" remarks from all the manly men with a mike in their hands (said while watching manly men in tight pants bash each other hello). It all played nicely into the "girly Dem" meme that's with us even today.

Somehow union-bashing is manly now as well (how times have changed). Leave it to Matt Taibbi to tease out all the contradictions. He starts (my emphasis):

So it seems the whole sports world is abuzz about the decision by the Minnesota Vikings and New Orleans Saints players to raise a finger in the air before the season-opening game as an expression of union loyalty -- "We are one" -- in a year in which the players and the owners are negotiating a new collective bargaining agreement. I watched that gesture during the game and knew it was going to inspire the usual sneering (it started almost immediately, with Al Michaels chirping, "There's nothing like starting an NFL season with a labor statement"), as voices from all corners (including, unbelievably, many former NFL players) denouncing the absurdly brief, silent, and inoffensive demonstration as a tasteless interruption of our God-given right to nonstop mindless entertainment.

Forget about people actually supporting unions in a labor disagreement: they apparently don't even want to see them, not if it's going to delay a football game by three whole seconds. There were actually arguments across the media landscape to the effect that NFL players were out of line bringing their labor disagreement into our living rooms, the implication being that any display of union activity is somehow unseemly or (I love this) selfish. We have a whole reality-show culture celebrating the cause of people eating centipedes and stabbing each other in the back for cash prizes and fame, but football players quietly showing union solidarity is tasteless. If you can explain that one to me, please don't hesitate to write in.

Anyway the NFL players gesture was a significant thing because it was seen by 28% of the country; it's probably going to be the signature piece of labor theater in America this year. For obvious reasons the NFL union is a tough sell to most people. You're talking about guys who get paid millions to play a kids' game, so when they start getting together to talk about holding out for more (although any work stoppage next year will technically be a lockout), most people tune out instantly. I don't agree with this attitude -- if people think the players are greedy, what would they call the owners, who don't even have to get beat up for their money and have the gall to beg taxpayers for stadium money on top of their TV billions -- but I get where it's coming from.

This post takes many turns, ending at an interesting cultural-political place:

That kind of thinking is spreading, because our pop culture priests have succeeded in filling the population with shame and nervous self-loathing to the point where they think of anyone who isn't an employer as a parasite, and anyone who isn't rich and famous, or trying to be, as a loser.

Wise words, Matt.

I often think we wouldn't be in the state we're in — handing the country over in buckets to the predatory rich — if it weren't for that (well engineered) cultural shift.

GP Read the rest of this post...

Coburn blocks food safety, wants to deny FDA right to recall dangerous food

Once again, the GOP shows how little it cares about people other than corporate interests. It's laughable to suggest that the FDA is a troubled agency, since it was the GOP who created those problems in the first place. They have denied the agencies ability to issue food recalls, instead relying on the classic Republican lie that self-regulation works. It doesn't, as we know from Wall Street to food. The FDA has been one of the more improved agencies during Obama's term and they're pushing for more corporate responsibility. If there's one thing the Republicans hate, it's corporate responsibility.

Republican Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma says the bill, which has stalled in the Senate for more than a year, adds to the deficit and expands the power of an already troubled agency.

Advocates for the bill say it is crucial to strengthen the nation's toothless food safety oversight and would help prevent large outbreaks of tainted food.

Coburn's office said Wednesday the senator will object to bringing up the bill if his concerns aren't addressed. His objections are a major blow to supporters' chances of passing the legislation this year.

Read the rest of this post...

Summers: Tax cuts for richest Americans should be set aside for now

Poor Larry. It's just not his week, is it? First the Elizabeth Warren news and now he has to talk down tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, also known as his best friends and former clients. How much can the poor guy take?

"With deficits looming as seriously as they are, why is now the right moment to lock in several hundred billion dollars of tax cuts for 2 percent of the population when we could be using those revenues to strengthen incentives for investment in the country's future?" Summers said.

"I think the case is pretty clear, if you look at what the vast majority of economists are saying, (that) what will stimulate economy more are measures that are targeted at investments, it's measures that are targeted at research and development," he continued. "So I think those are the right steps forward."

This does seem to suggest that the Obama administration is ready to stick with this position and fight, which is good news. Read the rest of this post...

FOX is suing Robin Carnahan for hurting Chris Wallace's 'private self-esteem and dignity'

You can't make this up.

Last week, Robin Carnahan began running an ad, which featured Chris Wallace asking Roy Blunt some tough questions, as reported by Jake Wagman:

The new ad by Carnahan shows a four-year old clip of Blunt being interviewed by Fox News anchor Chris Wallace.

At the time, Blunt — who rose through the ranks of GOP leadership with help from an alliance with Tom DeLay — was fighting to replace DeLay as Majority Leader.

Blunt’s ties to lobbyist became a key issue in the tussle, which he eventually lost to Ohio Republican John Boehner.

“You have to show you’re the party of reform,” Wallace says to Blunt in the clip, as it’s replayed on the Carnahan ad. “But some question whether you are the man to do that.”

But, FOX, the GOP network, freaked out:

However, Fox News appears to have some concerns about the ad — it was taken down by YouTube, replaced with a message that said the clip had been pulled “due to a copyright claim by Fox News Network."

Seriously, YouTube??? But, get this: The ad that FOX hates is still running on t.v. stations throughout Missouri. No YouTube, but it's being broadcast across Missouri.

Anyway, it gets better. FOX is now suing Carnahan over the ad. Not kidding:

The suit, which says that Wallace won every major broadcast news award, claims the Carnahan ad 'intruded upon [Chris] Wallace’s private self-esteem and dignity; and caused him emotional or mental distress and suffering."

Who knew Chris Wallace was such a delicate little flower?

FOX will do anything for Blunt and other GOPers -- even file a lawsuit that makes its leading reporter sound like a thin-skinned, fragile prima donna.

Meanwhile, Robin is undaunted. She's keeping the ad on the air. Her press secretary, Linden Zakula, sent this statement:

We stand behind our ad and will continue to tell the truth about Congressman Roy Blunt’s attempt to slip a secret provision into the Homeland Security Act to benefit tobacco giant Philip Morris, while he was dating the company’s lobbyist. It’s unclear why Fox News refuses to stand by its own content that simply asked questions about Congressman Blunt’s Washington record and ties to convicted felon lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Congressman Blunt’s 14 year record of wasteful spending, corruption and sticking it to the middle class represents the very worst of Washington: he does not deserve a promotion to the Senate.

That's true.

More at FiredUp Missouri.

We set up an ActBlue page for Robin here. If you contribute, your paying for an ad that ticks off Roy Blunt and FOX News. What a deal. But, be advised: Your also paying to damage Chris Wallace's very fragile ego.

UPDATE @ 6:15 PM: Media Matters notes that the PAC of News Corp., the parent of FOX News, donated $10,000 to Roy Blunt -- and none to Robin, of course. Now, FOX is suing his opponent. The complaint is below. The biggest joke is in paragraph 18, wherein FOX News purports to have objectivity:

18. Defendant’s unauthorized use of the FNS Interview footage in its Carnahan Ad also devalues the original work. FNC is a news organization that has not endorsed a candidate in the 2010 Missouri senatorial race. The value of its news reporting is based in part upon the public’s faith in the accuracy and integrity of those reports. By including the FNS Interview in an advertisement endorsing a specific political candidate, Defendant harmed the value of the original work by compromising its apparent objectivity.

The lawsuit should be thrown out for that alone.FOX News lawsuit against Robin Carnahan Read the rest of this post...

Anti-masturbation activist, and GOP Senate candidate from Delaware, says women have crippled the military

You'll recall we wrote the other day about anti-masturbation activist who is now the GOP Senate candidate from Delaware. You might not be surprised that she's opened her mouth yet again. From VetVoice:

O'Donnell, when asked by the moderator whether taxpayer-funded, single-sex military institutions were constitutional, said:

I think they're definitely constitutional and I think they're vital to the security of our country and to the defense of our country. By integrating women into particularly military institutes, it cripples the readiness of our defense. Schools like The Citadel train young men to confidently lead other young men into a battlefield where one of them will die. And when you have women in that situation, it creates a whole new set of dynamics which are distracting to training these men to kill or be killed. And these dynamics between men and women are what make the relationship between men and women beautiful. So I don't think that we should try to desensitize men to the differences.

In response to a critique of sex discrimination by Hannah Olanoff of the National Organization for Women, O'Donnell replied, "It's an honor to be a lady. That's a beautiful part of womanhood is to be ladylike." She insisted that West Point "has had to lower their standards ... in order for men and women to compete." By lowering standards, she added, "we have reduced the effectiveness of our military."

Read the rest of this post...

Votes aren't there to stop filibuster of Defense Authorization. Where are Collins and Brown?

And just as important, where are President Obama and Majority Leader Reid? The President and the Democratically-controlled Congress decided to wait until the last minute to address only the first of several top promises the President made to the gay community during the campaign. And now that promise is in trouble. I seriously hope the President, and Senator Reid, pull out all the stops. Because an already bad relationship with the gay community is in danger of getting significantly worse only six weeks before a crucial election.

As an aside, it's interesting that the Republicans are so gung-ho on filibustering a defense bill six weeks before an election. If the Dems tried a trick like that, we'd be crucified by the GOP and we're probably lose the election as a result. I'd like to think that the White House and Senator Reid have something equally vicious to throw back at the GOP if and when this filibuster is launched. but But I fear they don't, and won't. Read the rest of this post...

Krugman examines the economic crisis in the NY Review of Books

If you are interested in a longer examination of the current crisis from Paul Krugman than quick blog posts or OpEd articles, this article, in the New York Review of Books, is for you.

It's called "The Slump Goes On: Why?" by Paul Krugman and Robin Wells, and is being published in two parts. Click the link for Part 1.

Like many essays in NYRB, this one is structured around a set of book reviews, but is actually as much about the reviewers' opinions as those of the authors. The set of books reviewed is interesting:

Fault Lines: How Hidden Fractures Still Threaten the World Economy
by Raghuram G. Rajan

Crisis Economics: A Crash Course in the Future of Finance
by Nouriel Roubini and Stephen Mihm

The Holy Grail of Macroeconomics: Lessons from Japan’s Great Recession
by Richard C. Koo

Rajan is a fresh-water economist from the University of Chicago whom I've got on Movement-Activist watch. He's making less and less sense, and sometimes no sense at all, in defense of his AEI-inspired positions. (In my opinion, but not Krugman's, he's getting by on a once-honest academic career; but he looks like a made man now.)

Roubini you probably know of; he's the infamous "Dr. Doom" who predicted the current mess and got much press for it. And Koo is a respected economist from the Nomura Research Institute.

As you can imagine, Rajan comes off rather badly, primarily for pushing the meme "It's all Barney Frank's fault" against much contrary evidence.

The piece is very well written, but also long. So I'll leave you with an overview and a taste. Krugman and Wells start by observing that while there are books about the Why of the crisis, and books about What Not To Do next time, there are no books about fixing the current mess, especially unemployment.

In Part 1, we learn about the four commonly declared causes, and what each of the authors, plus Krugman and Wells, thinks of them.

Call it the great North Atlantic real estate bubble: in the first decade of the third millennium, prices of both housing and commercial real estate soared in parts of Europe and North America. From 1997 to 2007, housing prices rose 175 percent in the United States, 180 percent in Spain, 210 percent in Britain, and 240 percent in Ireland.

Why did real estate prices rise so much, in so many places? Broadly speaking, there are four popular explanations (which aren’t mutually exclusive): the low interest rate policy of the Federal Reserve after the 2001 recession; the “global savings glut”; financial innovations that disguised risk; and government programs that created moral hazard.

The bulk of Part 1 involves that four-part assessment. I found it both fascinating and engaging — a fine read with much worthy detail. Here's the Rajan take-down:

While it’s a story that ties everything up in one neat package, however, it’s strongly at odds with the evidence. And it’s disappointing to see Rajan, a widely respected economist who was among the first to warn about a runaway Wall Street, buy into what is mainly a politically motivated myth. Rajan’s book relies heavily on studies from the American Enterprise Institute, a right-wing think tank; he doesn’t mention any of the many studies and commentaries debunking the government-did-it thesis.5 Roubini and Mihm, by contrast, get it right[.]

Krugman's been questioning Rajan for a while without impugning his intellectual honesty. (I believe this to be Krugman's blind spot, by the way. Too much collegial "well, we just disagree"; not enough reading of his own book on what he calls "a revolutionary force" and how it behaves.)

Krugman and Wells' discussion of the Minsky Moment and its role in the explanation is especially enlightening.

Enjoy Part 1; it won't take long to get through it. I'm one of those who envy Krugman and Wells their clarity. (Robin Wells is Krugman's wife, co-author, and editor. Lucky man.)

And stay tuned for Part 2 in a few weeks.

GP Read the rest of this post...

US home repossessions up 25% from last year

Ouch. This is yet another sign that the problems are not yet over.

In all, banks repossessed 95,364 properties last month, up 3 percent from July and an increase of 25 percent from August 2009, RealtyTrac said.

August makes the ninth month in a row that the pace of homes lost to foreclosure has increased on an annual basis. The previous high was in May.

Banks have been stepping up repossessions to clear out their backlog of bad loans with an eye on eventually placing the foreclosed properties on the market, but they can't afford to simply dump the properties on the market.

Read the rest of this post...

US calls for idle oil rig wells to be plugged

It's about time someone starts giving orders to the oil industry instead of letting them call the shots. Besides the idle oil wells, it may be worth doing a sample study of 27,000 old wells that are closed. Perhaps the oil industry invested time and money to permanently close them with care, but taking their word for it means little.

Now is the time to let Big Oil live by the same rules as everyone else. There's a reason why their profits are the highest ever on the planet.

The US is set to require oil companies to plug 3,500 non-producing Gulf of Mexico oil wells in an effort to prevent future leaks, officials say.

The interior department will also require companies to dismantle 650 unused oil and gas platforms.

Some installations have sat idle for decades without inspection for leaks.

Read the rest of this post...

Obama to hire Elizabeth Warren

A very good choice. Poor Larry Summers must be having a pretty bad day though. Warren may not have made it through Senate confirmation to be the formal consumer director because the GOP was dead set against anyone who wasn't a banker and part of the problem. The GOP knows where their bread is buttered.

President Barack Obama plans to name Wall Street critic Elizabeth Warren to a special advisory role helping to set up the new U.S. consumer financial watchdog, Democratic sources said on Wednesday.

Warren, a 61-year-old Harvard law professor, would report to Obama and the Treasury Department in a position that would bypass the Senate confirmation process.

An announcement was likely to come on Friday.

Warren is reviled by many on Wall Street for her calls to crack down on abusive lending practices by financial firms, but she is a hero to liberal activists and consumer groups.

Read the rest of this post...

USA Today: Tea Party's wins fuel a 'civil war' within GOP

Headlines we like to see:

Although O'Donnell won with a small percentage of votes in one of the nation's smallest states, her victory reverberated across the nation and widened a chasm separating conservative insurgents and their Tea Party allies on one side, and mainstream Republicans and centrists on the other.

"It's official: There is now a civil war within the Republican Party," said Mark McKinnon, a former adviser to the presidential campaigns of George W. Bush and John McCain. "The good news for Republicans is the Tea Party is capturing the anti-establishment energy in America. The bad news is that includes the Republican establishment."

Read the rest of this post...

Thursday Morning Open Thread

Good morning.

The President has a busy day. He's got all kinds of meetings -- with his Export Council and new Ambassadors and key Congressional Latino leaders. And, he's making an announcement about the "Educate to Innovate" initiative "to improve science, technology, engineering, and math." Then, he's flying to Connecticut for a fundraiser with Senate candidate Dick Blumenthal.

We should find out for sure today about the GOP's filibuster of the Defense Authorization bill. Expect Harry Reid to file cloture setting up a key vote next week. Today, Servicemembers United is holding a DADT lobby day on Capitol Hill, appropriately titled the "Final Assault."

Republicans are still sorting through the wreckage of Christine O'Donnell's victory in Delaware. Karl Rove is really getting kicked around by right wingers. How fun is that?

It's Mexican Independence Day. Our neighbor is celebrating its bicentennial. ¡Viva México! Read the rest of this post...

Bank of England Governor 'surprised' bank bonuses not being discussed more

How can you argue against Mervyn King on this point? How soon everyone forget that we're in this mess because of high risk taking by the bankers. The high risk trades helped generate the high income bonuses. They also triggered the collapse of the financial sector yet they've hardly been scratched because of cowardly politicians who are terrified of taking on the banks.

King attracted a warm reception from a packed hall in central Manchester when he made clear his own views on bank bonuses.

"I understand the strength of feeling," he said. "I'm surprised it often hasn't been expressed more deeply. I certainly understand that."

King, who has been given new responsibilities for governing the regulation of the financial sector, said Britain's financial systems needed "radical reform" to avoid a repeat of the crisis that put both the economy and union members' livelihoods at risk.

Improved regulation would mean that banks that "get it wrong" in the future "must be allowed to fail", to avoid ordinary depositors or taxpayers paying the price, he said.

He told the TUC conference that most people in the country did not object to others earning more than them – even a lot more – provided they understood why, and saw the contribution the better-paid had made.

Indeed. Precisely what value or contribution have the bankers made? They somehow believe that their modern "financial engineering" provides something well beyond bigger bonus money. It doesn't. It's all about the bonus. Read the rest of this post...

LibDem leader defends cuts to the poor

It's looking like the Liberal Democrats are going to be politically irrelevant for decades starting with the next elections. In this coalition government, they've agreed to all of the dirty work for the Conservatives and have received nothing in return. You know it's going to be bad when politicians start talking about what is fair for society. The Guardian:

But Clegg made clear he considered the reforms to be essential.

"A fair society is not one in which money is simply transferred by the central state from one group to another," he wrote in an article for the Times (paywall).

"Welfare needs to become an engine of mobility, changing people's lives for the better, rather than a giant cheque written by the state to compensate the poor for their predicament.

"Instead of turning the system from a 'safety net' into a 'trampoline', as Labour promised, people have been stuck on benefits, year in, year out."

A fair society, he wrote, was "one in which people are able to make a better life for themselves, with support from government and the broader community".

Read the rest of this post...

Goldman being sued for sexual discrimination

The numbers certainly don't look favorable for Goldman Sachs. NY Times:

Three women formerly employed by Goldman Sachs sued the investment bank on Wednesday, contending that the firm systematically discriminates against its women employees.

The lawsuit, filed in United States District Court in Manhattan, claims that Goldman intentionally pays its male employees more than their female counterparts, and promotes them more frequently. A persistent pattern of bias has resulted in an underrepresentation of women in the firm’s management ranks, the complaint alleges.

“The number of women in management positions at Goldman Sachs dwindles as the level of management rises,” says the complaint, citing firm data that show women making up 29 percent of the firm’s vice presidents, 17 percent of the managing directors and 14 percent of its partners.

Read the rest of this post...

VIDEO: Hand dancing (freaking cool)

(Hat tip to HuffPost Hill, that keeps me informed, laughing, and weird.) Read the rest of this post...