Possible link between non-stick chemicals and child cholesterol

More tests need to be performed but it sounds big enough to warrant such a review. BBC:

Scientists are concerned that exposure to chemicals used in non-stick frying pans could raise cholesterol levels in children after finding a link.

They have no proof, but the West Virginia team says further research is needed to rule it out.

They studied over 12,000 children involved in a lawsuit regarding a water supply contaminated with the same chemicals used on non-stick pans.

Experts stressed that the children's exposure was much higher than typical.

Read the rest of this post...

The Great Divergence - how did income inequality get so bad?

As the article discusses, in 1915 during the age of the Robber Barons the top 1% controlled 18% of the wealth in the US. Today it's closer to 24%. For whatever reason, the widening gap and actual opportunity to move upward has barely been noticed by most Americans. There is still the widespread belief that the US is the land of opportunity even though it's no longer at the top or even near the top of the list of countries where this is possible. Maybe part of the problem is that we grow up repeating the myth that because we're Americans, we have the best. That certainly was part of the problem in the health care debate where some hold firm to the belief that the US has the best health care system in the world.

There's a follow up to this very interesting discussion (that address race and sex) but for now, here's part one of The Great Divergence. It's worth reading it all if you have the time. Meanwhile, tell me again why any Democrat is afraid to make this part of the discussion? Even worse, why would any Democrat consider extending tax cuts that help feed this problem?

The Great Compression ended in the 1970s. Wages stagnated, inflation raged, and by the decade's end, income inequality had started to rise. Income inequality grew through the 1980s, slackened briefly at the end of the 1990s, and then resumed with a vengeance in the aughts. In his 2007 book The Conscience of a Liberal, the Nobel laureate, Princeton economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman labeled the post-1979 epoch the "Great Divergence."

It's generally understood that we live in a time of growing income inequality, but "the ordinary person is not really aware of how big it is," Krugman told me. During the late 1980s and the late 1990s, the United States experienced two unprecedentedly long periods of sustained economic growth—the "seven fat years" and the " long boom." Yet from 1980 to 2005, more than 80 percent of total increase in Americans' income went to the top 1 percent. Economic growth was more sluggish in the aughts, but the decade saw productivity increase by about 20 percent. Yet virtually none of the increase translated into wage growth at middle and lower incomes, an outcome that left many economists scratching their heads.

Read the rest of this post...

Bush tax cuts failed to deliver on promises

Besides negative household income growth and fifty five year low job growth, it was dreamy. Tell me again why any Democrat is promoting more of this? More from the Center for American Progress:

Yet conservatives continue to argue for another round of permanent tax cuts similar to those of the Bush administration. Even if all of the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire as scheduled, the projected cost of the Bush tax cuts to the federal budget over the next ten years is $3.9 trillion, an average of 1.4 percent of the country’s total economic activity (GDP) per year. Those asking for more permanent tax cuts continue to justify the cost, claiming tax cuts create jobs.

But their analysis ignores what actually happened during the economic cycle that began in March 2001 and ended in December of 2007—which almost exactly coincides with the Bush presidency and the implementation of the Bush tax cuts. This period registered the weakest jobs and income growth in the post-war period. Overall monthly job growth was the worst of any cycle since at least February 1945, and household income growth was negative for the first cycle since tracking began in 1967. Women reversed employment gains of previous cycles. And for African Americans, the worst job growth on record was matched by an unprecedented increase in poverty.

Read the rest of this post...

FDA to review Franken-fish for approval

Just say no.

The Food and Drug Administration is poised to approve the first genetically modified animal for human consumption, a highly anticipated decision that is stirring controversy and could mark a turning point in the way American food is produced.

FDA scientists gave a boost last week to the Massachusetts company that wants federal approval to market a genetically engineered salmon, declaring that the altered salmon is safe to eat and does not pose a threat to the environment.

"Food from AquAdvantage Salmon . . . is as safe to eat as food from other Atlantic salmon," the FDA staff wrote in a briefing document.

Read the rest of this post...

Gallup weekly tracking now shows a tie, but still finds a huge enthusiasm gap.

We've been posting a lot of polls with bad news lately. Last week, there was a lot of attention on the Gallup weekly tracking poll, which showed a 10-point advantage for the GOP. What a difference a week makes.

This week, Gallup's weekly tracking shows a tie:

Republicans and Democrats are tied at 46% among registered voters in Gallup's weekly tracking of congressional voting preferences, marking a shift after five consecutive weeks in which the Republicans held the advantage.

These results are based on aggregated data from more than 1,650 registered voters surveyed Aug. 30-Sept. 5 as part of Gallup Daily tracking. The results reflect more competitive voting intentions than has been the case recently. Republicans' leads over Democrats among registered voters in three of the previous four weeks were the highest Gallup has measured for this midterm election campaign, and higher than any GOP advantage Gallup has measured in a midterm election year since 1942.

Last week marked the return of President Barack Obama from his 10-day vacation, and included his national address to announce the official end of combat operations in Iraq. The president's three-day job approval rating rose to 47% for Aug. 29-31 -- a level it had reached only once since mid-July. Last week also brought media commentary in the aftermath of conservative talk-show host Glenn Beck's massive rally in Washington, D.C. It is not clear if these or other factors affected Americans' voting preferences as measured by the generic ballot.

Here's how it looks:

Don't get too excited. The enthusiasm gap is still pretty wide:

There has been no change in the advantage Republicans hold over Democrats on motivation to vote in the fall elections. Republicans remain twice as likely as Democrats to be "very enthusiastic" about voting, tied with the previous week's measure as the largest such advantage of the year.

50% of GOPers are very enthusiastic. For Democrat, it's 25%. Read the rest of this post...

Krugman is not pleased with Obama's infrastructure proposal

I was wondering what the Professor would say. The headline — "Obama proposes $50 billion in new infrastructure spending" — has a sweet ring to it. Well, the Professor is decidedly sour on the idea:

1. It’s a good idea
2. It’s much too small
3. It won’t pass anyway — which makes you wonder why the administration didn’t propose a bigger plan, so as to at least make the point that the other party is standing in the way of much needed repair to our roads, ports, sewers, and more– not to mention creating jobs. Once again, they’re striking right at the capillaries.

I guess once more size counts, at least for Mr. Krugman. He then goes on to make another point:

Beyond all that, the new initiative is a chance for me to air one of my pet peeves: the stupidity of the claim, which you hear all the time — and you’ll hear again now — that it’s always better to provide stimulus in the form of tax cuts, because individuals know better than the government what to do with their money.

I think many of us know that he's right, but he makes the case well.

Striking at the capillaries. Nice, sir.

GP Read the rest of this post...

Right-wing preacher vows to burn Qurans despite danger to U.S. troops

In case you think the haters can't get any more deranged:

A Christian minister said Tuesday that he will go ahead with plans to burn copies of the Quran this weekend to protest the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks despite a warning from the top U.S. general in Afghanistan that doing so would endanger American troops.

Pastor Terry Jones of the Dove World Outreach Center said he understands Gen. David Petraeus' concerns, but plans to go forward with the burning this Saturday, the ninth anniversary of the attacks.

Where's the outrage from Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, Glenn Beck and all the other conservative frauds who purport to support the troops?

The action of burning the Qurans itself is despicable and warrants harsh criticism from everyone across the political spectrum. But, where are all the voices from the right who used to ask "How high?" any time Petraeus said "jump." Read the rest of this post...

Mayor Daley not running for reelection. Will Rahm jump in?

Big news in the Windy City -- with implications for the White House:

Mayor Richard Daley says he will not run for re-election in 2011.

"The truth is I have been thinking about this for the past several months," Daley said at a City Hall news conference. "In the end this is a personal decision, no more, no less."

Daley spoke for less than five minutes and took no questions.

I always thought Daley was a good mayor because Daley's goal was to be mayor, not run for some high office. And, I think being mayor is one of the toughest jobs to have. One actually has to stay on top of the fundamentals of our lives: schools, roads, crime, trash, snow plowing.

One of the potential contenders for the Mayor's office is Rahm Emanuel:

Earlier this year, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel voiced his mayoral ambitions. But the former North Side congressman quickly added that he wouldn't take on Daley, for whom he served as a strategist and fundraiser in the mayor's first winning bid.

The primary is February 22, 2011. The filing deadline is December 13, 2010. Rahm should probably start his campaign ASAP. He's already done enough damage to the Obama presidency. Bringing Obama's approval rating from the 70s to the low 40s was quite an accomplishment. One of Rahm's job was to make sure that the first two years of the Obama administration didn't mimic the first two years of Clinton. Great job with that.

If Chicago wants him, they can have him. I'd prefer that Rahm Emanuel never serve in a role that has any impact on my life ever again. Read the rest of this post...

President pushes for tax hike because 'it's essential to our economic recovery program'

Oh sorry, that was Saint Reagan in August of 1982. Why is it that Reagan could do this but Obama is a socialist for letting tax cuts expire for a few percent of the US taxpayers? Imagine the possibilities if the administration had not been so aggressive against "the left of the left" during their laughable and pathetic attempts to win over the extreme right. If there are any signs of success from that adventure they don't look obvious in the polls. Read the rest of this post...

More of the Beck rally from New Left Media

Chase and Erick from New Left Media produced another video with more scenes from the rally. Definitely worth watching:
Read the rest of this post...

Joe Bageant on 'Washington's political class'

Thanks to this post by Ken Silverstein, the Washington editor of Harpers, I'm pointed to one of my favorite writers and stylists, Joe Bageant. Bageant makes an astute observation, one that helps us understand the slavishness of the political class to the ruling class (the very rich).

I'm using these terms literally, by the way. By "political class" I mean those who enter politics, win national elections, and serve as office-holders and advisers. Bill Clinton, Madeleine Albright and Tim Geithner are in this group.

By "ruling class" I mean those with enough money to finance the high cost of campaigning and "maintaining" elected officials (those bribes don't pay themselves, you know). The ruling class includes the über-rich, people like Richard Mellon Scaife, the Coors family ("Twins for Jesus"), the Koch brothers and Pete Peterson. It also includes those at the top of the corporate money machines — Jack Welch, for example, or Jamie Dimon.

Bageant makes his point via rich, pungent prose (catch the second sentence), and in passing touches on a subject I touched on once before. Joe Bageant (with my intrusive emphasis):

How about them political elites, huh? Five million bucks for Chelsea Clinton's wedding, 15K just to rent the air-conditioned shitters -- huge chrome and glass babies with hot water and everything. No gas masks and waxy little squares of toilet paper for those guys.

Yes, it looks big time from the cheap seats. But the truth is that when we are looking at the political elite, we are looking at the dancing monkey, not the organ grinder who calls the tune. Washington's political class is about as upwardly removed from ordinary citizens as the ruling class is from the political class. For instance, they do not work for a living in the normal sense of a job, but rather obtain their income from abstractions such as investment and law, neither of which ever gave anybody a hernia or carpal tunnel. By comparison, the ruling class does not work at all.

Moneywise, Washington's political class is richer than the working class by the same orders of magnitude as the ruling class is richer than the political class. This gives the political class something to aim for. To that end, they have adopted the ruling elite's behaviors, tastes and lifestyles, with an eye on becoming members. Moreover, it is a molting process that begins with the right university and connections, and culminates in flying off to Washington with the rest of your generation's most privileged and ambitious young moths.

I don't agree with everything he says, but it's certainly food for thought. Joe Bageant, ladies and gentlemen; here all week.

GP Read the rest of this post...

Robert Reich on Obama's 'cynical' business tax cut plan

Whether it's an attempt to corner the GOP or not, it's anything but good news for working Americans. Robert Reich:

The economy needs two whopping corporate tax cuts right now as much as someone with a serious heart condition needs Botox.

The reason businesses aren’t investing in new plant and equipment has nothing to do with the cost of capital. It’s because they don’t need the additional capacity. There isn’t enough demand for their goods and services to justify it. Consumers aren’t buying because they’re trying to come out from under a huge debt load, including mortgage debt; they have to start saving because their nest eggs are worth substantially less; and they’ve lost or are worried about losing jobs and pay.

In any event, small businesses don’t have enough profits against which to use these tax credits and deductions, and large corporations are sitting on over a trillion dollars of profits and don’t need them.

Republicans and corporate lobbyists have been demanding tax cuts on corporate investments for one reason: Big corporations are investing in automated equipment, robotics, numerically-controlled machine tools, and software. These investments are designed to boost profits by permanently replacing workers and cutting payrolls. The tax breaks Obama is proposing would make such investments all the more profitable.

Read the rest of this post...

Another poll shows a grim outlook for Democrats

The Washington Post/ABC News poll doesn't look good for the 2010 elections. It's the latest in a series of polls showing that the Republicans are looking to make major gains in November. There's a caveat that could provide an opening for Democrats -- the GOPers have no "clear plan" to govern. That's because they don't have any plans to govern. And, if recent history is any judge, any plans they do have will lead to intractable wars and an economic crisis. But, it seems like voters are so angry, they may be willing to ignore that recent history:

For the first time in more than four years, Republicans run about evenly with Democrats on the basic question of which party they trust to handle the nation's biggest problems. Among registered voters, 40 percent say they have more confidence in Democrats and 38 percent say they have more trust in Republicans. Three months ago, Democrats had a 12-point advantage.

On the economy, 43 percent of voters side with Republicans when it comes to dealing with financial problems, while 39 percent favor Democrats. (Fifteen percent say they trust neither party more.) Although not a significant lead for Republicans, this marks the first time they have had any numerical edge on the economy dating to 2002. In recent years, Democrats have typically held double-digit advantages on the issue.

The principal obstacles to GOP electoral hopes continue to be doubts that Republicans have a clear plan for the country should they win control of the House or Senate in November. But overall, the poll shows that the party has made big gains in the public's estimation since earlier this year.

Among all voters, 47 percent say they would back the Republican in their congressional district if the election were held now, while 45 percent would vote for the Democrat. Any GOP advantage on this question has been rare in past years - and among those most likely to vote this fall, the Republican advantage swells to 53 percent to the Democrats' 40 percent.

Polling like this is going to leave Democrats skittish when they get back next week. They should be doing everything possible to improve the job situation -- and to fire up their own base. I don't expect much action on firing up the Democratic base. The professional Democrats in DC (the staffers, consultants) think that pushing the Democratic agenda is what got them into trouble with voters. I think it's the opposite. The White House let Republicans shrink the stimulus. The White House let Max Baucus and the House Blue Dogs drag out the health care debate. Remember when Blue Dog Stephanie Herseth Sandlin crowed last year, “It is because of the Blue Dog Coalition that there is no floor vote before the August break.” That helped a lot, huh?

It really seems like the White House and the professional Democrats don't like their base. They get annoyed when people actually expect them to deliver. Now, all those people who actually believed the promises made in 2008 aren't real happy. There's not much time left to fix it -- and there's not much of an indication that anyone is even going to try.

The President is trying to go on the offensive on the economy and jobs this week. He's got to keep doing that til November. Read the rest of this post...

'Safe' House Dems owe $2.1 million in DCCC dues

In the comments to this post ("Rahm Emanuel: 'F*ck the UAW'", I'm tipped to this report in the HuffPost by lynchie. Apparently the various Dem ATMs are closing down — including the one that sends congressional cash to the DCCC.

Interesting. Amanda Terkel at HuffPost:

As the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) battles to keep ahead of the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), a handful of Democrats who are either in solidly safe seats or retiring have yet to pay their dues to the House fundraising arm -- funds that would go toward boosting the election chances of their vulnerable colleagues.

The Huffington Post obtained the dues sheets for several of these House members. In total, they owe $2,134,509 in unpaid dues to the DCCC. All members, except Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), have enough cash on hand to cover the balance. Individually, they owe anywhere between $45,000 and $250,000.

Here's her chart:


Note Peter DeFazio and Anthony Weiner, both decent progressives, on the list. There's more good information in Terkel's article. For example, Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) is quoted as saying:

When you contribute to [the DCCC, the money] goes to front-liners and usually Blue Dogs, and [they] usually vote against our issues.

Recall that the DCCC was run by Rahm Emanuel (see the first sentence of this post), who in 2006 gave us a generous helping of Heath Shuler and his ilk. It's now led by Chris Van Hollen, who appears to support cuts in Social Security. (Go ahead, click it; you won't be amazed.)

Given these facts, some people might be inclined to send notes of thanks to these holdouts. That is if some people think filling the Democratic party with true progressives, for a change, is a worthy goal.

This will be a tough year for Dems. Do we fill the joint with Blue Dogs, just to have Dems, or let those who gave us our lumps take responsibility — and their own lumps — as well?

That decision I leave to you and your conscience. Me, I'm just standing here passing out info.

GP Read the rest of this post...

Tuesday Morning Open Thread

Good morning.

Well, summer is over. Not officially. But, it always feels like that way on the day after Labor Day.

D.C. will bustling again, although Congress doesn't return til next week. And, we're in the final stretch of the 2010 campaigns.

After the trip to Wisconsin yesterday, The President doesn't have any big public events on his schedule today. He is meeting separately with Secretary Clinton and Secretary Gates. (Might be a good time to talk to Gates about putting some muscle behind getting the Defense Authorization bill passed in September. That's our best hope for insuring that the compromise DADT language becomes law this year, as promised.) Obama is also meeting with Anders Fogh Rasmussen, who is the Secretary General of NATO.

Obama is heading to Cleveland tomorrow to deliver another speech on the economy.

What else? Read the rest of this post...

Australia forms center-left government

It has taken a while and it's a razor thin majority, but it's done. The Independent:

Prime Minister Julia Gillard's center-left Labor Party will form a minority government to rule Australia for a second three-year term, after two independent lawmakers joined her coalition Tuesday in the interest of stable government.

The decision by Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott gives Gillard's party control of 76 seats in the 150-seat House or Representatives and avoids the need for another round of polls, following inconclusive elections late last month.

It also means Gillard can continue with her plans to introduce a 30 percent tax on iron ore and coal miners' burgeoning profits and make Australia's biggest polluters pay for carbon gas emissions.

Read the rest of this post...

Tony Blair cancels London book signing

I guess Blair didn't like the free gifts that were given to him the other day in Dublin. Why would anyone want to buy another pack of lies from that egomaniac? Blair is enjoying settling some old scores and dismissing the progressives who detest him in his new book and tour. Funny enough, Blair also can't see (like Bill Clinton) that it's no longer the 1990s and playing nice with the Big Finance industry is no longer considered respectable. Blair doesn't realize that it's Blair, not the left, who is now out of step with the public. What voter in Europe, UK or the US believes that we all need to bend in favor of letting the banking industry be "innovative?"

The poodle can't stand the heat.

Tony Blair today cancelled a high-profile signing of his new memoirs in central London amid warnings that he would face a hostile reception from anti-war protesters.

The former prime minister scrapped the event on the day he signalled a desire to return to domestic politics as he conducted a round of interviews to promote his book, called A Journey.

He cancelled his appearance at the flagship Waterstone's store in Piccadilly, which had been scheduled for Wednesday.

Read the rest of this post...