NYC names three finalists for taxi of the future

The three look decent enough though I'm partial to the Karsan. The inside of the Karsan reminds me of a London taxi and I always find them easy to get in and out of quickly, with or without luggage. Mayor Bloomberg is looking for feedback from New Yorkers who can vote here. Read the rest of this post...

Night Music

Open Thread, the Life Love Death edition.

Read the rest of this post...

If the TSA and Napolitano want to keep talking about body scanners and the underwear bomber, explain how they are useful in solving the problem

At the beginning of the year when the TSA started to tell us body scanners were the answer to the underwear bomber, German TV showed us otherwise. They continue to promote this expensive process that has little proof that it's a valid solution. We also know that the bad guys and gals could hide whatever they like in a body cavity and it would go undetected. Hopefully Washington hasn't already signed up for those searches as well. Again, everyone wants to be safe, but enough of this security theater that trashes our rights.

I'd like my country back, so quit with the excuses.

John Pistole, the head of the Transportation Security Administration, told TODAY's Matt Lauer that his agency is looking for a balance between security and privacy.

"Everybody wants the best possible security to know that everybody else on that flight has been screened properly, that there's not a group of people with box cutters who may want to storm the cabin, or people with liquid explosives, or shoe bombs, or underwear bombs," Pistole said.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, in an opinion piece in USA Today, said body scanners used at many airports around the country are safe, and the images are viewed in private. Additionally, she said pat downs have been used for years at airports and measures are in place to protect travelers' privacy.

Read the rest of this post...

Female traveler claims TSA sexually assaulted her

It will be interesting to see where this goes. Below is an excerpt but read the full story down to the latest updates. There have been similar stories online from pilots, who became ill after the TSA "pat downs."

She then moved in front of me and touched the top and underneath portions of both of my breasts.

She did not tell me that she was going to touch my breasts.

She then felt around my waist. She then moved to the bottoms of my legs.

She then felt my inner thighs and my vagina area, touching both of my labia.

She did not tell me that she was going to touch my vagina area or my labia.

She then told me that I could put my shoes on and I asked if I could pick up the baby, she replied Yes.

She then moved back to my belongings to finish scanning them with the paper discs for explosives. When she finished she said I was free to go.

I stood there holding my baby in shock. I did not move for almost a minute.

I stood there, an American citizen, a mom traveling with a baby with special needs formula, sexually assaulted by a government official. I began shaking and felt completely violated, abused and assaulted by the TSA agent. I shook for several hours, and woke up the next day shaking.

Read the rest of this post...

Clarence Thomas' wife steps down from far right group

Wash Post:

Virginia Thomas, political activist and wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, has decided to relinquish control of Liberty Central, the conservative group she founded less than a year ago, so that the organization can escape the "distractions" of her media celebrity, a spokeswoman said.

There's that. Or maybe the distraction was your recent phone call to Anita Hill, you freak. Read the rest of this post...

'Who will stand up to the superrich?'

That's the title of Frank Rich's latest column, and it's the key question, not just of this election cycle, but perhaps of the first half of the new century.

Who will stand up to the superrich? From the columnist who coined the phrase "billionaires' coup" (my emphasis throughout):

The wealthy Americans we should worry about ... are the ones who implicitly won the election — those who take far more from America than they give back. They were not on the ballot, and most of them are not household names. Unlike Whitman and the other defeated self-financing candidates, they are all but certain to cash in on the Nov. 2 results. There’s no one in Washington in either party with the fortitude to try to stop them from grabbing anything that’s not nailed down.

Just a note on that last line, "grabbing anything that's not nailed down." What do you call it when absolutely everything on the planet is for sale to the only people left with money? Mission accomplished. Frank Rich again:

The Americans I’m talking about are not just those shadowy anonymous corporate campaign contributors who flooded this campaign. No less triumphant were those individuals at the apex of the economic pyramid — the superrich who have gotten spectacularly richer over the last four decades while their fellow citizens either treaded water or lost ground. The top 1 percent of American earners took in 23.5 percent of the nation’s pretax income in 2007 — up from less than 9 percent in 1976. During the boom years of 2002 to 2007, that top 1 percent’s pretax income increased an extraordinary 10 percent every year. But the boom proved an exclusive affair: in that same period, the median income for non-elderly American households went down and the poverty rate rose.

Good numbers to remember when your "Reagan Democrat" hate-the-hippies uncle mouths off at Thanksgiving. The top-1% folks went from 9% of all pretax income to 23% — your "Reagan revolution," and his tax dollars, at work.

After excoriating the "timid" Obama and the Democratic Congress, Rich makes his most important point, the reason the nation needs those Big Boy taxes put back into place — a country ruled by the Barons of America's "new Gilded Age" is not a democracy, but something else:

The bigger issue is whether the country can afford the systemic damage being done by the ever-growing income inequality between the wealthiest Americans and everyone else, whether poor, middle class or even rich. That burden is inflicted not just on the debt but on the very idea of America — our Horatio Alger faith in social mobility over plutocracy, our belief that our brand of can-do capitalism brings about innovation and growth, and our fundamental sense of fairness. Incredibly, the top 1 percent of Americans now have tax rates a third lower than the same top percentile had in 1970.

And the Obama Wealth Transfer Commission has them reaching for more. How did we get here? Not by accident:

Inequality is instead the result of specific policies, including tax policies, championed by Washington Democrats and Republicans alike as they conducted a bidding war for high-rolling donors in election after election.

In other words, Rich is another who says, Big Money is the Puppet Master that pays both parties. And despite the illusion of conflict, only one agenda gets enacted.

(This may be the reason, by the way, for Nancy Pelosi's "compromise" regarding Steny Hoyer's leadership position in the Dem caucus. If this is a novel, Pelosi got a message from big-money donors that says, "Hands off our boy" — a message she can't afford to refuse.)

Rich cites good information from the new book Winner-Take-All Politics, by political scientists Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson, as well as the 2007 "travel" book Richistan by Robert Frank. The article is definitely worth a read.

Rich's prescription for change: Reject any compromise on the Bush tax cut extension for the rich. He doesn't sound optimistic, but there's no question he gets it, and that he's found his theme. Rich is a valuable asset. Thanks to him for this column — and its stark question:

Who will stand up to the superrich?

Candidates welcome.

GP Read the rest of this post...

The unsettled science of cellphones and cancer?

It's surprising that this journalist even thought the issue was settled. NY Times:

The cellphone instructions-cum-warnings were brought to my attention by Devra Davis, an epidemiologist who has worked for the University of Pittsburgh and has published a book about cellphone radiation, “Disconnect.” I had assumed that radiation specialists had long ago established that worries about low-energy radiation were unfounded. Her book, however, surveys the scientific investigations and concludes that the question is not yet settled.

Brain cancer is a concern that Ms. Davis takes up. Over all, there has not been a general increase in its incidence since cellphones arrived. But the average masks an increase in brain cancer in the 20-to-29 age group and a drop for the older population.

“Most cancers have multiple causes,” she says, but she points to laboratory research that suggests mechanisms by which low-energy radiation could damage cells in ways that could possibly lead to cancer.

Read the rest of this post...

Krugman on Obama: Can he fight? 'So far the answer has been no.'

[T]he main reason Mr. Obama finds himself in this situation is that two years ago he was not, in fact, prepared to deal with the world as he was going to find it. And it seems as if he still isn’t.

This promise of transcendence may have been good general election politics, although even that is questionable: people forget how close the presidential race was at the beginning of September 2008, how worried Democrats were until Sarah Palin and Lehman Brothers pushed them over the hump. But the real question was whether Mr. Obama could change his tune when he ran into the partisan firestorm everyone who remembered the 1990s knew was coming. He could do uplift — but could he fight?

So far the answer has been no.

Right at the beginning of his administration, what Mr. Obama needed to do, above all, was fight for an economic plan commensurate with the scale of the crisis. Instead, he negotiated with himself before he ever got around to negotiating with Congress, proposing a plan that was clearly, grossly inadequate — then allowed that plan to be scaled back even further without protest. And the failure to act forcefully on the economy, more than anything else, accounts for the midterm “shellacking.”

Mr. Obama could and should be hammering Republicans for trying to hold the middle class hostage to secure tax cuts for the wealthy. He could be pointing out that making the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy permanent is a huge budget issue — over the next 75 years it would cost as much as the entire Social Security shortfall. Instead, however, he is once again negotiating with himself, long before he actually gets to the table with the G.O.P.

Read the rest of this post...

Palm Center tries to kill DADT repeal

Someone is playing 11th dimensional chess. And you can take a guess as to who convinced them that this would be a good idea (two sets of initials come to mind, as does a particularly un-fierce advocate). Read the rest of this post...

'You touch my junk and I'm going to have you arrested'

The TSA wasn't given the opportunity, but they are now threatening the (attempted) traveler with a $10,000 fine. The choices today are unproven so adding the threat of a fine only adds to the disgrace. Neither of these options do anything to stop people from hiding weapons in any body cavity. So are full cavity searches next? Everyone wants the skies to be as safe as possible but this police state hysteria has to end. Maybe it's time everyone has a serious discussion about safety instead of simply throwing hundreds of millions of dollars at the problem. Funny how neither party has managed to stand up for privacy, but courage has rarely been valued in Washington.

The bad guys have clearly won.

The incident itself started when Tyner, 31, was directed toward the full-body scanner in the security line. Tyner refused, opting instead for the traditional metal body scan and a pat-down. When he was told that the TSA agent would have to conduct a kind of "groin check." Tyner balked, saying, "You touch my junk and I'm going to have you arrested."

That's when things got interesting. Various supervisors got involved, Tyner was pulled aside, the police came by, and a supervisor told Tyner that he wouldn't be allowed to travel unless he submitted to the check. Tyner opted to leave instead, getting a full refund for the ticket, but not before he was told that if he left the secured area he would be "subject to a civil suit and a $10,000 fine." Tyner left anyway.

Read the rest of this post...

The Hill predicts 'political disaster' for Obama if DADT repeal effort is abandoned

UPDATE @ 10:24 AM: Following the vigil at the grave of Sgt. Leonard Matlovich, LGBT Vets, joined by GetEQUAL, visited Senator Reid's Capitol Hill office today to discuss DADT repeal. Doesn't sound like there's any clear plan to bring the Defense Authorization bill with the DADT repeal language to the Senate floor.
___________________________
Last week, on MSNBC, John warned that if the DADT language doesn't pass this year:

"This is going to be a disaster for the President. The gay community is not gonna take this anymore."

That's basically the same message proferred by The Hill in an article that members of Congress and Capitol Hill staffers will be reading today. It's pretty clear that the future of DADT repeal is in the hands of President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid:

The need to shepherd the defense authorization bill through the Senate in the lame-duck session has left the Democratic leadership with a precarious dilemma.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) may not be able to secure enough votes to pass the bill because of language repealing the ban on gays in the military. Stripping that provision may be the only way to pass the legislation, which authorizes funding and sets policy for the Pentagon.

But abandoning the effort to repeal the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy would be a political disaster for President Obama, who made a campaign promise to end the ban.

Political disaster. Yep.

This line is key, too:

Much depends on how Reid handles the issue.

Indeed, it does. Read the rest of this post...

Banks expecting easy ride with GOP Congress

Which is precisely why they showered the GOP with campaign contributions directly and through the US Chamber of Commerce. Voters will surely applaud another easy ride for the bankers, right? Turn back the clock, because it worked out so well the last time.

The coming term should bring scores of oversight hearings into the implementation of new rules governing financial institutions. There will be scuffles over control of a new consumer financial protection agency. And lawmakers will debate how to restructure the quasi-governmental mortgage agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — which retain a major role in the current housing crisis.

All are issues that Bank of America, Wells Fargo and large other banking institutions will pay close attention to.

"We had been disappointed with a number of legislative outcomes with the past Congress, and so we look forward to better outcomes with this Congress," said Peter Garuccio, a spokesman for the American Bankers Association in Washington.

Garuccio said banks expect a corrections bill to peel back some of the financial regulations passed into law this year. Among them would be a repeal of the so-called Durbin Amendment, which cut debit-card fees for retailers. Banks say it cost them billions.

Read the rest of this post...

Monday Morning Open Thread

Good morning.

The President has returned from his trip around the world. We've been advised, "The President has no public events scheduled." Okay.

The House and Senate also return to DC today for the lame duck session. Now, remember, the Democrats are still in control until the end of the year. Let's see if they use their remaining power for some good.

We'll probably get a sense today from Harry Reid about his priorities for the lame duck session. We're paying close attention to what Reid says about when and how the Senate will deal with the Defense Authorization bill, which includes the DADT language. One excuse we won't accept is that there's not enough time. It's not acceptable for the Senate to adjourn on December 10th. Most Americans, at least those who are fortunate enough to have jobs, don't get to take the two weeks off before Christmas because they're tired. That option should not be available to Congress either. They need to keep working til they get their jobs done. And, that includes passing the Defense bill -- with the DADT language intact.

It's going to be a wild couple weeks. This morning, GetEQUAL's Week of Action for DADT repeal begins with vigil at gravesite of AF Tech. Sgt. Leonard Matlovich.

And, we must, of course, wait to see what President McCain will allow the Senate to do. Read the rest of this post...

British bank bonuses may be cut due to public anger

There's always been a lot of big talk so I'll be waiting to see the final results of this discussion. While they remain legends in their own minds, to the rest of us in the real world, they remain arrogant and unimpressive. How many more years will it be until client portfolios rebound as strongly as bonuses?

Britain's biggest banks were said today to be in talks about reducing the multi-billion pound staff bonus pot.

Negotiations about cuts to around £7 billion of payouts already earmarked for the New Year were being steered by the British Bankers Association, the BBC reported.

One participant told the broadcaster that public anger about the size of the bonus pool could see it slashed to £4 billion.

Read the rest of this post...

Napolitano meets pilot union to discuss airport security

But change won't be coming any time soon. As usual in Washington, it's all about continuing the last fight instead of looking forward. If Democrats and Republicans alike are going to throw about privacy, shouldn't they at least have to prove that their tactics actually deliver results? Sorry if I don't believe them on their word, but their word means nothing to me. I'm especially suspicious of the links between the body radiation scanners and Chertoff. Links like this also bring me back to that annoying issue of the American duopoly.

DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano and Pistole met executives from the travel industry, including hotels and online sites, on Friday to talk about concerns the added security is crimping travel and hurting their businesses.

"The meeting with Secretary Napolitano was informative but not entirely reassuring," said Geoff Freeman, an executive vice president with the U.S. Travel Association. "We understand the challenge DHS confronts but the question is where we draw the line."

Pistole mentioned several forthcoming reforms for so-called trusted travelers, Freeman said.

"Our country desperately needs a long-term vision for aviation security screening rather than an endless reaction to yesterday's threat," he said.

Read the rest of this post...