Blockbuster debited Anthony's PayPal account two days in a row for the same monthly plan. PayPal won't help

Blockbuster Double Dips In PayPal Account; Naturally, PayPal Does Nothing [PayPal]

from Consumerist by Chris Walters

Blockbuster debited Anthony's PayPal account two days in a row for the same monthly plan. PayPal won't help—they say it's between Blockbuster and Anthony, offering further proof that PayPal is a great service only as long as nothing goes wrong.

Anthony writes:

Called both Blockbuster and PayPal this morning and of course one pointed the finger at the other for the double subscription charge. So here I am with two charges and no way to resolve the issue since Blockbuster does not see both charges in their system and PayPal says I need to contact Blockbuster for resolution.

[Note: we edited the above screenshot for space, but we did not remove any figures.]

Has anyone else had this problem with Blockbuster's PayPal account agreement? It's a small amount in this case, but that's only because Anthony's plan is the cheapest Blockbuster offers; they charged him the full subscription fee both times.

CREW’s Most Corrupt Members of Congress provides a detailed analysis of the unethical and sometimes illegal activities of 24 congressmen and women who have most egregiously betrayed the public’s trust

CREW names the 20 most corrupt members of Congress and four to watch | Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

CREW names the 20 most corrupt members of Congress and four to watch

Submitted by crew on 10 September 2008 - 9:35am. CREW's Most Corrupt

Today, CREW released our fourth annual report on the most corrupt members of Congress.

CREW's Most Corrupt Members of Congress provides a detailed analysis of the unethical and sometimes illegal activities of 24 congressmen and women who have most egregiously betrayed the public's trust.  The full report can be found here.

CREW also has launched the report's tandem website, www.CREWsMostCorrupt.org, which offers short summaries of each member's transgressions as well as the full-length profiles and all accompanying exhibits.

New to this year's study are Reps. Marsha Blackburn, Vern Buchanan, Vito Fossella, Dan Lipinski, Charlie Rangel, Laura Richardson and Mike Turner, and Sens. Mary Landrieu and Norm Coleman.

Of this year's list of 24, at least 12 are under investigation: Ken Calvert, John Doolittle, Tom Feeney, Vito Fossella, William Jefferson, Jerry Lewis, Alan Mollohan, Gary Miller, Tim Murphy, Rick Renzi, Don Young and Ted Stevens. One other, Charlie Rangel, is under a self-initiated House ethics committee investigation. 

Upon release of the report, CREW''s Melanie Sloan said:

With soaring gas prices, a housing market in crisis, rising unemployment, and a nation at war, elected officials should be prioritizing their constituents' needs over their own self-interests. Unfortunately, the members of Congress listed in CREW's Most Corrupt report have decided that their personal needs are paramount to those they represent. This report holds them accountable for those choices.

Over the next few days, we'll be spotlighting the members named in Beyond DeLay.  Here's the list:

The 20 most corrupt Members of Congress

• Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-FL)
• Rep. Ken Calvert (R-CA) Rep.
• John T. Doolittle (R-CA)
• Rep. Tom Feeney (R-FL)
• Rep. Vito J. Fossella (R-NY)
• Rep. William J. Jefferson (D-LA)
• Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA)
• Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA)
• Rep. Daniel Lipinski (D-IL)
• Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
• Rep. Gary G. Miller (R-CA)
• Rep. Alan B. Mollohan (D-WV)
• Rep. Timothy F. Murphy (R-PA)
• Rep. John P. Murtha (D-PA)
• Rep. Steve Pearce (R-NM)
• Rep. Charles B. Rangel (D-NY)
• Rep. Rick Renzi (R-AZ)
• Rep. Harold Rogers (R-KY)
• Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK)
• Rep. Don Young (R-AK)

Dishonorable mentions

• Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)
• Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN)
• Rep. Laura Richardson (D-CA)
• Rep. Michael Turner (R-OH)

Since 1976, Alaska has ranked every year in the top five for rapes, with a rate currently 2.2 times the national average, according to the state's Health and Social Services department.

Under Palin, Wasilla Charged Rape Victims for Evidence Kits | Workbench

During the first four years that Sarah Palin was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, the town's police department charged women who had been raped with the cost of "rape kits," the $300 to $1,200 exams necessary to collect evidence of the sex assault. A May 20, 2000, article in The Frontiersman, Wasilla's hometown newspaper, provides the details:

Wasilla Police Chief Charlie Fannon does not agree with the new legislation, saying the law will require the city and communities to come up with more funds to cover the costs of the forensic exams.

In the past we've charged the cost of exams to the victim's insurance company when possible. I just don't want to see any more burden put on the taxpayer, Fannon said.

According to Fannon, the new law will cost the Wasilla Police Department approximately $5,000 to $14,000 a year to collect evidence for sexual assault cases.

Ultimately it is the criminal who should bear the burden of the added costs, Fannon said.

The policy was changed by an Alaskan state law that was written specifically to prevent Wasilla from continuing to charge women for the evidence necessary to prosecute their attackers, according to the bill's author Eric Croft (D-Anchorage).

Since 1976, Alaska has ranked every year in the top five for rapes, with a rate currently 2.2 times the national average, according to the state's Health and Social Services department.

In a 2006 gubernatorial debate, Palin said that she opposes abortion even in cases of rape or incest.

The candidates were pressed on their stances on abortion and were even asked what they would do if their own daughters were raped and became pregnant.

Palin said she would support abortion only if the mother's life was in danger. When it came to her daughter, she said, "I would choose life."

"After you meet your goal, you can take out money in a MasterCard debit card or a gift card from one of their retail partners like Amazon."

Save For Specific Goals With SmartyPig.com [Reviews]

from Consumerist by Ben Popken

"Saving up." It's nearly an alien concept in this "buy with debt" world, but into that breach steps SmartyPig. The site lets you set and save for specific goals in their online savings accounts at a competitive 3.9% APY savings rate. There's all sorts of built-in graphs and widgets to track your progress, but then you can make it social, if you like, by making a page where your goals public and having friends and family or other random people on the net track and root for your progress, or even contribute to your goal.

After you meet your goal, you can take out money in a MasterCard debit card or a gift card from one of their retail partners like Amazon.

One thing to remember is that you can only take out the money after your goal is met, and the goal has to be at least $250. So if you're looking for the liquidity of a normal online savings account, this isn't it. But if you're looking for something with built-in restrictions and tools that will both help and force you to save up for specific purchase goals, instead of whipping out the plastic, SmartyPig could be worth a shot.

Smarty Pig [Official Site]

The site has been around for a bit, here's a few other people who've written reviews about it worth checking out:

Get Rich Slowly [Get Rich Slowly]
SmartyPig Review: With Less Fees, Are Piggy Banks Back? [My Money Blog]
Social Networking Meets Savings Accounts: SmartyPig Launches this Week [NetBanker]
Some people had trouble with the sign-up, but I was able to clickity-click and get rolling within minutes.

"...displayed no remorse when confronted with their activities"

Bush administration officials exchanged sex for oil.

from Think Progress by Think Progress

The Interior Department's inspector general revealed today that 13 government officials "handling billions of dollars in oil royalties improperly engaged in sex with employees of energy companies they were dealing with and received numerous gifts from them." As the AP reports, the investigation revealed a "culture of substance abuse and promiscuity":

The reports describe a fraternity house atmosphere inside the Denver Minerals Management Service office responsible for marketing the oil and gas that energy companies barter to the government instead of making cash royalty payments for drilling on federal lands. […]

Between 2002 and 2006, nearly a third of the 55-person staff in the Denver office received gifts and gratuities from oil and gas companies, including Chevron, Shell, Hess Corp. and Denver-based Gary-Williams Energy Corp. the investigators found. Two oil marketers who received gifts and gratuities on at least 135 occasions displayed no remorse when confronted with their activities, Devaney said.

State utility regulators Wednesday granted Commonwealth Edison Co. a rate hike that they say will add $4.50 to the average customer’s monthly electric bill.

Chicago Business News, Analysis & Articles | ComEd given power to raise rates | Crain's

(Crain's) — State utility regulators Wednesday granted Commonwealth Edison Co. a rate hike that they say will add $4.50 to the average customer's monthly electric bill.

That would be a 5.5% increase over the current average household bill of $81.

The vote by the Illinois Commerce Commission was a victory for the utility. In approving the roughly $270-million increase, commissioners rejected a $218-million hike recommended by an administrative judge in the case. Instead, the regulators sided with a compromise proposal agreed to by ComEd and staff of the ICC.

ComEd originally asked for $360 million but brought its request down after discussions with ICC staff.

"We're disappointed in the decision today," said David Kolata, executive director of the Citizens Utility Board, a consumer watchdog group. "We think the facts clearly show a big increase isn't warranted. We'll do everything we can to overturn it."

A ComEd spokeswoman had no immediate comment, saying the utility hadn't yet reviewed the actual language of the order.

In addition, the ICC tentatively approved ComEd's request for a new rate-setting mechanism that would pave the way for implementation of a "smart grid," a tech-savvy metering system giving customers real-time information on their usage that could lead to systems allowing users to save money by curtailing power consumption during times of heavy demand.

But the commission isn't yet funding the proposal, allowing for future negotiations between consumer groups, ICC staff and ComEd over the details.

Mr. Kolata said the potential for a "consumer-friendly" smart grid was the one silver lining to come out of Wednesday's ruling.

The rate hike, which applies only to ComEd's charge for delivering power to households and businesses in Northern Illinois, is the latest in a series of increases that have raised average electric bills about 35% since a 10-year freeze on rates was lifted at the beginning of 2007.

And customers should brace for more.

An executive with ComEd parent Exelon Corp. told investors at a conference in New York last week that ComEd intends to file for another rate hike in the first half of next year. If approved by the ICC, that would take effect sometime in the first half of 2010.

Bloomberg.com: Opinion

Bloomberg.com: Opinion
Sept. 9 (Bloomberg) -- When the history is written on the collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, it will go down in the annals of corporate scandals as one of the greatest accounting scams committed in broad daylight.

All anyone had to do to know the government-guaranteed mortgage financiers were insolvent was read their financial statements. You didn't need a trained professional eye to discern this open secret, only a skeptical one.

Just last month, Fannie and Freddie said their regulatory capital was $47 billion and $37.1 billion, respectively, as of June 30. The Treasury Department now says it may have to inject as much as $200 billion of capital into the two companies. Nothing much changed at the companies in that span. They just couldn't get the government to keep up the ruse any longer.

To have believed those capital figures, you first needed to accept two key assertions by the companies. The first was that the mortgage-market meltdown was a temporary blip. The second was that Fannie and Freddie both would be wildly profitable for decades to come, once the blip was over.

These weren't the only fairy tales Fannie and Freddie told. They're just the ones that had the biggest impact on their calculations of regulatory capital. Had Fannie and Freddie ever backed off these predictions, they would have been officially insolvent, even under the government's lax standards.

Until late last week, though, nobody with any authority was willing to call them on it. That's why Fannie and Freddie were able to avoid a government takeover for so long.

Accounting Magic

By the time the government moved in, Freddie had accumulated $34.3 billion of paper losses on mortgage-related securities that it excluded from its calculations of regulatory capital. All Freddie had to do was say the losses were ``temporary,'' and they could be kept out of the company's capital figure. It didn't seem to matter how ridiculous the claim was.

Fannie played the same game. As of June 30, it had $11.2 billion of supposedly temporary losses on mortgage-related securities, which it excluded from its calculations of core capital, as the government calls it. (A better name would be ``kore kapital,'' like the imitation krab sticks on a sushi bar menu.)

The so-called temporary losses had the warped effect of inflating a line item on both companies' balance sheets called deferred-tax assets. The bigger the companies' losses got, the more these tax assets grew, based on the premise that someday the companies would be able to use the losses to offset future income-tax bills.

The catch is that if a company doesn't expect to have enough profits to use these assets, it's supposed to record a valuation allowance on its balance sheet to reduce their size. Freddie and Fannie didn't let this requirement get in the way. They never set up any allowances.

Dreams of Billions

So, as of June 30, when Freddie said it had deferred-tax assets of $18.4 billion, it supposedly envisioned about $50 billion of future taxable income that, in its judgment, would probably materialize in the face of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

Ditto for Fannie. It claimed to have $20.6 billion of deferred-tax assets as of June 30.

The companies' delusions didn't stop there. In their financial disclosures, both companies represented that the fair- market value of their tax assets was billions of dollars more than what they were allowed to show under generally accepted accounting principles.

All of this was malarkey, of course. And it was all disclosed, even if the companies' explanations weren't always clear.

Gatekeepers Doze

There were lots of gatekeepers who could have stopped this sooner and chose not to. Freddie and Fannie had boards with outside directors and audit committees, though the evidence that they did their jobs is scant.

Freddie's auditor, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, could have stopped it, and didn't. The same is true of Fannie's auditor, Deloitte & Touche LLP.

The Securities and Exchange Commission's chairman, Christopher Cox, had other priorities. He was too busy this summer trying to prop up the companies' stock prices by chasing short sellers away from their shares.

James Lockhart, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, kept telling the public this summer that Fannie and Freddie were adequately capitalized. He must have known this was a joke, assuming he had bothered to read their quarterly reports.

All the while, Ben Bernanke at the Federal Reserve and Hank Paulson at Treasury offered the same warm assurances about the companies' capital. They surely knew better, too.

Don't cry for investors who lost money on the companies' stocks either. If they didn't do any research or didn't understand what they owned, the people they should blame are themselves.

The reality is that investors should withhold their faith in the government officials who regulate our financial markets. That's not cynicism. In the parlance of securities law, it's a risk-factor disclosure.

The moral of this story: You're on your own, folks, and there's more where this came from.

(Jonathan Weil is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.)

To contact the writer of this column: Jonathan Weil in New York at jweil6@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: September 9, 2008 03:52 EDT

"When it comes to their claim to support the troops, John McCain and his party are flat-out liars"

Contempt For Those Who Serve

from Crooks and Liars by Cernig

John Soltz, Co-Founder and Chair of VoteVets.org, writes:

Last week's Republican convention sure made every superficial effort to come off as pro-Troop and pro-Veteran. And, of course, the media ate it up, not challenging a single thing. But to those of us who did serve, it was offense after offense after offense. … Maybe because it's because he has a terrible record, but not once in John McCain's speech did he talk about taking care of those who served their nation in the military. With exploding rates of PTSD, suicide, homelessness among veterans. With ridiculous wait times for veterans seeking care, and a VA that every major vets group says is woefully underfunded. With administrators dumping vets out of the veterans care system by diagnosing them with a lesser mental injury than they have. Not. A. Single. Word.

Soltz, who was an Army captain during Operation Freedom, goes on to list some of the sins Republicans don't want mentioned when it comes to their oft-mentioned "support" for servicemen and veterans. They include: Rush Limbaugh's "phony soldiers" accusation levelled at servicemen who disagree with Bush's awful policies on Iraq and Afghanistan; their faux-outrage when General Wesley Clark pointed out that being a POW isn't a qualification for being Commander in Chief and, of course, Sarah Palin's recent violation of OPSEC by revealing her son's deployment date.

Of course, we should add Rumsfield's "we go to war with the army we have" insult. When he said that, half of all casualties in Iraq up to that point had been because of a lack of vehicle and body armor the Bush administration had been unwilling to fund. We should add their repeated robbing of the soldier's paychestto force Congress into funding the Iraq occupation. And let us not forget the original Walter Reed debacle.

But that's not where McCain and his party end on their false "support. As a diary at Booman Tribune detailed back in February, Mr Straight Talk is full of doubletalk.

McCain voted against the Webb amendment calling for adequate troop rest between deployments.

McCain voted against an amendment that would provide $20 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for health care facilities.

McCain voted against increasing Veterans medical services funding by $1.5 billion in FY 2007 to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes.

McCain voted to table an amendment by Senator Dodd that called for an additional $322,000,000 for safety equipment for United States forces in Iraq.

McCain urged other Senate members to table a vote (which never passed) to provide more than $1 billion for National Guard and Reserve equipment in Iraq related to a shortage of helmets, tents, bullet-proof inserts, and tactical vests.

McCain voted against increasing the amount available for medical care for veterans by $650,000,000.

When it comes to their claim to support the troops, John McCain and his party are flat-out liars. The message is simple - if you really support the troops, stop voting Republican.

how to reach the executive level at CVS

How To Reach Someone At CVS [Cvs]

from Consumerist by Chris Walters

An anonymous tipster sent us the following information today on how to reach the executive level at CVS. Remember, don't use this to be a jerk to anyone—use it when you have a valid complaint that you can't get resolved through the recommended paths.

Here is some information you might find handy.

Call 401-765-1500 and press #

This will get you into the Company phone directory. All you have to do is say the name of the person you want to call...including the CEO (Tom Ryan). You wont get him, he has 2 dedicated secretaries, but it will get things moving along.

Also, if the people being "nasty" are pharmacists or in-training, the worst they will get is a slap on the hand. There is a lack of pharmacists in the country right now so no-one will get fired.

The most customer service can authorize is a $25 gift card. That is hard-coded into the system. The only person that can go over that limit is the District manager. You can usually find their name on the main store door (should list the manager and DM).

If you need a list of executives at CVS, check here.

Senator Herb Kohl (D-WI) asked the top wireless carriers to explain why they doubled the cost of sending text messages over the past 3 years

Congress Asks Wireless Carriers To Justify Text Message Rate Increases [Text Messaging]

from Consumerist by Chris Walters

This week, Senator Herb Kohl (D-WI) asked the top wireless carriers—AT&T, Verizon Wireless, Sprint, and T-Mobile—to explain why they doubled the cost of sending text messages over the past 3 years. They have until October 6th to respond.

The similar price increases, coming at similar times, Kohl said, "is hardly consistent with the vigorous price competition we hope to see in a competitive marketplace."

Kohl noted in the letter that the top four carriers combined have over 90 percent of the U.S. market, and wants the carriers to provide information on

• how their pricing structures differ from their competitors;
• the factors that led to their decision to raise prices;
• a comparison of text message pricing to other wireless service pricing;
• the utilization of text messaging over the past three years.

"Congress questions high cost of texting" [Cnet: The Iconoclast] (Thanks to Brett!)

McCain aides are privately furious about the contradiction, I’m hearing

McCain's Embarassing FCS Gaffe

from Crooks and Liars by Cernig

     John McCain attacked Barack Obama recently saying Obama would "slow" FCS, the future combat system which has been a procurement nightmare with corruption and overruns all around. McCain had previously spoken out about how bad that nightmare has been.

Indeed, it's been so bad that, back in July, the McCain's campaign's senior economic adviser submitted a "plan to balance the federal budget by 2013 to The Washington Post editorial board" that specifically set out what McCain would do about it as president.

Noah Shachtman at Danger Room found the relevant passage:

Balance the budget requires slowing outlay growth to 2.4 percent. The roughly $470 billion dollars (by 2013) in slower spending growth come from reduced deployments abroad ($150 billion; consistent with success in Iraq/Afghanistan that permits deployments to be cut by half — hopefully more), slower discretionary spending in non-defense and Pentagon procurements ($160 billion; there are lots of procurements — airborne laser, Globemaster, Future Combat System — that should be ended and the entire Pentagon budget should be scrubbed).

Oops.

Noah continues:

McCain aides are privately furious about the contradiction, I'm hearing. But there's been no official comment, so far, about the mix-up.

I bet McCain's infamous anger is showing right now - and his campaign staff are on the receiving end.

Crossposted from Newshoggers

CVS = ASSHOLE HOMOPHOBES WORST CUSTOMER SERVICE EVAR!

CVS Employee Calls Customer A 'Fucking AIDS Freak,' Threatens To 'Go Off' [Cvs]

from Consumerist by Chris Walters

Check out this stunning exchange between a Philadelphia CVS employee and a customer:

I said to this young man "You know what? I don't think you're handling this very well or being very polite, and I'd like to speak to someone else about this."

His response was "Whatever, somebody needs to come deal with this because I'm about to go off..."

"You're about to 'Go off?', I asked him (probably exacerbating the situation, I admit.) "Do you really think that's the best thing to say to a paying customer?"

And at this point, with his back turned to me, the young man muttered "Fucking AIDS freak."

Read J's full story of how it got to this point, and CVS' meager response, below.

Here's J's full email, for those of you who want a more detailed story:

In what has been one of the most horrifying experiences of my entire life, I have had a dreadful recent encounter at my local CVS. Ironically one of the other worst customer-service related mishaps I've ever had was at a CVS as well, though not the same one...

I was in my local CVS in Philadelphia getting my partner's prescription filled. We are a gay male couple and my partner is HIV+. The medication, Atripla, is HIV related. We are both currently on a medicaid-related health insurance plan, a situation that is new to us and directly related to his current health issues.

I had in hand a coupon from the local paper that awarded me a $20 gift card if I transferred a prescription to CVS. I had actually used the coupon the day before for another prescription, as it says you can do use it multiple times (just not on the same day.)

On this particular day they were having a very hard time getting through to the other pharmacy to put the transfer through. The staff was also particularly snide and unpleasant; moreso than usual, at any rate.

After the fiasco of getting the actual transfer put through, when the young man attempted to ring me up and process my coupon, something went wrong in the computer. Another employee came by to try and figure things out, and they determined that the coupon was not acceptable for those with Medicaid.

I got a little agitated because they weren't being particularly polite about it, and I tried to explain that I wasn't specifically on Medicaid proper, but on a related plan. I also pointed out that I had just used the same coupon the day before. They then called over another young man who was apparently a manager. His actual position in the store is still up for debate; he appeared to be a front-of-store manager who was doing some work in the pharmacy area.

He walked into the situation with an extremely aggressive attitude. He wouldn't allow me to actually SAY anything or discuss the situation with him, and it was clear he was taking an "I know what I'm talking about, I know what you're up to, and I'm going to nip this in the bud" kind of stance with the whole thing. I was getting impatient, embarassed and frustrated. The whole of the staff back there were just glaring at me, and I was extremely perturbed.

My inclination in these situations, which seem to happen more frequently these days, is to try and be rational and direct without being rude. I said to this young man "You know what? I don't think you're handling this very well or being very polite, and I'd like to speak to someone else about this."

His response was "Whatever, somebody needs to come deal with this because I'm about to go off..."

"You're about to 'Go off?', I asked him (probably exacerbating the situation, I admit.) "Do you really think that's the best thing to say to a paying customer?"

And at this point, with his back turned to me, the young man muttered "Fucking AIDS freak."

I have to be honest with you: I'm 30 years old, and in all of my adult life - with all of the bigotry and hatred I have encountered in various forms and situations - this was the absolute most shocking and flabbergasting thing that has ever happened to me.

It was one of those situations where I was so stunned and slack-jawed that I had no real faculties to handle the situation. It's the kind of anger that silences you while your body tenses up and you try to control the shaking that's coming from the inside out.

By this point a woman, the manager of the pharmacy, had approached me and asked - stone faced - if she could help. I told her that if her employees felt comfortable speaking to customers they way they just did, and in her presence, that I didn't think she COULD help because obviously they felt doing so was okay. I asked her to void my prescription transfer and I left.

When I got home I immediately called a different CVS location and asked for a number to call to file a complaint. I called a local "headquarters" number and left a complaint on a voicemail for a district manager. I also called the general 800 number for CVS and left a complain with the customer service person. I was told the general manager of the store, Anthony, was on vacation until Monday.

On Monday, Anthony did call me back. Our conversation was brief and typical of what I expected. I was told that he would investigate the situation, and that if what I described did, in fact, happen, it would be dealt with. But that basically he couldn't promise anything other than that if I ever came into the store again and something similar happened, I should ask to speak to him directly.

I can tell you now that nothing really came of the situation. The young man still works at that CVS, and I have done my best to simply not go there anymore. As it is located only 2 bocks from my apartment, and is the only 24-hour estalishment in the area, I do still go occasionally, hating myself every step of the way.

I don't know what I expected CVS to do. I suppose - and I say this laughingly - an apologetic gift card might have been nice. But the real point is, is there any real resolution to a situation like this? Other than having the guy on video or audio tape, he's obviously going to deny that it happened, and his co-worker chums - presuming they heard what he said (as that one part is probably the only "fireable" part of his lousy customer service) - didn't seem the types inclined to get involved.

There's no real great way to wrap up this report. I guess the great lesson is, people can still be complete douchebags, and sometimes there's nothing you can do about it.

J, you may want to try writing a complaint letter and mailing it to the executive headquarters in Rhode Island—here's a list of their executives. (We looked for executive phone numbers and email addresses in their SEC filings, but couldn't find any.) Some people will never stop being complete douchebags, but it's likely your complaint never made it past the district manager, and since it wasn't adequately resolved at that level, you should take it higher.

video shows how a variety of food products have shrunk over the years, while the price remains the same"

Video: The History Of Maxwell House Shrinkage []

from Consumerist by Ben Popken

This video shows how a variety of food products have shrunk over the years, while the price remains the same, and the tricks manufacturers use so we don't notice the differences. She stacks up the coffee cans as they go from 16 oz to 11 oz. At one point, Maxwell House says that while the size is going down, the potency is going up. "We've fluffed the beans!" they say. So then why do the instructions on the side of the can for the amount of coffee you use to make a perfect cup stay the same? Though we don't really mourn for lost Maxwell House value, the example is illustrative of standard industry tactics, even on food that doesn't taste like crap.

Food Amounts Shrink Over Years, But Containers Are Same Size [WTAE] (Thanks to Kevin!)

Top Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008

OpenSecrets | Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Invest in Democrats - Capital Eye

The federal government recently announced that it will come to the rescue of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, two embattled mortgage buyers that for years have pursued a lobbying strategy to get lawmakers on their side. Both companies have poured money into lobbying and campaign contributions to federal candidates, parties and committees as a general tactic, but they've also directed those contributions strategically. In the 2006 election cycle, Fannie Mae was giving 53 percent of its total $1.3 million in contributions to Republicans, who controlled Congress at that time. This cycle, with Democrats in control, they've reversed course, giving the party 56 percent of their total $1.1 million in contributions. Similarly, Freddie Mac has given 53 percent of its $555,700 in contributions to Democrats this cycle, compared to the 44 percent it gave during 2006.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have also strategically given more contributions to lawmakers currently sitting on committees that primarily regulate their industry. Fifteen of the 25 lawmakers who have received the most from the two companies combined since the 1990 election sit on either the House Financial Services Committee; the Senate Banking, Housing & Urban Affairs Committee; or the Senate Finance Committee. The others have seats on the powerful Appropriations or Ways & Means committees, are members of the congressional leadership or have run for president. Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), chairman of the Senate banking committee, has received the most from Fannie and Freddie's PACs and employees ($133,900 since 1989). Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-Pa.) has received $65,500. Kanjorski chairs the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance and Government-Sponsored Enterprises, and Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs.

Top Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008

Name	Office	Party/State	Total
1. Dodd, Christopher J	S	D-CT	$133,900
2. Kerry, John	S	D-MA	$111,000
3. Obama, Barack	S	D-IL	$105,849
4. Clinton, Hillary	S	D-NY	$75,550
5. Kanjorski, Paul E	H	D-PA	$65,500
6. Bennett, Robert F	S	R-UT	$61,499
7. Johnson, Tim	S	D-SD	$61,000
8. Conrad, Kent	S	D-ND	$58,991
9. Davis, Tom	H	R-VA	$55,499
10. Bond, Christopher S 'Kit'	S	R-MO	$55,400
11. Bachus, Spencer	H	R-AL	$55,300
12. Shelby, Richard C	S	R-AL	$55,000
13. Emanuel, Rahm	H	D-IL	$51,750
14. Reed, Jack	S	D-RI	$50,750
15. Carper, Tom	S	D-DE	$44,389
16. Frank, Barney	H	D-MA	$40,100
17. Maloney, Carolyn B	H	D-NY	$38,750
18. Bean, Melissa	H	D-IL	$37,249
19. Blunt, Roy	H	R-MO	$36,500
20. Pryce, Deborah	H	R-OH	$34,750
21. Miller, Gary	H	R-CA	$33,000
22. Pelosi, Nancy	H	D-CA	$32,750
23. Reynolds, Tom	H	R-NY	$32,700
24. Hoyer, Steny H	H	D-MD	$30,500
25. Hooley, Darlene	H	D-OR	$28,750

Includes contributions from PACs and individuals.
2008 cycle totals based on data downloaded from the
Federal Election Commission on June 30, 2008.

The Tribune refused to publish the notice's final line: "In lieu of flowers, please vote Democratic."

Chicago Reader Blogs: News Bites

The Tribune -- even the new "if we all think outside the- box maybe this-sorry ship-won't sink" Tribune -- doesn't like to offend. So when stand-up comic Ken Swanborn died the other day, the paper turned up its nose at the paid death notice his family submitted.

The Tribune refused to publish the notice's final line, a nod to Swanborn's sense of humor and political convictions: "In lieu of flowers, please vote Democratic."

Says a woman on the paper's paid-death-notice desk, "If it's considered discriminatory or offensive, they take the line out."

Offensive?

"What if I'm a Republican and I'm offended?"

But instead you offended the family.

"Well, it was not intentional, but we do have protocols and we do have rules we have to follow."

But the family was paying to say this!

"We have guidelines."

The Sun-Times published the death notice as the family wrote it. And Sun-Times columnist Richard Roeper quoted the last line in his tribute to Swanborn, a buddy from the days when they were growing up in Dolton.

Says Carol O'Neill, another Dolton buddy, "Only Swanny could have his obit rejected. He's been a huge political activist for years. His parents started the movement years ago. When black families started moving into Dolton in the early 60s they were involved in meeting with the Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King. So at an early age Swanny was involved in standing up for social justice. In his mind you were a Democrat or get out of here."

Tribune innovation czar Lee Abrams might want to innovate some common sense.

'Only a guy with his complete disregard for the truth would be willing to attack his political opponent for supporting a law designed to protect youngsters from sexual predators"

Why Is John McCain Defending Sexual Predators? - The Jed Report

So John McCain has a new ad on the air (watch it here) attacking Barack Obama for voting for a law that supposedly required schools to teach kids in kindgarten the birds and the bees.

Except the law required no such thing. In fact, the vote in question was actually about (among other things) providing school districts educational tools to protect young children from sexual predators. Moreover, there was no requirement that school districts use those tools. The legislation merely required that if a school destrict chose to offer such a program, the program could not be mandatory.

This guy McCain is a total joke. Only a guy with his complete disregard for the truth would be willing to attack his political opponent for supporting a law designed to protect youngsters from sexual predators.

Update (4:50PM): I should note that McCain's ad doesn't outrage me as much as it amuses me. I mean the truth is, John McCain is starting to make Elmer Fudd look dignified.

"It is shameful and downright perverse for the McCain campaign to use a bill that was written to protect young children from sexual predators..."

McClatchy Washington Bureau | 09/09/2008 | Out of bounds! McCain misstates Obama sex-ed record

WASHINGTON — Throw the flag against: The McCain-Palin campaign.

Call: Unsportsmanlike conduct.

What happened: A new 30-second TV ad attacks Barack Obama's record on education, saying that Obama backed legislation to teach "'comprehensive sex education' to kindergartners." The announcer then says, "Learning about sex before learning to read? Barack Obama. Wrong on education. Wrong for your family."

Why that's wrong: This is a deliberately misleading accusation. It came hours after the Obama campaign released a TV ad critical of McCain's votes on public education. As a state senator in Illinois, Obama did vote for but was not a sponsor of legislation dealing with sex ed for grades K-12.

But the legislation allowed local school boards to teach "age-appropriate" sex education, not comprehensive lessons to kindergartners, and it gave schools the ability to warn young children about inappropriate touching and sexual predators.

Republican Alan Keyes tried to use Obama's vote against him in the 2004 U.S. Senate race. At the time, Obama spoke about wanting to protect young children from abuse. He made clear then that he was not supporting teaching kindergartners about explicit details of sex.

Obama spokesman Bill Burton said Tuesday of McCain's ad: "It is shameful and downright perverse for the McCain campaign to use a bill that was written to protect young children from sexual predators as a recycled and discredited political attack against a father of two young girls."

Penalty: 15 yards for the McCain campaign's deliberate low blow.

ABC's Charlie Gibson posed no challenge to several false, contradictory, or dubious assertions made by Sen. John McCain during a September 3 interview

Media Matters - Gibson, who is scheduled to interview Palin, let several McCain falsehoods go unchallenged

Summary: ABC's Charlie Gibson posed no challenge to several false, contradictory, or dubious assertions made by Sen. John McCain during a September 3 interview. Gibson is scheduled to interview McCain's running mate, Gov. Sarah Palin, later this week.

On the September 7 edition of Fox News Sunday, Rick Davis, campaign manager for Sen. John McCain, asserted that Gov. Sarah Palin would not be interviewed until "at which point in time we feel like the news media is going to treat her with some level of respect and deference." ABC News subsequently announced that World News anchor Charlie Gibson had secured the first television interview with Palin following her vice-presidential nomination, which is scheduled to air on September 11 and 12. Indeed, during a September 3 interview with McCain, Gibson posed no challenge to several of his false, contradictory, or dubious assertions. For example, Gibson did not challenge McCain on his false claim that when Palin became governor of Alaska, she said, "No more [earmarks] for my state"; Gibson offered no rebuttal to McCain's claim that Sen. Barack Obama has never "taken on the special interests in his party on a major issue"; and did not note that McCain previously reportedly had a different view from his current one of the relevance of a governor's experience presiding over his or her state's National Guard.

Earmarks and the "bridge to nowhere"

As Media Matters for America documented, Gibson did not challenge the claim by McCain that after Palin obtained millions of dollars in earmarks as mayor of her Alaskan hometown, Wasilla, she "learned that earmarks are bad" when she became governor and said, "No more for my state." At no point did Gibson point out that as governor, Palin, by her own account, requested nearly $200 million in earmarks for Alaska just this year. Other media outlets have noted Palin's earmark requests as governor; The Seattle Times reported on September 2 that her earmark requests for 2008 amounted to "more, per person, than any other state."

Gibson also left unchallenged McCain's claim that Palin said, "We don't want the 'bridge to nowhere.' " In fact, as The Seattle Times article reported, after "appear[ing] to embrace" the "so-called 'Bridge to Nowhere' " during her run for governor, "A year later, as criticism of earmarks mounted, Palin began to speak out against earmarks" but nonetheless kept the federal money for Alaska and used the funds for other projects.

Obama "has never taken on the special interests in his party on a major issue ever"

Gibson allowed McCain to claim without challenge that Obama "has never taken on the special interests in his party on a major issue ever." Gibson did not note that Obama has refuted that claim by pointing to his work dealing with ethics reform and education, and that media, including ABC News, have reported that Obama has taken positions that were not popular with interests or politicians within his party.

ABCNews.com reported on Obama's proposal for merit pay for teachers in a November 20, 2007, analysis by Teddy Davis and Sunlen Miller headlined "Obama Bucks Party Line on Education":

Obama's willingness to boost teacher pay based on performance separates him from his Democratic rivals, including Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., who supports school-based, rather than individual teacher-based, merit pay. The broader political significance of his unorthodox proposal is that it gives him an opportunity to buttress his argument that he is the Democrat best positioned to bring people together for purposes of challenging the status quo.

Even author David Freddoso wrote in his book, The Case Against Barack Obama, that an ethics reform bill co-sponsored by Obama, The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006, was "a real accomplishment for Obama in the name of reform" and "a small victory for open government and bipartisanship" that was "approved over the objection of some of Capitol Hill's worst porkers." From Pages 93-94 of Freddoso's book:

Obama's reform record is not a complete wash. His most notable accomplishment in Washington was the bill he co-sponsored with Republican senator Tom Coburn, the conservative junior senator from Oklahoma. The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 -- also known as "Google for Government" -- helped expose to the sunlight the congressional practice of "earmarking," in which members of Congress direct federal spending to parochial projects -- swimming pools, bridges to nowhere -- that often have no national importance or congressional authorization.⁶³ Coburn and Obama's bill, approved over the objection of some of Capitol Hill's worst porkers, really was a small victory for open government and bipartisanship.

This was a real accomplishment for Obama in the name of reform -- the second such accomplishment of his career after the Illinois ethics law.

In a June 16 interview with ABC News senior national correspondent Jake Tapper, Obama cited "ethics reform legislation" as an example of a time he "worked across the aisle in such a way that entailed a political risk." According to the Nexis database, the exchange was aired on the August 12 edition of World News, in a segment introduced and concluded by Gibson. From the interview transcript:

TAPPER: But have you ever worked across the aisle in such a way that entailed a political risk for yourself?

OBAMA: Well, look, when I was doing ethics reform legislation, for example, that wasn't popular with Democrats or Republicans. So any time that you actually try to get something done in Washington, it entails some political risks.

Obama also cited ethics reform as an example of when he "went against party loyalty, and maybe even went against your own best interest, for the good of America" during the August 16 Saddleback Presidential Forum, moderated by pastor Rick Warren:

WARREN: We've talked about this before, about the common good, and the common ground and common good. Can you give me an example of a time -- you know, I've seen that a lot of good legislation gets killed because of party loyalty. Can you give me a good example where you went against party loyalty, and maybe even went against your own best interest, for the good of America?

OBAMA: Well, you know, I'll give you an example that, in fact, I worked with John McCain on, and that was the issue of campaign ethics reform and finance reform. That wasn't probably in my interest or his, for that matter, because the truth was that both Democrats and Republicans sort of like the status quo. And I was new to the Senate and didn't necessarily engender a lot of popularity when I started saying, you know, we're going to eliminate meals and gifts from corporate lobbyists. I remember one of my colleagues, whose name will be unmentioned, who said, where do you expect us to eat, McDonald's? I thought, well, actually, a lot of your constituents probably do eat at McDonald's, so that wouldn't be such a bad thing.

But I think that we were able to get a bill passed that hasn't made Washington perfect, but at least has started moving things forward. I guess the other example where I'm not sure that this was a -- more of a partisan issue, but it was something I felt very deeply, was when I opposed the initial decision to go into war in Iraq. That was not a popular view at the time. And I was just starting my campaign for the United States Senate. And I think there were a lot of people who advised me, you should be cautious. This is going to be successful. The president has a very high approval rating and you could end up losing the election as a consequence of this.

Further, during a February 11 Politico/WJLA-TV interview, when Politico editor-in-chief John Harris asked Obama to "[n]ame some issues where you've been willing to stand up against your party," Obama responded, "education":

HARRIS: Senator, we've got a question that goes right to that. The likely Republican nominee, Sen. McCain, has regularly stood up against his own party and has some real scars that he's wearing because of it, when he thought it was in the national interest to do so. Name some issues where you've been willing to stand up against your party, and also take those scars?

OBAMA: Well, look, we've talked about education. We actually had a roundtable here about what we need to do with the schools. I've consistently said, we need to support charter schools. I think it is important to experiment, by looking at how we can reward excellence in the classroom.

Similarly, on the April 27 edition of Fox News Sunday, when host Chris Wallace asked Obama to "name a hot-button issue where you would be willing to buck the Democratic Party line," Obama cited "issues of education" [transcript from the Nexis database]:

WALLACE: As a president, can you name a hot-button issue where you would be willing to buck the Democratic Party line and say, "You know what? Republicans have a better idea here?"

OBAMA: Well, I think there are a whole host of areas where Republicans in some cases may have a better idea.

WALLACE: Such as?

OBAMA: Well, on issues of regulation. I think that back in the '60s and '70s a lot of the way we regulated industry was top-down command and control, we're going to tell businesses exactly how to do things.

And you know, I think that the Republican Party and people who thought about the markets came up with the notion that, "You know what? If you simply set some guidelines, some rules and incentives, for businesses -- let them figure out how they're going to, for example, reduce pollution," and a cap and trade system, for example is a smarter way of doing it, controlling pollution, than dictating every single rule that a company has to abide by, which creates a lot of bureaucracy and red tape and oftentimes is less efficient.

I think that on issues of education, I've been very clear about the fact -- and sometimes I've gotten in trouble with the teachers' union on this -- that we should be experimenting with charter schools. We should be experimenting with different ways of compensating teachers that --

WALLACE: You mean merit pay?

OBAMA: Well, merit pay, the way it's been designed, I think, is based on just a single standardized test -- I think is a big mistake, because the way we measure performance may be skewed by whether or not the kids are coming into school already three years or four years behind.

But I think that having assessment tools and then saying, "You know what? Teachers who are on career paths to become better teachers, developing themselves professionally -- that we should pay excellence more." I think that's a good idea, so --

Alaska National Guard

Gibson did not challenge McCain's repeated citation of Palin's tenure as "commander of the [Alaska] National Guard" as evidence that she has "the qualities and has enough experience to be commander in chief" and "the national security experience and background to be president," or McCain's claim that Palin "has had national security as one of her primary responsibilities." Gibson did not ask McCain to cite any actions Palin took as commander of the Alaska national guard that suggest the "qualities" and "experience" necessary to be commander in chief. Nor did Gibson point out that McCain has previously dismissed a governor's role as commander of his state's National Guard in assessing that person's national security experience.

During a January 30 Republican presidential primary debate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney stated that "as a governor, you're also a leader. You're the commander-in-chief of your National Guard." Moments later, when asked, "What makes you more qualified than John McCain to run the military as commander-in-chief," Romney replied, in part: "You see, my objective is to keep America the strongest nation on Earth, economically, militarily, and, if you will, from the spirit of our people. I believe I can do that by virtue of a lifetime of experience leading, making decisions." Following Romney's remarks, McCain was asked, "Is Governor Romney ready to be a military commander?" McCain replied: "Oh, I'm sure that, as I say, he's a fine man. And I think he managed companies, and he bought, and he sold, and sometimes people lost their jobs. That's the nature of that business. But the fact is -- but the fact is we're at a time in our history -- we're in a time in our history where you can't afford any on-the-job training."

Additionally, in a September 5, 2007, article, The New York Times reported that McCain "questioned the foreign policy credentials" of Romney. McCain reportedly said that Romney had "nothing in his background that indicates that he has any experience" in "foreign policy or national security," apparently ignoring or dismissing Romney's role as commander of the Massachusetts National Guard while governor:

And for the first time Mr. McCain, who has a lengthy résumé in the Navy and in Congress, questioned the foreign policy credentials of his main rivals for the Republican presidential nomination: Mr. [Rudy] Giuliani, a former New York City mayor and prosecutor, and Mitt Romney, a former Massachusetts governor and a businessman.

"I think the nation respects the mayor's leadership after 9/11, and I do, too, and I think he displayed leadership at a time that Americans needed some steady hand, and I think that his conduct was very laudatory following 9/11," Mr. McCain said, when asked why so many voters identify Mr. Giuliani with the issue of terrorism.

But he went on to say: "I don't think it translates, necessarily, into foreign policy or national security expertise. I know of nothing in his background that indicates that he has any experience in it, with him or Romney."

Obama has "the most liberal extreme voting record of anybody in the Senate"

Gibson failed to challenge McCain's assertion that Obama "has the most liberal extreme voting record of anybody in the Senate." McCain appeared to be referring to the National Journal's ranking of Obama as the "most liberal senator" for 2007, which many conservatives and media figures have repeated without noting the ranking's subjectivity. As Media Matters has repeatedly noted, the National Journal based its rankings not on all votes cast by senators in 2007, but on "99 key Senate votes, selected by NJ reporters and editors, to place every senator on a liberal-to-conservative scale." In contrast, a study by political science professors Keith Poole and Jeff Lewis that used every non-unanimous vote cast in the Senate in 2007 to determine relative ideology placed Obama in a tie with his running mate, Sen. Joe Biden, for the ranking of 10th most liberal senator. Gibson also did not point out that that McCain himself "did not vote frequently enough" to receive a rating in 2007, according to the National Journal.

Nor did Gibson note that according to a presidential support study by the nonpartisan publication Congressional Quarterly, an earlier version of which McCain himself cited in 2003 as evidence that "the president and I agree on most issues," McCain has voted with President Bush 90 percent of the time during Bush's presidency, including 95 percent of the time in 2007. In a January 13 article (accessed via Nexis), Congressional Quarterly reported that "McCain's 95 percent support [for Bush] score for last year was the highest in the chamber."

From the ABCNews.com transcript of Gibson's September 3 interview with McCain:

GIBSON: Senator, since I've been following politics, every single presidential nominee has said that the first quality they look for in a vice presidential pick is the capability and the readiness to take over as president.

Can you look the country straight in the eye and say Sarah Palin has the qualities and has enough experience to be commander in chief?

McCAIN: Oh, absolutely. Having been the governor of our largest state, the commander of their National Guard, she was once in charge of their natural resources assets, actually, until she found out there was corruption and she quit and said it had to be fixed.

[...]

GIBSON: But you criticized, for a long time, Sen. Obama...

McCAIN: Sure.

GIBSON: ... based on his lack of experience...

McCAIN: Sure.

GIBSON: ... in your words...

McCAIN: Yes.

GIBSON: ... with the foreign policy area. Jan. 6, I'm quoting you, "Sen. Obama does not have the national security experience and background to be president."

McCAIN: I said he didn't...

GIBSON: Sarah Palin does?

McCAIN: I said that he didn't have the judgment. He doesn't have the judgment. He didn't have the judgment on Iraq. He still refuses to acknowledge that the surge has succeeded.

Gov. Palin knows the surge has succeeded. She's the commander of the Alaskan National Guard. He said that Iran was a tiny problem. He's never visited south of our border. He has no experience on these issues.

She has been in charge and she has had national security as one of her primary responsibilities. Sen. Obama has never had a position of responsibility to do with many of those responsibilities. I'm proud of her vision. I'm proud of her strength. And everybody knows energy is a key element in American strength and future. She knows how to address that issue.

GIBSON: You had many people to consider. Sen. Lieberman, who has spent a lifetime in government.

McCAIN: Yes.

GIBSON: Gov. Romney, who has had large executive experience. Tom Ridge, who has served in so many different capacities.

And you feel she's more qualified than any of them.

McCAIN: Of course, I think, overall, she's by far the best candidate. And, again, being governor with an 80 percent approval rating of America's largest state, I think, is a very significant plus.

And by the way, if you'd talk to the other governors who have worked with her, they're very impressed with her. They all give her very high marks, very high marks.

In the U.S. Senate, Sen. Obama has the most liberal extreme voting record of anybody in the Senate.

Gov. Palin has appointed Democrats, independents. She has reformed their government.

Sen. Obama comes from the old Chicago machine politics and has never taken on the special interests in his party on a major issue ever. She's taken them on time after time. That's what Americans want.

GIBSON: It says "Country First" all over the convention hall, as you'll see when you go in there tomorrow night, probably seen pictures of it, it says "Country First."

[...]

GIBSON: Earmarks...[Palin] got $27 million in earmarks for her small town. You have talked about them in pernicious terms that you campaign. So why are they OK for them?

McCAIN: And then she learned that earmarks are bad. I know lots of people that are converts. And then when she became governor, she said, "No more for my state." She said, "We don't want the 'Bridge to Nowhere.'"

She, of course, understood, over time, how terrible and pernicious these earmarks are and how great an evil they are, and I'm glad she took the position that she did, against the old bulls in her own party.

GIBSON: Gave a speech or spoke at a Pentecostal church not long ago, said, "Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers," talking about Iraq, "on a task that is from God." "From God." Do you agree?

"McCain is the most absent senator in Congress, having missed 63 percent of the votes since the 110th Congress opened session on January 3, 2007. 63%."

McCain, Bush and Palin - The Freeloading Riches Of The GOP

from Emptywheel by bmaz

Turns out Sarah Palin has a very spotty attendance record in her brief experience as Governor of Alaska. Juneau is the state capital of Alaska. From the Juneau Empire:

Palin has spent little time in Juneau, rarely coming to the state capital except when the Legislature was in session, and sometimes not even then.

During a recent special session called by Palin herself, she faced criticism from several legislators for not showing up personally to push for her agenda.

Someone at the Capitol even printed up buttons asking "Where's Sarah?" Rep. Andrea Doll, D-Juneau, called it a telling question.

"At a time when her leadership was truly needed, we didn't know where she was," Doll said.

Local Alaskan reporter Shannyn Moore, on Tuesday night's Countdown on MSNBC, confirmed that many members of the Alaskan legislature wore yellow "Where's Sarah" buttons. Of course, this must be read in conjunction with the fact that Palin has bilked taxpayers for 312 nights spent in her own home during her first 19 months in office (well over half of the time), charging a per diem allowance normally intended to cover meals and incidental expenses while traveling on state business. She charged the State of Alaska for staying in her own house and away from her job at the state capital.

Habitually away from where her governing job, for which she is paid to attend and perform by the citizens; gee, that makes Sarah Palin just like....

George Bush. Although you can certainly make the argument that the country is better off when Bush is not on the job, the fact remains that he has been the most absentee President in modern history. As of March 2008, Bush had spent 452 days on vacation at his Crawford ranch in Texas; well over a full year of his seven years in office spent down on the farm ranch. And this, of course, doesn't include the other fun filled time Bush spends slapping bikini clad babe's butts at the Olympics and all the other larks he galavants off on.

Habitually away from his governing duties in Washington DC, for which he is paid to attend and perform by the citizens of this country; gee, that makes George Bush just like....

John McCain. McCain is the most absent senator in Congress, having missed 63 percent of the votes since the 110th Congress opened session on January 3, 2007. 63%. McCain's absentee record even beats that of Sen. Tim Johnson (D-SD), who was completely absent nearly a year while recovering from a brain hemorrhage.

In the calendar year of 2008, McCain has missed a whopping 82% of the votes cast in the United States Senate (160 out of 195 votes missed as of September 8, 2008; 32 of the 35 votes McCain made were over three days, with McCain only voting on a total of 5 days of the entire legislative session in 2008). McCain was absent from the job he was elected to perform for the citizens of Arizona 82% of the time; a job for which he is paid in excess of $165,000.00 a year and for which he and his family are given the finest healthcare plan in the world. McCain has not been present for one single vote in the Senate since April 8, 2008. None. Nada.

Here are some more facts and figures from Smintheus (Note: these figures are as of July 29, 2008, so almost every category is now higher and more egregious):

63% - How many votes in the Senate McCain has skipped during the 110th Congress (since January 2007).

96 - The number of Senate votes McCain has missed since his last recorded vote on April 8.

111 - The number of days since McCain last attended a committee hearing (of the Senate Armed Services Committee, on April 9).

25% - How many full SASC hearings McCain has attended during the 110th Congress.

89% - How many full SASC hearings McCain has skipped since April 2007 (32 out of the last 36 hearings).

2007 - The last year in which McCain attended any Commerce, Science & Transportation Committee hearings or subcommittee hearings.

The League of Conservation Voters noted in February that McCain has skipped every one of the 15 Senate votes on environmental issues that it deemed critical during this Congress.

This is a common thread between Bush, Palin and McCain; none of them are ever in the city they are supposed to be in, at their job, doing the work the people pay them to do. Heck, Palin even charges bilks the State of Alaska for being away from the capital and holed up in her own mansion on a lake. When every element of our society is flatlining, Bush, Palin and McCain are constantly MIA from their job, and they seem to feel entitled to do that on the people's dime. Like Dick Cheney, they consider it to be "their due".

McCain, Palin and Bush don't put "country first"; if they did, they would consistently be in the city where their job was located, doing the work they were elected to do. McCain, Palin and Bush are not "public servants"; if they were, they would be serving their constituents instead of themselves. No, McCain, Palin and Bush are more like grifters living off of the largesse and goodwill of the citizens, bleeding them dry and living high on the hog (with lipstick) in the process.

In a sense, McCain, Palin and Bush are analogous to The Riches in the excellent FX television series by the same name about an Irish Traveller family of con artists and thieves that steal a large amount of money, get involved in a car accident that kills a very wealthy couple (the eponymous Riches), and choose to pursue a "better life" by adopting the Riches' identity, and opulent mansion, and taking up their life in an affluent gated community.

McCain, Palin and Bush are the freeloading Riches of the GOP; taking the citizen's money and living high off the hog in mansions without doing their duty and work to earn it. Time to rid ourselves of the grifters.

"Allianz insured facilities and personnel at concentration camps like Auschwitz and Dachau"

Sports Business - Naming Rights and Historical Wrongs - NYTimes.com

The Giants and the Jets face moral and public-relations questions as they negotiate the possible sale of the naming rights to their new stadium with Allianz, a Munich-based insurer and financial services company with disturbing connections to Nazi Germany.

Allianz insured facilities and personnel at concentration camps like Auschwitz and Dachau. Kurt Schmitt, its chief executive in the 1930s, served as Hitler's second economics minister and can be seen in a photograph from a rally wearing an SS-Oberführer's uniform and delivering the Nazi salute with Hitler standing in front of him.

Like other insurers in Germany at the time, Allianz followed anti-Semitic policies by terminating or refusing to pay off the life insurance policies of Jews, and sent cash that was due beneficiaries and survivors to the Nazis.

It also became the insurer of Jewish valuables taken by the Nazis.

Gerald Feldman was a historian asked by Allianz in 1997 to produce an unfettered history of its role in Hitler's Germany. He wrote in "Allianz and the German Insurance Business, 1933-1945" about when the company extended its group accident insurance for engineers working for the notorious I.G. Farben chemical company at Auschwitz.

"It was just one more piece of business in the Third Reich," he wrote in his book, which was published in 2001, "but it demonstrated that such pieces on any large scale made contact at some point with all that is represented by the name 'Auschwitz' — from slave labor to extermination — virtually inescapable."

A deal with Allianz would not be easy to sell publicly, like Citigroup's with the Mets. The possibility of an Allianz Stadium will make some people cringe, especially in a market that is home to many Jewish people, and in which the Tisch family, which owns half of the Giants, has supported many Jewish causes.

"There must be sensitivity to the psychological impact this would have," said Elan Steinberg, a vice president of the American Gathering of Jewish Holocaust Survivors and Their Descendants. "Survivors are still alive. It would not be appropriate to affix the Allianz name to a stadium name in an area where a lot of survivors still living."

A serious burden will be on the Giants and the Jets to persuade fans and others of the propriety of naming a stadium for Allianz, even if its terrible era is more than 60 years past. The teams have hired a crisis management firm to vet all naming rights candidates, but it is certain that most of its time has been spent on Allianz.

•

Even the best arguments in Allianz's favor are imperfect. The teams can say that Allianz has done much to atone for its role before and during the war, but no amount of apologies or restitution to victims and survivors can make full amends for its past.

The teams can say Allianz participated in two major efforts that began in the 1990s to compensate slave and forced laborers as well as insurance policy holders — but only after pressure from the American government, state insurance regulators and Jewish groups, and class-action suits filed in federal court.

The teams refused to speak about Allianz, which has United States subsidiaries like Fireman's Fund Insurance and Oppenheimer Capital, because a deal is not done. And Allianz refused to discuss the naming-rights negotiations.

But Peter Lefkin, a senior vice president of Allianz of America, said, "Over the years, Allianz has done everything possible to redress all the wrongs perpetuated by the Third Reich."

Stuart Eizenstat, who was President Clinton's special representative on Holocaust-era issues, said that Allianz cooperated on compensation, but only after it demanded legal protection from being sued, which he felt was appropriate.

"Allianz paid all its claims under I.C.H.E.I.C.," he said, referring to the International Commission on Holocaust Era Insurance Claims, which has distributed more than $300 million to 48,000 claimants. "It paid its dues, participated in a good-faith process, and has continued to pay claims even after I.C.H.E.I.C. closed it doors last year."

Critics insist that Allianz and other companies have not paid nearly enough under a very flawed process. Sidney Zabludoff, an economist who specializes in restitution finances, said Allianz acted "reasonably," but operated under "German rules" that kept its payments at a lower rate than those paid by insurers in other European countries.

In all, he said, Allianz has paid claimants about $12 million through International Commission on Holocaust Era Insurance Claims.

The Jets and the Giants will now determine if Allianz will be able to use their stadium to extend its global brand to the United States by paying them $20 million or $30 million a year.

•

Michael J. Bazyler, a professor at the Chapman University School of Law and the author of "Holocaust Justice," said accepting the concept of Allianz Stadium might be as individual a choice as buying a German car, which he would not.

"If it was Allianz Stadium, would I not go to the game?" Bazyler said, the son of Holocaust survivors. "I'd feel uncomfortable. But when people think of a German company that cooperated with the Nazis, Allianz doesn't pop up."

"Lawyers for investors in Enron will get $688 million in fees for recovering more than $7.2 billion from its lenders"

Legal Fees Set in Enron Case - NYTimes.com

Lawyers for investors in Enron will get $688 million in fees for recovering more than $7.2 billion from its lenders, auditors and directors, a judge ruled.

The judge, Melinda Harmon of the United States District Court in Houston, found the payment was justified in light of the record-setting amount the lawyers had recovered for investors, who sued for more than $40 billion in losses.

The fees, awarded to Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins, were reasonable and "earned by an extraordinary group of attorneys who achieved the largest settlement fund ever despite the great odds against them," Judge Harmon wrote in her decision.

Judge Harmon said the lawyers' rate, 9.5 percent, was substantially lower than in comparable class actions. She also approved the settlement distribution plan, allowing the firm to begin handing out money to plaintiffs by the end of the year, said Patrick J. Coughlin, the lead lawyer.

"...Paulson changed tax law so that the two lenders aren't paying more in taxes to the government as a result of that same government becoming their controlling investor."

Fannie, Freddie Get Tax Pass, Too - - CFO.com

Wouldn't it be nice if the Internal Revenue Service issued a new tax rule that applied just to your company to help it retain all the net-operating losses it could? In that way, the NOLs could be used over the next 20 years to offset income, and reduce the company's tax bill.

That's what Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson did for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac on Monday, when he had the IRS issue Notice 2008-76, which essentially allows the two government-sponsored enterprises to retain all of their NOLs, despite a change of control of ownership, tax expert Robert Willens told CFO.com.

Under the tax code — specifically Section 382 — NOLs are severely limited when there is a change of control. The rule is in place to prevent acquiring companies from buying up targets just to gain access to their NOLs. The NOLs for Fannie and Freddie are substantial. Over the last four quarters, Fannie and Freddie recorded about $14 billion in aggregate losses.

In essence, Paulson changed tax law so that the two lenders aren't paying more in taxes to the government as a result of that same government becoming their controlling investor. When the government structured its bailout of the two mortgage lending giants, it seized control of Fannie and Freddie by buying up $1 billion worth of senior preferred stock in each GSE. The plan also stipulates that Fannie and Freddie will pay a 10 percent annual dividend on the preferred stock owned by the government; and no other dividend can be paid out without the permission of the Treasury Department.

If the Treasury Department were simply another company, such a takeover would constitute a change of control under the tax code. But the new ruling creates a big exception for the two mortgage lenders. And while the IRS ruling was issued without any basis in law, says Willens, the NOL provision of the bailout was done "very effectively." He explains that the new rule eliminates the "testing dates" that normally would have applied to Fannie and Freddie, or any other company, in the event of a takeover.

The testing date is used to determine when a change of control takes place, and the stock price of the target company on that day. The stock price is used to calculate the target company's market capitalization (share price times shares outstanding), and then the market cap is plugged into a formula to figure out how much of the target company's losses the new parent can claim as its own NOLs.

The formula is straightforward. The change-of-control NOL limit is calculated by multiplying the target company's market capitalization on the day of the acquisition by the IRS's long-term tax-exempt rate – which is currently 4.6 percent.

With Fannie and Freddie's market caps at all time lows, the government would have been able to claim only a fraction of the original NOLs, opines Willens. However, by eliminating the testing date, the IRS also eliminates the question of whether the bailout constituted a change-of-control under the tax law. "It becomes a moot point," says Willens.

Nevertheless, under the bailout deal, the government is forcing Fannie and Freddie to contribute to federal coffers through the annual 10 percent dividend payout. Further, Willens points out that by giving the mortgage lenders a way to reduce their future income tax bills, the plan frees up more cash so Fannie and Freddie can meet the dividend requirements. To be sure, NOLs do not offset the dividend payout, NOLs only offset pre-dividend, pre-tax income.

"I am not saying that the IRS ruling is a good thing, or a bad thing, it is just unusual," asserts Willens. "Then again, this is a very unusual situation."

If you've got a flea problem, HartzVictims.org suggests you ask your veterinarian for a suggestion, and avoid any OTC product from a retail store.

Hartz Flea & Tick Remover Harms Some Cats And Dogs [Hartz]

from Consumerist by Chris Walters

If you plan on treating your dog or cat for fleas, talk to your vet and read these stories before applying Hartz. There are multiple instances where pets have responded adversely to the products, in some cases dying. Hartz agreed to remove a flea product for cats and kittens in 2006 based on similar adverse reactions, but according to the stories from angry pet owners (warning, they will make you want to hug your pet), there are still plenty of problems with current Hartz products.

Darryl wrote to us about what happened to his girlfriend's dog:

Today I received a frantic call from my girlfriend about her dog Brutis. Brutis is a 130 pound Black Lab, more like a barrel shaped teddy bear. Brutis is also a very, very big boy. He lives in the country and in the Michigan summer, fleas tend to come around. My girlfriend noticed a flea on his tail and decided to give him a bath and apply some Hartz Flea & Tick remover according to the generic instructions.

Please do not get the impression she applied it improperly. It was sprayed no where near his face, nose, eyes, etc. He was sprayed outside to provide ventilation. 45 minutes later Brutis starts throw up violently, becoming weak with shaking and tremors. He would fade in and out of this condition. I went to the internet to find information, finding the advice to wash the dog with luke-warm water and dish soap. She thoroughly washed Brutis repeatedly to remove any of the flea & tick remover. He was still trying to vomit, merely dry heaving bile from his stomach. Sorry this is graphic.

We rushed the dog to Michigan State's Emergency clinic which is roughly 15 miles away from their house. The dog continued to vomit in her back seat on the way to the clinic. He was very lethargic and unresponsive, not displaying his usual characteristics. It was determined that the Hartz spray was responsible for this violent reaction.

We don't know how Brutis turned out, but we've asked for an update and will post it if Darryl replies.

If you've got a flea problem, HartzVictims.org suggests you ask your veterinarian for a suggestion, and avoid any OTC product from a retail store.

Update: Darryl sent us a status report on Brutis, along with a pic:

When we brought him in Friday night, he was extremely dehydrated and his heart rate was 180 bpm, when it should normally be between 60-100bpm. We were told that if we had not brought him in he would have died from either dehydration or heart failure.

After some great care provided by the MSU Emergency Clinic, Brutis is at home resting sound waiting for his next meal, and the one after that, and the one after that..

I still have to go through the trouble of getting them to cover the bill, but that is non-comparative to the value of having them exposed for the people that never have the satisfaction of bringing their pet home alive.

www.hartzvictims.org
"Against Hartz"
(Photo: Getty)

"What has been revealed is the existence in the United States... of a plutocracy—the political rule of the rich"

Record corporate bailout reveals the bankruptcy of American capitalism

The US government takeover of the mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has dealt a shattering blow to the ideology of market capitalism, which has been used for decades to justify a relentless assault on the working class and a vast transfer of wealth to the American ruling elite.

The endless invocations of the virtues of private enterprise, individual entrepreneurship and self-reliance, used to demonize socialism and defend a system that exploits the vast majority for the benefit of a financial elite, have been exposed as frauds. When it comes to big capital, losses are socialized. Only profits remain private.

The same forces who year after year have inveighed against "big government" in order to justify the removal of all legal impediments to the accumulation of corporate profits and private fortunes, and carry out the destruction of social safeguards for the working class, have engineered a massive expansion of government power to safeguard the interests of the financial elite.

The bailout has as well exposed the real relations of political power and influence behind the façade of American democracy. The largest government bailout of private companies in world history—whose ultimate cost to taxpayers is likely to reach hundreds of billions—was sanctioned in advance by the Democratic Congress and given instant approval by the leadership of both parties and both of their presidential candidates.

There have been no investigations into the greatest financial scandal in world history. Neither party has any interest in bringing to light the swindling and skullduggery of the Wall Street moguls, because they are both bound hand and foot to those responsible for the financial debacle.

What has been revealed is the existence in the United States, behind the increasingly tattered veneer of democratic institutions, of a plutocracy—the political rule of the rich. When it comes to the basic interests of the financial aristocracy, both parties and all of the official institutions of society snap to attention and do the bidding of their Wall Street masters.

The bailout of the two mortgage giants—which account for 80 percent of new home mortgages in the US—is a demonstration of the historic failure of American capitalism and the profit system on a global scale. It was precipitated by the deepest economic crisis since the Depression of the 1930s, whose epicenter is the United States. The Bush administration moved to take over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under conditions of a rapid erosion of international confidence in the solvency of not only these two companies, but of the United States government itself.

Over the past several months, global investors, including central banks and government investment funds, primarily in Asia and Russia, have been dumping their vast holdings in mortgage-backed securities issued by the US government-sponsored firms. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have a combined liability of $5.3 trillion in mortgage-backed securities which they own or guarantee. The run on their assets has not only intensified the crisis of the two companies, which are massively leveraged and have suffered billions of dollars in losses as a result of the collapse of the US housing market, it has thrown into question the status of all US government debt, including US Treasury bonds.

The US, by far the world's largest debtor nation, with a current account deficit of nearly $800 billion, is sustained by the inflow of hundreds of billions of dollars from abroad. It currently imports $1 trillion in foreign capital every year, or over $4 billion every working day.

But the assumption by the US government of the debts of the two mortgage companies, while averting an immediate financial meltdown, only compounds the crisis of American capitalism. As Martin Wolf, the financial correspondent of the Financial Times wrote on Tuesday, "As a result, US housing finance has been brought under direct government control and, in the process, the gross liabilities of the US government, properly measured, have increased by $5,400 billion, a sum equal to the entire publicly held debt and 40 percent of gross domestic product."

At a stroke, US sovereign debt has doubled and is now roughly equal to America's gross domestic product. On July 14, one day after US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson called for legislation to give him unilateral and unlimited powers to use public funds to rescue Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the Wall Street Journal editorialized on the implications of a government bailout of the two companies. It wrote: "But with financial woes mounting, some investors are betting they may profit from weighing the unthinkable question: Could the US government default?"

This immense increase in US government indebtedness can only further undermine international confidence in the credit-worthiness of US Treasury bonds, resulting in a further decline in the dollar and a sharp increase in the interest paid by the US to borrow from its international creditors.

The claims made by the Bush administration, echoed by the US media, that the bailout of the two mortgage finance companies will consume at most $200 billion in public funds—itself a massive amount that eclipses previous corporate bailouts, including the $160 billion bailout of the savings and loans industry less than two decades ago—are not credible. An indication of the sums envisioned by US policy makers is the fact that the legislation passed last July giving Paulson the power to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac raised the US debt limit by $800 billion, increasing the cushion between the debt limit and current government indebtedness to $1.1 trillion.

Some sense of the social priorities of the US ruling elite and its two parties can be gleaned from a comparison between the sums being extended to bail out just these two companies and those allocated by the federal government in 2008 for education ($67.5 billion), unemployment benefits ($37.3 billion), highways and mass transit ($53.1 billion) and housing ($7.4 billion).

Moreover, the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is only the prelude to a far broader use of public funds to bolster the balance sheets of major corporations. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and his Republican opponent John McCain are both supporting a $50 billion bailout of the US auto companies, which will inevitably entail further cuts in jobs and wages. And the plunge of the Wall Street investment bank Lehman Brothers toward bankruptcy—the firm's stock fell by 45 percent on Tuesday—poses another rescue operation similar to the $29 billion bailout of Bear Stearns last March.

It is already being widely broached that the government establish a permanent mechanism for using taxpayer funds to buy billions of dollars in failing assets from major banks and financial companies. The Wall Street Journal wrote on Tuesday, "Creating a government-backed entity to buy up these assets could jump-start the market for home loans and relieve banks and other financial institutions, which are taking big hits to their balance sheets as they fall in value."

The Financial Times sounded the same theme, declaring, "The US government might end up having to support the recapitalization of a much wider range of financial institutions in order to curb the credit crunch."

These statements give the lie to the attempt to portray Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as aberrations, which in their reckless speculation and pursuit of super profits departed from the norm. On the contrary, they typify the financial parasitism and outright criminality that have become pervasive characteristics of the workings of American capitalism and the social physiognomy of the US corporate elite.

The operations of the two government-sponsored firms are entirely in line with the unbridled speculation, based on an immense expansion of debt, that has become the hallmark of American capitalism. Their role in the housing and credit boom that has now come crashing down was of a piece with the creation of the vast edifice of paper values, engineered through the so-called "securitization" of debt, which sustained the super profits and immense salaries raked in by Wall Street.

In the wake of the bailout, press reports have noted the bloated salaries of the companies' CEOs. Before they were sacked as part of the government takeover, Fannie Mae CEO Daniel Mudd and Freddie Mac chief Richard Syron took in between them $29.5 million over the several years they headed their respective corporations. And they stand to receive another $29 million as part of their exit packages.

But these sums are by no means exceptional. The Financial Times reported last week that compensation for major executives of the seven biggest US banks totaled $95 billion between 2005 and 2007.

The collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is a paradigm of the US economy as a whole. Over the past three decades, the decay of American capitalism has taken the form of a vast growth of financial parasitism. At its heart, this involves the separation of wealth creation from the creation of real value in the production process. The American ruling elite has largely dismantled the productive base of the US economy, ruthlessly downsizing manufacturing at the cost of millions of jobs and the destruction of working class living standards, in order to reap higher profits from increasingly reckless forms of financial speculation.

The indices of the growth of financial speculation in the US economy are staggering: In 1982, the profits of US financial companies accounted for 5 percent of total after-tax corporate profits. In 2007, they made up 41 percent of corporate profits.

This process has generated ever greater levels of social inequality, the most telling symptom of the degenerate state of the US profit system. A report by the Congressional Research Service, updated July 31, provides a measure of the ever growing chasm between the ruling elite and the broad mass of the American people. It states that the share of national income accounted for by the top 1 percent of earners (as reported on tax returns) reached 21.8 percent in 2005—a level not seen since 1928. The report further noted that in 2006, corporate profits totaled 12.4 percent of national income, a level not reached in 50 years.

The cost of the ever-expanding bailout of American big business will be borne squarely by the working class. Even in the midst of growing unemployment and poverty and a flood of home foreclosures, there is much talk in the media about the American people "living beyond their means."

That the next administration, whether headed by McCain or Obama, will sharply intensify the assault on working class living standards was spelled out by the New York Times, which editorialized Tuesday: "Senators John McCain and Barack Obama have both voiced support for the bailout, which shows good judgment. But what the next president will need to worry about, and both candidates need to talk about, is the depth of the country's economic problems. It will take discipline and sacrifice to address them."

The only alternative to a rapid lowering of working class living standards and the only rational and progressive solution to the financial crisis is a socialist program of nationalization of the entire financial system under the democratic control of the working people, with provisions to secure the investments of small depositors and share-holders. The wealth and resources of the country must be developed and allocated to meet the social needs of the population, not the money-mad strivings of financial speculators.

This policy can be carried out only through the independent political mobilization of the working class in opposition to the two-party system and the financial aristocracy which it serves. The Socialist Equality Party is dedicated to the building of such a mass socialist movement of the working class.

It's beginning to look like Young is on the verge of a full-scale collapse.

This Vince Young Melt Down Is Getting Uglier...and Scary [NFL]

from Deadspin by Clay Travis

It's beginning to look like Young is on the verge of a full-scale collapse. All day long Nashville airwaves exploded with talk of Young's alleged refusal to return to the field after his second interception. Now, things off the field are looking worse. Last night at 12:30 a.m., according to WKRN News, Titans coach Jeff Fisher and Young had an emergency meeting at the Titans facility after Young left his apartment and couldn't be located for several hours.

According to sources, questions about Young's state of mind began when the quarter back left his home abruptly at 7:30 p.m. Monday.

According to the same sources, Young seemed emotionally down and left his cell phone behind.

Titans' officials alerted Metro police to be on the lookout for Young's SUV.

The video story from WKRN is also here.

Eventually, after alerting the police to be on the lookout for Young's SUV, Fisher was able to track Young down and meet with him at the Titans headquarters. As he left the facility, Fisher pronounced the whole thing a "misunderstanding." Which is what Fisher also said about Young not going back into the football game. He also refused to go on camera and said his quarterback was fine.

Leaving all this aside, Young's mental state seems to have moved well beyond a football issue and into a more serious realm involving potential mood swings and mental health struggles. You don't contact the local police force and ask them to be on the lookout for your missing quarterback's SUV if everything is going fine. Stay tuned, this whole situation is just getting started.

Concerns for Titans Quarterback prompt midnight meeting [WKRN]

Titans worried about VY's mental state [Music City Miracles]

The Los Angeles Opera has staged The Fly, an operatic re-imagination of David Cronenberg's incredible 1986 film

The Fly: The Opera

from Boing Boing by David Pescovitz

The Los Angeles Opera has staged The Fly, an operatic re-imagination of David Cronenberg's incredible 1986 film. Indeed, the opera was directed by Cronenberg himself and features original music by Howard Shore (Lord of the Rings) who also composed the film's soundtrack. Placido Domingo conducts. As a huge fan of Cronenberg's films, I hope I have the opportunity to see his work in this medium. The opera's Web site is rich with video and photos including set designs and production sketches. The Fly: The Opera (LA Opera)

On education, at least, it does appear that Barack Obama is the “change” candidate.

Obama <s>and McCain</s> on Education

from Open Congress : Congress Gossip Blog by Donny Shaw

(This is part of a series on legislation being sponsored in the Senate by presidential candidates Barack Obama (D-IL) and John McCain (R-AZ). Subscribe to our rss feed to get the rest.)

On a day when the two presidential candidates went back and forth over education policy, I figured I would take a look at some of the education-related legislation they are sponsoring in Congress.

As I began looking through the bills each candidate has sponsored this session (Obama's, McCain's), it was instantly that education policy marks a stark contrast in the candidates legislative records this session – while Barack Obama has proposed 11 bills directly related to education, John McCain has introduced zero.

As is typical of senators from the minority party in Congress, McCain has introduced far fewer bills than Obama in general. Less than one-third, in fact. Still – and this isn't scientific – I would say that 11 education bills is exceptionally high and zero is exceptionally low. Even looking at the Library of Congress's Thomas.gov website for information on bills in the previous, 109th Congress, it doesn't look like any of McCain's bills last session were related to education policy.

I planned on doing a general comparison of the candidate's education bills, but, instead, here's a quick and dirty overview of Barack Obama's education legislation – click on the bill numbers for way more information:

S.3047 – Enhancing Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education Act of 2008

A bill to provide for the coordination of the Nation's science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education initiatives.

S.2428 – National STEM Scholarship Database Act

A bill to direct the Secretary of Education to establish and maintain a public website through which individuals may find a complete database of available scholarships, fellowships, and other programs of financial assistance in the study of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.

S.2227 – Success in the Middle Act of 2007

A bill to provide grants to States to ensure that all students in the middle grades are taught an academically rigorous curriculum with effective supports so that students complete the middle grades prepared for success in high school and postsecondary endeavors, to improve State and district policies and programs relating to the academic achievement of students in the middle grades, to develop and implement effective middle school models for struggling students, and for other purposes.

S.2111 – Positive Behavior for Effective Schools Act

A bill to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to allow State educational agencies, local educational agencies, and schools to increase implementation of early intervention services, particularly school-wide positive behavior supports.

S.2066 – Back to School: Improving Standards for Nutrition and Physical Education in Schools Act of 2007

A bill to establish nutrition and physical education standards for schools.

S.Res.268 – A resolution designating July 12, 2007, as "National Summer Learning Day"

Designates July 12, 2007, as National Summer Learning Day. Urges people to promote summer learning activities to send youth back to school ready to learn, support working parents and their children, and keep children safe and healthy during the summer months.

S.1574 – Teaching Residency Act

A bill to establish Teaching Residency Programs for preparation and induction of teachers.

S.1513 – Predominantly Black Institution Act of 2007

A bill to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to authorize grant programs to enhance the access of low-income African-American students to higher education.

S.1389 – Climate Change Education Act

A bill to authorize the National Science Foundation to establish a Climate Change Education Program.

S.116 – Summer Term Education Programs for Upward Performance Act of 2007

A bill to authorize resources to provide students with opportunities for summer learning through summer learning grants.

S.114 – Innovation Districts for School Improvement Act

A bill to authorize resources for a grant program for local educational agencies to create innovation districts.

On education, at least, it does appear that Barack Obama is the "change" candidate. For information on McCain's legislative record, see his "education" issue portal on his senatorial website. And for good measure, here's Obama'a education portal.

"We are writing to inform you that we recently became aware that a Countrywide employee (now former) may have sold unauthorized personal information about you to a third party..."

Countrywide Sends Fraud Alert Letters: 'Your Info May Have Been Sold' [Countrywide]

from Consumerist by Chris Walters

A Countrywide customer emailed to tell us he received a unpleasant surprise in the mail today: a former Countrwide employee may have sold his loan info.

I received a letter from Countrywide today that says:

"We are writing to inform you that we recently became aware that a Countrywide employee (now former) may have sold unauthorized personal information about you to a third party...

Based on a joint investigation conducted by Countrywide and law enforcement authorities, it was determined that the customer information involved in this incident included your name, address, Social Security number, mortgage loan number, and various other loan and application information."

It goes on to say they will give you 2 years of Triple Advantage credit report monitoring for free and they include a website address and activation code to start the credit monitoring service.

Just great. Luckily the only thing Russian hackers could buy with my credit is a bottle of cheap vodka.

We don't understand why temporary free credit monitoring is always the go-to remedy every time a company "loses" your personal data. The security breach could have huge and long-term financial consequences for you, and the company that enabled that breach should take responsibility for it.

Every company that deals in sensitive data should have identity theft counselors on staff—people who will walk you through a formalized plan for changing account numbers where possible, getting new account numbers if necessary, and setting up a systemized way to monitor financial activity on a weekly or monthly basis. (And they should pay for any fees you're charged in the process.)

Just saying "sorry, here's some free online monitoring" is inadequate—it's like a doctor leaving a clamp inside you after surgery, then giving you coupons for free checkups for a couple of years.

(Thanks to Frisco!)
(Photo: Getty)

GOP congressional candidate Rick Goddard criticized an MSNBC reporter’s sharp questioning of Newt Gingrich at the Republican National Convention...called the African-American reporter, Ron Allen, “uppity“

Georgia GOP candidate calls black MSNBC reporter 'uppity.'

from Think Progress by Amanda

Speaking to a Georgia morning news show last Thursday, GOP congressional candidate Rick Goddard criticized an MSNBC reporter's sharp questioning of former House speaker Newt Gingrich at the Republican National Convention. Goddard called the African-American reporter, Ron Allen, "uppity":

I'll tell you one thing, I think we're going to have a very, very strong, capable president in John McCain. Last night, Newt Gingrich disarmed a very uppity newscaster who tried to question him on the capabilities and leadership of Governor Palin. There's simply no comparison between a governor and a community organizer.

Also last Thursday, another prominent Georgia political figure — Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R) — used the racial epithet in reference to Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL). Watch the segment between Allen and Gingrich here.

"it would be unacceptable for executives of these institutions to earn a windfall at a time when U.S. Treasury has taken unprecedented steps to rescue these companies with taxpayer resources,"

Obama is right about outrageous Fannie, Freddie golden parachutes

from BloggingStocks by Jonathan Berr

Filed under: From the boards, Employees, Federal Natl Mtge (FNM), Economic data, Federal Reserve

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama today sharply criticized the pay packages given to the departing chief executives of Fannie Mae (NYSE: FNM) and Freddie Mac (NYSE: FRE).

Obama told reporters that he wrote letters to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Housing Finance Agency Director James Lockhart stating that "it would be unacceptable for executives of these institutions to earn a windfall at a time when U.S. Treasury has taken unprecedented steps to rescue these companies with taxpayer resources," according to CNBC.

He's absolutely right.

Yes, I realize that compared with the fallen CEOs of Wall Street, the pay packages are chump change. Fannie Chief Executive Daniel Mudd is 'only' getting around $9.3 million and his counterpart at Freddie Mac Richard Syron stands to receive $14.1 million. But just because Mudd and Syron are getting less than 10% of the $160 million parting gift awarded to Stan O'Neal for ruining Merrill Lynch & Co. (NYSE: MER) does not make them any less egregious.

Continue reading Obama is right about outrageous Fannie, Freddie golden parachutes

If you download this then you deserve to be infected....

Malware Lurks Behind Obama Sex Video Spam

from Wired News: Top Stories by David Kravets

The latest e-mail spam infecting computers with malware is one that purports to have a pornographic video of Sen. Barack Obama having sex with Ukrainian girls. The video is so good that those watching it get screwed. The video unleashes a trojan and those watching the video get their data hijacked to Finland.

"This is war, Barack, and you had better fight back"

FOX "News Analyst" attacks MSNBC for bias, especially the "lesbian Air America host"

from Crooks and Liars by bluegal

    Oh no!    He didn't!    Well, yes he did.

 Download | Play     Download | Play  (h/t Bill W.)

This is worse than any pot/kettle analogy could describe.  Brent Budosky at The Hill:

Even by the low standards of the Republican News Network, this morning's attack on Rachel Maddow, on the Fox News network, as a "lesbian Air America host" was a despicable new low. Those words, an open appeal to bigotry and hate, [were] said by an alleged media analyst named Tim Graham… This is sick and despicable stuff, even for Fox News.

Here is a message to Barack Obama: You need to spend more time fighting back against the lies and smears of a Swift Boat campaign more ugly than the campaign against John Kerry, and less time having sweet-talk meetings with Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes followed by professorial discourse with Bill O'Reilly. This is war, Barack, and you had better fight back.

Veterans advocates point to the Bush administration’s abysmal record in hiring contractors who have no expertise in the area they’re hired to work

Veterans Groups Attack Bush Administration Plan To Outsource GI Bill Benefits

from Think Progress by Amanda

In June — after months of kicking and screaming — President Bush finally signed a war supplemental spending bill that included a doubling of GI Bill college benefits for veterans.

Bush's Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), however, doesn't seem too happy about the increased work these new benefits will create and plans to outsource it all. Last month, VA Secretary James Peake wrote to the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) union announcing the plan. From Peake's letter, obtained by ThinkProgress:

The challenges of creating the procedures and systems to support a new program and ensuring accurate and timely benefit payments under this new program effective August 1, 2009, will tax VA's resources. … Therefore, the decision has been made to seek private-sector support to implement this new program.

The government wants to automate all GI Bill requests and is looking to hire a private contractor to set up such a system. AFGE is condemning this decision, which would dump the expertise of 850 government employees who are able to process a veteran's request for GI benefits within 20 days.

The VA is arguing that with this new outsourcing plan, benefits could be processed in minutes. Veterans advocates point to the Bush administration's abysmal record in hiring contractors who have no expertise in the area they're hired to work:

Marty Conatser, American Legion: "Our newest generation of veterans deserve the benefits administered by the Dept. of Veterans Affairs, not outside contractors. Patients, critics and most media all cite the outstanding job the VA is doing. Outsourcing is not the answer."

Rick Weidman, Vietnam Veterans of America: "If anything goes wrong, I'll tell you what'll happen, and it's what always happens in these instances, is they'll say, 'Well, it's not our job, it's the VA's.' And the VA will say, 'We can't do anything, it's contracted out. It's the contractor's job.' And that is baloney. The problem isn't the troops; the problem is the leadership."

Rep. Harry Mitchell (D-AZ): "I just cannot believe that we'd ever allow this to happen. The level of service won't be the same."

So far, the Bush administration has treated this contracting process like it has so many others — with secrecy. As NPR reported today, the VA has so far "handpicked only a small number of companies to compete for the contract, and so far, officials won't even reveal the companies' names."

Perhaps this move by the Bush administration is intended to take the agency one step closer to McCain's dream of privatized veterans health care?

Boehner claimed he was there “each and every day”

Boehner forgets his golfing vacation, says he was at GOP drilling protest 'each and every day.'

from Think Progress by Satyam

Last month, House conservatives engaged in a political stunt in the Capitol, demanding a vote on oil drilling while Congress was adjourned for recess. Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH), however, was absent for part of the protest, squeezing in a couple of rounds of golf in Ohio while his colleagues were in Washington. Speaking today on the floor, Boehner claimed he was there "each and every day":

Well, Mr. Speaker, let me say welcome to my Democratic colleagues. Welcome to the House. … While you all were out, I and my Republican colleagues were here each and every day with the lights dimmed, the microphones off, no one in the chair, the cameras off, talking to visitors who were coming through the Capitol about our plan to produce all of the above.

Watch it:

"Please demand more and better knowledge before you commit yourselves to a political leader."

Quote du Jour

from Pensito Review by Buck

I am not denying that Sarah Palin may have great skills. She may well. I am insisting that neither you, nor I, nor John McCain has any valid reason to believe that she does. This is not an argument about the attributes she lacks. It's an argument about the information we lack. I am pleading with my fellow conservatives: Please demand more and better knowledge before you commit yourselves to a political leader. That's all.

— Former Bush speechwriter David Frum

in a 1994 interview, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) suggested that the U.S. should abolish the Department of Energy and the Department of Education

In 1994, McCain proposed 'doing away' with Dept. of Education.

from Think Progress by Satyam

Greg Sargent notes that in a 1994 interview, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) suggested that the U.S. should abolish the Department of Energy and the Department of Education:

FRANK SESNO: Senator McCain, would you favor doing away with the Department of Housing and Urban Development or the Department of Energy?

McCAIN: I would certainly favor doing away with the Department of Energy and I think that given the origins of the Department of Education, I would favor doing away with it as well. HUD had experienced many failures under both Republican and Democrat administrations and I would certainly want to revamp it from the bottom up, because, clearly, public housing in America is almost as big a disaster as the welfare program…

McCain spokesperson Tucker Bounds, in a statement, said that "nothing that John McCain has proposed would reduce funding for public schools."

While our attention has been turned elsewhere, the Endangered Species Act, our major environmental protection legislation, is being gutted-now

We've Got One Week Left to Stop One of Bush's Worst Environmental Attacks | Environment | AlterNet

By George Lakoff and Chris Shutes, AlterNet
Posted on September 8, 2008, Printed on September 9, 2008
http://www.alternet.org/story/98065/

The Endangered Species Act is our primary legal tool for environmental protection.

We have until September 15-about a week-to save the Endangered Species Act.

Not just some species, but the Act itself! Bush administration officials are proposing redefinitions of terms that would allow conservative appointees in federal agencies to virtually the destroy the Act.

Their goal is to allow proposed projects to proceed even if such projects would kill off endangered species or place them or their habitats in jeopardy.

If the changes are not effectively challenged by September 15, they will go into effect, and, Goodbye Species!

Act now: Go to the end of this article for instructions. We need the public to flood the agencies involved with comments opposing the redefinitions and rule changes.

When the Cat's Away

While our attention has been turned elsewhere, the Endangered Species Act, our major environmental protection legislation, is being gutted-now.

Not by Congress. Not by the courts. Not even by Bush's executive orders. It is being destroyed by redefinition, by a series of linguistic tricks.

Causation, within an ecological system, is almost always systemic in nature. That is, there are disparate contributing causes with disparate contributed effects in various places at different times. Direct causation is rare. Direct causation occurs when there is a single act at a given time and place that results in a single effect at that time and place. For example, a species of frog limited to a local wetland could be completely wiped out by a condo development with that wetland filled in. Direct causation.

But frogs around the country are dying out due to a complex combination of factors in different places at different times. Systemic causation.

Progressives and conservatives tend to think differently about causation. Conservatives, who think in terms of individual not social responsibility, tend to think in terms of direct causation-what an individual does. Progressives, who think in terms of social as well as individual responsibility, tend to think in terms of systemic causation. For example, if you ask what the causes of unemployment are, conservatives will tend to say people who aren't willing to do hard work, or willing to get the skills they need. Progressives will talk first about social causes: lack of education, lack of opportunities to acquire needed skills, corporate greed or insensitivity, and so on.

The present Endangered Species Act is realistic about systemic causation: disparate causes that contribute to disparate future effects count as "causation." But imagine what would happen if "causation" were redefined to mean only direct causation. Development projects now forbidden because they contribute significantly to future disparate loss of species and species habitat would now be allowed. Lots and lots of disparate projects at disparate places and times would be allowed. Their collective systemic effects could wipe out a great many habitats and species.

This is exactly what is being proposed by the Departments of the Interior and Commerce, as published in the Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 159 / Friday, August 15, 2008 / Proposed Rules. They want to redefine causation so that only direct causation (they call it "an essential cause") counts as causation that jeopardizes the existence of a species listed under the Endangered Species act, or jeopardizes that species' critical habitat.

The effect is that proposed development projects can contribute significantly to the destruction of habitat and the extinction of species, provided that they do not directly cause the elimination of a species, or directly reduce the population of a species or extent of its habitat-something that rarely happens. The result is that almost all proposed developments that were previously understood as "causes" of habitat destruction or species extinction will no longer be seen as "causes" at all and will be permitted. The reason will be that "cause" itself will have been redefined.

Consultation

Up until now, the Endangered Species Act was governed by certain rules. The rules involved the following:

• A federal "action agency" (for example, FERC-the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) which proposed a project. An example of such a project might be the granting a license to operate a hydroelectric power plant.
• A "service"- either the Fish and Wildlife Service for inland species or the National Marine Fisheries Service for marine species-whose job is the protection of plants, fish and wildlife and the gathering of information relevant to that protection.
• A "consultation"-a well-defined process in which an agency consults a service about a proposed project if it "may affect" species listed under the Act as threatened or endangered, in order to gather relevant information for the protection of those species.
• A Biological Assessment-a document written by the federal agency or its designated representative (perhaps, the hydroelectric project's owner) and presented to the relevant service. This document analyzes what the consequences of the proposed project might be for any threatened or endangered species the project might affect.
• A Biological Opinion written by the relevant Service which states whether there is jeopardy to listed species or their critical habitat. If there is jeopardy, the Biological Opinion sets forth measures that must be taken to mitigate project effects, or, if the effects cannot be mitigated, stops the project.

Under the proposed rule change, the federal action agency could use, in place of a Biological Assessment, a document that it assembled for other purposes, as long as the information about effects on listed species was contained in it. While this might make it easier for the action agency, it makes is more difficult and time-consuming for the Service, which then has to distill and reassemble on its own the information relevant to listed species.

Under the new rules, many such consultations would no longer even be required. The agency itself would be allowed to make that determination. In the past, the consultation determined whether or not there was jeopardy or damage to critical habitat. Under the new rules, the party proposing the project would determine whether it even needs to consult based on whether it itself, and not the Service, thinks there may be jeopardy or damage to critical habitat. In the past, a federal agency that proposed a project had to defend the notion that its project would do no harm to listed species. If the rules are changed, it will merely have to assert that it will do no harm.

The Endangered Species Act also permits "informal consultation," in which an agency informally consults with a service to see if a proposed action is reasonably certain to affect listed species. At the end of the informal consultation, which has no defined timeline, the agency is either required to enter into formal consultation, and prepare a Biological Assessment, or it is absolved by the Service from doing so. Under the new rules, this process would be limited to 60 days, an almost impossible timeline for the Services, which for years have been underfunded and understaffed. The new rules also state that if this timeline is missed, formal consultation cannot be required.

The Bush appointees who control the Services today say that it is appropriate for other federal agencies to take on some of the role that was up till now reserved to the Services. These appointees say that after 35 years of experience, the other federal agencies know a problem when they see it. The reality is that, even if the Services are in the future headed up by more progressive leadership, conservative directors of other federal agencies will still have the opportunity to evade consultation, killing off or jeopardizing endangered species.

Death by Definition

There it is. We have until September 15 to act.

The proposed new rules state that it if an agency allows the death of a plant or animal that is part of a listed species (or, in the language of the ESA, "take"), or the reduction of critical habitat, that it can be punished. This supports the conservative viewpoint that the way one avoids bad things is by a system of rewards and punishments. But the idea of the ESA is not to punish people after there is harm or reduction of habitat; the goal is to manage so that those things don't happen in the first place. If a species goes extinct, punishing the agency won't bring it back.

In addition, this conservative viewpoint presupposes that the burden of proof will be upon the Service to show that there has been take; in other words, we are back to having to show direct causation. If there is a combination of issues that may have contributed to the death of steelhead from the example described above, it would be necessary to show that a specific action resulted in the death of a specific fish.

As it stands now, the combination of low flows, high water temperatures, lack of shallow rearing habitat for young fish in non-summer months, lack of high flows to help fish get from the river to the ocean, ocean conditions, and so on, all contribute to poor numbers of steelhead returning to the river to spawn. It is difficult, though not impossible, to show that low flows in the river in the summer caused take. However, looking at the matter proactively, from the point of view of the present options available to NMFS, the Service can require higher flows in the river to eliminate at least that part of the problem. It might not be definitive, or in the terms of the present proposed rule, "essential," but it can substantially improve the chance of increased survival for the fish that are present in the river.

Polar Bears

These changes proposed as parting shots by the Bush appointees at the head of the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service are not about clarity, or eliminating unnecessary consultations, or the experience gained in thirty-five years of the Endangered Species Act. They are part of a concerted effort by conservatives to change the fundamental way that science is viewed and used in our society.

The language in the proposed rule change was reverse-engineered to address a huge looming issue: polar bears are clearly threatened by the systemic cause of ecological damage par excellence, global warming. But the evidence and the consequences of the systemic causation of environmental degradation are everywhere. Even if the conservatives succeed in truncating what scientists do and are allowed to say, and in limiting the Endangered Species Act by a linguistic trick, systemic causation, in the world of environmental science, will always be the ultimate inconvenient truth.

Act Now!

Here are some Talking Points:

• You are against the proposed rule changes because they weaken the Endangered Species Act nearly to the point of nonexistence.
• Environmental systems mostly work by systemic causation, with many indirect causes, not by "essential causation." The change to "essential causation" opens the door to an indefinitely large number of projects that can jointly put endangered species in jeopardy.
• The change in "consultation" rules will de facto eliminate the gathering of information relevant to protecting species.

Here's how you get your comments read:

Go to www.regulations.gov and use the search terms: "50 CFR Part 402 proposed rule."

The proposed changes are in Document # EB - 18938

To see the proposed changes, click on "View this document"

Click on "Send a comment or submission" to write your comment.

Note that plain e-mails will not be considered. This is another way public input is being limited.

Write your comments before September 15, 2008.

George Lakoff is Richard and Rhoda Goldman Professor of Cognitive Science and Linguistics at the University of California at Berkeley and author of The Political Mind: Why You Can't Understand 21st Century Politics With an18th Century Brain. Chris Shutes works for the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance.

© 2008 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/98065/

Palin has billed taxpayers for 312 nights spent in her own home during her first 19 months in office, charging a "per diem" allowance intended to cover meals and incidental expenses

Palin Billed State For Nights Spent In Her Own Home

from The Jed Report

This one should have legs. Washington Post:

ANCHORAGE, Sept. 8 -- Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has billed taxpayers for 312 nights spent in her own home during her first 19 months in office, charging a "per diem" allowance intended to cover meals and incidental expenses while traveling on state business.

There's a lot more detail in the article, including questions about why she billed the state $25,000 for expenses related to her daughters. She also was reimbursed for attending a basketball game. Perhaps the kicker is that she charged the state over $2,000 for a three-night stay at a $707 per night hotel room in New York City.

The problem here is obvious: Palin's lavish spending completely undercuts the moosehunter maverick myth being spun by the McCain campaign. This is exactly the kind of politics as usual that they claim to be running against.

AP report raises some questions about Palin’s credentials, saying: “She is younger and less experienced than the first-term Illinois senator, and brings an ethical shadow to the ticket.”

Fact-Checking McCain's 'Alaska Maverick' Ad

from Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines

With all the spin and rumor-mongering going on this election season, it's a good thing there's FactCheck.org to do some much-needed investigation, because those inflated claims and scurrilous smears only work when voters don't do their homework. Here, the FactCheck squad tackles the McCain campaign ad entitled "Alaska Maverick," about a certain lady from the Land of the Midnight Sun.

FactCheck.org:

The ad uses a partial quote—she "has a record of bi-partisan reform"—from an Aug. 29 Associated Press report. Those words do appear in the article, but so do several others that aren't as flattering.

In fact, the AP report raises some questions about Palin's credentials, saying: "She is younger and less experienced than the first-term Illinois senator, and brings an ethical shadow to the ticket." It also says, "Palin's lack of experience undercuts GOP charges that Obama is not ready to be commander in chief."

The ad also quotes the Wall Street Journal as saying, "Governor Palin's credentials as an agent of reform exceed Barack Obama's." But those words didn't come from the newspaper's reporters, they came from the WSJ's editorial board, which is notably conservative and generally friendly to Republicans and hostile to Democrats.

Read more

READ THE WHOLE ITEM

Apple just annoucned firmware 2.1 for the iPhone and iPod touch

iPhone 2.1 software update announced

from Engadget by Thomas Ricker

Ah, bug fixes galore. Apple just annoucned firmware 2.1 for the iPhone and iPod touch. "No crashes," says Steve. He's calling it a big update with the promise of fewer dropped calls, big battery improvement, and faster backups. Is this a dream? We'll find out when it's released this Friday.

P.S. No mention of copy and paste.

Chicagoist really nailed a lot of things I love about the fall and winter change in Chicago......

Today's brisk temperatures are a sure sign that fall is almost here. At at the Chicagoist home offices, most of us are excited. Here's what we're most looking forward to before winter actually sets in:

• Hot Cider
• Chicago International Film Festival
• Leaves on the ground
• Buh-bye to summer's high humdity
• Crockpot cooking
• Halloween candy at the office
• My favorite day of fall is the first day you wear a sweatshirt under a jacket. Like, it's too warm to upgrade to the for-reals winter coat, but too cold for just the jean jacket. Mmmm, layers.
• Taking an entire Sunday to make homemade chili
• Dogs playing in leaves
• Seeing little kids walking to school wearing backpacks that are bigger than they are. (So cute)

• Cool enough/warm enough to go for long walks
• Good sales as stores clear out their summer merchandise, bargains galore
• The best thing about fall is enjoying a steamed apple cider that you slowly stir with a cinnamon stick.
• Uggs (or Warmbats) all day, everyday
• Enjoying dark, malty beer again.
• My favorite day of fall is the first one when you sit outside -- in long sleeves -- and drink a totally weather-appropriate warm beverage.
• Let's hear it for the all the good hair days the suddenly less humid air brings.
• The red and yellow leaves, duh
• World Music Festival
• Crisp early morning bike rides
• Hot toddies
• Warm soups
• Shorter days
• Ogling at runners during the Chicago Marathon from the corner of Archer and Halsted
• Cool nights in beer gardens
• Switching to wine
• Hideout Block party
• Football season!
• Baseball playoffs
• Piles of leaves and the snuffleupagus truck that sucks them up
• Scarves
• New notebooks
• Football on in the background while you do other things
• Caramel applesring backpacks that are bigger than they are. (So cute)
• Trading sandals for boots
• Fall television programming
• Hooded sweatshirts.
• Stouts and porters; Related: Pumpkin beers.
• Football (read: socially acceptable to start drinking at noon)
• And I'm probably the only person that likes this, but there's something strangely comforting about being on a Chicago bus on a stormy night with the windows completely fogged and you can't see nothing. It's a kind of cocooning effect.
• Can stop shaving legs
• Changing weather + strong winds => closer to nature, closer to "the Maker" experiences
• Fewer catcalls/less street harassment
• Blanket usage makes sleep feel more legit
• Overcast days = better outdoor photography conditions
• Becomes more acceptable to dress like a slutty ghost/cat lady/accountant
• Increased use of oil keeps the economy going
• Elections => more conscious populace
• Buying XBOX 360 games to play during the winter months. GO XBOX LIVE!
• Making home made soups
• Watching my dog chase leaves in the park
• Dressing in layers
• When someone else lets you wear their sweatshirt. Other people's sweatshirts just feel different.

On a personal note, I moved to Chicago in September lo those many years ago, so every year right around this time, I get super loveydovey about the city. Poke me, I'm soft.

the relevance of Palin’s role with the National Guard was severely undercut by the actual commander of the Alaska National Guard — its Adjutant General, Major General Craig Campbell

Did Palin Promote Alaska National Guard General Because He Changed His Tone To Support Her Credentials?

from Think Progress by Matt

In an effort to claim that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has adequate foreign policy experience, Sen. John McCain's (R-AZ) presidential campaign has repeatedly referred to her as "the commander of the National Guard, of Alaska's National Guard." On Fox News Sunday last week, McCain himself invoked that experience, saying, "She has been with her troops, the National Guard that she commands."

But in several interviews last week, the relevance of Palin's role with the National Guard was severely undercut by the actual commander of the Alaska National Guard — its Adjutant General, Major General Craig Campbell:

– "But, in an interview with The Associated Press on Sunday, [Cambpell] said he and Palin play no role in national defense activities, even when they involve the Alaska National Guard. The entire operation is under federal control, and the governor is not briefed on situations." [The Associated Press, 8/31/2008]

– "And while the Alaska National Guard operates a launch site for a US anti-missile system at Fort Greely, about 100 miles south of Fairbanks, the Alaskan governor is not in the site's chain of command and has no authority over its operations, according to Maj. Gen. Craig E. Campbell." [Boston Globe, 9/3/2008]

– "Campbell also said that Palin has authority over the National Guard's domestic missions — such as fighting wildfires and rescuing stranded residents, but that she has a limited role in determining how the forces are trained or equipped." [Boston Globe, 9/3/2008]

Brandon Friedman at VetVoice points out that Campbell struck a different tone days later when he spoke to Fox News, saying, "National Guards are state military forces run by governors, and Sarah Palin does it great." Watch it:

Popout

As Friedman notes, Palin promoted Campbell two days later, making him a Lieutenant General in the Alaska National Guard. There is no direct evidence of a causal link between Campbell's praise for Palin and his promotion, but Friedman writes that "this series of events raises serious questions about what's going on" and "the media would be wise to probe this further."

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has billed taxpayers for 312 nights spent in her own home during her first 19 months in office, charging a "per diem" allowance intended to cover meals and incidental expenses while traveling on state business.

Secessionist Sarah and Her Stay-at-Home Subsidies

from Emptywheel by emptywheel

By now you've heard of Sarah Palin's brilliant way of easing tensions between family and career: she has billed Alaska for her girls to travel to her official events (Jane hits it here and Christy here).

In separate filings, the state was billed about $25,000 for Palin's daughters' expenses and $19,000 for her husband's.

Flights topped the list for the most expensive items, and the daughter whose bill was the highest was Piper, 7, whose flights cost nearly $11,000, while Willow, 14, claimed about $6,000 and Bristol, 17, accounted for about $3,400.

One event was in New York City in October 2007, when Bristol accompanied the governor to Newsweek's third annual Women and Leadership Conference, toured the New York Stock Exchange and met local officials and business executives. The state paid for three nights in a $707-a-day hotel room.

Think about it! If women everywhere just billed their employers for lugging their kids on business trips, it would strengthen families and make it easier for women to sustain vibrant careers. And I'm sure the corporations picking up the tab won't mind about the cost, given the way it would strengthen families ...

But that's not the most interesting aspect of today's Palin scandal du jour, IMO. I'm more interested in the way that Palin's actions have effected a policy change that the Alaska Independence Party--those loony secessionists her husband was officially affiliated with not so long ago--has been pushing for some time.

Along with wanting to separate from America, you see, the AIP has long supported efforts to move the state capitol from Juneau to some place more central--some place like the Mat-Su Valley (Palin's home) or Anchorage. And that's what Palin has effectively done--at least in her role as Governor.

Palin's Support for Moving the Capitol

As Governor, Palin's first purportedly anti-Juneau act came when she took the oath--it in Fairbanks, not Juneau. Then, she told her Commmissioners they didn't have to live in Juneau.

But overall in the last few months she's seen less of Palin, who's moved most of her operations up to Anchorage, the biggest city in Alaska and a place much friendlier to the sort of conservative pro-business pro-drilling stance that's marked her tenure as governor. "She had started off by telling her Commissioners that none of them had to live in Juneau, which makes Juneauites nervous. We're always convinced that they're going to try and move the State Capitol again."

In fact, when Palin called a special legislative session earlier this year to push through her pipeline plan, she wasn't in Juneau that much.

Palin has spent little time in Juneau, rarely coming to the state capital except when the Legislature was in session, and sometimes not even then.

During a recent special session called by Palin herself, she faced criticism from several legislators for not showing up personally to push for her agenda.

Someone at the Capitol even printed up buttons asking "Where's Sarah?"

But that's just Sarah and her top aides--the Executive--that have effectively been working outside of Juneau.

She has also said she would not veto an ongoing attempt to move the legislature out of Juneau--even though the measure would bypass a measure passed in 1994 that gives Alaskan voters a say in whether the capitol will move or not. 

It seems that Governor Palin's a pretty big fan of moving out of Juneau--or at least not being in Juneau.

Subsidies for an Expensive Policy

But that's what today's article is so interesting to me. Her per diem charges for being in Wasilla and commuting down to Anchorage effectively require the citizens of Alaska to subsidize a de facto move of the executive branch outside of Juneau.

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has billed taxpayers for 312 nights spent in her own home during her first 19 months in office, charging a "per diem" allowance intended to cover meals and incidental expenses while traveling on state business. 

Sarah Palin has billed Alaska's taxpayers for an executive that has worked in Wasilla for 312 out of the 645 days she has been governor. 

The AIP and Palin and Moving the Capitol

What makes this still more interesting is where Palin first got started in efforts to move the capitol--to a 2002 effort championed by the AIP to move the capitol to Palin's own Mat-Su borough.

The chairman of the Alaskan Independence Party and two other sponsors of an initiative to move legislative sessions out of Juneau are one step closer to putting the question on the state ballot.

The group on Friday filed an application with the lieutenant governor¹s office for an initiative petition. If the state approves the application and the group collects about 29,000 signatures, voters will decide whether to move sessions to the Matanuska-Susistna Borough near Anchorage.

That's not to say Palin supported it because the secessionists did--after all, her town of Wasilla stood to benefit if it could land the capitol. But it was a connection the AIP used to celebrate openly with the picture (above) of Palin signing their petition, which until recently was on the AIP's own photo gallery.

I'll leave it to the Alaska taxpayers to decide whether it makes sense to move their capitol to Anchorage. It surely offers some benefits, like road transportation for a significant proportion of the population and easy access to oil lobbyists (heh).

But for her own purposes, Sarah Palin has already largely decided that issue.  And billed the taxpayers accordingly.

I need my shares to appreciate!

Sirius Shares Fall on Slower Growth - TheStreet.com

Sirius XM (SIRI - Cramer's Take - Stockpickr) offered subscriber targets for this year and next that indicated slower growth for the satellite radio provider, sending shares to a new five-year low.

The recently merged company said it expects to end 2008 with approximately 19.5 million subscribers and that it should end 2009 with approximately 21.5 million subscribers, an increase of 10.2%.

By comparison, Sirius ended 2007 as a standalone company with 8.32 million subscribers, up 38% from the end of 2006. The 6.02 subscribers Sirius had at the end of 2006 was up 82% from the end of 2005. When XM operated by itself, it saw its subscriber count jump 18% in 2007 to 9.02 million subscribers.

Shares of Sirius XM were falling 7 cents, or 5.6%, to $1.19, touching a low earlier of $1.15. The stock is now down 61% for the year and more than 35% since the merger between Sirius and XM Satellite Radio was finalized on July 29.

On the positive side, Sirius XM also upped its estimate of net synergies in 2009 to $425 million from $400 million.

"We have made great strides over the last six weeks and continue to make progress integrating the company and delivering on our promises to customers and stockholders," said CEO Mel Karmazin, in a statement. "We are finding significant cost savings on every line item of the [profit and loss statement] and are beginning to realize these synergies already."

Karmazin also offered more clarity on line-item and longer-term assumptions, saying that Sirius XM expects to post pro forma revenue of about $2.4 billion in 2008 and revenue of about $2.7 billion in 2009. Analysts currently expect 2008 revenue of 2009 revenue of $2.77 billion, according to Thomson Reuters.

Sirius XM also said it expects adjusted loss before interest and investment income, interest expense, depreciation expense, and non-cash stock compensation expense of $350 million in 2008, which is in line with analysts expectations. The company also reiterated that it should see $300 million in positive adjusted EBITDA for 2009.

I love sports because of this kind of stuff....

Fear of a Black Cat

from Chicagoist by Benjy Lipsman

While the Cubs have raced through the 2008 season atop the NL Central, often with the best record in all of the majors, Cubs fans can't help but feel some sense of dread over the past week. Or its eerie similarities to the Cubs' infamous swoon of '69...

Superstitious or not, exactly 39 years ago today, a black cat circled Ron Santo while in the on-deck circle at Shea Stadium, then proceeded past manager Leo Durocher in the dugout and into the crowd. The loss of that game was the Cubs' sixth straight and part of an eight-game losing streak. The "Miracle" Mets jumped the Cubs in the NL East standing and never looked back.

Entering a series with division rival St. Louis, the similarities are cause for pause if not yet concern. Both in '69 and this year, the Cubs entered September with 57 losses and then dropped five of their first six. The Cubs ended with an 8-17 September and failed to make the playoffs in '69. Will this year's team suffer a similar fate?

Milwaukee, however, remains 4 1/2 games back and of the Cubs—a lot of ground to make up in 3 weeks. And of course with the wild card, the Cubs still have an excellent insurance policy against losing the division. So even with their recent troubles, the playoffs seem to be a certainly this year on the North Side.

Hard to find 800 Numbers [Official Site]

Uncover Hard To Find 800 Numbers [Company Phone Numbers]

from Consumerist by Ben Popken

Whether by accident or design, or bad web design, sometimes it's darn difficult to find some company's phone number. Into this need niche steps hardtofind800numbers.com. It's arranged alphabetically by company name, just click on the first letter of the company name. I like their tagline, "You keep them in business. Yet they hide from you. Until now."

Hard to find 800 Numbers [Official Site]

Reviews of Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince - not so good....

So there was a Chicago test screening of HARRY POTTER & THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE on Saturday!! Wanna hear about it? UPDATED!! -- Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and

Hey everyone. Capone in Chicago here. I knew most of last week that there was going to be a test screening of HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE this past Saturday, and I fought with myself about whether I should try to get in. For whatever reason, they test every HARRY POTTER film months in advance in Chicago; I've been to two of them in the past. And since this sixth film's release date has been pushed to July 2009, this is technically the earliest they've ever test screened an HP films.

In the end, I knew that if I'd been spotted by the wrong people trying to get in, the consequences would have far outweighed the reward. I also knew an army of folks that were going and who were likely to send in reviews; I wasn't wrong about that. Here's the first from a frequent attenedee of many of the screenings I do in the Windy City. He calls himself Jimbo Wage, and he has faithfully submitted a Spoiler-ific review. You've been warned. The main problem I've heard about is pacing, but this was a test screening, so presumably pacing issues will be largely worked out come July of next year. Here's Jimbo Wage...

Hi. I saw Harry Potter & the Half-Blood Prince this past Saturday in Chicago. It was presented on the flyers as a mystery screening, and right before it started, a man with a microphone said we were the first people to see it. Maybe 75% of the special effects were complete. Also, some pieces of music from Batman Begins were on the soundtrack, indicating the score had yet to be totally completed. The runtime of this version was about 145 minutes.

I read the books once, maybe twice for a couple of them, but I'm definitely not what I'd call a fanatic. I've seen the movies, but started to lose interest in them after the fourth, which I felt they could have done a much better job with. I read Half-Blood Prince about three years ago and don't remember all of the details, so please bear with me.

And there are spoilers, so don't say I didn't warn you.

The film opens with an assault on a bridge in London by Death Eaters. The fly around it in corkscrew-like formations, causing the bridge to collapse into the water below. They make their way into Diagon Alley, put a bag over some guy's head, and take him away. It was a pretty spectacular opening, and I understand after talking to a couple of people that the filmmakers decided to show some of the Death Eaters' assaults on muggles instead of having two guys in a room talking about it as it was portrayed in the book, but in regards to the rest of the film, I couldn't understand really why it was there. Whoever gets kidnapped doesn't reappear for the rest of the movie, and the money spent on that opening sequence (which isn't in the book) could have been diverted to something that happens later on, the absence of which should leave fans of the book disappointed. (The person getting kidnapped might be Ollivander, and the person getting bagged might have been a stand-in for him – all of the effects weren't finished. Why they would do that digitally, though, makes no sense to me.)

We're introduced to Horace Slughorn, who is played by Jim Broadbent. When I first heard he wouldn't be fat and he wouldn't have a mustache, I was irritated, but Broadbent's character is easily the most enjoyable in the film. There's two scenes where he's drunk that are great. He takes over as the Potions teacher, and Harry finds a book that once belonged to the Half-Blood Prince. In one scene, Harry follows the book's modified potion-making instructions and gets proper results as the rest of his classmates fail around him. This leads me to another problem I had with the film – the mystery as to who the Half-Blood Prince is takes a backseat to all the dating stuff. Some of it's pleasant and funny, but it should have been background comic relief to help balance the drama in the forefront. There's a part where Harry fights Malfoy in a bathroom and he uses some violent spell, causing Malfoy's chest to bleed, but the fact that Harry got the spell from the potions book was lost on me. I might have missed something, but regardless, whatever scene or line of dialogue was supposed to emphasize that fact definitely needs more attention. Also, there's a scene during Christmas that wasn't in the book where some Death Eaters attack the Weasley household, drawing first Harry and Ginny into a field of wheat (or something), then Lupin and someone else, I forget who. The scene feels totally unnecessary –tacked on to give the audience a jolt of action at around the halfway point of the film.

I had the most problems with the film's final third. Harry and Dumbledore's trip to the caves seemed to come out of nowhere, as did Dumbledore's declaration that he had to drink the water from the podium in which the locket they were after was held. I don't remember if that's how it happened in the book, but I remember arriving at that location & conclusion in a way that at least felt more natural.

After that, they make their way to the tower and instead of using a charm to immobilize Harry and cover him with the invisibility cloak like in the book, Dumbledore just sends Harry away, and Harry goes downstairs, stops & watches the following scene through cracks in the floor above him. Malfoy tries to kill Dumbledore but realizes he can't. Snape arrives on the floor below & signals Harry to be quiet, which he uncharacteristically does. Snape then goes upstairs & sends Dumbledore to his death. The modifications made to this scene from book to film are terrible, and they partially blow what may be the biggest surprise of the entire franchise.

Afterwards, there is no enormous battle. The Death Eaters stroll out silently. I remember the fight in the book being fantastic, and I personally would rather have had a short scene in the beginning with two guys talking about the horrible things the Death Eaters are doing than eliminate the battle at the end. Harry runs after them and confronts Snape, who quietly tells him he's the Half-Blood Prince. Again, due to lack of attention paid to this plotline, I didn't really care. In the book, he screams his response. The book has Snape screaming and the film has him using his indoor voice. What a disappointment.

And as if this weren't enough, there is no funeral for Dumbledore. It's been cut.

They have almost a year before this film is released, so there's plenty of time for editing, which is good news because this cut was quite underwhelming. A woman in our post-screening discussion of about 20-25 people said she usually cries at movies, but didn't react at all when Dumbledore died. Hopefully, the filmmakers will ease up on the relationship stuff and emphasize more of the potions book/Half-Blood Prince plot. I'd like to think they'd shoot that missing end battle and also shoot the funeral, but I doubt the studio would be willing to spend any more money, especially because of how elaborate the battle was in the book.

Jimbo Wage

Hey, Capone again. Here are a few words from an unhappy customer from the same screening. And he has even more spoilers than the last guy.

Hello. I saw an incredibly early test screening of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince on Saturday in Chicago. It was an event shrouded in secrecy, the audience only being told what film they had come to see seconds before the lights went down, and I was honestly excited. Like, five-year old boy excited.

My disappointment with what followed is endless.

Warning: this review contains many, many spoilers.

First, let's go with what was good if for no other reason than it will take less time. The opening, far different from the novel, was very strong. We see a bridge destroyed by Death Eaters, Diagon Alley blown to bits, Harry and Dumbledore mourning before an onslaught of Magical Press, and Snape making a very ominous, very Unbreakable Vow. I got a real sense of urgency, of darkly engrossing things to come. And they did. Just not in the sense that I had expected.

There was also the inspiring performance by Jim Broadbent as Prof. Horace Slughorn. Easily the most enjoyable character in the film, I found myself lolling away the scenes he was absent from anticipating the next one he was in. In fact, there was a lot of good humor, not only from Broadbent. There is a lot of teen drama in this film, most notably a love triangle between Harry, Ginnie Weasley, and Dean Thomas. A love potion gone awry adds a bit of welcomed lightness for Ron Weasley (who finally gets a crack at Quidditch, one of many points of anticipation hacked out of the last film).

And, well, that's about it.

The problem with all of this romance is All of This Romance. It dominates the movie, drawing our focus away not only from major plot points – which fall disastrously through the cracks – but also deters the mood, which, in a (nearly) penultimate film, should be at the forefront.

The title of this film is Harry Potter and the HALF-BLOOD PRINCE but the title character gets next to no screen time and even less explanation, save for a few asides that, if you haven't read the book, may as well have been cut. Better to call the movie Harry Potter and the Hormones from Hedes and save us our disillusionment.

Most of my issues with this film deal with deletions and alterations from the book, which would be okay if they were for the betterment of the movie-going experience, except that they're not. Gone are notable characters such as Rufus Schrimgouer, Fleur Delacour, and Bill and Charlie Weasley. Series regulars such as Maggie Smith and Robbie Coltrane are reduced two line cameos.

For a book based on Harry and Dumbledore's quest to find out more about Voldemort, and how to stop him, via his memories, all but three memories have been cut from the film. Why is it that the filmmakers decided it was more important to focus on teen-age love rather than what are inarguably critical plot points? It is aneurysm inducing logic that will surely leave me dead in my bathtub.

And the ending. Good God, the ending. Not only is the fight between the Death Eaters and the Order of the Phoenix completely removed, but so is Dumbledore's funeral. The last third of this movie is so incredibly mishandled that Dumbledore's death feels more like an unfortunate accident than genuine tragedy. No one in the film seems even remotely upset that he's gone and the Death Eaters who murdered him, including would-be-good-guy Severus Snape (Alan Rickman, the title-character in cameo form), walk out of Hogwarts unmolested.

Anyone who has read the book (an incredible sum of folk who Warner Bros. seem to have forgotten are the target audience – either that or they have some personal vendetta against them) will be severely, SEVERELY disappointed with this film. Let's just hope that in the ten intervening months between now and the film's release, Warner's will take the time and the money to fix this incredible mess.

Sadly, I'm not holding my breath.

Michael Bravo

"Lucille" interviewed by the LA Progressive, which also asserted Palin refers to Aboriginal people as "Arctic Arabs" and "fucking Eskimos."

Sarah Palin Conspiracy Theories: The Ultimate Guide [Faq]

from Gawker by Ryan Tate

Even false rumors can be revealing. It wasn't true that Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama was a secret Muslim, or that his wife hated white people, but the persistence of those claims in email chain letters, online comments and blog posts told you what a chunk of middle America feared, namely scary foreign terrorists in disguise. What to make, then, of the flood of conspiracy theories about Sarah Palin that are flooding the dark corners of the internet? We thought rumors about the Republican vice presidential candidate and her family were going to dry up last week, but since our last comprehensive factsheet they have just kept coming. There's some genuine scandal. But a fake pregnancy? Secret rehab stints? Maybe the Bush and Clinton years left the blue states dreading anyone who seems too country-fried. Or maybe the Palin's really do have this many skeletons in their closet! Trudge through the thickening swamp of Palin mud and decide for yourself, one rumor at a time, after the jump.

Track Palin joined the Army to avoid jail time for drugs or vandalism.
True? Unsubstantiated. Pops up without corroboration on message boards and in email chains.
Notable: The Palin hometown of Wasilla is considered the "meth capital of Alaska." There are rumors Track was one of three unnamed teenagers charged with vandalizing 44 school buses while drunk. None of this proves anything, but it makes it much more fun to speculate!
Why someone would make this up: Sarah Palin made Track's military service a key part of her address at the Republican National convention. If he's a delinquent, those comments were disingenuous, and some conservatives would wonder about Palin's parenting, particularly amid the simultaneous SCANDALOUS pregnancy of Palin's 17-year-old unwed daughter Bristol.

Levi Johnston was in court-ordered rehab.
True? Almost certainly false, considering someone enthusiastically emailed us this rumor — and swore up and down to its authenticity — just one day before Johnston appeared at the Republican National Convention.
Notable: Citing courtroom sources, our tipster said the rehab would immediately be followed by a shotgun wedding. A dash of truth makes any smear more believable!
Why someone would make this up: Would make Johnston's engagement to pregnant Bristol Palin seem seriously nutty and Sarah Palin foolish to allow it.

Todd Palin had affairs.
True? There is zero evidence for this. It's pure assertion.
Notable: A Wonkette tipster phrased it as "the first dude has a John Edwards problem times ten zillion."
Why someone would make this up: Because if Todd Palin is having affairs, it means his wife must be doing something wrong. If you're a conservative, you might argue she works too much and isn't performing her wifely duties or whatever. If you're a liberal, you might argue Todd Palin cheats because his wife shuts him out of sex because she doesn't use birth control (even though she probably DOES use birth control since, according to Time, she supports the use of birth control generally and belongs to a anti-abortion, pro-birth-control group).

Sarah Palin had an affair.
True? If you unquestioningly believe the National Enquirer, which alleged Sarah Palin had an affair with an unnamed business partner of her husband. Palin vigorously denied the report, and the Enquirer offered only a tepid backing of its story.
Notable: The tabloid promised more details, but hasn't yet delivered. Bloggers went after the divorce court records of one of Todd Palin's business associates, thinking maybe he was the guy the Enquirer was talking about, but the records proved barren.
Why someone would make this up: To trash Sarah Palin's judgement and character, obviously.

Sarah Palin had a different affair
True? Even less likely than the other alleged affair.
Notable: This rumor started when liberal bloggers noticed that the McCain campaign denied the one specific affair alleged by the Enquirer with one specific person. What if Sarah Palin was sleeping with someone else? Her denial doesn't apply to that! She could be sleeping with tons of people and having affairs left and right and we'd NEVER KNOW!!
Why someone would make this up: Because he is 1> bored and 2> still traumatized by Bill Clinton's narrowly-crafted denials of his hanky-panky 10 years ago.

Sarah Palin faked her pregnancy to cover up for her daughter having a love child
True? Still hotly contested. But the Times weighed in today with a story quoting witnesses in and adjacent to the delivery room, as well as state governors who were with Palin when she began leaking amniotic fluid at an event in Texas. Pretty strong case! Skeptics still wondered if this reporting could be trusted, noting how the Washington Post made a big error in a prior story like this. The doubters also still wonder how Palin hiked briskly around Juneau in high heels while seven months pregnant and how she was back at work three days after giving birth (see Times story).
Notable: Officially, Bristol Palin is five months pregnant, which would have to be a lie if she secretly gave birth in May and had the baby passed off as her mother's.
Why someone would make this up: Because it would show that Sarah Palin was secretly ashamed of her daughter's out-of-wedlock child before she decided she had to embrace it publicly. Also, TWO out-of-wedlock babies are maybe twice as bad as one?

Sarah Palin is racist! She said "Sambo beat the bitch!" when Barack Obama defeated Hillary Clinton.
True? The source on this is a supposed Aboriginal Alaskan waitress named "Lucille" interviewed by the LA Progressive, which also asserted Palin refers to Aboriginal people as "Arctic Arabs" and "fucking Eskimos."
Notable: No one else has interviewed this "Lucille."
Why someone would make this up: The vast majority of Americans have never met or even SEEN an Alaskan up close. They only know these strange pseudo-Americans live in a remote, desolate land and make their money fishing, working with oil and collecting checks from the federal government. In other words, they're rednecks. So what else are they going to do, as far as the elite lower 48 states are concerned, but sit around and be racist all the time?? We're READY to believe Sarah Palin is a big secret racist. So this might seem like an effective and cheap way to smear her. But many of her supporters might also be wary of politically-correct super-elites from the coasts falsely throwing around accusations of racism.

Sarah Palin is a rude, conniving bitch.
True? Well, a blog tipster tried to ask Sarah Palin whether she was supporting corrupt Republican Sen. Ted Stevens, and she totally dodged the question, like some kind of politician or something! Also, a widely-circulated letter from someone identifying herself as Anne Kilkenny of Wasilla, Alaska says Palin "has bitten the hand of every person who extended theirs to her in help" and is known as "Sarah Barracuda." Juicy!
Notable: Ken Layne at Wonkette said Palin is like the "snarling evil god-obsessed nut who punished you constantly" in junior high but "your parents would never quite believe it because she 'seemed like a nice lady,' from a distance, with her squeaky voice."
Why someone would make this up: Because while Tina Fey will totally vote for a bitch, many voters find bitches threatening. Plus "evil bitch" is way different from "bitch on the side of angels."

Levi Johnston will not go through with his announced wedding to Bristol Palin.
True? This is from our tipster's friend's employee in Alaska, so it's airtight.
Notable: We were told Levi "is not marrying Bristol. He does not want to move to Washington. Sarah is going to abandon her daughter in Alaska... They tried to force a 18-year-old kid to marry. His parents balked. Then they said they are going to sue for child support... This is extortion."
Why someone would make this up: To make Sarah Palin look like a manipulative liar who created a sham marriage to shore up her political future.

Todd Palin is the new Hillary Clinton, wielding undue influence through his spouse.
True? Palin has been accused in a whisper campaign and even in the Times of London of lobbying on behalf of the oil industry, but his work is officially confined to a non-management role as a oil production operator and no reports provide specific information contradicting this. More troubling and substantiated are his ties to the investigation of a state trooper he and his wife wanted punished more severely than had originally been decided by the appropriate state authorities.
Notable: Todd Palin has already, perhaps inevitably, been compared to Hillary Clinton.
Why someone would make this up: Not clear, really. Vice presidents are usually pretty powerless, and it would be surprising if inexperienced Palin was an exception. The amount of damage Palin's husband could do, in turn, through inappropriate influence is miniscule.

Sarah Palin burns books, has a crazy preacher, and wants Alaske to secede from the union!
See our last roundup.

This bailout is not free. Noone knows the final damage this bailout will do to the Treasury, but most believe that the losses will be in the hundreds of billions.

How does the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bailout affect you?

from Wise Bread by Xin Lu

By Xin Lu

Yesterday Henry Paulson decided to use the power given to him by the housing bailout bill to officially take over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. This is a decision that has a huge impact on global financial markets. So how does this change affect you? Here is a list of the winners and losers in this situation.

Winners

Homebuyers with cash - The news of the takeover sent mortgage rates on 30 year fixed conforming loans by almost a quarter of a percent according to Bankrate and it is expected to fall a bit more in the next few weeks. So homebuyers who are looking to get a new loan may be saving quite a bit of dough. Lending criteria is more stringent than previous years so loans may only be available to the most qualified borrowers with a substantial downpayment and great credit.

Investors in financials and homebuilders - The stock market rallied on the news that the government is taking over Fannie and Freddie. The biggest winners are the financial and homebuilding industry.

Banks that invested in Fannie and Freddie's debt - Fannie and Freddie sold trillions of dollars in mortgaged backed securities to central banks all around the world. For example, China's People's Bank owns more than $300 billion in Fannie and Freddie's mortgage backed securities. If both of these companies defaulted on all of these securites the Chinese national bank may have gone bankrupt.

Non-Americans - As I said in the previous point, many foreign banks purchased the debt backed securities issued by Fannie and Freddie. This bailout by the United States government essentially protected the assets of many foreign banks and non-Americans in these countries should be thankful that their banks are not going bankrupt. Additionally, the money used for the bailout is straight from the pockets of American taxpayers.

Losers

American taxpayers - This bailout is not free. Noone knows the final damage this bailout will do to the Treasury, but most believe that the losses will be in the hundreds of billions. Considering that Fannie and Freddie holds approximately $5 trillion in home loans and currently more than 9% of loans are in the process of defaulting, then simple math tells us that these two companies could potentially lose $450 billion. Additionally, taxpayers will have to pay for the upkeep and operations of these companies so the costs will keep on increasing for years to come.

Banks depending on Fannie and Freddie dividends - Dividends from Fannie and Freddie's stocks have been eliminated. According to this article, many small banks around the country used the preferred shares of Fannie and Freddie as income investments. Now that the dividends are eliminated these banks no longer have a steady income stream and may fail.

Existing shareholders of Fannie and Freddie's stocks - This is pretty obvious since the stock price of Fannie and Freddie fell to under $1. Technically these two companies are now under a conservatorship which basically means that they are bankrupt. As a result those who hold these stocks directly or through a mutual fund are seeing losses in their investments.

Home sellers facing plunging home prices - Even though this bailout will reduce mortgage rates for the best borrowers, it probably will not do anything to stem the plunging home prices in the most bubblicious areas of the country. Home sellers that are upside down in their loans will still have to deal with losses by themselves.

Lobbyists for Fannie and Freddie - They have been silenced now that the government owns Fannie and Freddie.

The bottom line is that noone really knows what exactly will happen in the next couple years, but letting Fannie and Freddie fail completely does not seem like a valid option. The global reach of Fannie and Freddie is humongous and this takeover move has some commentators saying that America is now "more communist than China" and "more socialist than France ". Indeed, America is using public funds to take over more than 50% of the credit market. Whether this decision makes America stronger or weaker in the global economy is up for debate. As consumers, all we can do is be vigilant as to where our money is kept and be careful when we enter into important financial contracts. Finally, I hope that a positive effect that comes out of this giant mess is that Americans will learn to save again and realize that an economy held up by debt cannot be sustained.

Bisphenol A was found to impede the formation of new nerve connections in the brain, with serious implications for cognition and mood

National: Plastic Not So Fantastic

from MenuPages Blog :: Chicago by Polina

They loved Lucy, hula hoops and "pure and good" Kool Aid. And the creepy, semi-utopian ads of the Space Age reflected this widely held belief that technology was key to world peace and immortality. Ok, so maybe not, we're starting to discover. Take, for example, plastic (via Reuters):

Scientists reported this week new evidence that low doses of the chemical bisphenol A (BPA), widely used to make plastic food and drinking containers, can impair brain function in primates, extending the findings of previous research conducted in rats.
Whether the amount of BPA that leaches out of containers into food and beverages represents an environmental risk is a subject of controversy.
"Our primate model indicates that BPA could negatively affect brain function in humans," study investigator Tibor Hajszan said in a press release from the Yale University School of Medicine in New Haven, Connecticut.

So add that to your ever-growing list of things that are bad for your health (trans fats, high fructose corn syrup, the VMA's). Bisphenol A, which fortifies plastic bottles and containers so that they don't shatter, was found to impede the formation of new nerve connections in the brain, with serious implications for cognition and mood. And shall we remind you that PVC, often found in plastic wrap used for packaging meat, is not only a hormone disruptor but also a carcinogen? (You can find a useful analysis of various plastics here.)

In the meantime, why not stick to more time-tested materials for your food-storage needs -- like glass? Some great alternatives include Crate & Barrel's glass storage bowls with plastic lids and these all-glass storage containers. Pyrex also offers cheaper options and claims its containers are made of non-porous glass that won't absorb flavors (a definite plus).

And while progress hasn't quite lived up to the hype, this reassuring new study comes on the heels of another thought -- that there may be some things worse than animal testing.

Plastics chemical harms brain function in monkeys [Reuters]
Since You Asked - Bisphenol A [National Institute For The Environmental Health Sciences]
Buying Guide - Plastic Food Storage [EVO]

"I came to Amazon to buy it, but clearly the DRM is repulsive and malware in nature. I will not buy it," wrote one reviewer.

Amazon users drub Spore's aggressive DRM

from AfterDawn.com

Spore, Will Wright's latest blockbuster PC game has been receiving some unwanted negative attention from Amazon users who love the game but have major complaints about the SecuROM DRM that comes installed with the game.

The aggressive DRM allows the buyer to only install the game three times total before you are forced to contact EA and request more codes. EA holds the right to deny you any new codes though.

Over 700 reviewers have given the game a one star rating (out of five) on the site, with most calling the game great but slamming the DRM.

"I came to Amazon to buy it, but clearly the DRM is repulsive and malware in nature. I will not buy it," wrote one reviewer.

"I'm very disappointed that EA has chosen to treat us all like criminals," bluntly stated another.

Other users note that despite the DRM the game was still leaked to torrents and P2P four days before its official US launch date.

"Fantastic game, gets 1 star because of DRM. It was pointless anyway, since the game was leaked 4 days before the release date."

Over 700 one-star votes, unbelievable. Hopefully EA will issue a patch that removes the three-install DRM.

"some individuals and firms who deserve extra special recognition for their complete lack of competence. I am referring, in particular, to the analytical team at Citigroup, which steadfastly maintained a "buy" recommendation"

Let's Give them a Hand

from Financial Armageddon by panzner

Although a few of us have long had a pretty good inkling about where the share prices of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were ultimately headed (hint: it rhymes with "Nero"), it seems that many of those who are supposed to know best never quite "got it." Some, in fact, were totally clueless.

Of course, not every analyst covering the sector or investor allowed to buy the shares of the two government-sponsored enterprises got things spectacularly wrong, though the list of those who did seems pretty extensive.

Regardless, there are some individuals and firms who deserve extra special recognition for their complete lack of competence. I am referring, in particular, to the analytical team at Citigroup, which steadfastly maintained a "buy" recommendation on Fannie Mae's shares over the course of the past year  (according to Bloomberg) -- as they plunged by nearly 99 percent.

Let's give these highly-paid "experts" a hand (or, maybe, if you are a customer, some other appendage?).

[Click on graph to enlarge]

Here are the 2016 Olympics logo designs submitted by the 7 applicant cities

2016 Olympics Logos

from Funtasticus.com by maverick

The International Olympics Committee (IOC) shortlisted four of the seven applicant cities—Chicago (United States), Madrid (Spain), Tokyo (Japan), and Rio de Janeiro (Brazil); over Baku (Azerbaijan), Doha (Qatar), and Prague (Czech Republic)—on June 4, 2008 during the announcement in Athens, Greece. Now is the intense bidding war between the final 4 cities with only 1 that will get to host the 2016 Olympics. The results will be announced at the 121st IOC Session in Copenhagen, Denmark, on October 2, 2009. Here are the 2016 Olympics logo designs submitted by the 7 applicant cities.

The logo suggests the natural rich landscapes of Rio de Janeiro, with a yellow sun rising behind the green hills and valleys of Rio (highlighting the Sugar Loaf (Portuguese: Pão de Açucar), the city's best known icon), and blue sea. Overall, the logo has a heart shape which represents the Brazilian's passion and enthusiasm for sports. Through its repetition, a stylized clover is formed, associated with the luck for everyone seeking to surpass limits, without any artifices other than the strength and heartiness of the person who brings along his people's dreams. The logo was designed by Ana Soter. An exclamation mark is incorporated into the number "1″ to suggest the expectation and excitement for the opportunity to host.

"The Tokyo 2016 logo takes the form of a traditional Japanese knot known as "MUSUBI". It integrates the five Olympic colours into a motif of colourful and decorative knotted strings which have long been utilised in Japan to signify blessings during times of celebration."

The original logo, that arrived to the IOC (International Olympic Committee) in Lausanne, together with the applicant letter had to be slightly changed. According to the IOC the original graphic design was confusing. They proposed a slight adjustment, where the numbers move to the bottom of the picture. The Czech Olympic Committee agreed. The laurel twig is as in the original design, bounded with ribbons of red, blue and yellow. Red and yellow are the colors of Prague, blue symbolizes Vltava river. The Prague logo represents a branch from a laurel wreath, both a traditional sign of victory and celebration as well as a reward in the Ancient Olympics (and most recently featured in the 2004 Summer Olympics in Athens, Greece) and ribbons in the Olympic colors.

On May 16, 2007, Chicago was informed that its logo, a representation of a torch with the flames reminiscent of Chicago's skyline, violated IOC rules against using Olympic torch imagery. Bidding rules prohibit logos containing the Olympic symbol, motto, flag or other imagery including a flame, torch or medal. The current redesigned logo was released on September 19, 2007. Using the same color palette, a unique six-pointed "Chicago star" represents a compass pointing in all directions reaching out to the world. Each point represents an Olympic value: Hope, Respect, Harmony, Friendship, Excellence and Celebration. The warm colors initially represented in the flame (or top) of the image refer to the sun, the cool colors represent the green parklands and blue waters of Lake Michigan. It has been proposed by Chicago City Council alderman Edward Burke that a fifth star be added to the Flag of Chicago if the city wins its bid for the Olympic games in 2016.

A contest was run to submit a logo for the games. A number were chosen from which the public could vote, finalizing the final three. The official logo was revealed in late September 2007, which was elected by a group of experts. The logo is named "Corle" and represents a hand in the colors of the Olympics, welcoming foreigners to the games. It was designed by Argentinian Joaquin Malle. The initial design was merely an outline of the hand; the final version bursts with color rings within the hand.

Baku revealed its logo in December 2007. The logo depicts images from the UNESCO world heritage site of Gobustan Rock Plateau, which features the remains of settlements and burials reflecting ancient human culture.[10]

The logo's design represents the blossoming of the hopes and aspirations of Qatar, rooted in the rich heritage of the country. The Aldahma, the 'Flower of the Spring', was chosen to represent the vital and energetic spirit of the season. The Aldahma's natural habitat in the sands of the desert draws a parallel with the vibrant and colourful life flourishing in the State of Qatar. The calligraphy strokes making the words 'Doha 2016′ are a unique manipulation of the traditional organic Henna patterns that women use to adorn their hands and arms as part of social and holiday celebrations. The interaction between the Arabic calligraphy and the English type is an interpretation of modernity. The logo was created by students at the Virginia Commonwealth University School of the Arts in Qatar (VCUQ). The Doha 2016 Slogan is "Celebrating Change."

When we talk about John McCain and Sarah Palin being more of the same, this is what we're talking about.

More False Political Attacks From McCain-Palin

from The Jed Report

John McCain and Sarah Palin are now attacking Barack Obama on earmarks, claiming he requested $1 billion in funds. But consider these facts:

1. This year, Obama hasn't requested a single dime in earmarks.
2. With Sarah Palin as governor, Alaska has requested more than $750 million -- by far the most earmarks per capita of any state.
   
3. In July, Palin said that the reason why she supported earmark reform was because both McCain and Obama supported reform.
   

When we talk about John McCain and Sarah Palin being more of the same, this is what we're talking about. These are the same old kinds of political attacks that Republicans have been using for years, all the while refusing to do anything about the real problems this country faces.

This is exactly why we need real change.

"The two auditing firms have some serious explaining to do to taxpayers and members of Congress"

Where were the auditors as Fannie and Freddie circled the drain?

from BloggingStocks by Jonathan Berr

Filed under: From the boards, Federal Natl Mtge (FNM), Economic data

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLC and Deloite & Touche LLP had a ring side seat to the collapse of Freddie Mac (NYSE:FRE) and Fannie Mae (NYSE: FNM) which may cost taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars. The two auditing firms have some serious explaining to do to taxpayers and members of Congress.

According to the New York Times, advisers to the U.S. Treasury Department found that Freddie's accounting methods overstated its financial cushion.

"The company had made decisions that, while not necessarily in violation of accounting rules, had the effect of overstating the firm's capital resources and financial stability," the paper said. "Indeed, one person briefed on the company's finances said Freddie Mac had made accounting decisions that pushed losses into the future and postponed a capital shortfall until the fourth quarter of this yearwhich would not need to be disclosed until early 2009." Fannie Mae used the same methods, though, apparently not as aggressively as Freddie Mac.

A spokesman Freddie Mac's auditors, Pricewaterhouse, did not immediately return an email seeking comment. In its letter to shareholders filed with the 2007 annual report report, PwC noted that Freddie Mac had changed some accounting policies. It elected to offset the amounts of some derivative contracts as of October 1; elected to measure newly acquired interests in securitized financial assets that contain embedded derivatives at fair value as of January 1, 2007; changed its method for accounting for uncertainty in income taxes as of January 1; changed the method for accounting for defined benefits plans as of December 31, 2006, changed its method for determining gains and losses on sales of certain guaranteed securities as of October 1, 2005

That's quite a bit to keep track of, no? I am sure Congressional investigators will want more detail about why these policies were changed.

Fannie Mae, whose former chief executive Franklin Raines was ousted in 2004 following another accounting scandal, paid Deloitte $49.3 million in fees in 2007. The firm was hired by Fannie Mae in 2005 because its predecessor KPMG missed accounting errors that cost the housing finance company $9 billion in previously reported profit. A Deloitte spokesman declined to comment.

Chief Executive Daniel Mudd told investors following weaker-than-expected first quarter results that this year and next year would beg "tough." Little did he know that those words would foreshadow his ouster along with his counterpart at Freddie Mac Richard Syron. They no doubt will be getting a pretty fat golden parachutte. Both companies have lost a combined $14 billion over the past year.

If the auditors were not as dilligent with Freddie and Fannie as they should have been, then members of Congress needs to hold them accountable. The shareholders who have been wiped out by the government's rescue deserve to know if auditors missed signs of the collapse that they should have caught.

Continue reading Where were the auditors as Fannie and Freddie circled the drain?

"the actor let slip that, as far as he knows, Will Smith was offered the part of Captain America. Bet you didn't see that one coming."

Was Will Smith Offered Captain America?

from Cinematical by Erik Davis

Just when you thought Marvel was trying to get a blue-eyed, blonde-haired muscle head to play Captain America in their upcoming live-action flick, MTV sneaks onto the scene with one whopper of a rumor. While speaking to Derek Luke about Miracle at St. Anna up in Toronto, the actor let slip that, as far as he knows, Will Smith was offered the part of Captain America. Bet you didn't see that one coming.

Now keep in mind this is just a rumor right now -- and Luke could either have the wrong info or he could be screwing around; we don't know. However, I wouldn't put it past Marvel to switch things up and throw Smith into the role. Not only did Smith do a fine job as a homeless, alcoholic superhero in need of rehabilitation in this summer's Hancock, but the dude would guarantee a gigantic opening box office. As MTV points out, Marvel has changed the color of characters before; most notably with Nick Fury (who used to be a middle-aged white man, and was recently played by Samuel L. Jackson in Iron Man).

Hey, I'm all for it. We're close to electing the first African American president in the United States, so why not bring on the first black Captain America? Just makes the eventual Avengers flick that much more interesting, huh?

The First Avenger: Captain America is due in theaters in May, 2011.

the owner of the car dealership that serves as the backdrop to A&E's "King of Cars" will close his Hummer dealership

"King Of Cars" Closes Hummer Dealership, Will Start Selling Smart Cars [Hummer]

from Consumerist by Meg Marco

The Wall Street Journal's "Deal Journal" blog says that the owner of the car dealership that serves as the backdrop to A&E's "King of Cars" will close his Hummer dealership and begin selling "Smart Cars."

This closing is notable because of where it is taking place and who is pulling the plug. It is, after all, one thing for enviro-friendly people in San Francisco–another city that recently lost a key Hummer dealership–to shun the brand. It is entirely different when Sin City decides the vehicles are too excessive. Towbin said Las Vegas is a custom fit for Hummer. "It's all about bling and it's in the desert," he said.

And Towbin is an uber-Hummer enthusiast. He credits a Hummer with saving his life, and he counts a Hummer as his daily driver. "I feel very aligned with the brand," he said. "Neither General Motors nor I wanted to go this way."

One of Nation's Largest Hummer Stores to Shut Its Doors [WSJ]

how does McCain intend change that helps 15 million unemployed and underemployed Americans when his economic plan not only adopts Bush’s policies, but digs the hole deeper?

McCain's Economic Non-Plan (Just Do What Bush Did) Is a Disaster

from Pensito Review by Trish

If you think the economy is bad now, just wait, according to the Daytona News-Journal. And if you want to make it unimaginably bad, vote for McCain.

On Tuesday, the Congressional Budget Office will release its summer update to the budget and economic outlook. The report will include grim numbers that aren't being talked about much on the campaign trail, including a budget deficit near or beyond the record $412.7 billion deficit recorded in 2004…

How does McCain intend change that helps 15 million unemployed and underemployed Americans when his economic plan not only adopts Bush's policies, but digs the hole deeper?

Unemployment gets the headlines. But deficits matter just as much in the long run. When they're small, the government has more room to borrow and smaller payments to finance the debt. Interest rates can go down…allowing businesses to invest more and consumers to buy more on credit.

..When deficits balloon, everything eventually goes in reverse. Interest rates rise to finance the deficit, and auto loans, mortgages, credit cards, college loans and business investments all become more expensive to finance.

The problem with the job losses of the past eight months is that they happened before the effects of much larger deficits take their toll. That doesn't speak hopefully of the future when, by the White House's estimate, the next president will inherit a $500 billion deficit.

…John McCain's plan is sheer folly: Make the Bush tax cuts permanent, and cut taxes and reduce federal revenue even more by abolishing the Alternative Minimum Tax, reducing the corporate tax and doubling the child tax credit. That's a recipe for trillion-dollar deficits on top of a national debt approaching $10 trillion.

One thing is clear. President Bush's economic policies failed. The tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 did not produce the promised economic growth. Growth in Bush's eight years did not produce the promised jobs. It did not lift wages. After inflation, household income has fallen below 2000 levels despite the few years of economic growth between the 2001 and 2008 recessions. Artificially lowering interest rates boosted the housing market artificially, leading to a very real crash. Changing Washington would be nice. But how does McCain intend change that helps 15 million unemployed and underemployed Americans when his economic plan not only adopts Bush's policies, but digs the hole deeper?

Bed, Bath & Beyond refused to let some customers use the phone to call 911 after they saw a toddler locked in a hot car in the store's parking lot.

Bed, Bath & Beyond Will Not Let You Use The Phone To Call 911 [Bed Bath And Beyond]

from Consumerist by Meg Marco

Bed, Bath & Beyond refused to let some customers use the phone to call 911 after they saw a toddler locked in a hot car in the store's parking lot. The witnesses told the local news that the employees told them, "...You cannot call no one, what goes on in the parking lot is not our concern."

"I said, lady, there is a child out there in a hot car and it's locked and it needs help. And I said, will you let us use your phone and call and she said no, we will not get involved."

The Lexington police arrived, smashed the car window and gave the 3-year-old some water. The mother was arrested and charged with wanton endangerment. Meanwhile, Bed, Bath & Beyond has issued a statement about the incident.

"The customer did ask the store to contact the authorities, the store suggested that the customer, who had witnessed the situation, contact 911. We are pleased that the manner was addressed in a timely manner and will use this incident as a training opportunity."

Police: Toddler In Hot Van For 45 Min. [LEX 18 News] (Thanks, Doug!)
(Photo: Morton Fox )

It's known as "balance billing," and it's often illegal, BusinessWeek reports

Beware Balance Billing [Health]

from Consumerist by Ben Popken

When insurers don't pay the full amount of the bill, health-care providers are going after patients to make up the difference. It's known as "balance billing," and it's often illegal, BusinessWeek reports. Under state and federal laws, doctors and hospitals generally need to be dealing with the insurers, instead of pressuring vulnerable patients. Have you had any success with fighting balance billing? Leave your story in the comments.

Medical Bills You Shouldn't Pay [BusinessWeek] (Thanks to Eric!) (Photo: jgodsey)

Seems she is refusing to release about 1,100 e-mails between herself and her aides that a Republican activist claims violate ethics and hiring rules.

Sarah Palin's Secret E-Mails

from Pensito Review by Buck

There's yet another potential scandal dogging Gov. Sarah Palin as she continues to avoid speaking to the media. Seems she is refusing to release about 1,100 e-mails between herself and her aides that a Republican activist claims violate ethics and hiring rules. Of course, Palin and her cronies are crying "executive privilege," but what is undermining that argument is that the governor's husband Todd Palin was copied on many of the e-mails. Since he has no position in state government, but is just another upstanding Alaskan, the argument for privilege is moot.

But the real reason the e-mails are being withheld is likely because they contain a whole lotta wrongdoing that might further tarnish Palin's halo:

The list of confidential emails includes a number of communications related to the Public Safety Employees Association, a union for the state's police officers and state troopers, and the headings refer to PSEA ads and a "PR campaign." Many of these PSEA-related emails were CC'ed to Todd Palin—and were also withheld under the deliberative process and executive privileges. (Recently, John Cyr, the PSEA executive director, told The Washington Post that Sarah Palin held a grudge against the state troopers and held down their salaries and other funding because her ex-brother-in-law-the-trooper had not been fired.) A separate email sent from Frye to Bailey and Todd Palin and headed "I may be in trouble here guys" was withheld because it involves a personnel matter. In April, a series of emails with the subject line "from Sheila Toomey" zipped between Sarah Palin, Bailey, Frye, other Palin aides, and Todd Palin. Toomey writes the "Alaska Ear" political gossip column for the Anchorage Daily News. These emails were also withheld under the deliberative process and executive privileges. And a string of emails titled "Racism on the Radio" that went back and forth between Governor Palin and her aides was blocked from release on the same grounds.

Andreé McLeod, the person who originally requested the e-mails and who used to work for Palin in Alaska government, is continuing her efforts to shake loose the secret e-mails:

"I've known Sarah for years, " says McLeod, who moved to Alaska from New York in 1978. "When the finger is pointed at somebody else, she's all for accountability. When it's pointing at her, it's different. Sarah Palin was elected on the basis of providing open and honest government. She has failed miserably."

"Executive privilege?" Withholding e-mails? Sounds like Palin subscribes to the Cheney School of Vice President (emphasis on the "vice").

waitressing and babysitting, and how those are a lot like her new job, governing a couple thousand crazy Alaskans and making sure they get their welfare checks from the privatized Marxist oil scheme they're running up there

Palin: Governing Alaska Just Like Waitressing [Experience]

from Gawker by Pareene

Hey, everyone stop complaining that Sarah Palin won't grant anyone except Uncle Charlie Gibson any interviews and therefore we have no clue if she knows anything about foreign or domestic policy besides "drilling good, wolves bad." Because you guys had your chance back when she was just a little-known governor and you wasted it! Here's a clip of Palin in the green room of Charlie Rose. She is talking about her first jobs, waitressing and babysitting, and how those are a lot like her new job, governing a couple thousand crazy Alaskans and making sure they get their welfare checks from the privatized Marxist oil scheme they're running up there. Click to watch! (Later in the interview, btw, she names her favorite authors of all time. They are Christian children's book writer C. S. Lewis and a columnist for Runners' World magazine.)

"Johnny Depp as The Riddler and Philip Seymour Hoffman as The Penguin.’ I said, ‘Shit, they’ve done it again!’” [Laughs]

Whaaaa?!: Michael Caine Confirms Johnny Depp Up For The Riddler, Philip Seymour Hoffman for The Penguin in Batman 3!

from /Film by orfilms@gmail.com (slashfilm.com)

We're pretty sure some type of "clarification" will be sent out shortly regarding the following statement from Michael Caine, but for now, it's the first confirmation from someone involved in the Batman franchise about new villains and casting choices. The ubiquitous rumors about Johnny Depp as The Riddler and Philip Seymour Hoffman as The Penguin will undoubtedly escalate after this. Here's what Caine told MTV's Splash Page…

"I was with [a Warner Bros.] executive and I said, 'Are we going to make [a sequel to The Dark Knight]?' They said yeah. I said, 'How the hell are we going to top Heath? And he says 'I'll tell you how you top Heath — Johnny Depp as The Riddler and Philip Seymour Hoffman as The Penguin.' I said, 'Shit, they've done it again!'" [Laughs]

Caine seemed to reiterate his certainty, confirming that he's also read the rumors in the British tabloids and that "[Warner Bros.] already got [Depp and Hoffman] in mind." Make of this what you will. Christopher Nolan is on vacation and hasn't publicly stated any storylines for a sequel, and Caine confirms he hasn't spoken with him about it. More on this as it develops…

UPSET: Sunday night's game was a blowout. Surprisingly, it was the Bears who stunned the Colts and won 29-13

Bears Put Down Colts

from Chicagoist by Benjy Lipsman

When the NFL released its 2008 schedule a few months back, we cringed at the prospects of our Bears being embarrassed on national television at the hands of the Indianapolis Colts. Since facing each other in Super Bowl XLI, the Bears had fallen on hard times while the Colts continued to rank among the league's elite.

As expected, Sunday night's game was a blowout. Surprisingly, it was the Bears who stunned the Colts and won 29-13 as Indy broke the seal on their new Lucas Oil Field.

So how'd the do it? The same way they made it to the Super Bowl two seasons ago. The offense ran the ball effectively all night long and didn't turn the ball over. The defense held Peyton Manning in check most of the night, limiting the Colts to field goals on two long drives.

The breakout star of the game was rookie runningback Matt Forte, who quickly made Bears fans forget the Cedric Benson era. Forte broke free for a 50 yard touchdown early in the first quarter and the Bears never looked back. He finished with 123 yards on 23 carries, while the team as a whole managed 183 yards on the ground. Kyle Orton will never be expected to put up the kind of passing numbers Manning does, but he looked poised, completing nearly 2/3 of his passes and he never turned the ball over.

The defense, ranked near the bottom of the NFL in '07 and not looking any better throughout the preseason, regained their swagger just in time. They frustrated Manning all night while shutting down the Colts running game. The defense also scored nine of the Bears points on a safety and a TD return of a fumble, while also giving the offense good field position after preventing the Colts from converting on fourth downs.

Was this game a fluke? Or will the Bears surprise its fans and the NFL like it did in 2005, the last time Kyle Orton was this team's starting QB? We'll know more this Sunday when the Bears take on the Carolina Panthers.

AP Photo/Darron Cummings

After more than a month of campaigning and conventioning, Congress is returning to work today to begin the final homestretch of this session

They're Back

from Open Congress : Congress Gossip Blog by Donny Shaw

After more than a month of campaigning and conventioning, Congress is returning to work today to begin the final homestretch of this session.

The official adjournment date is set for September 26th, but given the contentious issues they're hoping to resolve, Congress will likely be back again after the November elections for a lame duck session.

First and foremost on the legislative agenda is finding an agreement on offshore oil drilling. Since before the August recess, Republicans have been demanding a vote on a stand-alone measure to repeal a moratorium on drilling offshore and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) that has been in place for 27 years. Democrats, many of whom have recently come around to accept some expanded drilling, want to pass a comprehensive energy bill that includes a limited expansion of offshore drilling, improvements in the environmental regulations of drilling, a repeal of tax cuts for oil companies, renewable energy tax credits and a measure to crack down on speculation in the oil markets.

Tied up in the whole drilling debate is the fact that Congress has to pass a bill to fund the entire government (known as a continuing resolution) by September 30th, or else let the government completely shut down. Some Republicans are already threatening to risk a government shutdown if Democrats don't give them a full expansion of offshore drilling.

To see the House of Representatives' full schedule for the week, click here. And a rough outline of the Senate's agenda can be seen here.

The first bill up for a vote in the Senate will be the Defense Authorization Act, S.3001, which was filibustered by Senate Republicans in July over unrelated offshore drilling amendments. Republicans have decided to back off their filibuster of that bill, but a contentious debate is still expected, especially over a Democratic amendment to require that Congress approve any long-term security agreement between the U.S. and Iraq.

the bankruptcy reports are "completely untrue,"

UAL bankruptcy rumors untrue: Stock goes to 1 cent, old news story reportedly the culprit

from BloggingStocks by Melly Alazraki

Filed under: Major movement, Rumors, Apple Inc (AAPL), Market matters, UAL Corp (UAUA)

UAL Corp. NASDAQ: UAUA) shares were halted Monday following rumors the company was filing for bankruptcy.

MarketWatch is reporting that UAL said the rumor is completely untrue.

Apparently, an old news item on United Airlines filing for bankruptcy somehow resurfaced on the Chicago Tribune newspaper Web site, CNBC reported. The sell-off nearly wiped out the company's share price, as UAUA, which opened trading at $12.17 this morning, plummeted 99.92% to 1 cent before being halted.
[Update 12:35 pm: United issued a statement, saying that the bankruptcy reports are "completely untrue," and that it was actually the "irresponsible posting of a 6-year-old Chicago Tribune article by the Florida Sun Sentinel newspaper website with the date changed" (not on the Tribune site as CNBC reported).]

This isn't the first time rumors in the age of the Internet have caused stocks to plunge, even whole markets. Just recently, Bloomberg had its own snafu when it inadvertently published its updated obituary for Steve Jobs, Apple Inc.'s (NASDAQ: AAPL) CEO. While that didn't cause any reaction as it was caught in time, last year, markets crashed because a website reported of an imminent U.S. strike of Iranian nuclear installations.

Continue reading UAL bankruptcy rumors untrue: Stock goes to 1 cent, old news story reportedly the culprit

Check out the US Paralympic Team website and I encourage you to keep yourself posted on these incredible and courageous athletes

The Paralympics Begin With Style, The US Dominates Swimming [2008 Beijing Paralympics]

from Deadspin by Sarah Schorno

The Paralympics have kicked off in Beijing with an opening ceremony that rivaled the Olympic opening ceremony. The US swim team dominated the swimming events yesterday, coming away with four gold medals, two silver and three bronze. Some other medals of note:

• The first gold medal of the games went to Slovakian shooter Veronika Vadovicova, shooting the 10 meter air rifle event from a wheelchair. The silver medal went to Germany's Manuela Schmermund and the bronze to Puerto Rico's Nilda Gomez Lopez. Special applause goes to 66 year-old shooter Kosmala, the oldest shooter on the range and a 5 time Paralympian.

• The first gold for the host country went to China's Du Jianping in the 100m freestyle at S3 class. Jianping, who has lower body disabilities, edged ahead of Ukraine's Dmytro Vynohradets who took the silver. China's Li Hanhua came away with the bronze.

• Great Britain cyclist Simon Richardson won gold for his country in the men's LC3/4 one-kilometre time-trial, a race for athletes with lower-limb disabilities. He also set a Paralympic record in the process. Fellow countrywoman Aileen McGlynn also took gold in the women's B&VI 1-3 one-kilometre time-trial. McGlynn, who is registered blind, competes with a pilot rider. Darren Kenny took a third cycling gold for Great Britain in the CP3 individual pursuit.

There are a number of inspiring stories coming out of this year's Paralympic games. Check out the US Paralympic Team website and I encourage you to keep yourself posted on these incredible and courageous athletes.

Will Howard Stern talk about this since its his favorite restaurant? Hypocrite......

Nobu Busted for Secretly Selling Endangered Sushi [Hypocritical Dining]

from Gawker by ian spiegelman

Nobu—the sushi restaurant chain co-owned by Robert Deniro that caters to celebrities like Madonna, Leo DiCaprio and Sean Combs—has been busted in an undercover sting for selling critically endangered Atlantic bluefin tuna while concealing it from customers. Greenpeace sent spies to three London Nobu franchises, where they specifically ordered the near-extinction fish, and were told that the restaurants didn't stock it. But the cunning Greenies took their sushi back to the lab, where DNA tests revealed that the restaurants were indeed serving bluefin to moneyed gourmands. It's legal to serve bluefin, but people who claim to care about the environment—like Deniro, DiCaprio, Combs and Madonna—would supposedly never knowingly touch the stuff, preferring instead the less endangered, but less delicious, yellowfin. Which explains Nobu's sneakiness.

Nobu does not specify on its menus which species of tuna it serves. Requests for the information by campaigners have been met for several years with a terse "no comment".

Although it is not illegal to serve Atlantic bluefin, also known as northern bluefin, many chefs, including Gordon Ramsay, have dropped it because of concern that fishing is at higher levels than stocks can withstand. At Nobu Berkeley St, which has one Michelin star, investigators asked for Atlantic bluefin (hon maguro in Japanese) but staff told them the restaurant did not stock it. However, DNA tests proved that the fish they were given was indeed Atlantic bluefin.

[A] second dish they ordered, described only as "o-toro", the fattiest belly meat, was Atlantic bluefin. At Nobu London, a waitress told the investigators that a dish on the menu was hon maguro. The fish that was served tested positive as Atlantic bluefin.

The lack of clear information about the species of tuna on sale at Nobu could land the restaurants in trouble. A spokesman for Westminster city council said that falsely describing food was an offence.

Willie Mackenzie of Greenpeace said: "Nobu and Robert De Niro are clearly making a great deal of money serving up endangered fish." The restaurant declined to comment. [Telegraph]

Lola Ogunnaike, entertainment reporter for CNN's American Morning, seems to believe the image is authentic.

CNN Duped By Palin Photoshop [For The Record]

from Gawker by Ryan Tate

It can be hard to sift truth from myth from conspiracy theory when it comes to Sarah Palin, even if that's what you're paid to do. But one would hope a professional journalist's natural skepticism would be piqued by the now-notorious Photoshop job at left of Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin holding a rifle next to a swimming pool while wearing a bikini. Too good to be true! But Lola Ogunnaike, entertainment reporter for CNN's American Morning, seems to believe the image is authentic. Yesterday she told Reliable Sources host Howard Kurtz that Palin should maybe avoid posing with guns like this, because it might come back to bite her in the ass:

I mean, McCain has been really good about painting Obama as this lightweight, using the word "celebrity" as a pejorative. They don't want to have a boomerang effect. They don't want that to come back on Sarah Palin, and people say, yes, she looks good in a bikini clutching an AK-47, but is she equipped to run the country?

Kurtz never corrected Ogunnaike, on either the fake picture or on the even more absurd suggestion that some critical mass of people think the VP candidate looked good in it.

Next on CNN: Whether Palin alienated conservative voters by faking her own pregnancy.

[Reliable Sources]

the company will sell the little fuel sipper only in Europe

The 65 mpg Ford the U.S. Can't Have

Ford's Fiesta ECOnetic gets an astonishing 65 mpg, but the carmaker can't afford to sell it in the U.S.

If ever there was a car made for the times, this would seem to be it: a sporty subcompact that seats five, offers a navigation system, and gets a whopping 65 miles to the gallon. Oh yes, and the car is made by Ford Motor (F), known widely for lumbering gas hogs.

Ford's 2009 Fiesta ECOnetic goes on sale in November. But here's the catch: Despite the car's potential to transform Ford's image and help it compete with Toyota Motor (TM) and Honda Motor (HMC) in its home market, the company will sell the little fuel sipper only in Europe. "We know it's an awesome vehicle," says Ford America President Mark Fields. "But there are business reasons why we can't sell it in the U.S." The main one: The Fiesta ECOnetic runs on diesel.

Automakers such as Volkswagen (VLKAY) and Mercedes-Benz (DAI) have predicted for years that a technology called "clean diesel" would overcome many Americans' antipathy to a fuel still often thought of as the smelly stuff that powers tractor trailers. Diesel vehicles now hitting the market with pollution-fighting technology are as clean or cleaner than gasoline and at least 30% more fuel-efficient.

Yet while half of all cars sold in Europe last year ran on diesel, the U.S. market remains relatively unfriendly to the fuel. Taxes aimed at commercial trucks mean diesel costs anywhere from 40 cents to $1 more per gallon than gasoline. Add to this the success of the Toyota Prius, and you can see why only 3% of cars in the U.S. use diesel. "Americans see hybrids as the darling," says Global Insight auto analyst Philip Gott, "and diesel as old-tech."

None of this is stopping European and Japanese automakers, which are betting they can jump-start the U.S. market with new diesel models. Mercedes-Benz by next year will have three cars it markets as "BlueTec." Even Nissan (NSANY) and Honda, which long opposed building diesel cars in Europe, plan to introduce them in the U.S. in 2010. But Ford, whose Fiesta ECOnetic compares favorably with European diesels, can't make a business case for bringing the car to the U.S.

TOO PRICEY TO IMPORT

First of all, the engines are built in Britain, so labor costs are high. Plus the pound remains stronger than the greenback. At prevailing exchange rates, the Fiesta ECOnetic would sell for about $25,700 in the U.S. By contrast, the Prius typically goes for about $24,000. A $1,300 tax deduction available to buyers of new diesel cars could bring the price of the Fiesta to around $24,400. But Ford doesn't believe it could charge enough to make money on an imported ECOnetic.

Ford plans to make a gas-powered version of the Fiesta in Mexico for the U.S. So why not manufacture diesel engines there, too? Building a plant would cost at least $350 million at a time when Ford has been burning through more than $1 billion a month in cash reserves. Besides, the automaker would have to produce at least 350,000 engines a year to make such a venture profitable. "We just don't think North and South America would buy that many diesel cars," says Fields.

The question, of course, is whether the U.S. ever will embrace diesel fuel and allow automakers to achieve sufficient scale to make money on such vehicles. California certified VW and Mercedes diesel cars earlier this year, after a four-year ban. James N. Hall, of auto researcher 293 Analysts, says that bellwether state and the Northeast remain "hostile to diesel." But the risk to Ford is that the fuel takes off, and the carmaker finds itself playing catch-up—despite having a serious diesel contender in its arsenal.

The fix is in, as it has been in every election since 2000

The Fix is In – Again! | AfterDowningStreet.org

Better get used to the idea: John McCain will probably be the next President of the United States.

The fix is in, as it has been in every election since 2000.

This follows from two overarching facts that the corporate media will not report, and the Democrats choose to ignore:

1. The ruling oligarchy can not allow a reformist Democrat to occupy the White House.

2. They have the means to prevent it, as they did in 2000, in 2004, and as they might do again in 2008.

All other aspects of this "election" – issues, personalities, media blitzes – are secondary and perhaps even irrelevant.

The Stakes

What "oligarchy"? It's the "military-industrial complex" that Dwight Eisenhower warned us about in 1961, now expanded into a "military-industrial-academic-media-congressional complex." These include corporate CEOs who earn more, in half a day, than their median workers earn in an entire year. These are among the one-tenth of one-percent richest Americans (annual income of more than $1.6 million) whose income from 1980 to 2002 increased two and a half times, while the median family income was essentially unchanged; the same super-rich 0.1 percent that received 15% of Bush's tax cuts. These oligarchs sit on each others' Boards of Directors, and on University Boards of Regents. They own the mass media and thus control the "news" that is fed the general public. (See theyrule.net). And they fund political candidates before elections and, quid-pro-quo, dictate policy after elections.

To be sure, the super-rich (and getting richer) include a few progressive individuals such as Warren Buffet and George Soros, but they are the "mavericks." However, by and large, the "hyper-rich" (David Kay Johnson's term), own, operate and control America.inc.

And they have benefitted enormously from both Democratic and Republican administrations, but most notoriously, from the administration of Bush the Lesser. They have looted the U.S. Treasury, increased the national debt to almost ten trillion dollars, hollowed-out and exported the manufacturing base, promulgated foreign imperialistic wars and sent the bill to future generations, and they have installed a tax structure that systematically draws the national wealth "upward" from the middle class that creates the wealth, into the pockets of those who own and control the wealth.

The oligarchy's surrogates in Washington have, in defense of this corporatocracy, effectively put themselves above the law. Acts of Congress, when found inconvenient to "the unitary executive" President, are nullified by "signing statements." Citizen rights, enumerated by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, have been swept aside, as have numerous international treaties which have the force of law. The list of illegal acts by the current administration is long and agonizingly familiar. (See Dennis Kucinich's 35 Articles of Impeachment). And the Congress has steadfastly refused to apply the Constitutional remedy of impeachment.

The oligarchs are not about to give up all this ill-gotten loot, and in some cases find themselves before the bar of justice, by submitting to something called "reform," instigated by "the will of the people."

And they are quite capable of preventing such reform, and frustrating the people's will.

Because, you see, they also own the privatized enterprises that count the votes with no independent means of validation.

Hidden in Plain Sight

The undisputed facts about "direct electronic recording" (DRE) voting machines should add up to a scandal. Instead of a scandal, we get a yawn.

These are the facts: the software that records the individual votes, and the software that "compiles" (collects) the vote totals, is "proprietary" which means, in a word, secret. It is known only to the private companies that write the codes, and these companies are owned and managed by Republican partisans. Accordingly, if the software is programmed to "fix" an election, there is no direct way to expose the fraud. Conversely, even if the vote tabulation is entirely accurate and honest, there is still no way to validate the vote. It is, as some have called it, "faith-based voting." (See my "The Greatest Story Never Told").

Last April, the Democratic Congress attempted to pass a bill that would fund state efforts to replace DREs with paper ballots. The GOP members, at the request of George Bush, defeated the measure.

Now why would they want to do that? With all the suspicion of GOP election fraud at large in the public, one might suppose that the Republicans would be eager to require means of validation. Yet somehow they are not.

For while there is no direct means of validating DRE totals, there is abundant statistical, circumstantial and anecdotal evidence that numerous elections, including the past two presidential elections, have in fact been stolen. (Because I have presented this evidence in numerous articles on the internet, I won't repeat it here. But for documentation of these allegations, see my "Where's the Outrage?" and "Evidence? We Don't Want Your Stinkin' Evidence!," then follow the links therein).

We've heard the rebuttal from the right: "These allegations of election fraud are paranoid fantasies. The Republicans, and their friends in the voting machine industry, wouldn't dare fix a national election. Such a conspiracy would be too massive to keep secret, and once it came to light, it would destroy the GOP."

Quite frankly, I once believed that eventually the truth would out, and that it would devastate the Republicans.

But if the truth of election fraud were revealed, who would report it? The corporate media? Gimme a break!

In fact, the truth has come out, and from the inside of the DRE industry. A programmer, Clint Curtis, has testified under oath that he was asked by Congressional Candidate, Tom Feeney, to write a program that would fix an election and leave no trace of the crime. He replied that it would be a simple matter to do so, but refused the offer. Curtis later lost to Feeney in an election that posted totals at odds with post-election surveys. (The Democratic Congress declined to investigate). In California, word processor Steven Heller released confidential legal documents proving that Diebold violated state law by installing uncertified software in state elections. For this act of civil disobedience, Heller pled guilty to a felony and was fined $10,000. And finally Steven Spoonamore, a McCain advisor and security researcher, disclosed that Diebold tampered with the 2006 Georgia gubernatorial and senatorial elections, in which the Republican candidates overcame huge polling deficits to win the election. (Follow this link for the first of an eight segment interview with Spoonamore).

So the evidence of stolen elections, some from inside whistleblowers, is "out there," reported by citizen groups and by the progressive internet. But not by the corporate media. And amazingly, the victims of this fraud, the Democratic Party and its candidates, are also silent.

So the system remains in place: In the November election, 80% of the votes will be cast or tabulated by computer, including 38% on DRE machines with "proprietary" software.

Will the announced vote totals be accurate? Will the oligarchy-friendly manufacturers and programmers be tempted to "fix" the results? You can count on it. Will they in fact yield to the temptation, facing no legal consequences if they do? Unknown and unknowable.

But given the evidence from past elections, I have grave forebodings about the next.

The Diebold Zone

If, as in previous elections, the GOP friendly privatized election industry is up to its undetectable dirty tricks, then John McCain need not tally a majority of votes in key states to win the election. All he needs is to gather as many as 45% – into "the Diebold Zone" – and the DRE's and the proprietary software codes will take care of the rest. Just as, arguably, Bush and the Republicans did in 2004. In a stunning essay, read by very few, Michael Collins explains how they did it. The DRE machines switched and stuffed millions of GOP votes in the big cities, where they would be least likely to be noticed. Collins' evidence is compelling.

Again, not a word about this in the corporate media, and no investigations by law enforcement or by the Democratic Congress.

And so, to put the matter bluntly, McCain does not need a majority to win. Just plausibility. As in 2000 and 2004, a plausible win is a win.

The media will not dispute it, much less investigate it.

But what if, once again, both pre-election polling and exit polling indicate an Obama victory, only to be overcome by a McCain "upset."

When this happened in Ohio in 2004, the media and the GOP came up with "the reluctant voter theory," whereby it was suggested that Bush voters were somehow less inclined than Kerry voters to talk with exit pollsters. No independent evidence was offered to explain this remarkable phenomenon, which seemed to be confined to precincts with DRE machines.

This time, if John McCain achieves a stunning upset, there will be a more plausible explanation on hand to deal with any discrepancy with poll projections: "the Tom Bradley effect." This phenomenon, which gets its name from the 1982 California gubernatorial race between Tom Bradley and George Deukmejian, indicates that a sizeable number of white voters who tell pollsters that race is not a factor in their voting choices, will in fact vote against a "person of color" when alone in the voting booth.

"The Bradley Effect" is extremely accommodating to the Republicans, since there is no way whatever to gauge its extent, if any. Thus almost any imaginable degree of "upset" can be explained away by this "effect."

If McCain does win in a stunning upset, count on the corporate media to grab onto "The Bradley Effect" in an instant. The pundits will deplore the "fact" that racism still plays such a large part in our elections. But it will all be a charade.

Just remember: thanks to "faith-based" voting and compliant media, for McCain and the GOP a plausible victory is a victory. And "the Bradley Effect" provides the plausibility.

Is There Any Hope?

Due to the aforementioned circumstances, an Obama victory in November is unlikely. But it is not impossible.

The election is three months away, and the party conventions are just ahead. Three months in politics can be an eternity.

First of all, the oligarchs might decide that a Democratic win might not be all that troublesome, and thus might tell their friends in the voting machine industry to cool it and let the voters have their way. After all, there is an economic shit-storm in the offing, and the corporatocracy might be more than willing to see it happen on the Democrats' watch.

Besides, as Matt Taibbi has argued this week, the corporatocracy pretty much owns Barack Obama anyway, and as the aftermath of the 2006 Congressional elections has proven, even when in control the Democratic party can be tamed and contained without much strain.

Second, the Obama campaign might come up with a brilliant strategy, though there is little indication so far of any such development. The Democrats have had four years to study the 2004 debacle and to plan a counteroffensive. For sure enough, 2008 is turning out to be 2004 redux, as Karl Rove and his acolytes dust off the old playbook and proceed accordingly. They know full well that McCain can not win legitimately on his merits, so instead, and predictably, they are attacking Obama: "an elitist," "a celebrity," "not one of us" (i.e., he's black and maybe a Muslim), "he's posing as 'The One'" (i.e., he's the anti-Christ). As in 2000 and 2004, the Republican campaign is attempting to define its opposition. And once again, they appear to be succeeding.

So has the Obama camp at last come up with an effective way to deal with the Sigretti-Atwater-Rove brand of gutter politics? To date, they have largely responded by being "positive" and concentrating on "the issues." They should ask John Kerry how all that worked out for him.

It won't do. It's time for a Willie Stark moment. During his week-long retreat, Barack Obama should read Chapter 2 (in particular, pages 136-144) of Robert Penn Warren's "All the King's Men," wherein Stark throws away his wonky, issue-clogged speech, speaks from his anguished and angry heart, and turns his fortunes around.

Strange to say, in this strangest of political years, Paris Hilton has shown the way. John McCain has to be taken down, and with ridicule. He is, after all, a ridiculous figure, spewing forth gaffes and errors almost daily, thus revealing his incompetence each and every time.. The McCain campaign, with its smears, innuendoes and outright lies, has given Obama the license to go negative. McCain has reversed himself on so many issues that his stand on any of them is not credible. So show video clips of McCain vs. McCain. He is tied to the despised Bush regime, so show those images of the Bush-McCain hug, and do so repeatedly as the media did with the Clinton-Monica hug at the rope line. Collect damaging video clips from You-Tube and let McCain speak his own refutation and condemnation. Then offer something better: an "audacity of hope."

Can Obama and the Democrats overcome a rigged voting system and a hostile corporate media?

Unlikely, but not impossible.

The public clamor for change combined with the widespread disgust with McCain, Bush and the Republicans, must become so enormous as to overwhelm the propaganda of the corporate media and the finagling of the voting machines. Recall that despite all the media slander of 2000 ("inventing the internet," "discovering Love Canal"), Al Gore received a half million more votes than George Bush. And there is good reason to believe that in 2006, the Democratic Senatorial candidates in Montana, Virginia, and Missouri overcame GOP "fixes" in those contests.

In short, to win at all, the Democrats must win big. A close contest within "The Diebold Zone" will likely go to John McCain.

And that is reason enough for progressives to stay in the fight and to redouble their efforts.

###

Dr. Ernest Partridge is a consultant, writer and lecturer in the field of Environmental Ethics and Public Policy. He has taught Philosophy at the University of California, and in Utah, Colorado and Wisconsin. He publishes the website, "The Online Gadfly" (www.igc.org/gadfly) and co-edits the progressive website, "The Crisis Papers" (www.crisispapers.org). His book in progress, "Conscience of a Progressive," can be seen at http://www.igc.org/gadfly/progressive/^toc.htm

John McCain has also used his vote in the Senate to help companies profit at the expense of taxpayers and working people who need jobs

Political Affairs Magazine - McCain's Record on Killing Jobs in Michigan

Michigan working families worry about jobs and the economy above all else. The past two elections cycles, Republican candidates have tried – and failed – to blame Democratic Governor Jennifer Granholm for high unemployment and weak economic numbers for the state. But voters understand the problems faced by the state are not simply local ones; they are fueled by national policies.

Michigan voters were fed a dose of this blame-the-state-first thinking by the likes of former Republican gubernatorial candidate and billionaire Dick DeVos, whose mostly Michigan-based company, Amway, took advantage of federal tax loopholes and subsidies to move some of its production out of the country. Now they are hearing the same tune again from Republican congressional candidates and John McCain.

As is widely understood, though, economic hardship in Michigan has been driven primarily by so-called free trade policies pushed by the Bush administration and John McCain. But John McCain has also used his vote in the Senate to help companies profit at the expense of taxpayers and working people who need jobs. For this reason, it is important to closely examine his record on economic policies that have impacted the state, say many Michigan residents.

In lock-step with George W. Bush, John McCain voted in March of 2005 to give tax breaks to companies that move manufacturing plants out of the country. It is worth noting this because he is now running ads in Michigan claiming he is against the very policy he voted for. He must be confused.

The truth is that McCain, in 2005, helped defeat a Democratic measure that would have repealed tax incentives for companies who move manufacturing plants out of the country and to use the resulting revenue to help balance the budget. The authors of the amendment estimated that $3.2 billion taxpayer dollars could have been saved by eliminating subsidies to corporations who cut jobs in this country, many thousands of which are in Michigan.

Incidentally, Barack Obama, in one of his first votes as a Senator, supported this measure to end tax incentives for companies moving out of the country. This issue isn't just one of policy for Obama, says his campaign. Having worked closely with families impacted by the closing of steel mills in Chicago in the 1980s, Obama understands what happens to families and communities when good-paying jobs leave. His campaign says that while Obama and the Chicago communities he worked with saw some successes in keeping jobs, providing better housing, and improving schools, he understands that a sound national economic policy is needed to keep jobs here, create new jobs in new industries, and rebuild crumbling communities.

Just one year before the two presidential candidates cast those defining votes, McCain voted against another measure that would have prohibited the use of taxpayer dollars to help ship jobs overseas, again in line with the policy of the Bush administration. In March of 2004, McCain helped block the creation of a reserve fund of about $24 billion that would have directly aided companies that sought to create manufacturing jobs in the US and for small businesses to supply health care coverage to their employees.

Just one week before that, McCain voted to allow outsourcing jobs, even for federally funded contracts. He was one of 26 Senators who stood up to the "made in America" lobby and voted against a measure that would prohibit federal government contracts, including state contracts that are partially federally funded, from being performed outside of the country. Is this what McCain means by "country first"?

But McCain's habit of voting to kill jobs in the United States doesn't end there. In 1998 he voted to block an amendment that required employers to find and keep US workers before recruiting guest workers form other countries. As part of that same package of votes, McCain tried to block an amendment that would have prohibited an employer from hiring a worker from another country under the H-1B visa program if the employer has recently laid off any US-born workers.

In 1995, McCain voted against an amendment that repealed a special tax break on the incomes of shareholders who profit in the billions on investments that create wealth and jobs outside of the country.

Regarding the auto industry, like George W. Bush, John McCain has simply done nothing to help Michigan automakers invest in new technology to compete in the global economy. He only changed is mind on allowing loans to the Big Three after strong public pressure that would have threatened his presidential bid during the primaries.

John McCain says he will fight exclude worker and environmental protections from free trade agreements like NAFTA, which alone has cost Michigan tens of thousands of jobs. In fact, he wants more free trade agreements and wants them fast-tracked through Congress to limit scrutiny, much like George W. Bush did. He has admitted to giving up on keeping jobs here and told his supporters that more jobs will be lost in the name of free trade and the global race to the bottom.

Toeing the Bush administration line, McCain helped Republicans filibuster the pro-labor Employee Free Choice Act, signaling his opposition to the right of workers of workers to join or organize labor unions. Unions are one of the best social institutions working families have to improve their standards of living in an economy that fast sinking – thanks in no small part to John McCain.

With 26 years in Congress under his belt, John McCain's record on economic issues is clear. This record along with eight straight months of growing unemployment across the country has many Michigan residents wondering, is this the kind of "experience" we need in the White House? Many people want to know how it is possible to keep the same politicians with the same policies in Washington and expect different results.

One of America's biggest military contractors is being sued by a Nepali labourer and the families of a dozen other employees who say they were taken against their will to work in Iraq.

KBR Sued For Forcing Nepalese Workers To Iraq | AfterDowningStreet.org

One of America's biggest military contractors is being sued by a Nepali labourer and the families of a dozen other employees who say they were taken against their will to work in Iraq. All but one of the Nepalese workers were subsequently kidnapped and murdered.

According to the lawsuit filed in Los Angeles, the Nepalese workers were recruited in 2004 in their home country by KBR and its Jordanian contractors, Daoud & Partners, to work as kitchen staff in a luxury hotel in Amman. Once they reached the Jordanian capital, however, their passports were taken from them and they were sent to Iraq. While travelling in an unprotected convoy, the Nepalis were kidnapped and later executed.

"It doesn't appear that any of them knew they were going to Iraq," said Matthew Handley, a lawyer representing the only survivor and the families of those who were killed. "A few were told they were going to work at an American camp...They thought they were going to work in America."

The lawsuit says that, after the 12 men were kidnapped, the sole survivor, Buddi Prasad Gurung, was forced to work for 15 months against his will in a warehouse at the al-Asad air base before his passport was finally returned. The plaintiffs allege the "illicit trafficking scheme - from their recruitment in Nepal to their eventual employment in Iraq - was engineered by KBR and its subcontractor".

The lawsuit was brought under a new human trafficking law that allows foreign citizens to sue the US government, military or corporations over human rights abuses committed in their countries.

Earlier this year, the US Department of Labour ordered Daoud to make a payment of $1m (£500,000) to be split between each spouse and set of parents of the murdered 12 Nepalis. The company has so far failed to comment on the lawsuit.

The 12 Nepalis were seized by a group calling itself the Army of Ansar al-Sunna. The men were taken hostage on 20 August 2004 and shortly afterwards the kidnappers released a video of one being beheaded and the other 11 shot.

KBR, formerly known as Kellogg, Brown and Root and once a subsidiary of Halliburton, the company of which the US vice-president, Dick Cheney, was once the chairman, said: "The safety of our employees remains KBR's top priority. The company in no way condones or tolerates unethical or illegal behaviour."

Federal prosecutors have sent target letters to six Blackwater Worldwide security guards involved in a September shooting that left 17 Iraqi civilians dead

Justice Department Moves Toward Charges Against Contractors in Iraq Shooting | AfterDowningStreet.org

Federal prosecutors have sent target letters to six Blackwater Worldwide security guards involved in a September shooting that left 17 Iraqi civilians dead, indicating a high likelihood the Justice Department will seek to indict at least some of the men, according to three sources close to the case.

The guards, all former US military personnel, were working as security contractors for the State Department, assigned to protect US diplomats and other non-military officials in Iraq. The shooting occurred when their convoy arrived at a busy square in central Baghdad and guards tried to stop traffic.

An Iraqi government investigation concluded that the security contractors fired without provocation. Blackwater has said its personnel acted in self-defense.

The sources said that any charges against the guards would likely be brought under the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act, which has previously been used to prosecute only the cases referred to the Justice Department by the Defense Department for crimes committed by military personnel and contractors overseas. Legal experts have questioned whether contractors working for the State Department can be prosecuted under its provisions.

The sources cautioned that prosecutors are still weighing evidence gathered in a 10-month investigation that began shortly after the shootings. A federal grand jury has heard testimony from about three dozen witnesses since November, including U.S. and Blackwater officials and Iraqis, according to two of the sources.

Target letters, often considered a prelude to indictment, offer suspects the opportunity to contest evidence brought before the grand jury and give their own version of events. The letters were sent this summer, although the sources, who agreed to discuss the case only on the condition of anonymity because of its sensitivity, said a final decision on whether to indict may not be made until October, about a year after the incident.

The U.S. attorney's office in Washington and the Justice Department's National Security Division are leading the investigation. Channing Phillips, a spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office, declined to comment, as did Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd. A spokeswoman for the FBI's Washington field office, which investigated the shooting on the ground in Iraq in the weeks after the incident, also declined to comment.

Anne E. Tyrell, a spokeswoman for North Carolina-based Blackwater, said that the company believes the guards fired their weapons "in response to a hostile threat" and is monitoring the investigation closely.

"If it is determined that an individual acted improperly, Blackwater would support holding that person accountable," Tyrell said in a statement. "But at this stage, without being able to review evidence collected in an ongoing investigation, we will not prejudge the actions of any individual. The company is cooperating fully with ongoing investigations and believes that accountability is important."

Earlier reports on the investigation indicated that the FBI had focused on three Blackwater guards among a larger but unknown number present at the time of the Sept. 16 incident in Baghdad's Nisoor Square. None has been publicly identified, and authorities did not say which six received the target letters.

The shooting, and the perceived failure to hold anyone accountable for it, has fueled congressional dissatisfaction with the government's use of private security contractors in a combat zone. Contractors working for the Defense Department are now explicitly liable for crimes under laws covering the military, but several efforts in Congress to extend that jurisdiction to State Department contractors have failed.

The incident also angered Iraqi political leaders. U.S. contractors have been exempt from Iraqi law under a decree imposed by the U.S. occupation administration in 2003.

Seeking to respond to widespread fury among Iraqis over the Nisoor Square incident, the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki insisted in negotiations over a new bilateral security agreement with the United States that all contractors come under Iraqi legal jurisdiction. Facing pressure to finalize an agreement by the end of the year, the Bush administration agreed to meet the Iraqi demand, according to officials close to the discussions. But the administration continues to insist on immunity from Iraqi law for military and official Defense Department personnel, the officials said.

Blackwater is one of three U.S. security firms under contract with the State Department to provide personal security in Iraq. The State Department in May extended Blackwater's contract for another year, saying that while the case was still under investigation it had no enforceable cause to cancel it.

Lawyers for the Blackwater guards have argued in ongoing discussions with prosecutors that the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act, known as MEJA, can be applied only to contractors working for the Defense Department, two sources said. That position appeared to be buttressed by the Congressional Budget Office, which said in a report on contractors in Iraq released last week that MEJA "does not apply to civilians working ... for federal departments or agencies other than DOD [the Department of Defense]."

Legislative proposals to extend MEJA's provisions beyond the Defense Department - which have been repeatedly opposed by the White House - have made the same point.

But the question has never been tested in court. Some outside legal experts said that prosecutors would be able to make a compelling argument that MEJA covers Blackwater guards involved in the shooting under a 2005 amendment that expanded MEJA's provisions to include contractors "supporting the mission of the Department of Defense."

"You are dealing with a military environment," said Scott Silliman, a law professor at Duke University who specializes in national security matters. "If the contractors were not there, those State Department folks would be guarded by the military. Prosecutors could argue to the judge that those facts fit within the definition of furthering the [Defense Department] mission in Iraq."

Among other possible complications in potential legal action against the Blackwater contractors are interviews some of the guards gave to officials from the State Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security immediately after the incident. The interviews were conducted under legal protections against self-incrimination granted to government employees, and the guards were informed that they could not be used by FBI investigators or in a potential prosecution.

Several former prosecutors and defense attorneys said that the government would have a difficult time proving the case even if it overcame the jurisdictional question. They noted the hurdles facing prosecutors in domestic police shooting cases, adding that such cases are exceedingly hard to win.

Trying to convince jurors that guards committed a crime by opening fire in a war zone "makes it an exponentially tougher case to prove" than a bad police shooting, said George Parry, a former federal and state prosecutor in Pennsylvania who handled law enforcement shootings as a prosecutor and defense attorney. Parry does not represent anyone in the Blackwater matter.

The former prosecutors and defense attorneys said defense lawyers would work hard to put jurors inside the war zone and portray the guards as having to make split-second decisions in an environment where insurgents dress like civilians and attacks could occur anywhere, at any moment. Witnesses in such situations also often contradict each other, and evidence gathered in Baghdad may not meet the same forensic standards that jurors are used to seeing in the United States, the lawyers said.

The Nisoor Square incident took place on a Tuesday afternoon. A Blackwater team arrived in several vehicles at the intersection - accounts differ as to why they were there - and tried to stop traffic. Shooting erupted, leaving numerous Iraqis dead and wounded. Blackwater officials have said the guards came under fire; investigations by the U.S. military and the Iraqi government - and initial findings by the FBI - concluded that no one fired except the contractors.

It is a future where constitutional rights mean nothing and where lawful dissent is branded a form of terrorism

Truthdig - Reports - Tyranny on Display at the Republican Convention

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080908_tyranny_on_display_at_the_republican_convention/

Posted on Sep 8, 2008

By Chris Hedges

St. Paul is a window into our future. It is a future where, as one protester told me by phone, "people have been pepper-gassed, thrown on the ground by police who had drawn their weapons, had their documents seized and their tattoos photographed before being taken away to jail." It is a future where illegal house raids are carried out. It is a future where vans containing heavily armed paramilitary units circle and film protesters. It is a future where, as the protester said, "people have been pulled from cars because their license plates were on a database and handcuffed, thrown in the back of a squad car and then watched as their vehicles were ransacked and their personal possessions from computers to literature seized." It is a future where constitutional rights mean nothing and where lawful dissent is branded a form of terrorism. 

The rise of the corporate state means the rise of the surveillance state. The Janus-like face of America swings from packaged and canned spectacles, from nationalist slogans, from seas of flags and Christian crosses, from professions of faith and patriotism, to widespread surveillance, illegal mass detentions, informants, provocateurs and crude acts of repression and violence. We barrel toward a world filled with stupendous lies and blood. 

What difference is there between the crowds of flag-waving Republicans and the apparatchiks I covered as a reporter in the old East German Communist Party? These Republican delegates, like the fat and compromised party functionaries in East Berlin, all fawned on cue over an inept and corrupt party hierarchy. They all purported to champion workers' rights and freedom while they systematically fleeced, disempowered and impoverished the workers they lauded. They all celebrated the virtue of a state that was morally bankrupt. And while they played this con game, one that gave them special privileges, power and wealth, they unleashed their goons and thugs on all who dared to challenge them. We are not East Germany, but we are well on our way. An economic meltdown, another catastrophic terrorist attack on American soil, a war with Iran, and we could easily swing into an authoritarian model that would look very familiar to anyone who lived in the former communist East bloc.

A few of those arrested in St. Paul, including eight leaders of the RNC Welcoming Committee—one of the groups organizing protests at the GOP convention in St. Paul—now face terrorism-related charges. Monica Bicking, Eryn Trimmer, Luce Guillen Givins, Erik Oseland, Nathanael Secor, Robert Czernik, Garrett Fitzgerald and Max Spector could get up to seven and a half years in prison under the terrorism enhancement charge, which allows for a 50 percent increase in the maximum penalty. This is the first time criminal charges have been filed under the 2002 Minnesota version of the federal Patriot Act. 

The Patriot Act, which was put in place as much to silence domestic opposition as to ferret out real terrorists, has largely lain dormant. It has authorized the government to monitor our phone conversations, e-mails, meetings and political opinions. It has authorized the government to shut down anti-war groups and lock up innocents as terrorists. It has abolished habeas corpus. But until now we have not grasped its full implications for our open society. We catch glimpses, as in St. Paul or in our offshore penal colonies where we torture detainees, of its awful destructive power. 

The commercial media told us that what was important in St. Paul was happening inside the convention hall. The vapid interviews, the ridiculous soap opera sagas about Sarah Palin's daughter and the debate about whether John McCain or Barack Obama has proprietary rights to "Change" divert us from the truth of who we have become. You had to search out "Democracy Now!," TheUptake.org, Twin Cities Indymedia, I-Witness, along with a few other independent outlets, to see, hear or read real journalism from St. Paul. 

It does not matter that the RNC Welcoming Committee describes itself as an "anarchist/anti-authoritarian" organization. We don't have to embrace a political agenda to protect the right to be heard. Shut down free speech and radicals only burrow deeper underground, splitting ossified political systems into fractured extremes. We may well end up with the Christian right on one side, with politicians like Sarah Palin providing an ideological veneer to a Christian fascism, and embittered leftist radicals who turn to violence on the other. 

St. Paul was not ultimately about selecting a presidential candidate. It was about the power of the corporate state to carry out pre-emptive searches, seizures and arrests. It was about squads of police in high-tech riot gear, many with drawn semiautomatic weapons, bursting into houses. It was about seized computers, journals and political literature. It was about shutting down independent journalism, even at gunpoint. It was about charging protesters with "conspiracy to commit riot," a rarely used statute that criminalizes legal dissent. It was about 500 people held in open-air detention centers. It was about the rising Orwellian state that has hollowed out the insides of America, cast away all that was good and vital, and donned its skin to shackle us all.

AP Photo / Matt Rourke

Police use pepper spray on a woman as she walks towards them with a flower during a rally at the Republican National Convention in St. Paul.

Local people say that US forces bombed preparations for a memorial ceremony for a tribal leader. Residential compounds were levelled by US attack helicopters, armed drones and a cannon-armed C130 Spectre gunship.

cryptogon.com » Archives » Yes, The U.S. Did Kill 92 Afghan Civilians, 60 of Which Were Children

Via: Times Online:

As the doctor walks between rows of bodies, people lift funeral shrouds to reveal the faces of children and babies, some with severe head injuries.

Women are heard wailing in the background. "Oh God, this is just a child," shouts one villager. Another cries: "My mother, my mother."

The grainy video eight-minute footage, seen exclusively by The Times, is the most compelling evidence to emerge of what may be the biggest loss of civilian life during the Afghanistan war.

These are the images that have forced the Pentagon into a rare U-turn. Until yesterday the US military had insisted that only seven civilians were killed in Nawabad on the night of August 21.

Last night the Pentagon announced that it was reopening the investigation in the light of "emerging evidence" and was sending an officer to Nawabad to review its previous inquiry. Villagers and the UN insist that 92 were killed, including as many as 60 children. Locals say that the US and Afghan troops who came into the village looking for a Taleban commander, with US air support, used excessive force.

In the video scores of bodies are seen laid out in a building that villagers say is used as a mosque; the people were killed apparently during a combined operation by US special forces and Afghan army commandos in western Afghanistan. The film was shot on a mobile phone by an Afghan doctor who arrived the next morning.

Local people say that US forces bombed preparations for a memorial ceremony for a tribal leader. Residential compounds were levelled by US attack helicopters, armed drones and a cannon-armed C130 Spectre gunship.

MSNBC said Sunday it is replacing Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews as co-anchors of political night coverage with David Gregory

t r u t h o u t | MSNBC Demotes Keith Olbermann

New York - MSNBC said Sunday it is replacing Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews as co-anchors of political night coverage with David Gregory, and will use the two newsmen as commentators.

    The change reflects tensions between the freewheeling, opinionated MSNBC and the impartial newsgatherers at NBC News. Throughout the primaries and summer, MSNBC argued that Olbermann and Matthews could serve as dispassionate anchors on political news nights and that viewers would accept them in that role, but things fell apart during the conventions.

    Gregory, the veteran Washington hand, will anchor MSNBC's coverage of the presidential and vice presidential debates and election night, said Jeremy Gaines, network spokesman. The change was first reported by The New York Times.

    The tipping point appears to have come during the Republican convention when Olbermann, after the network aired a Sept. 11-themed video prepared by the Republicans, said that MSNBC should not have shown it.

    MSNBC executives, who had publicly defended their anchors' roles while privately monitoring it throughout the political season, made the change over the weekend after discussion