Skip to content

Random notes

Monday, January 11, 2010

A few observations, with the only common thread being that they involve our media.

I have largely ignored the “underwear bomber” because I don’t think much of the faked controversy that’s kept the pundits busy for weeks. So long as we continue to invade Middle Eastern countries we can expect to be targeted by terrorists. Sometimes they’ll succeed, and sometimes they’ll fail, and with every success or near success we will find that we missed opportunities to stop them. That’s true, whether it’s a Republican or a Democrat that sits in the oval office. It is not a law of nature that one party has to partner with the terrorists by trying to raise the fear level, but that’s another issue.

One thing I picked up, despite my lack of real interest in all the gory details, was that one sign we missed was the fact that the bomber bought a one way ticket:

…CNN anchor Erica Hill asked: “So, just how did a guy on a terror watch list with a one-way ticket paid for in cash, with no luggage … manage to board a U.S. airliner and allegedly try to blow it to pieces? Simply put tonight, who screwed up?”

And here’s Rush Limbaugh on Friday: “When a 20-something Muslim male buys a one-way ticket with cash and has no luggage, that’s not a dot. That’s a fire alarm! He may as well have “I’m a terrorist” taped on his T-shirt.”

Have you heard or read it too? Well, it’s not true, strange to say, as the linked article demonstrates, but it’s unlikely that the media that spread the word so widely will take pains to un-spread it. It will probably just acquire the status of truth through repetition, just as it is now true that Al Gore claimed to invent the internet.

Meanwhile, some in the non-print media are actually somewhat embarrassed about the fact that they routinely allow their on-air guests to lie to them and their viewers. The usual punishment for such conduct is an invitation to return and lie some more. Recently, however, some of these folks abused their privileges by lying so blatantly that even the typical brain dead television viewer may have been jolted out of his somnolence. Rudy Giuliani, for instance, claimed that there were no terrorist attacks under Bush, and Jim DeMint claimed that Obama never used the word terrorist. In both cases the television “personality” let the claims go unchallenged.

Now there’s some talk among the talking (but not thinking) heads about fact checking their guest’s statements and maybe, just maybe, going over those statements on later shows. That will, of course, be of no use at all. As Mark Twain said, A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes. It won’t do the truth any good if it doesn’t even get to put on its shoes for several days after the lie takes off.

Here’s an idea: Take a little of those megabuck salaries they pay those deadheads and hire some interns to do real time fact checking while the shows are actually on air. They could use “the google” and other esoteric tools of the internet age. How long would it have taken an intern to turn up 9/11 (why they might not even need to use Google for that) after Rudy spewed his lie, not to mention the anthrax scare, and the non-Arab terrorists like the anti-abortion bombers. If liars like Giuliani were confronted in real time they would start to be a bit more careful. Another idea: maybe the TV folks could consider not inviting proven liars onto their shows.

Here’s an idea.


Filed in Media | | Comments (2)

Democrats opt to tax their base

Sunday, January 10, 2010

Firedoglake has engaged in a sometimes hostile opposition from the left to the Obama Administration. At times it has been a bit over the top, but sometimes they get things exactly right.

We are all, perhaps, getting a bit weary about even thinking about health care, which is just what the lobbyists want, so they can move in for the kill. They never get weary so long as the bucks keep flowing.

One of the main differences between the House and Senate version of health care, besides the doomed public option, is the method of paying for it. The House proposes to tax the rich; the Senate proposes to tax working people, in the form of a tax on “cadillac” health plans.

Let me pause here to say that our own Joe Courtney has taken the lead in opposing the Senate plan on this count.

The Administration literally hired an MIT economist to give this tax intellectual cover. It’s a tax, by the way, that Obama opposed during his campaign. The unions used that opposition to Obama’s great advantage at the time. He has now embraced it, perhaps because Ben Nelson wants it. It is yet another of those issues that he has caved on without a fight.

The argument is that if these plans are taxed, employers will find a cheaper way to get insurance for their workers, and return the savings to their workers in the form of higher wages. Anyone who works for a living would immediately tell you this is absurd, but it is an article of faith among many economists, much as it was an article of faith that criminals (i.e., too-big-to-fail bankers and hedge fund managers) lining their pockets with short term, imaginary profits would put the interests of their stockholders first. Emptywheel, at Firedoglake, has done a good job at exposing both the intellectual shill (a fellow named David Gruber) and the fact that there is a distinct lack of empirical data in support of this claim. This is yet another example of the Democrats seeming desire to commit electoral suicide (I thought of the metaphor before finding the link). The Republicans are supposed to be the party that tries to turn the members of the middle class against each other, and all of them against the working class and poor. It works for them. The Democrats are once again doing their work for them.


Filed in Democrats, Health Care, Joe Courtney | | Comments (0)

Krugman speaks

Saturday, January 9, 2010

I am always smugly satisfied when Paul Krugman agrees with me. Of course “agrees” is somewhat of a stretch, implying as it does that he has read anything I’ve ever written; rather let us say that our minds have run along parallel tracks, and sometimes mine pulls into the station ahead of his (at least on the written record). Anyway, I’ve said more than once that the (e.g., here) that the Democrats can retrieve their failing fortunes by going after Wall Street, and forcing Republicans to play defense for their corporate masters. Krugman said the same thing in a column otherwise devoted to the critical need for taming the beast that the world of finance has become:

Let me conclude with a political note. The main reason for reform is to serve the nation. If we don’t get major financial reform now, we’re laying the foundations for the next crisis. But there are also political reasons to act.

For there’s a populist rage building in this country, and President Obama’s kid-gloves treatment of the bankers has put Democrats on the wrong side of this rage. If Congressional Democrats don’t take a tough line with the banks in the months ahead, they will pay a big price in November.

The Republicans are the beneficiaries of this rage, even though, if put to the test, their gloves will be far softer than Obama’s. They will benefit unless they are put to the test, which I predict once again the Democrats will fail to do. Were the Democrats to propose effective action, and make that bill the centerpiece of their legislative agenda, they could energize their own dispirited base, while deflating the tea party folks. Chris Dodd could do his party and his nation one more big favor if he used his new independence to push for extremely strong legislation. Let the Republicans filibuster such a bill. If the Democrats can’t put them on the defensive for doing that, then they don’t deserve to govern.


Filed in Democrats | | Comments (0)

Friday Night Music-Jackson Browne

Friday, January 8, 2010

It’s been a couple of weeks since I’ve posted music, the holidays having gotten in the way.

Today’s selection was inspired by a bittersweet event that I attended earlier today. I attended a memorial service for Bill Hescock, former North Stonington first selectman, chairman of the North Stonington Democratic Town Committee, loyal Democrat and enthusiastic Obama supporter, lawyer and friend for more than 30 years, who died suddenly on New Year’s Day. The service was held at the Wheeler Library in North Stonington. It was a true celebration of Bill’s life, and of his dedication to the Town of North Stonington, to which he was almost fanatically attached. Bill’s family and friends told stories and, though some tears were shed, there were mostly fond and funny reminiscences. Bill was a bit of a character, so there were no shortages of stories.

His son, Adam, told a story, which I won’t attempt to repeat, that involved this song, which they played each year as they approached their vacation home. It became special to them, and it occurred to me that since it’s a good song, it would be well worth posting and dedicating to Bill. He’ll be missed. Jackson Browne’s Running on Empty:

In keeping with Bill’s lifetime of public service, the service doubled as a fundraiser for his newest pet project, renovation of the Wheeler Library. Anyone interested can send a check made out to the Wheeler Library, PO Box 217, North Stonington, CT 06359


Filed in Music | | Comments (2)

Second Anniversary

Friday, January 8, 2010

Despite problems with our reminder emails, we had a nearly full house last night for our Drinking Liberally “meeting”. This was our second anniversary, a milestone I had my doubts we’d ever meet. Here’s our merry band, after most of the liberal drinking had already taken place.

I should mention here that the folks at the Bulkeley House, particularly Marilla, who keeps the beer flowing for us, have been great.


Filed in Local issues | | Comments (0)

25% man

Thursday, January 7, 2010

Joe Lieberman’s approval rating in Connecticut is at 25%. He has managed to alienate voters across the board, losing points with Democrats, Independents and Republicans. Quite a feat.

I made the point a few months ago that his machinations on health care have been motivated by pure spite, and I think these poll results support that theory. There was no classical political calculus to it: he wasn’t being true to any discernible principles; he was only marginally serving the interests of potential contributors; and he was not trying to improve his re-election chances. I would take odds that he simply won’t run again. He has had lots of satisfaction undermining the Democratic party, and he has three more years to wreak more destruction, enabled by the spineless Democratic party itself.

After that, he’ll settle comfortably into a sinecure at some right-leaning think tank, from where he can, for big bucks and easy hours, continue to pontificate about things he knows nothing about.

In the meantime, Connecticut, we’re stuck with him, and we have no one to blame but ourselves.


Filed in Lieberman | | Comments (0)

Brilliant

Wednesday, January 6, 2010

Smartest guy on television.


Filed in Video | | Comments (0)

Emergency announcement-Don’t Forget Drinking Liberally!

Wednesday, January 6, 2010

Due to technical difficulties, my wife’s monthly email reminder failed to go out in a timely fashion. So to all Southeastern Connecticut liberal drinker: the meeting is on. Given the events of the past few days, we should have plenty to talk about.

Tomorrow night, 6:30 at the Bulkeley House in New London


Filed in Announcements | | Comments (0)

Doing the right thing

Wednesday, January 6, 2010

We owe Chris Dodd a debt of gratitude for doing the right thing today. Some of his problems were self inflicted. Most were not, but none of that matters in politics, where perception so often makes reality.

He was an excellent Senator, and a year from November that’s the way most people will remember him, too late, unfortunately, for this November. We’re lucky that we have a strong bench here in Connecticut. We now have to hope that Simmons both stays in the race and gets the nomination. Blumenthal will grind him up. Simmons didn’t beat Sam Gejdenson in 2000; Sam beat himself. Simmons’ only hope this year was for Dodd to beat himself, and now that hope is gone. Simmons fundraising has been anemic at best, considering that Dodd was considered so vulnerable. The money will now dry up awfully fast. Here’s hoping it doesn’t dry up so much that he drops out. I may be alone in this, but I worry about McMahon. Money talks in this country.

I just got a phone call from a friend who congratulated me on correctly predicting that Dodd would drop out. I would feel better about my prescience if I had any recollection of doing so. He says he has witnesses, so I guess I did.

By the way, don’t be fooled by the media’s willingness to spread the Republican meme about Democrats jumping ship, or, as ABC reported, about Democrats “dropping like flies“. More Republicans Senators, Congresspersons and Governors have chosen not to run than Democrats in like offices. That doesn’t mean the Democrats won’t have it tough this November. They have turned off their base and the Independents too. They are naturally situated ideologically to spend the next year slamming Wall Street, which might bring them back into the good graces of the electorate, but they won’t do it. And, with Chris gone,they are poised to put Wall Street’s best friend in charge of the Banking Committee, something they will surely do (assuming they manage to hold onto the Senate) rather than disturb the collegiality of the Senate. After all, what’s more important, good feeling among Senators, or the American people?


Filed in Dodd | | Comments (0)

McMahon wrestles with FEC

Tuesday, January 5, 2010

I have often criticized the New London Day, my sort of hometown newspaper. But for all it’s faults, the Day sometimes does yeoman work Ted Mann may be the best political reporter presently operating in Connecticut. He exposed Rell’s pollster shenanigans, and he also took the initiative to burrow into Linda McMahon’s campaign finance reports. Last month he reported that she reported huge, unspecified expenses as in-kind contributions from herself. McMahon, who perhaps is more obviously seeking to buy a Senate seat than anyone else in history (and that’s going some) pooh-poohed the story, but apparently the FEC begs to differ, as Mann reports:

After The Day first reported on the in-kind contributions in December, the McMahon campaign blasted the article as “erroneous,” since the campaign had not received a notice from the FEC requesting more detailed disclosures. And a spokesman said he saw no reason to file additional details with the FEC disclosing the identities of the campaign’s vendors.

“Why would we amend or re-file something that without question is filed correctly?” McMahon spokesman Ed Patru said on Dec. 11.

But attorneys for the FEC believe more detail is required. In a letter sent to the campaign on Christmas Eve, the commission instructs the campaign to provide the names of the recipients of McMahon’s in-kind payments, information that is “essential to the full public disclosure of your federal election campaign finances.”

The notice instructs McMahon’s campaign to provide the information by Jan. 28 or face “enforcement action.”

It should be noted here that it takes a rather blatant violation to get the usually quiescent FEC to take notice. Mann is doing a good job. Here’s hoping Dodd doesn’t do anything to draw his attention.


Filed in Politics | | Comments (1)