Month: February 2008

When Journalism Sucks Wet Farts from Dead Pigeons

No Comments

When Jake Tapper ran a story suggesting that Bill Clinton suggested that slowing the economy of the developed nations would have to slow their economies to deal with global warming, when he was actually showing that such a strategy would not work.

Here is Bill Clinton’s quote:

“And maybe America, and Europe, and Japan, and Canada — the rich counties — would say, ‘OK, we just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions ’cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren.’ We could do that.

But if we did that, you know as well as I do, China and India and Indonesia and Vietnam and Mexico and Brazil and the Ukraine, and all the other countries will never agree to stay poor to save the planet for our grandchildren. The only way we can do this is if we get back in the world’s fight against global warming and prove it is good economics that we will create more jobs to build a sustainable economy that saves the planet for our children and grandchildren. It is the only way it will work.”

(emphasis mine)

But Jake Tapper reported it thusly:

In a long, and interesting speech, he characterized what the U.S. and other industrialized nations need to do to combat global warming this way: “We just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions ’cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren.”

At a time that the nation is worried about a recession is that really the characterization his wife would want him making? “Slow down our economy”?

I don’t really think there’s much debate that, at least initially, a full commitment to reduce greenhouse gases would slow down the economy….So was this a moment of candor?

Remarkably hacktacular. In fact, it was so hacktacular that right wing blogs, such as The Corner on National Review Online, and Hot Air are criticizing Jake Tapper for being unfair to Bill Clinton.

When you have right wingers complaining that you are unfair to Bill Clinton, it is clear that you have jumped the shark.

H/t The Carpet Bagger Report

I Disagree With Paul Krugman

No Comments

Dr. Krugman comments on the redefinition of high speed internet penetration. It’s now considered complete in a zipcode if one person gets over 200 kb/s.

So Bush is declaring “Mission Accomplished” on broadband, which is, once again, a lie.

However, I disagree with Krugman on the problem.

It’s not, “the failure of US policy to create effective competition”, it is a lack of regulation.

The incumbent providers are not spending money on upgrading the infrastructure because it is not to their business advantage to upgrade the infrastructure.

It is more profitable, and requires less capital, to put up barriers to other entrants into the field.

Europe and Japan with their state owned telecommunications monopolies, and their highly regulated wireless infrastructure are kicking our butt, because the market does not work in this area.

Economics Update

No Comments

In January, employers cut 17,000 jobs, the first cut in about 4 years.

Truth be told, the private sector has not been responsible for significant employment growth in this “tide that leaves ordinary people drowning” recovery anyway. It’s pretty much all been public sector jobs.

Additionally, you have 2007 having the worst performance since 2002, with factory orders for the year being only 1.4% above 2006, though the month to month numbers for November and December were relatively healthy.

In the increasingly inevitable meltdown of the monoliner bond insurance companies, private equity firms want no part of a bailout of the insurers, so banks are trying to go it alone (here and here).

Banks trying to bail out insurers, so that the banks won’t show huge losses or insolvency as a result of losses in the market.

So, you have broke insurers being bailed out by banks that are broke too?

This will all unwind, just like the 1929 crash, only the availability of computers, and computer models, means that the level of exposure of these institutions has multiplied many times.

In any case, it appears that the credit crunch is in the process of making large private equity deals more risky for investment banks, in this case, a take over of Harrah’s Entertainment by Apollo Management and Texas Pacific Group.

The banks are, “Having trouble selling on the leveraged buy-out debt to third parties. With the bulk of the debt remaining on their books, the banks are sitting on a sizeable loss.” No one wants to buy the funny paper no more.

For the UK, there is some good news, asthere are now competing bids for the Northern Rock bank, with Richard Branson and the board of Northern Rock competing, which implies that the UK taxpayers won’t take too bad a hit.

In a sign of the new world order, CitiGroup is no longer number one in the world in market capitalization, that honor now goes to the Industrial & Commercial Bank of China Ltd., China Construction Bank Corp. and Bank of China Ltd. (ICBC).

In fact, it’s number 7 on the list, after ICBC, Bank of America, HSBC Holdings, China Construction, Bank of China, and JPMorgan Chase.

And we now have indications that perhaps that trader was not so “rogue”, with Societe Generale in court defending itself against money laundering. It appears that they were laundering stolen checks through Israeli banks.

Krugman Looks at Insurance Mandates

No Comments

Well, Krugman nails it again.

First, he cites a study that predicts that, a plan without mandates would cost $4,400 per newly insured person, and one with mandates would cost only $2,700, because the young and healthy will take their chances, leaving only those already needing medical treatment on the plan.

His summation nails it:

But while it’s easy to see how the Clinton plan could end up being eviscerated, it’s hard to see how the hole in the Obama plan can be repaired. Why? Because Mr. Obama’s campaigning on the health care issue has sabotaged his own prospects.

You see, the Obama campaign has demonized the idea of mandates — most recently in a scare-tactics mailer sent to voters that bears a striking resemblance to the “Harry and Louise” ads run by the insurance lobby in 1993, ads that helped undermine our last chance at getting universal health care.

If Mr. Obama gets to the White House and tries to achieve universal coverage, he’ll find that it can’t be done without mandates — but if he tries to institute mandates, the enemies of reform will use his own words against him.

If you combine the economic analysis with these political realities, here’s what I think it says: If Mrs. Clinton gets the Democratic nomination, there is some chance — nobody knows how big — that we’ll get universal health care in the next administration. If Mr. Obama gets the nomination, it just won’t happen.

Got your back, Doc.

On the Superbowl

No Comments

I didn’t have a dog in the hunt, I am a Redskins fan, though my wife is bumming. My congratulations to the NY Giants.

However, I don’t think that this is the greatest upset ever. That honor still goes to Joe Namath and the Jets in Super Bowl III.

My favorite ad was the dancing lizards.

Your favorite ads below.

Harry and Louise and Barack Obama

No Comments

Well, in the annals of right wing memes embraced by Obama, I come across this, care of Paul Krugman and Ezra Klein.

Here is the Obama ad:

Look familiar?

Just to jog your memory, here is the 1993 Harry and Louise ad:

Yep, it’s the same damn thing.

So we have his health plan, which eschews mandates, which means that adverse selection will make it a failure, and he’s campaigning in a way that will provide ammunition to enemies of healthcare reform.

This is crap. When people talk about scorched earth campaigning, there is nothing more scorched earth, or sodden earth in the case of Hurricane Katrina, than the Republican side on all of this.

We need the Republicans out of the white house, and increasingly it looks like Obama wants to be another Republican.

Pay Per View Review

No Comments

It was movie night, and it was Natalie’s turn to choose, and she chose Shreck the Third. Charlie objected mildly, since he had already seen it at school, but he he enjoyed it once it was on.

Mike Myers … Shrek (voice)
Eddie Murphy … Donkey (voice)
Cameron Diaz … Princess Fiona (voice)
Antonio Banderas … Puss in Boots (voice)
Julie Andrews … Queen Lillian (voice)
John Cleese … King Harold (voice)
Rupert Everett … Prince Charming (voice)
Eric Idle … Merlin (voice)
Justin Timberlake … Artie (voice)

First and foremost, as with any franchise, the question is if it was true to series.

The answer is yes.

The plot is by no means throw-away, with Shreck trying to find a Nephew of the King, Arthur (Artie), so that he does not have to be king.

We also have the vengeful Charming, and some amusing sendups of dinner theater and high school along the way.

The use of music in this movie is the best yet. I’ll never think of Led Zepplin’s The Immigrant Song in the same way.

It is a worthy successor of the first two.

Recommended.

Wanker of The Day: Northwestern U’s Coordinator of Violence Prevention and Sexual Health Education

No Comments

Here is the cartoon:

It’s pretty straightforward. It’s a call for promiscuity, something I whole heartedly approve of, unless it’s MY daughter.

Unfortunately, you have Northwestern’s Coordinator of Violence Prevention and Sexual Health Education not getting the fact that sex and rape are different things, and so she conflates them.

Letters to the Editor – Forum

Cartoon sexist, offensive

In The Daily on Friday, Jan. 25, a Drawing Board illustration was published depicting an angry stick figure and the message “I like my women like I like my cell phone minutes: Unlimited on nights and weekends.” Directly opposite this image were two Daily articles about the highly publicized sexual assault of an NU student that occurred near campus in May of 2007.

These two items juxtaposed in our student newspaper speak volumes about the culture here at NU. Whether or not the cartoon was created in an attempt to parody the attitude expressed in the quote, the illustration calls into question a set of beliefs about women and sex that research has shown to contribute to the alarmingly regular occurrence of sexual assault on college campuses.

Sexual assaults happen because the sexual aggressor believes that he is entitled to a woman’s body and pursues sexual activity without care or concern about the wishes of the victim. Attitudes like the one expressed in the cartoon reflect and contribute to a cultural climate where women’s value is based on their ability to sexually gratify men. When women are devalued in this manner and sexual relationships between men and women are viewed as adversarial, sexual violence against women is the natural extreme on a continuum of sexually aggressive and exploitative behaviors. In such a climate, the belief that women should be “unlimited” (and the assumption that they are) takes away an individual’s ability to give consent to sexual activity.

Most men who commit rape do not define their behavior as assault and are therefore able to justify their actions to themselves and others. Perpetrators of sexual assault are products of a culture that encourages them to view women as sexual objects and to believe that they are entitled to unlimited sexual access to women.

The belief that the majority of sexual assaults are committed by strangers in dark alleys is a misconception. Perpetrators of sexual assault are not mentally ill or psychotic, as the myths suggest, but rather they are “normal” men on your campus who hold beliefs about women and sex identical to those expressed in the Daily cartoon.

While the cartoon was most likely created in good humor, it is critical to make the connection between this humor and the set of beliefs that perpetuates and justifies sexual assault. We can all play a role in changing the culture at NU by thinking critically about the messages we receive and striving to challenge those that support and condone sexual violence.

– Kathryn Guilfoyle
Coordinator of Violence Prevention and Sexual Health Education
NU Health Education Department

The problem here is a simple one, and it not that the cartoon is crass, and perhaps a bit tasteless.

There is no call for violence. There is no implication of violence. There is a call for promiscuity.

There is a problem however, and that is when a “Coordinator of Violence Prevention” because of a need to justify the existence of such a position.

She is paid to be humorless and easily offended….Come to think of it, perhaps she needs a raise.

In conflating the desire with promiscuity with violence, Ms. Guilfoyle diminishes real, and ongoing threats of sexual violence.

She makes rape becomes about how humorless people find any reference to sex a call for rape, rather than being about the real, and more common than we would like to think, of sexual violence in our society.

911 Panel Ececutive Driector Had Close Ties to Bush and His Evil Minions™ and Regularly Talked to Karl Rove

No Comments

What a bloody surprise. Neocon, and former Concoleeza Rice aid Philip Zelikow is hired as the executive director of the 911 commission, and it turns out that we was working to protect Bush, not the country. (here, here, and here)

The problems:

  • “In his book, Shenon also says that while working for the panel, Zelikow appears to have had private conversations with former White House political director Karl Rove, despite a ban on such communication, according to Holland. Shenon reports that Zelikow later ordered his assistant to stop keeping a log of his calls, although the commission’s general counsel overruled him, Holland wrote.”
  • Staffers accuse him of refusing to allow a report showing Rice to be incompetent to be submitted.
  • Zelikow was responsible for demoting Richard Clark, but never told the committee members about this.
  • His resume given to the 911 commission omitted details of his involvement in the events leading up to 911.
  • He told his secretary to stop logging his phone calls.

Zelikow claims that, “Out of 85 staffers, half a dozen were disgruntled, Zelikow told ABC News. “Under the circumstances, that was a pretty low fraction,” he said. “But they all talked to Shenon.”

No for whistleblowing, 1 out of 500 is a low fraction. 1 our of 15 is insanely high.