Obama Revises Campaign Promise Of 'Change' To 'Relatively Minor Readjustments In Certain Favorable Policy Areas'
WASHINGTON—In a slight shift from his campaign trail promise, President Obama announced Monday that his administration's message of "Change" has been modified to the somewhat more restrained slogan "Relatively Minor Readjustments in Certain Favorable Policy Areas." "Today, Americans face a great many challenges, and I hear your desperate calls for barely measurable and largely symbolic improvements in the status quo," said Obama, who vowed never to waver in his fight for every last infinitesimal nudge forward on the controversial issues of torture and the military ban on homosexuals. "Remember: Yes we can, if by that you mean tiptoeing around potentially unpopular decisions that could alienate a large segment of the populace." Washington insiders said that, while the new mottos are certainly in keeping with Obama's pledge of government transparency, they are significantly less catchy.
http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/obama_revises_campaign?utm_source=onion_rss_daily
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Friday, May 29, 2009
ralph nader on gov't-industrial complex GM bailout
just a prelude of the central planning to come????
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124355327992064463.html
excerpt: 4) Why is the task force permitting GM to increase manufacturing overseas for export back into the U.S.? Under the GM reorganization plan, the company will rely increasingly on overseas plants to make cars for sale in the U.S., with cars made in low-wage countries like Mexico rising from 15% to 23% of GM sales here. For the first time, GM plans to export cars from China to the U.S. in what is a harbinger of the company's future business model. What is the conceivable rationale for permitting GM to increase manufacturing overseas -- especially in dictatorships, for export back into the U.S. -- when preserving jobs and industry is the avowed goal of this immense taxpayer bailout?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124355327992064463.html
excerpt: 4) Why is the task force permitting GM to increase manufacturing overseas for export back into the U.S.? Under the GM reorganization plan, the company will rely increasingly on overseas plants to make cars for sale in the U.S., with cars made in low-wage countries like Mexico rising from 15% to 23% of GM sales here. For the first time, GM plans to export cars from China to the U.S. in what is a harbinger of the company's future business model. What is the conceivable rationale for permitting GM to increase manufacturing overseas -- especially in dictatorships, for export back into the U.S. -- when preserving jobs and industry is the avowed goal of this immense taxpayer bailout?
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Friday, May 22, 2009
armchair neo-cons
here's video of the latest neo-conservative journalist's attempt to show how waterboarding isn't torture....I love how these guys buckle instantly.
"its gonna like being in da tub".....
here's christopher hitchins the neo-con reporter for vanity fair with another poor performance by a armchair quarterback neo-con sissy.
"its gonna like being in da tub".....
here's christopher hitchins the neo-con reporter for vanity fair with another poor performance by a armchair quarterback neo-con sissy.
another great debt/deficit analogy
from the same guy that did the penny-cutting video...
from big picture blog
from big picture blog
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
japanese donks??
this popped up on a blog feed..looks like japanese gangsters roll their own 'power ranger' inspired 'donk' cars...
from this site: http://www.allpics4u.com/bizarreoddities/japanese-gangster-vans.html
here's the original southern fried donk...
http://kingofthestreet.com
from this site: http://www.allpics4u.com/bizarreoddities/japanese-gangster-vans.html
here's the original southern fried donk...
http://kingofthestreet.com
Monday, May 18, 2009
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Thursday, May 14, 2009
better than original?
kris allen's rendition of kanye west's 'heartless'
[vodpod id=Groupvideo.2524223&w=425&h=350&fv=id%3D13441495%26vid%3D5058940%E2%8C%A9%3Den-us%26lang%3Den-us%26intl%3Dus%26thumbUrl%3Dhttp%253A%2F%2Fl.yimg.com%2Fa%2Fp%2Fi%2Fbcst%2Fvideosearch%2F8859%2F85428468.jpeg%26embed%3D1]
original
[vodpod id=Groupvideo.2524223&w=425&h=350&fv=id%3D13441495%26vid%3D5058940%E2%8C%A9%3Den-us%26lang%3Den-us%26intl%3Dus%26thumbUrl%3Dhttp%253A%2F%2Fl.yimg.com%2Fa%2Fp%2Fi%2Fbcst%2Fvideosearch%2F8859%2F85428468.jpeg%26embed%3D1]
original
real world vs. government bureaucrat world
excerpt:
Across the private sector, workers are swallowing hard as their employers freeze salaries, cancel bonuses, and institute longer work days. America's employees can see for themselves how steeply business has fallen off, which is why many are accepting cost-saving measures with equanimity -- especially compared to workers in France, where riots and plant takeovers have become regular news.
![[Commentary]](http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/ED-AJ492_malang_D_20090513141945.jpg)
AP
But then there is the U.S. public sector, where the mood seems very European these days. In New Jersey, which faces a $3.3 billion budget deficit, angry state workers have demonstrated in Trenton and taken Gov. Jon Corzine to court over his plan to require unpaid furloughs for public employees. In New York, public-sector unions have hit the airwaves with caustic ads denouncing Gov. David Paterson's promise to lay off state workers if they continue refusing to forgo wage hikes as part of an effort to close a $17.7 billion deficit. In Los Angeles County, where the schools face a budget deficit of nearly $600 million, school employees have balked at a salary freeze and vowed to oppose any layoffs that the board of education says it will have to pursue if workers don't agree to concessions.
Call it a tale of two economies. Private-sector workers -- unionized and nonunion alike -- can largely see that without compromises they may be forced to join unemployment lines. Not so in the public sector.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124227027965718333.html
Across the private sector, workers are swallowing hard as their employers freeze salaries, cancel bonuses, and institute longer work days. America's employees can see for themselves how steeply business has fallen off, which is why many are accepting cost-saving measures with equanimity -- especially compared to workers in France, where riots and plant takeovers have become regular news.
APGovernment workers protest in California, March 13.
But then there is the U.S. public sector, where the mood seems very European these days. In New Jersey, which faces a $3.3 billion budget deficit, angry state workers have demonstrated in Trenton and taken Gov. Jon Corzine to court over his plan to require unpaid furloughs for public employees. In New York, public-sector unions have hit the airwaves with caustic ads denouncing Gov. David Paterson's promise to lay off state workers if they continue refusing to forgo wage hikes as part of an effort to close a $17.7 billion deficit. In Los Angeles County, where the schools face a budget deficit of nearly $600 million, school employees have balked at a salary freeze and vowed to oppose any layoffs that the board of education says it will have to pursue if workers don't agree to concessions.
Call it a tale of two economies. Private-sector workers -- unionized and nonunion alike -- can largely see that without compromises they may be forced to join unemployment lines. Not so in the public sector.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124227027965718333.html
Monday, May 11, 2009
"military missionaries"
clip from bill mahre on h0w many military GIs and generals are pushing an evangelical christian message throughout our middle east occupations...isn't this why they hate us?...this isn't rocket science....
more on our idiot crusaders...
more on our idiot crusaders...
Friday, May 8, 2009
if only spitzer wasn't buried by the sex scandal last year...
..maybe he could have helped expose the government-banking complex/colusion before it bankrupted this country.....less prostitutes..more muckraking....
excerpt:
So who selected Geithner back in 2003? Well, the Fed board created a select committee to pick the CEO. This committee included none other than Hank Greenberg, then the chairman of AIG; John Whitehead, a former chairman of Goldman Sachs; Walter Shipley, a former chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank, now JPMorgan Chase; and Pete Peterson, a former chairman of Lehman Bros. It was not a group of typical depositors worried about the security of their savings accounts but rather one whose interest was in preserving a capital structure and way of doing business that cried out for—but did not receive—harsh examination from the N.Y. Fed.
The composition of the New York Fed's board, which supervises the organization and current Chairman Friedman, is equally troubling. The board consists of nine individuals, three chosen by the N.Y. Fed member banks as their own representatives, three chosen by the member banks to represent the public, and three chosen by the national Fed Board of Governors to represent the public. In theory this sounds great: Six board members are "public" representatives.
So whom have the banks chosen to be the public representatives on the board during the past decade, as the crisis developed and unfolded? Dick Fuld, the former chairman of Lehman; Jeff Immelt, the chairman of GE; Gene McGrath, the chairman of Con Edison; Ronay Menschel, the chairwoman of Phipps Houses and also, not insignificantly, the wife of Richard Menschel, a former senior partner at Goldman. Whom did the Board of Governors choose as its public representatives? Steve Friedman, the former chairman of Goldman; Pete Peterson; Jerry Speyer, CEO of real estate giant Tishman Speyer; and Jerry Levin, the former chairman of Time Warner. These were the people who were supposedly representing our interests!
http://www.slate.com/id/2217811/
here's a list of his previous slate columns:
http://www.slate.com/id/1875/landing/1
excerpt:
So who selected Geithner back in 2003? Well, the Fed board created a select committee to pick the CEO. This committee included none other than Hank Greenberg, then the chairman of AIG; John Whitehead, a former chairman of Goldman Sachs; Walter Shipley, a former chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank, now JPMorgan Chase; and Pete Peterson, a former chairman of Lehman Bros. It was not a group of typical depositors worried about the security of their savings accounts but rather one whose interest was in preserving a capital structure and way of doing business that cried out for—but did not receive—harsh examination from the N.Y. Fed.
The composition of the New York Fed's board, which supervises the organization and current Chairman Friedman, is equally troubling. The board consists of nine individuals, three chosen by the N.Y. Fed member banks as their own representatives, three chosen by the member banks to represent the public, and three chosen by the national Fed Board of Governors to represent the public. In theory this sounds great: Six board members are "public" representatives.
So whom have the banks chosen to be the public representatives on the board during the past decade, as the crisis developed and unfolded? Dick Fuld, the former chairman of Lehman; Jeff Immelt, the chairman of GE; Gene McGrath, the chairman of Con Edison; Ronay Menschel, the chairwoman of Phipps Houses and also, not insignificantly, the wife of Richard Menschel, a former senior partner at Goldman. Whom did the Board of Governors choose as its public representatives? Steve Friedman, the former chairman of Goldman; Pete Peterson; Jerry Speyer, CEO of real estate giant Tishman Speyer; and Jerry Levin, the former chairman of Time Warner. These were the people who were supposedly representing our interests!
http://www.slate.com/id/2217811/
here's a list of his previous slate columns:
http://www.slate.com/id/1875/landing/1
Thursday, May 7, 2009
eliot spitzer on cnbc
[vodpod id=Groupvideo.2487941&w=425&h=350&fv=]
more about "Eliot Spitzer on Squawk Box | The Big...", posted with vodpod
Capitalism in Crisis
Excerpt from wsj article:
Lending borrowed capital -- the essence of banking -- is risky. That risk is amplified when interest rates are very low, as they were in the early 2000s because of a mistaken decision made by the Federal Reserve under Alan Greenspan to force interest rates down and keep them down. Because houses are bought with debt (for example, an 80% first mortgage on a house), low interest rates spur demand for houses. And because the housing stock is so durable a surge in demand increases not only housing starts but also the prices of existing houses. When people saw house prices rising -- and were assured by officials and other experts that they were rising because of favorable "fundamentals" -- Americans decided that houses were a great investment, and so demand and prices kept on rising.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124165301306893763.html
Lending borrowed capital -- the essence of banking -- is risky. That risk is amplified when interest rates are very low, as they were in the early 2000s because of a mistaken decision made by the Federal Reserve under Alan Greenspan to force interest rates down and keep them down. Because houses are bought with debt (for example, an 80% first mortgage on a house), low interest rates spur demand for houses. And because the housing stock is so durable a surge in demand increases not only housing starts but also the prices of existing houses. When people saw house prices rising -- and were assured by officials and other experts that they were rising because of favorable "fundamentals" -- Americans decided that houses were a great investment, and so demand and prices kept on rising.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124165301306893763.html
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Monday, May 4, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)